Octagonal barrels just for looks?
- Thread starter Husqvarna
- Start date
g.willikers
New member
Judging from the history book accounts of gunsmithing, octagon barrels came about as Polinese said.
A way to make thick barrels before the modern age.
They sure look cool, though.
I kind of miss my Dad's old Winchester rimfire that had one.
Shouldn't have lost interest in .22s in my youth and let him sell it.
Ditto for letting another relative sell their Browning lever action rimfire with one.
But back then, if it wasn't at least a .38, it wasn't considered a real gun.
Oh, the ones that got away........
A way to make thick barrels before the modern age.
They sure look cool, though.
I kind of miss my Dad's old Winchester rimfire that had one.
Shouldn't have lost interest in .22s in my youth and let him sell it.
Ditto for letting another relative sell their Browning lever action rimfire with one.
But back then, if it wasn't at least a .38, it wasn't considered a real gun.
Oh, the ones that got away........
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
I only know from reading, but the apparent consensus about .22 rimfire is that anything over some 16" shows negligible performance gain, if any. Not enough powder to maintain acceleration of the bullet.
I have one of the blued 24" models in 38/357. I wanted a 20" barrel, but at the time there were none to be found. The 24 does give you a few more rounds in the tube, longer sight radius, and the added weight makes shooting 38's feel like shooting a 22. In the end, I've been very pleased with the longer barrel, but would like to pick up a 16" one of these days.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Bo Clerke once gave me a tour of his barrel-making operation. All his barrel blanks were octagonal. They looked to be 24".
Jim Watson
New member
The octagonal barrel outsold the round in the 1873 Winchester even though it cost a whole $1.50 more, which was a lot in those days.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
I've always read that with lever guns' locking lugs at the rear of the bolt, they're limited to around 40,000 psi chamber pressure. That's not a lot above the max .357 pressure.
Odds are for pistol cartridges, the 20" barrel is likely as good as it gets for ballistics.
Since I've never hunted in rainy country, blue = stainless as far as maintenance goes. Never had a rust problem with blued steel.
Odds are for pistol cartridges, the 20" barrel is likely as good as it gets for ballistics.
Since I've never hunted in rainy country, blue = stainless as far as maintenance goes. Never had a rust problem with blued steel.
Brotherbadger
New member
Personally, I like the look, I don't know if they serve any other purpose.
before you buy your rossi, do some research on the barrel length. I bought the 357mag model, and went with the 20" because I wanted to possibly use for hunting if I ever decide to hunt, and wanted the most bang for the bullet. I was disappointed to find out that the powder is all burned up at right about 16", and anything longer causes the friction to start slowing the bullet down. not a big deal, but I am lugging extra weight(rifle is still insanely light btw) for no benefit. check out ballistics by the inch before settling on a PCC and barrel length. the shorter barrel would be a lot handier and prob easier to shoot from standing position. but, the added bbl length also adds capacity to the magazine, so give and take
but anyhow, everytime I see my stainless 20" rossi I get a grin, the purtiest thing I own by far. no octo barrel, but would the octo add weight? my favorite thing about it is the lightweight and I wouldn't sacrifice that for anything
50 yard standing
but anyhow, everytime I see my stainless 20" rossi I get a grin, the purtiest thing I own by far. no octo barrel, but would the octo add weight? my favorite thing about it is the lightweight and I wouldn't sacrifice that for anything
50 yard standing
skizzums-- Checked out the ballistics by the inch website for the .357 mag and in 7 out of 8 examples the velocity increased from 17" to 18" barrels. Wish they carried it on out to 24" to see what happens. Not saying their results aren't generally correct, but the problem is that unless they are starting with a long barrel and chopping it after each series, then the results are going to be flawed. Each brand/design of barrel used introduces a new variable that isn't accounted for, and unless I'm missing something then that would seem to be a very important oversight.