What is the fascination with short barrels in the UK

[kenbro]

Yes it is. Not much longer than the cartridge itself.

No, it’s not.
Ken.

No, it is a falling block. It pivots on a pin admittedly, so falls on an arc, nevertheless it is a block that falls. Operated by an underlever. Internal hammer. The Ruger #1 is a modern take on it. Very strong action when the parts fit together well.

Developed I think originally for the Martini Henry, .577-450, famously applied during the Zulu wars. I grew up shooting BSA Martini .22 target rifles, same action in miniature and got a blue for coming near the top of the inter-University league. A good one is still competitive in .22 benchrest. Greener shotguns also same action.

This is a rolling block, totally different, it's just a cylindrical piece forming the breech, with a cut-out to insert/extract the cartridge whilst open, rotated by a thumb lever. The external hammer locks into it as it strikes, making sure everything is in alignment, otherwise it won't go bang. Use the thumb lever as a safety if you want, as well as the hammer on half cock.

Still popular for black powder target shooting in 45-70, 100, 120 etc. Killed a lot of Buffalo, back in the day. Lovely things, much stronger and better than a Sharps, great fun.

Rolling block - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Lynx action uses a toggle linkage, a bit like a Luger pistol. I presume that the pivot pin is left a little sloppy, so that it's the two blocks that actually take the strain. Doesn't seem to offer anything useful, but it's different I suppose. A lot of exposed linkage sticking out of the back too, doesn't look much shorter than a bolt gun, I see only downsides, but never having actually seen one, I could well be wrong.

A Swiss K31 is a true straight pull, and might make the basis of something really idiosyncratic. They are very well made too.

Ruger #1 a modern take on a martini? Do me a favour! Farquharson designed that action sometime in the 19 th century.
Nobody in the know calls a Martini a falling block.
Seems to me you go googling when you print wrong info.
Ken.

 

[Sharpie]

Nonsense.

I think that I know the difference between block actions, and the rest.

There is no definition that the block has to move precisely and lock up in grooves exactly perpendicular to the barrel axis with a slightly complicated mechanism. Martini is a block action that turns on a radius and takes the force at the back. It works and is tolerant of field conditions. To put it mildly..

As is is anything that just puts a chunk of steel in the way, precisely and quickly, without needing turning of bolts etc,.

Whether they be historical stuff like Sharps,, or modern variants, main principles apply.

 

[alberta boy]

The main difference between Martini's and rolling blocks ( tilting or rotating blocks ) and true falling blocks like the Sharps , Winchester High Wall , Ruger No 1 and 3 , Farquharson , etc . is that in the Martini and RB the recoil force bears on the pivot or breech block pin , in the falling blocks , the breech block bears on the mortise inside the receiver . The latter is usually a larger surface and stronger than hinge pin designs . A small , but significant difference . I've owned a few of most of the above and really like the MH and rolling block designs . I have a Swedish RB action that's waiting for a barrel at the moment , it'll be something large caliber and long ( an advantage over the MH , where any round has to be short enough to feed through the feed radius of the breech block ) . In the end , they're all great designs .
To get back on the OP , I have rifles with very short barrels and some with very long barrels . The all have their applications . Carbines have been around for hundreds of years around the world , I don't think that the UK is any more guilty of liking short barreled handy rifles than anyone else . There are times when they're ideal for the situation , and times when they're not . Your mileage may vary .

AB

 

[Dalua]

I think this thread should probably stick to barrel-lengths for now.
When it's sorted that out, it can start to explore the different ways of mis-describing and misunderstanding the various mechanisms of breechloading small-arms.
Proabably it should have stopped when we learned that some short rifles with long barrels are shorter than longer rifles with shorter barrels.

 

[alberta boy]

I think this thread should probably stick to barrel-lengths for now.
When it's sorted that out, it can start to explore the different ways of mis-describing and misunderstanding the various mechanisms of breechloading small-arms.
Proabably it should have stopped when we learned that some shorter rifles with longer barrels are shorther than longer rifles with shorter barrels.

Yes , then we can discuss the width of shorter rifles with longer barrels ...... don't get me started on depth .

AB

 

[stevenedwards]

Yes , then we can discuss the width of shorter rifles with longer barrels ...... don't get me started on depth .

AB

Short fat rifles with long barrels are definitely wider than long thin ones with short barrels, I could provide measurements. Or not.

 

[Sharpie]

Rolling block goes sideways.
Ken.

Oh really ?

Watch this:

 

[Sharpie]

The main difference between Martini's and rolling blocks ( tilting or rotating blocks ) and true falling blocks like the Sharps , Winchester High Wall , Ruger No 1 and 3 , Farquharson , etc . is that in the Martini and RB the recoil force bears on the pivot or breech block pin , in the falling blocks , the breech block bears on the mortise inside the receiver .

I'm not sure that you are correct about the Martini, I have always supposed that the block took the load and transmitted it to the rear of the receiver, in a direct line, the pivot pin playing little part, but I could be completely wrong.

In my early days shooting BSA Martinis we had half a dozen in the club, the rifles were kept in a locked wooden cupboard accessible to all students, the mechanisms removed and locked in the Bursar's safe, we just took one at random and fitted it with the thumbscrew before walking openly, no slips, just slung over our shoulders hanging on to the single-point slings, a mile across the city to the TA range.

Somehow they seemed to work very well. No hearing or eye protection in those days either. As treasurer I looked after the ammo and cash box, kept under my bed. Nobody had an FAC, not even the Bursar, and the local shop sold me the Eley Tenex by the 500, having been told who I was.

The University had it's own independent police force in those days, who understood the ways of students. By the way our route passed the then highest security gaol in the country.

Similar arrangements at school in "the cadets" but using Lee Enfield training rifles. The games master also used his ex-service revolver as a starting pistol, and he didn't use blanks, just fired them vertically.

In the rolling block the forces are shared between the block pin and the hammer pin, as should be clear from the video I linked above.

In the Pfeifer it looks as if the breech is held together by the hinge pin and the locking lever. Obviously works, precise tolerances, and if it ever did let go you are more likely to just blow your shoulder off rather than get a bolt, gases, and shrapnel in your face, hand and eyes, Blaser 93 style. So I can see a positive to the bullpup arrangement.

 

[Sharpie]

No, it’s not.
Ken.

Ruger #1 a modern take on a martini? Do me a favour! Farquharson designed that action sometime in the 19 th century.
Nobody in the know calls a Martini a falling block.
Seems to me you go googling when you print wrong info.
Ken.

Yes it can be.

I only Google to provide links here, I've got a bookshelf a couple of yards long filled with authoritative books, and like to attend presentations by members of the Historical Breechloading Smallarms Association, and have used and shot pretty well all of the old ones, thanks to club members who own, sometimes vast, collections.

I'm certainly no expert, willing to learn even more, not afraid to be corrected.

 

[tackb]

Yes it can be.

I only Google to provide links here, I've got a bookshelf a couple of yards long filled with authoritative books, and like to attend presentations by members of the Historical Breechloading Smallarms Association, and have used and shot pretty well all of the old ones, thanks to club members who own, sometimes vast, collections.

I'm certainly no expert, willing to learn even more, not afraid to be corrected.

may I ask what you shoot yourself at the moment ?

 

[Sharpie]

I currently own a Marlin 336 in 30-30, and a Lee Enfield #4 Mk 2. Used to have a nice .223 but sold it to the club, where it gets more use now.

Otherwise it's club, or club members' rifles.

Stalking is occasional paid-for outings where I use the guest rifle.

Much as I'd like my own dedicated deer rifle, and a large arsenal of others, I can't really justify it to myself, for the limited use it would get without my own opportunities, am not made of money, and engaging in de-cluttering as well.

 

[Cris]

what pains me is people buying calibres like 7mm rem mag, 7x64, 270 in barrel lengths so short the velocity that makes them actually perform well compared to others, is entirely lost...and in turn, you're left with a bigger case, more powder, more barrel erosion, more recoil, more noise, etc...for what, the same performance you could have had if you bought a .308 or 8x57?

There's a reason stutzens are traditionally made in certain calibres, those that work with short barrels.

These days manufacturers believe (probably quite rightly so) that consumers are f*cking daft, and therefore offer a selection of calibres/chamberings in short barrels (one reason being,,,it's cheap!)..so people think for months and months, go on forums, research, god knows what and how much time they put into selecting a calibre and chambering that's perfect, little do they realise that their 18" 7mm RM actually underperforms (on various levels) a bog standard .308..DOH!

short barrels are also not helped by this odd phenomenon of people using moderators,,I can't personally get my head around it and why the hell you'd carry that type of sh*te around on the end of your rifle, but hey ho. so yes, short barrels helps people avoid the witches wand syndrome.

So when the US chap asked why we have such short barrels over here, it's not only a moderator thing but also that a lot of people here simply don't get the point that certain calibres and chamberings need a specific barrel length for burning powder, as well as hitting their sweet spot performance segment which differentiates them above their smaller siblings.

Well it may also be to do with the fact our population density makes using a mod more acceptable. Not for the shooter but other land users and residents. More so in the south were some land owners insist on it.
Short barrels well a dead deer is a dead deer ad until accuracy or legal threshold becomes a problem let the user have what he wants. Why should it matter to anyone. Crazy discussion!

 

[User00003]

Short barrels well a dead deer is a dead deer ad until accuracy or legal threshold becomes a problem let the user have what he wants. Why should it matter to anyone. Crazy discussion!

People can have short barrels if they want, and suffer from high muzzle flash, recoil, powder consumption, short barrel life, etc, etc..with no better performance than a smaller calibre that’s actually efficient in a short calibre..it’s fine, just bloody stupid and uneducated

 

[njc110381]

I like short barrels for some of my guns because it saves me whacking them on the windscreen of the truck when I'm shooting from it. Also, when I carry my 7STW (26" barrel and a long action) in my Vorn pack I spend half my life getting stuck on low branches! Use whatever works for the job, although I agree it's entirely pointless having a short barrel for an overbore cartridge. The likes of .308 are perfectly suited though. I'm just looking at a 16" .308 myself.

 

[ChesterP]

What amuses me with a lot of short barrels, and barrels than have been shortened, is that they use a heavy barrel contour barrel!....at least heavier than a traditional sporting contour. It might be to do with the fashion for wanting a rifle that avoids POI drift as the barrel heats up, but it's entirely questionable that this should be a consideration on a stalking rifle. I'm with PKL here. A lighter, sporting contour barrel of optimal length for the charge makes for the best efficiency and reduces blast and recoil whilst more than likely not weighing any more than a heavier contour barrel of 20 to 22 inches. A rough guide is that from the optimum length for charge/calibre, you loose about 25fps/inch, so those shooting say 20 or 22 inch barrels may be 100fps down on the same charge fired from a 26 inch barrel depending on the load combination. That means a pointless waste of powder and barrel life to get pressures up a fair bit more to match the longer barrel.

In balance, recent years have seen some entrenched attitudes about hearing protection replaced by sensible attitudes, and that has meant more people use moderators than possibly did ever before. A 26 inch barrel with a long mod' can be unwieldy so that's an example of where a 20 to 22 inch barrel makes sense in those cals where you don't lose much for the ranges you shoot at. Nothing wrong with that....just make it a sporting contour and not a varmint!

My shortest rifle is 24 inches and I wouldn't take it any shorter. My little 223 is 26 inches, and even with a match contour barrel is no bother to carry all day. I can see the attraction of having a short barrelled vermin rifle for a handy shot from a truck (off the public roads of course) but other than that or the reason above, can't see any logic in it. What really puzzles me is that even on the range, most of the rifles I see being shot are 22 inch barrels. These aren't the shooter's sporting rifles either...they're heavy chassis range rifles. It just all seems rather illogical.

 

[NigelM]

I'm a bit of a convert to OBT nodes and the the power of Quickload. I know some people don't believe in either of them but they have both proven to work well for me.

Using these two tools you can work out barrel length, predicting pretty accurately whats required.

I have recently spec'd two 6.5x47 Lapua barrels. One a LR rifle to shoot 150 SMK's and the other a Roe/Muntjac/Fallow rifle to shoot 129 ABLR's.

Using QL you can quite easily model the cartridges. Play with different powders to find which give you 95% load density or thereabouts, play with load and COAL to give an acceptable pressure at an OBT node with the barrel length you want at 100% powder burn. You soon find out what length barrel you need to achieve your objectives.

With the 150 SMK it became obvious pretty quickly that node 6 at 2600 fps was the best allrounder. A 24" barrel allowed me to run it at around 55k psi . 22" put me over 58k psi to hit the node which I did not want to get to in order to minimise throat erosion and even at 30" I couldn't get to the next node without excessive pressure.

With the 129 ABLR I didn't want to go above 2800 fps as it causes too much carcass damage on Roe for me (from experience). The OBT node was 2780 fps and I could get there at a very reasonable 54k psi with a 22" barrel. I would have liked to have gone 20" but pressure would have climbed above 58k psi and throat erosion would have increased significantly.

Barrel length can be calculated if you know what you want to achieve.

As for profile, it's all about wall thickness at the muzzle. A #2 profile in 6mm will give you about 180 thou wall thickness. More than enough for stalking. The same in 308 give a wall thickness below 150 thou. Not an issue if you're running a 18" barrel but if it's 26" you're going to end up with something pretty whipy.

I like a bit of weight to my barrels for balance so spec'd a #4 in 22" for stalking and a Heavy Varmint in 24" for LR.

A logical process can lead you to the right barrel length and profile for what you want to achieve for your rifle. It's never going to be the same for everyone and specifying a short barrel just because you like them is unlikely to get the best result.

 

[User00033]

People can have short barrels if they want, and suffer from high muzzle flash, recoil, powder consumption, short barrel life, etc, etc..with no better performance than a smaller calibre that’s actually efficient in a short calibre..it’s fine, just bloody stupid and uneducated

The phrase "bloody stupid and uneducated" is interesting @PKL, in the context of your comment above.

 

[Benji53]

I'm a bit of a convert to OBT nodes and the the power of Quickload. I know some people don't believe in either of them but they have both proven to work well for me.

Using these two tools you can work out barrel length, predicting pretty accurately whats required.

I have recently spec'd two 6.5x47 Lapua barrels. One a LR rifle to shoot 150 SMK's and the other a Roe/Muntjac/Fallow rifle to shoot 129 ABLR's.

Using QL you can quite easily model the cartridges. Play with different powders to find which give you 95% load density or thereabouts, play with load and COAL to give an acceptable pressure at an OBT node with the barrel length you want at 100% powder burn. You soon find out what length barrel you need to achieve your objectives.

With the 150 SMK it became obvious pretty quickly that node 6 at 2600 fps was the best allrounder. A 24" barrel allowed me to run it at around 55k psi . 22" put me over 58k psi to hit the node which I did not want to get to in order to minimise throat erosion and even at 30" I couldn't get to the next node without excessive pressure.

With the 129 ABLR I didn't want to go above 2800 fps as it causes too much carcass damage on Roe for me (from experience). The OBT node was 2780 fps and I could get there at a very reasonable 54k psi with a 22" barrel. I would have liked to have gone 20" but pressure would have climbed above 58k psi and throat erosion would have increased significantly.

Barrel length can be calculated if you know what you want to achieve.

As for profile, it's all about wall thickness at the muzzle. A #2 profile in 6mm will give you about 180 thou wall thickness. More than enough for stalking. The same in 308 give a wall thickness below 150 thou. Not an issue if you're running a 18" barrel but if it's 26" you're going to end up with something pretty whipy.

I like a bit of weight to my barrels for balance so spec'd a #4 in 22" for stalking and a Heavy Varmint in 24" for LR.

A logical process can lead you to the right barrel length and profile for what you want to achieve for your rifle. It's never going to be the same for everyone and specifying a short barrel just because you like them is unlikely to get the best result.

Good answer and bang on

 

[stevenedwards]

Ive just got back from stalking, amazingly I managed to shoot a deer with a 28 inch rifle with all the shortcoming listed in this thread. BF at 204 yds and I didn't notice any of them ! I'll leave you to it, going to feed the dog and put the deer in the fridge. I probably have a dog which is to short as well, miniature dachshund.

 

[User00033]

This is getting silly guys.

Its a simple maths problem, first, followed by ergonomics second, followed by aesthetics a distant last. If you've got that order the wrong way round, go home and try again.

A compromise between 1 and 2 above make for a very effective tool. But as we know, only certain cartridges are suitable (find out which, with the maths). And although I know several who don't moderate their short barrels, they really should.

Can't quite believe that the concept of short barrels gets some people so wound up!

@NigelM is right, Quickload is a fantastic tool to work all this stuff out. I spent a good while modelling my .308 to find the right compromise between portability, power and powder burn. I accept I will cook the first baffle in my DPT mod, eventually, can get a stainless steel one if I feel its necessary. You've all seen how many deer I head shoot from 500m with with my 20" .243...

A comment @ChesterP... heavier contour short barrels can be extremely useful, as they tend to balance the rifle better than a shortened sporter contour. Shortening for weight reduction generally isn't the primary motive, its portability in the bush, and a short medium or varmint contour barrel has a distinct advantage over a short light barrel, for shooting offhand.