39a, 1897...
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
I think, as much as anything, it has to do with sight radius. If all you have is iron sights, the further apart the front and rear sights, the more precise a sighting instrument you have. This is an advantage when the targets are small, and these are, after all, primarily small game rifles.
Like so much else in life, it is a matter of personal preference. I have always felt 24" is a little long. A few years ago I found a very nice Mountie. They are 20" with a straight grip. Since I am shooting a 1894 Cowboy II in .357 for CAS, the Mountie makes a better practice rifle than my 39A with a pistol grip.
Joined
·
442 Posts
Having competed in bullseye shooting foe years, the longer tubed guns were easier to stabilize when off hand shooting.
Joined
·
442 Posts
A little hard to explain, but short barreled lightweight guns dont stay on target during the trigger squeeze as well as longer, heavier barreled rifles. Also they have better follow through on running targets, this is why trap guns have long barrel.
Joined
·
77 Posts
39a -39m
I have always thought the 24inch barrels are RIFLES the 20inch ,or less are referred to as CARBINES.
Like it was said earlier ,try a 39M Mountie ,it is a carbine with a 20inch barrel ,lighter and maybe
quicker handeling.
I sort of prefer the long lean looks and accuracy of the rifle. I think it sets it apart from the competition ,such as the Win. 9422 and the Henrys,which are all carbines..
However ,I still do like carbines.My favourite gun is my Win 1894 carbine!
I have always thought the 24inch barrels are RIFLES the 20inch ,or less are referred to as CARBINES.
Like it was said earlier ,try a 39M Mountie ,it is a carbine with a 20inch barrel ,lighter and maybe
quicker handeling.
I sort of prefer the long lean looks and accuracy of the rifle. I think it sets it apart from the competition ,such as the Win. 9422 and the Henrys,which are all carbines..
However ,I still do like carbines.My favourite gun is my Win 1894 carbine!
Joined
·
784 Posts
I have a 39 Centennial with a 20" octagonal barrel that I put a Williams receiver sight on. It's one of my all time favorite rifles. Accurate and light and perfect trigger time for keeping my guide gun skills up.
If you like lever actions, you're missing something if you don't have one in .22.
Tests have shown that after about 19" additional barrel length is slowing the bullet. And with a peep the sight radius is ample.
Regards,
Grizz
Joined
·
77 Posts
.22 Lever Actions
I beg to disagree.
The Marlin 39M has 20 inch
The Winchester 9422 has 20 inch
Browning BL-22 has 20 inch
The Ithaca Model '72 has 18.5 inch
And all the Henry Lever action .22 have 20'' or less (most 18.5'')
I think the 39A is the only 24 inch barrel.
But ,I stand to be corrected.
I love my 39A. However,I would think that the the 39M ,with the straight grip and octagon barrel ,would be really great too!
I beg to disagree.
The Marlin 39M has 20 inch
The Winchester 9422 has 20 inch
Browning BL-22 has 20 inch
The Ithaca Model '72 has 18.5 inch
And all the Henry Lever action .22 have 20'' or less (most 18.5'')
I think the 39A is the only 24 inch barrel.
But ,I stand to be corrected.
I love my 39A. However,I would think that the the 39M ,with the straight grip and octagon barrel ,would be really great too!
Joined
·
77 Posts
24 inch barrel
One thing I notice with the 24 inch barrel is that it balances right there at the forearm stock .
That may be what 30-30remchester meant when he said that the 24" stabilizes better.
I don't have a 39M ,but it would seem that the Centre of Gravity would be moved back to the receiver
area. Maybe one of the 39M owners can confirm or this or not.
One thing I notice with the 24 inch barrel is that it balances right there at the forearm stock .
That may be what 30-30remchester meant when he said that the 24" stabilizes better.
I don't have a 39M ,but it would seem that the Centre of Gravity would be moved back to the receiver
area. Maybe one of the 39M owners can confirm or this or not.
Joined
·
3,251 Posts
The longer barrels were, in fact, needed to make use of the entire powder load, in the 19th Century when all that was available was blackpowder.
With the advent of smokless powders, and then again with today's very efficient powders, the long lengths aren't needed for ballistic efficiency anymore, but are kept in many rifles for nostalgia, sight radius, and style preference reasons.
.
With the advent of smokless powders, and then again with today's very efficient powders, the long lengths aren't needed for ballistic efficiency anymore, but are kept in many rifles for nostalgia, sight radius, and style preference reasons.
.
Joined
·
77 Posts
Black powder
Yes ,but wasn't nitro-powder rapidly replacing blackpowder in sporting arms by 1892 ?
Yes ,but wasn't nitro-powder rapidly replacing blackpowder in sporting arms by 1892 ?
Joined
·
1,013 Posts
My Mountie with 4X compact scope, the 1987 Texan with Williams receiver sight, and my 9422 with 4X regular scope, all with 20" barrels balance about 1" in front of the receiver. My 1895SS with 4X scope and 20" barrel balances 1" BEHIND the front of the receiver. This works quite well for me, as I'm only 5'4" tall and with short arms and my left hand grasps the rifles as far back on the fore-end wood as I can, without touching the metal. Longer barreled rifles always feel front heavy to me, as it is uncomfortable for my left hand to grasp them "way out there". Cutting the LOP also works to get the center of gravity closer to my body, and I have done that on occasion also. 13" LOP works real well for me.
Joined
·
77 Posts
C of G
Thanks Luisyamaha.
I was wondering about that. . My 39A rifle balances at a measured 2 inches from the front of the
receiver,so my left hand is at the rear-most position of the forearm with the C of G in the palm .
Do you suppose the octagon barrel on a 1897 is heavier ,so as to move the C of G forward a bit?
However , I am still curious about the 9422. My Win. 1894 carbine balances at the receiver ,my
hand naturally carries it there ,around the loading gate. I thought ,as the 9422 is supposed to be patterned after the 1894 ,they should balance at the same point. Neither my 39 or '94 have scopes.
Thanks Luisyamaha.
I was wondering about that. . My 39A rifle balances at a measured 2 inches from the front of the
receiver,so my left hand is at the rear-most position of the forearm with the C of G in the palm .
Do you suppose the octagon barrel on a 1897 is heavier ,so as to move the C of G forward a bit?
However , I am still curious about the 9422. My Win. 1894 carbine balances at the receiver ,my
hand naturally carries it there ,around the loading gate. I thought ,as the 9422 is supposed to be patterned after the 1894 ,they should balance at the same point. Neither my 39 or '94 have scopes.
Joined
·
1,013 Posts
The octagon barrel I do think is heavier, but it is also 4" shorter than the one on your 39A. Regardless, all my lever action 22's balance in the same place. 1" (maybe 1.5") in front of the receiver. Compact scope, regular scope, receiver sight, round barrels, octagon barrels, solid or laminated wood (9422). The only difference is the 1894SS (my typo before) which balances behind the receiver front. However, they all feel about the same when in the shooting position.
Joined
·
77 Posts
39 carbines
Thanks again for clearing that up Luisyamaha. I think my brother prefers the look of the straight-grip
that 39M's have and since I've never got to hold one,it is good to hear from one who knows 'em !
I think a 39M with a octagon barrel would be what he would like .
Thanks again for clearing that up Luisyamaha. I think my brother prefers the look of the straight-grip
that 39M's have and since I've never got to hold one,it is good to hear from one who knows 'em !
I think a 39M with a octagon barrel would be what he would like .
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!