• 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
  • Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

What does a longer barrel add to a rifle's ability that a shorter one gives up ?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Yeah, I agree ... But I've had difficulty setting up such a sight pair to my liking on BP rifles, mostly because the aperture (or close to aperture, such as a full buckhorn) sits higher above the barrel plain, and the drop at the comb is so dramatic compared to contemporary rifles. So I find it really difficult to get a solid and repeatable cheek weld that puts me in the same position for each shot with the peep or buckhorn if it's mounted in the standard rear sight dovetail -- raising my head or at least my chin to line up the sights, and that's no good. You can solve that problem if you use something like a tang-mounted aperture, but those aren't acceptable in a lot of traditional muzzle loading target circumstances.
If a tang mount aperture is out then the next best rear I know of is a wide flat top with plenty of light around a wide front blade. Stay away from the buckhorns which do not give as good of definition of elevation and are poor on horizontal moving shots of game.
 
Ah but they're not, eh? From your descriptions, the long barrels and short barrels don't have a crossing over caliber...
So folks have mentioned that the longer barrels will give you a longer sight plane. This is true and make it easier for a shooter's eye to give an accurate shot. Will the barrel be more accurate, no, if the accuracy of the barrel itself is bad, then a longer sight plane may help reduce the group but won't fix the actual problem. The front sight must be rather thin, and you the shooter must be able to see that thin front sight out there near the end of the 46" barrel.

Some folks mentioned higher velocity. Well, on paper, yes. The problem is for example you have the choice of a .40..., were you to use a moderate load of say 30 grains for squirrel or rabbit..., the friction of the barrel walls might actually slow your patched round ball down a bit as it travels 46" compared to a 33" barrel in .40 caliber using the same load.

Some folks have mentioned shooting..., Well that too depends. A very long barrel may give you a very "nose heavy" rifle, which some folks like when shooting from the standing, unsupported position. Some rifle makers might, however, balance that rifle by using some weight in the butt..., if they didn't like it that nose heavy. I don't shoot much standing, unsupported, so that wouldn't help me much, but it might help you.

Now, the slower twist rate is not going to make the rifle more accurate, per se. It normally allows for the shooter to shoot more powder, without the danger of the ball and patch disengaging from the rifling while moving up the barrel. But this normally isn't a problem unless very stout loads are used, and most folks even when hunting don't go that high. NOW for long range shooting, technically the slower twist will allow higher muzzle velocity, and thus less bullet drop on targets beyond 100 yards, so some will say that makes a slow twist rate more accurate. At under 100 yards, likely will not matter.

Do any of the rifles have set triggers? That may be a factor to consider as well.

LD
* The .40 Cal rifle weighs 7lbs, has a 46" barrel that is Swamped A weight. It has a set trigger, it is 62" OAL and has a Cherry stock that is a Southern Mountain Rifle configuration. Length of pull is 13 3/4".

* The .45 Cal rifle weighs 6lbs 10oz, has a 46" barrel that is Swamped A weight. It has a set trigger, it is 62" OAL and has a Cherry stock in a Southern Mountain Rifle configuration. Length of pull is 13 5/8".

* The .50 Cal rifle weighs 8lbs 4oz, has a 45 3/4" barrel that is not Swamped but is octagon to round. It has a set trigger and the rifling is 1:56" twist. It is 61 1/2" OAL, it has a Siler Lock as it was converted from percussion to flintlock. It has a 13 1/2" length of pull. Apparently it was built by Getz and then sent to Mike Roby for engraving as part of a raffle prize in a special event held in 1980 ( I've been told his by the seller so credibility is assumed). This rifle is maple stock and is of the Lancaster School of Rifle design.

Just got this information today from the seller's son as the seller has become ill and has his son handling matters for him. The Jager Rifle sold as well as the Common Rifle. I hope this helps more im still trying to figure out all of the specifics to muzzleloading firearms, my apologies.
 
If a tang mount aperture is out then the next best rear I know of is a wide flat top with plenty of light around a wide front blade. Stay away from the buckhorns which do not give as good of definition of elevation and are poor on horizontal moving shots of game.
I agree on that, although a buckhorn can be modified to provide what I think of as "elevation indices". And if you're not shooting at game, the horizontal movement issue doesn't arise. Still, I think the buckhorn (of course mounted somewhere up the barrel and not as a true aperture sight) suffers from a sort of fundamental visual sloppiness. I spent a long time experimenting with one, but finally retreated to the original flat top notch sight. My front blade now sports a tiny length of fiber optic glued to its top edge. :) Still trying to get the height of that exactly how I want it. :rolleyes:
 
Marble has some interesting sights. Take a look at their Bullseye rear peep sight that mounts in a dovetail. Unfortunately, as with any other peep sight, this is forbidden by various match regulations. But it's still a neat idea. Of course, for a BP rifle, you'll almost certainly need to work a bit on the base in order to fit your dovetail.
 
I'm going to remove the rear sight on one of my guns and play around with the front only. Works for the smoothie crowd.
 
Marble has some interesting sights. Take a look at their Bullseye rear peep sight that mounts in a dovetail. Unfortunately, as with any other peep sight, this is forbidden by various match regulations. But it's still a neat idea. Of course, for a BP rifle, you'll almost certainly need to work a bit on the base in order to fit your dovetail.
Being a hobbiest gun mechanic for the last 40 plus years I've had occasion to fabricate and try various sight types and about 20 years ago came across the idea of putting brass tops on bladed front sights with a 45 degree angle to the rear face. This angle will catch any available light and is one of the best I have found to hold elevation on game or target. Most of the blades I have milled for various gun projects are .100 wide and show up very well in the sight radius lengths of around 30 inches which is common for tang mounted apertures. This width will also work well for barrel sights which are usually much closer together. The technique is to hold six oclock on target or game. The width of the front sight is what holds the elevation profile so well in contrast to the rear sight wide flat with lots of light showing around the front sight.
 
That's what I just did and wow what a difference in the sight picture, I love that brass blade. I've tried a fiberoptic and it gave a blurry tip but the brass is a crisp bright gold line even in low light. I patina the sides and top of the blade to take any glare off the tip. I'm in the process of fitting all my rifles to this.
 
* The .40 Cal rifle weighs 7lbs, has a 46" barrel that is Swamped A weight. It has a set trigger, it is 62" OAL and has a Cherry stock that is a Southern Mountain Rifle configuration. Length of pull is 13 3/4".

* The .45 Cal rifle weighs 6lbs 10oz, has a 46" barrel that is Swamped A weight. It has a set trigger, it is 62" OAL and has a Cherry stock in a Southern Mountain Rifle configuration. Length of pull is 13 5/8".

* The .50 Cal rifle weighs 8lbs 4oz, has a 45 3/4" barrel that is not Swamped but is octagon to round. It has a set trigger and the rifling is 1:56" twist. It is 61 1/2" OAL, it has a Siler Lock as it was converted from percussion to flintlock. It has a 13 1/2" length of pull. Apparently it was built by Getz and then sent to Mike Roby for engraving as part of a raffle prize in a special event held in 1980 ( I've been told his by the seller so credibility is assumed). This rifle is maple stock and is of the Lancaster School of Rifle design.

Just got this information today from the seller's son as the seller has become ill and has his son handling matters for him. The Jager Rifle sold as well as the Common Rifle. I hope this helps more im still trying to figure out all of the specifics to muzzleloading firearms, my apologies.

If possible, buy them all. If not, buy the .50 for deer. Lancastrian guns are usually very comfortable to shoot. And the octagon to round is very cool. Unless you prefer SMRs. They have been very trendy for a good while, and especially so since Kibler brought his out.

I bought my last three rifles from a single estate. About 30 MLs in the estate and I got a SMR-Penn hybrid .40, a Bucksish .50, and a 20ga smoothrifle all at one go.
 
I like the Lancaster pattern rifle for its larger caliber for hunting. Probably my top choice. But the 45 caliber is a nice light and probably better handling rifle than the 2 pound heavier Lancaster.

It really may come down to which of these rifles feels best on the shoulder. The second level of choosing may come down to which one has the best lock and barrel.
 
* The .40 Cal rifle weighs 7lbs, has a 46" barrel that is Swamped A weight. It has a set trigger, it is 62" OAL and has a Cherry stock that is a Southern Mountain Rifle configuration. Length of pull is 13 3/4".

* The .45 Cal rifle weighs 6lbs 10oz, has a 46" barrel that is Swamped A weight. It has a set trigger, it is 62" OAL and has a Cherry stock in a Southern Mountain Rifle configuration. Length of pull is 13 5/8".

Well, I love .40 but it's not legal for deer in many states, yet tends to be pretty good as a target rifle as well as hunting small game if you can't use it for deer.

I'd probably opt however for the .45, as I already own a .40, .45 is fine for taking deer, and as one gets older the low or even unfelt recoil is a pleasure, AND you can find lots of different rifles with barrel out to 42" but something 46" is a real, rare find.

LD
 
Being a hobbiest gun mechanic for the last 40 plus years I've had occasion to fabricate and try various sight types and about 20 years ago came across the idea of putting brass tops on bladed front sights with a 45 degree angle to the rear face. ...
I like it. I've though of doing something like that myself, but didn't want to dig into that project. Nickel would work too. But I think you do need to be concerned about the glare coming off such a piece. So brass is probably better. But the idea is great because it provides more contrast between front and rear sight and between different parts of the rear sight. Contemporary pistol shooters don't have white or hi viz inserts or dots on their rear sights just because it looks cool.
 
I've tried a fiberoptic and it gave a blurry tip ...
Yeah, that's a problem. But you can tinker with the effect to some degree by the color you choose, the size, and the angle of the rear surface. I'm still tinkering a bit. Because of this effect, a fiber optic dot seems often to "look bigger" than a similar dot that's just white plastic or ivory or brass.
 
I always heard that a copper penny would show better than brass when used in low light conditions as a front sight
You could just use a thin, silver front sight post. They come in different heights, and are easily adjusted with a fine file down to the proper height. They are available from Track of The Wolf. I put thin silver on my rifles.

LD
 
So why the early development of swamped barrels rather than fluted barrels? Easier to machine with what was available at the time (lathe as opposed to milling machine)?
mostly aesthetics (reminiscent of the older "cannon muzzles"); and it gives the impression of a higher-value gun, as it takes substantially more work to produce swamped barrels than any other shape. There were also plenty of tapered and straight barrels pre-1830's, both in Europe and in the European Colonies in North America. You do see a few guns with flutes in the barrels pre-1800, but the mills needed to do those consistently and in a time-efficient manner didn't really show up until the 1810's, and then primarily in the hands of State Arsenals and large firms.
 
Last edited:
For older shooters the sight picture becomes more difficult to put together due depth of focus issues.
Thats why we move the rear sight forward until a good sight picture can be had. My rear sight was set 16 years ago, and I can still see both sights. Looks a bit silly, but shoots.
 
My Hawken full stock sports a 36 inch barrel ... does that qualify as a 'long rifle'? ;):rolleyes: Beauty is not a quality dependent on long or short, in my opinion, but on form. function, workmanship, choice of wood, and tasteful carving/engraving. I am not impressed with a lot of needless decoration of any sort. That said I love a tastefully designed and built gun, regardless of its size. I love 'em all but just don't put a brass lizard on a iron mounted deer rifle. My 1 1/2 cents worth. Polecat
 
Back
Top