Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
805 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have a Rossi 92 lever gun, chambered in .44 mag, with a 16 inch barrel.

Now I'm considering - or just trying to rationalize - the same model with a 20 inch barrel.

Would the longer barrel make for a noticeable difference in the velocity of the .44 mag round, or would it be relatively minimal?

I've browsed the internet to see if there was any specific info about it, with no luck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OD*

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
With the appropriate burn rate powder, you could see 100 fps or more from the 20 vs the 16 inch barrel.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
805 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Thank you, Jester560. Much appreciated.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
16,160 Posts
I agree on the burn rate of the powder, if all the powder burns in much less than the 20” you will actually lose velocity.
Here is a website that may provide some answers.

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
805 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I agree on the burn rate of the powder, if all the powder burns in much less than the 20” you will actually lose velocity.
Here is a website that may provide some answers.


Thanks for the link msgt/ret.

I remember reading about loss of velocity, a few years ago, but had forgotten about that part of the equation until you mentioned it. Thanks for that as well!
 
  • Like
Reactions: OD* and msgt/ret

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,982 Posts
I was going to mention Ballistics by the inch, but someone beat me to it. My own experience with 16" barrels is they are LOUD! 4" more makes a huge difference in the report. That short barrel may have advantages when jumping out of a truck, crawling through brush, or clearing houses. but 4 to 8" more barrel sure make them nicer to shoot. DR
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,262 Posts
Count me skeptical that 2400 or 296 or other powders with similar burning rates are all done within 10 inches of barrel. Some experimenting with a chronograph with .44 Magnum from a 20 inch barrel using H110 powder convinced me that the cartridge is a horse out of a decent barrel length when used with such powders. Those bullets sure ain't coastin' the last 4-inches.

The rifle was a 1970 vintage Winchester Model 94 with 20-inch barrel.

240 grain Sierra JHP, Max Sierra manual charge weight of H110: 1813 fps
180 grain Sierra JHP, Max Sierra manual charge weight of H110: 2218 fps (more velocity than a .30-30 20-inch carbine can fling a 170 grain bullet)

Why even relatively quick Unique in only a plodding light charge weight cranked velocities to 1139 fps from the 20 inch rifle barrel. Same load in an 8 3/8-inch revolver managed 949 fps.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
352 Posts
Count me skeptical that 2400 or 296 or other powders with similar burning rates are all done within 10 inches of barrel. Some experimenting with a chronograph with .44 Magnum from a 20 inch barrel using H110 powder convinced me that the cartridge is a horse out of a decent barrel length when used with such powders. Those bullets sure ain't coastin' the last 4-inches.

The rifle was a 1970 vintage Winchester Model 94 with 20-inch barrel.

240 grain Sierra JHP, Max Sierra manual charge weight of H110: 1813 fps
180 grain Sierra JHP, Max Sierra manual charge weight of H110: 2218 fps (more velocity than a .30-30 20-inch carbine can fling a 170 grain bullet)

Why even relatively quick Unique in only a plodding light charge weight cranked velocities to 1139 fps from the 20 inch rifle barrel. Same load in an 8 3/8-inch revolver managed 949 fps.
I think I was reading some of the 300AAC reasoning was within 10 inches of barrel therefore making it a good AR pistol round-but I do not have a chronograph to for sure tell how fast some of my loads are actually going.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
Back years ago my uncle and I were shooting at a floating object in the lake behind my house that was about 1/2 mile away. We were shooting the same ammo and I was shooting an O. F. Mossberg and Sons model 151M-B .22 rifle and had to aim the barrel about 30 degrees above the object to hit near it. He was shooting a High Standard Double-Nine model W-101 .22 revolver with a 5 1/2" barrel and was not raising the barrel but a very few degrees to hit the object.

After the powder burns any extra length of the barrel just slows the bullet down.

I've still got those old guns.

The High Standard was made in 1959 and the Mossberg was Made between 1947 to 1958. The rifle doesn't have a serial number.



 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,538 Posts
When using the same round the velocity will be greater in a longer barrel.

Think of an ice skater going into a spin, when they pull their arms and legs in they go faster and the longer they hold their body tight, the faster they spin.

Physics 😊
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,738 Posts
When using the same round the velocity will be greater in a longer barrel.

Think of an ice skater going into a spin, when they pull their arms and legs in they go faster and the longer they hold their body tight, the faster they spin.

Physics 😊
It does not work that way with internal ballistics. A bullet imparts a lot of drag in a barrel. As long as the powder is burning and creating pressure the bullet will accelerate. As soon as the powder stops burning pressure starts to drop off, as does acceleration. That is why some barrel lengths, with some bullet/powder combinations are not optimal. The 22 LR is known for this in long barrels, the 9mm does this with 16" barrels. Magnum revolver cartridges will do it if the combo is with parameters. Then there are fast barrels and there are slow barrels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,738 Posts
I think I was reading some of the 300AAC reasoning was within 10 inches of barrel therefore making it a good AR pistol round-but I do not have a chronograph to for sure tell how fast some of my loads are actually going.
The 300 was designed around a short barrel as a sub sonic round for military commandos.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,538 Posts
It does not work that way with internal ballistics. A bullet imparts a lot of drag in a barrel. As long as the powder is burning and creating pressure the bullet will accelerate. As soon as the powder stops burning pressure starts to drop off, as does acceleration. That is why some barrel lengths, with some bullet/powder combinations are not optimal. The 22 LR is known for this in long barrels, the 9mm does this with 16" barrels. Magnum revolver cartridges will do it if the combo is with parameters. Then there are fast barrels and there are slow barrels.
Yes, I just got schooled by my better half when he got up this morning - said the same. I told him that I felt sure someone here would let me know if I got it wrong ;)

I’m a former ice skater and was using that logic - it makes sense, however I did not consider the time after the powder stopped burning and the projectile slowed down.

Good post Bad Bob, I’m getting lots smarter this morning! 👍🏻
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,262 Posts
I've tried, but I just can't let this thread stand without commenting. Since it's the internet and any opinion may be put forth...

...I'm gonna say that a chronograph session years ago, January 20, 1982 to be exact, found that .22 Long Rifle ammunition kept accelerating in longer barrels and these claims about how short barrels yield higher velocities than longer barrels are utter rubbish and, in the main may be depended on to be false.

Yeah it was 38 years ago, but I doubt that .22 Long Rifle ammunition characteristics have materially changed since that time.

I've sporatically tested various .22 loadings since then, but have not made an all encompassing test of most brands available. .22 Long Rifle is still performing within about the same velocity ranges in my experience, standard velocity loadings being lower generally than high velocity loadings. I need to do that as an update to these tests.

I recently read somewhere online that a 19-inch .22 Long Rifle barrel milks all the velocity out of ammunition that may be gained and anything longer will actually give lower velocity.

Nope! 19 inches is no magic length and it was asinine for such a claim to have ever been made. That's the trouble with the internet. Everybody opens their heads and pours out the contents. Each barrel is a law unto itself as is each loading, but longer barreled .22s can be pretty well be depended on to beat out shorter barreled .22s (with few exceptions) and .22 caliber handguns are completely out of the running when compared with the same .22 cartridge loading when fired from a rifle.

With great effort I dug out my early edition of chronograph testing notes on .22 Long Rifle and will present it here. A generous selection of .22 Long Rifle loadings of the day were gathered and tested. 10-shot strings were taken and averaged for velocity figures.

Rifles used: Remington Model 513T Matchmaster with 27-inch barrel (yeah, that long), Winchester Model 57 with 22-inch barrel.

Handgun used: Smith & Wesson Model 17 K-22 Masterpiece with 8 3/8-inch barrel.

The Tests

Federal Lightning 40 gr. lead solid

27 inch barrel:
Muzzle Velocity 1220 fps
Muzzle Energy 132 ft./lbs.
Extreme Spread 75 fps

22 inch barrel
MV 1190 fps
ME 125 ft./lbs.
ES 126 fps

8 3/8 inch barrel
MV 1085 fps
ME 100 ft./lbs.
ES 55 fps

Winchester T22 40 grain lead solid*
27 inch barrel
MV 1116 fps
ME 110 ft./lbs.
ES 46

22 inch barrel
MV 1143 fps
ME 114 ft./lbs.
ES 56 fps

8 3/8 inch barrel
MV 994 fps
ME 88 ft./lbs.
ES 55 fps

CCI Stinger 32 gr. copper-plated hollow point
27 inch barrel
MV 1592 fps
ME 180 ft./lbs/
ES 62 fps

22 inch barrel
MV 1553 fps
ME 174 ft./lbs.
ES 114 fps

8 3/8-inch barrel
MV 1272 fps
ME 114 ft./lbs.
ES 89 fps

Federal Champion Target 40 gr. lead solid
27 inch barrel
MV 1157 fps
ME 119 ft./lbs.
ES 73 fps

22 inch barrel
MV 1141 fps
ME 115 ft./lbs.
ES 48 fps

8 3/8 inch barrel
MV 1037 fps
ME 96 fps
ES 40 fps

Federal Spitfire 33 gr. copper-plated hollow point*
MV 1449 fps
ME 153 ft./lbs.
ES 39 fps

22 inch barrel
MV 1454 fps
ME 155 ft./lbs
ES 41 fps

8 3/8 inch barrel
MV 1300 fps
ME 124 ft./lbs.
ES 53 fps

Remington Target 40 gr lead solid
27 inch barrel
MV 1186 fps
ME 125 ft./lbs.
ES 26 fps

22 inch barrel
MV 1144 fps
ME 117 ft./lbs.
ES 28 fps

8 3/8 inch barrel
MV 1051 fps
ME 98 fps
ES 45 fps

Remington Viper 36 gr copper-plated hollow point
27 inch barrel
MV 1390 fps
ME 154 ft./lbs.
ES 72 fps

22 inch barrel
MV 1345 fps
ME 140 ft./lbs.
ES 28 fps

8 3/8 inch barrel
MV 1196 fps
ME 114 ft./lbs.
ES 45

Federal Hi Power 40 gr copper-plated solid
27 inch barrel
MV 1240 fps
ME 137 ft./lbs.
ES 24 fps

22 inch barrel
MV 1236 fps
ME 135 ft./lbs.
ES 45 fps

8 3/8 inch barrel
MV 1122 fps
ME 111 ft./lbs
ES 33 fps

Eley Tenex 40 grain lead solid
27 inch barrel
MV 1058 fps
ME 99 ft./lbs.
ES 14 fps

22 inch barrel
MV 1045 fps
ME 97 ft./lbs.
ES 16 fps

8 3/8 inch barrel
MV 964 fps
ME 83 ft./lbs.
ES 48 fps


The .22 Long cartridge

Winchester Super-X 29 gr. copper-plated solid

27 inch barrel
MV 1217 fps
ME 95 ft./lbs.
ES 44 fps

22 inch barrel
MV 1204 fps
ME 93 ft./lbs.
ES 37 fps

8 3/8 inch barrel
MV 1072 fps
ME 74 ft./lbs.
ES 69 fps

The .22 Short cartridge

Federal Champion Target 29 gr. lead solid*

27 inch barrel
MV 1069 fps
ME 73 ft./lbs.
ES 27 fps

22 inch barrel
MV 1090 fps
ME 76 ft./lbs.
ES 69 fps

8 3/8 inch barrel
MV 1039 fps
ME 70 ft./lbs.
ES 84 fps


Federal Hi Power 29 gr. copper-plated lead solid
27 inch barrel
MV 1076 fps
ME 74 ft./lbs.
ES 42

22 inch barrel
MV 1060 fps
ME 72 ft./lbs.
ES 40

8 3/8 inch barrel
MV 1043 fps
ME 70 ft./lbs.
ES 61

CCI Mini-Cap 29 gr. lead solid (CB cap in a .22 Short Case)
27 inch barrel
MV 669 fps
ME 30 ft./lbs.
ES 15 fps

22 inch barrel
MV 667 fps
ME 29 ft./lbs.
ES 12 fps

8 3/8 inch barrel
MV 628 fps
ME 25 ft./lbs.
ES 12 fps

* Shorter 22-inch barrel delivers higher velocity than the 27-inch barrel

Looks like I've mislaid the notes for the .22 Magnum cartridge which was tested in a Mossberg 640K Chuckster rifle with 24-inch barrel and a Colt New Frontier .22 Magnum revolver with 4 3/8-inch barrel. Loadings centered around the 45 grain bullet weight which was available at that time and rifle velocities were 1700-1900 fps for the loads tested. Handgun velocities were 1100-1400 fps.

In the great majority of instances, the longer 27 inch barrel wins the velocity race. It may not be by much, but it comes out on top. For cryin' out loud even the silly Mini-Caps kept up the pace in the long 27-inch barrel!

This is from memory, but I'm pretty certain that I did have a Federal Champion Match .22 short bullet stick in the long barrel of the Remington Model 513T during that testing sequence. It stuck just before exiting and required prodding out with a cleaning rod.

It's old data so if you don't choose to believe it, get ya' own ol' chronograph and test to your heart's content. If you bet against the longer barrel you will lose money in the long run. Some few loads may perform better in shorter barrels, but this business of bullets coasting down the last few inches of the longer barrels needs to be laid to rest.

As far as .22 rim fire handguns shooting flatter and requiring less elevation than with the same load fired from a .22 rifle, that ain't never gonna happen. Perceptions can be deceiving and while it might appear that a handgun barrel required less elevated than than a rifle barrel, a 24-inch dowel rod or stiff wire taped to the side of a handgun barrel would have revealed a different picture. Slower bullets simply will not have flatter trajectories.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33,987 Posts
Why, Bad Bob, you make it sound as if a longer barrel and faster powder would suck a bullet in rather than blow it out. :rolleyes:
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top