• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

Short Barrel Hawken

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

52Bore

40 Cal.
Joined
Dec 14, 2016
Messages
622
Reaction score
830
Reading MB magazine and another of probably 1/2 dozen articles on Hawken (Sam & Jake) rifles written over the past 1.5-2 years; this article on short barrel Hawken's, less than 30" and author describes why/how they are different than other Hawken's.
The author has even reproduced copies of some of the rifles he's wrote about using TOW parts and old Bill Large barrels.
I found it interesting that his Chronograph testing of a 36" barrel, then cut off to 24" - only 100fps difference with each when using 90, 100, 120, 140 & 160gr Goex 2F.
 
That sounds about right.
For a close range rifle, a 100 fps drop isn't going to make a lot of difference.
 
52Bore said:
Reading MB magazine and another of
I found it interesting that his Chronograph testing of a 36" barrel, then cut off to 24" - only 100fps difference with each when using 90, 100, 120, 140 & 160gr Goex 2F.

Different than everything ever written before.
 
Do not remember where i read this but i recall an article from years ago where someone lopped off 1 inch at a time and chronoed it and seems like they lost a bit less then 100 fps with each inch lopped off.

Not an accuracy test but a velocity test. Wish i could remember where i read this.
 
unclear. 100 ft difference between the long barrel and the short barrel, or 100 difference between the 90 to 160 grain charges in the short barrel. A 24 inch barrel won't burn much over 75 grains before most of the rest is burned outside the barrel. So 90 to 160 grains won't make a big difference.
 
bigted said:
Do not remember where i read this but i recall an article from years ago where someone lopped off 1 inch at a time and chronoed it and seems like they lost a bit less then 100 fps with each inch lopped off.

Not an accuracy test but a velocity test. Wish i could remember where i read this.
I don' know where you read it either.

Dixie Gunworks did a test with a 40" long, .40 caliber barrel where they chopped off the barrel 2" at a time and tested a number of powder charge velocities at each length. The velocities are the average of 5 shots tested with each powder load.

Just picking the 47 grains of DuPont FFFg, they give these values:

40" = 1770 fps
38" = 1747
36" = 1735
34" = 1610 ?
32" = 1654
30" = 1642
28" = 1623
26" = 1596
24" = 1593
22" = 1553
20" = 1509

I added the question mark because it seems to have been a mis-print.

This table is in most if not all of the Dixie Gunworks catalogs in the data section.
 
I believe T/C did a similar test and determined the 28" bbl was a kind of optimum for efficiency and gun wt. I think the info was in their brochure included with the new rifle. Yes, the longer bbl was better, but .........
 
The data is plotted in graph form in MuzzleBlast. No numerical numbers (I'll estimate base on the graph)
54cal, 0.530" RB, 0.015" patch, Goex 2F
5 shot average

36" bbl
60gr 1200fps
80gr 1425
100gr 1575
120gr 1800
140gr 1950
160gr 2050

24"
60gr 1200fps
80gr 1350
100gr 1525
120gr 1650
140gr 1825
160gr 1925
 
From the information above, there is little reason in having a long barrel, longer than 24" other than eye appeal.
SO! Canoe guns really do rule!
So us guys with shorter stubby barrels are just as effective, :shocked2:
Fred
 
Been told its not the length, its how you use it. :slap:

Develop best load and then practice practice practice practice

Old Ford could go to the range and shoot a 1/2" group off hand in the wind with his gun. Let another guy give it a go at half the range from a bench and he gets a 6" group. He didnt use the optimum load for the gun and only shoots the 2 weeks before season opener.

:shake:
 
True, the author shows 2 targets.
50yds 1" 3 shot group
100yds 3.75" group with 1 shot looks to be 2" under the other 4.
The reproduction the author made looks very nice.
 
Mr. 52Bore,
If someone out there is saying he's getting a 3.75" group using 54cal, 0.530" RB, 0.015" patch, Goex 2F at 100yrds with a 24" barrel(?)
He's lying.
It may have sold a good article for a magazine,, but it's simply not something that is common, or something that a common man will do on a repeated basis.
(period)
 
Okay I am curios with your answer :hmm: . Is it because the ball and patch combo, the powder, or is it because of the barrel length? I am guessing it is because of the barrel length having the shorter sighting plain and open sights. That was a pretty blanket statement with no explaination. I got no horse in this race, I am just curious with your answer. DANNY
 
:metoo:

I usually wont keep a rifle that throws a group larger than 4" at 90yds. Also I have shot several 2" and less groups at that distance. Used to be more regular till the govt started puttin somethin in the water that has affected my eyes just a bit :confused:
 
That's valid.
Experience. Please note that I said;
not something that is common, or something that a common man will do on a repeated basis
Everyone has a "wallet group",, that's an actual cut out or photo of a really good group they got one time in their life that's has bragging rights.
It is massively extraordinary that the un-named paid author of the muzzleblast, article achieved those results. I'm sure in the article he wrote that the manufacturer of the ball and the patch where named, and that he thanks them for the opportunity to test their equipment.

Reality is, except for those few gifted and extraordinary people that participate in NMLRA national shoots year after year,, us common folk dealing with over the counter guns are doing very well to see 4-6" off-hand groups at 100yrds with standard length barrels let alone short barrels, small ball and loose patch.
It's just the daily truth.
 
Since the author of the Short Barrel Hawken article shot 5 shot groups with each of the 2 barrel lengths and loads from 60-160gr - I'd suspect much of his work was probably done from a rest...
I witnessed Ted G. shoot a 24" barrel percussion rifle shooting conicals "WIN" a Long Range ML match at Oak Ridge, TN (200, 300, 600 & 1000 yards).
So, the Muzzle Blast author shooting makes sense to me - a 1" group at 50 most certainly can open up to nearly 4" at 100 - after all the RB have the worst ballistics of any projectile.
But, it seems necchi can call the author a lier for posting a 3.75" group from a new rifle - yet post 4-6" is acceptable? It seems 2" have been achieved by more than 1 other post.
This isn't experience from necchi this is a Prima Donna.
 
It would seem to me that barrel length in and of itself would not change accuracy by itself at 100 yards. Velocity and trajectory may be different with a short barrel vs a long barrel. As Nechi pointed out the sighting distance of the barrel would be changed and the shorter distance would be harder for most of us to shoot accurately. Still the barrels themselves in the hands of a top level shooter wouldn't make much difference.
 
Several years ago a guy said he could shoot an aspirin out of the air with a recurve bow. Hard to believe. I never said he couldn't but it's one of those type things you wander about and want to see it done. Well, sometime later I saw a video of him doing just that. And not just once but several times in a row. Impressive.

I'm relatively new here but I'm not too keen on seeing someone call another a liar without hard proof, and showing the proof. That's a mighty strong word to use against another person on a public forum. I'd want proof of his untruthfulness, hard factual truth, before I did that. If this forum has dipped to that level, maybe I should just find another place to chat about muzzleloading rifles. I'm a bit surprised the Moderator's have left that accusation posted.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top