Those with Model 92 in .357 -- preferred barrel length?

[Bill in Oregon]

I know a bunch of you have Model 92s -- Winchester or Rossis. Is there any consensus on which barrel length is optimal? I had a Rossi a while back in .45 Colt with a 24-incher, but it was an octagon and added just enough extra weight to take the liveliness out of the platform. Guessing this might not be an issue with the round-barreled versions.

[Paladin]

I only have the 20-inch and the 16. In .44 Mag, .357, and .45 both are pretty handy but the 16-inch is probably my favorite.

After reading a couple of other responses I will admit I have Red dots or optics on almost all of my leverguns. Even my Co-Pilot has an Aimpoint Patrol rifle optic.

[JimT]

16 is my preferred ... the 18" Rossi is nice also.

[.45colt]

Bill, I don't want to interfere but I was Up in Erie Pa yesterday at a Great Gun Shop and they had a new Ruger/Marlin .357 on the shelf. They had MSRP on it over $1200 . It was very nice. I will be going back soon with some stuff to trade . I got a bad case of Leveritius and had to walk out before I lost My self control. I love My 92's but that Gun was Sweet!! You May want to be patient, look around.

[Sixgun]

It all depends on your needs, your eyesight, and generally what you feel better shooting. I’ve always been a rifleman, preferring the 24” on originals. I know next to nothing on imports, other than they don’t work half the time…except the Jap guns. Life is too short to waste time on junk.

I shoot better offhand with the 24” and was the preferred barrel length during competition, pretty much universally amongst competitors.

In my opinion, I’d use a revolver with a 6.5 or 7.5” as opposed to a 16” on a rifle….but that’s me….plus, 16” barrels on original Winchesters are as scarce as hens teeth.

My second favorite 1892 is a 38-40 SRC with a half magazine.

[Bill in Oregon]

Have to admit I am baffled as to why Rossi insists on the 1:30 twist in .357, but have found a number of comments that it will handle up to 170 and maybe 200 grains (in .38 Special brass) if moving fast enough.

[jnyork]

I have a Rossi, 24" octagonal barrel, perfect for silhouette with Lyman 17a front and Marbles tang sight. I smoothed it up a little, it has never stuttered through at least a couple thousand rounds.

[COSteve]

Got both a 20" carbine and 24" rifle in .357 mag and they both are good at what they're outfitted for. The answer you seek is totally dependent upon what you want out of your .357 mag levergun. The different barrel lengths have different strengths and none are perfect for everything.

The 20" Carbine is better for woods walking and general plinking out to 150 yds with the peep sight on the rear of the receiver giving it a 22" sight radius. The 24" rifle is better at longer range and more precise shooting out to 300 yds with it's target aperture tang rear sight and globe front sight that gives it a 30" sight radius and heavier barrel for better 'hang'.

Same with my Uberti .45 Colts; I've got a 19" 1866 Yellowboy clone with it's unique flip rear sight and a 24" 1873 Special Sporting rifle with another tang sight. They're each good for what they're set up for; shorter or longer range; fast acquisition or more accurate aiming.

[Griff]

I have 2 Rossi carbines in .357. Both were competition rifles for my wife & son in cowboy action. Both are 20", and met their needs. I also have a Short Rifle in 45 Colt with the 20" Octagon bbl. I used it a few times in matches, but really maintain it as my hog gun. All are only equipped with the factory sights.

[Pat C]

Love the 16 " trapper in a SRC . If it were not for having to SBR one I would make short 14"

[wvfarrier]

I prefer a 24" barrel but am ok with a 20". Do not care for anything shorter than that

[OldWin]

I only have one .357. It's an old Interarms Rossi 20" carbine. However, it's no different than any of my Winchesters when it comes to barrel length.
Full length rifles are best on the range or in the open. Sight radius, capacity, less heat issues regarding accuracy. They are more steady offhand, and the weight out front keeps them on target better when shooting fast.

Most of my field conditions, however, don't make a full length rifle a whole lot of fun. Due to the thick woods, ranges are also shorter. Naturally, I prefer a carbine Most of the time. While I like Trappers, and have several, for all around I think the 20" is a better balance. Literally, for balance, and because of this are a little steadier. For myself, if I have to shoot past a 100 yards, a 20" is easier than a Trapper to make quick hits.

[jkbrea]

Love the 16 " trapper in a SRC . If it were not for having to SBR one I would make short 14"

I'm with you. I have a few Winchesters, Marlins, and AR's . My go to, even after being in the Army and 3O years L.E. is my Winchester Trapper 16" in .357. Its accurate out to 200 with iron sights, handy as heck in my truck, UTV and RV. The .357 packs a punch, especially with Buffalo Bore and recoil is almost nothing.

[Grizz]

Love the 16 " trapper in a SRC . If it were not for having to SBR one I would make short 14"

I'm with you. I have a few Winchesters, Marlins, and AR's . My go to, even after being in the Army and 3O years L.E. is my Winchester Trapper 16" in .357. Its accurate out to 200 with iron sights, handy as heck in my truck, UTV and RV. The .357 packs a punch, especially with Buffalo Bore and recoil is almost nothing.

I have a trapper also. Model 94 AE. Complete with rebounding hammer and tang push button. That doesn't bother me because the gun hits what it's pointed at. Handi-Dandy likes 125Gr loads. I know, not a 92. I like how it shoots anyway.

[AJMD429]

.
I like the 16-in setup with a Marbles Bullseye rear sight and a Williams Firesight up front. They are the fastest to get on target of any sighting system I've seen, so perfect for home defense or snap-shooting.

I like the 20-in setup with a Williams FP rear sight and either a gold bead if it is a Marlin because that's what they come with, or a Williams Firesight up front. They are the most practical for hunting mostly because of the sights I prefer, but there is probably a little extra velocity and flatter trajectory.

I like the 24-in setup with a Lyman Globe front sight, and a Marbles (or Taurus clone) tang sight. Mostly because that extra site radius makes for fun at the range, where you don't really care about the extra barrel length.

Without the luxury of being able to have all three, I suppose I would pick the 16-inch one, but I might put the Williams FP on it because it's easier to adjust if I change loads than the Marbles Bullseye.

[earlmck]

Have to admit I am baffled as to why Rossi insists on the 1:30 twist in .357, but have found a number of comments that it will handle up to 170 and maybe 200 grains (in .38 Special brass) if moving fast enough.

I have a beautiful LBT 180 grain g.c. bullet that was for a long time my main pill in the revolver. Does not shoot for poop out of the Rossi past 100 yards. The Rossi does much better with a 140 grain g.c. bullet I throw from an Accurate mould and I have simplified my "supply lines" by using the same bullet in my revolver so long as I'm just plinking. (Were I ever to go back to hunting with the revolver I'd return to the 180 grainer.) With the 140 grain bullet I have got an occasional hit at the 600 yard buffalo using the Rossi. Or at least a grandson got the hits -- I use my old 38/40 when we're playing that game.

I like rifles. Rifles have 24" bbls or longer. I don't want the rifle to be "lively"; I want it to be deadly. But I totally respect that all of us have our personal preferences, and have noted that a majority on this forum really like their carbines. Come to think of it -- the 38/40 m92 has a 22" bbl and it is a strong contender for "favorite levergun" with me, so I guess I am not an absolutist.

Anyway, get one with a decent barrel length and I may buy it off you when your get tired of it in about 3 months Bill.

[Bill in Oregon]

Earl, it seems you still have my number, old friend!

[COSteve]

I think that all of the responses support my post; the preferred barrel length and sighting setup is mostly a function of preferred use, not an absolute rule. But that only seems logical to me as you'd likely not bring a bolt gun to a machine gun match or a machine gun to a 1,000 yd sniper match.

[Old Savage]

16”

[Bill in Oregon]

You fellers with the 16-inchers: Have any of you ever mounted a sling and carried them this way? Seems like they would be very out of the way and easy to pack so equipped. This would not be as handy as simply packing a .357 sixgun in a holster, but the little carbine would be much easier to put to accurate use at distance -- at least in my clumsy hands. Just day-dreaming here, waiting for the Canadian air to arrive this afternoon.

[Scott Tschirhart]

I don’t have a short .357 carbine. But I have toted a 16 inch Winchester 94 SRC in .30-30 around for many years.

I can’t imagine a handier rifle for my uses.

[Bill in Oregon]

Scott, I had a 94 in the Trapper configuration in .45 Colt, years ago. This was the version where the lifters kept breaking and Winchester quit making them, but with warm loads and a Williams Foolproof on the rear it was an incredibly handy and potent package.

[Scott Tschirhart]

Mine was made back before they started doing the angle eject models and it seems to work fine.

[mickbr]

I am a fan of 24" barrels on a lot of guns but I found in 357 the 24" rossi was end heavy for me . Original 92's had more taper, rossis seem almost paralell sided. In 44 mag which has the same dia barrel there is more meat taken out thanks to the bigger hole and these balance okay. For 357 though my vote as an all round shooter is 20". Of course if you are competition or silhouette shooting the 24" may be fine but I cant comment as I dont do either. Handle one before you buy though.

[91B40]

20 inch Rossi 92 is great for me. The wife has a 16 inch Trapper Model 94. The shorter barrel is easier for her to manage. Both are .357’s. I would like to find a Model 92 Trapper.

[Grizz]

On topic from a different angle. -> what, if any, velocity gain is there with the various barrel lengths of 357 ? I know the 4 inch smith kills deer on close shots. I never shot one with the trapper, but I wonder what the velocity is, and by extension what it is from a 24 inch barrel.

My 45/70 load runs at various velocities up to a point, but is seems to have run out of gas before escaping the 32 inch barrel, I guess it's slowing down from whatever the best for velocity length might be. Uh, no, I'm not gonna chop it off inch by inch . . .

Anyone have hard data on the 357 round v barrel length question?

[FLINT]

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

this chart only goes up to 18" and it looks like velocity MAY be still increasing at that point, but not much, and looks like it depends on the load

[COSteve]

Anyone have hard data on the 357 round v barrel length question?

Yes, I do for 20" and 24" Rossi 92s in 38spl & .357mag as well as for 19" and 24" Uberti 66/73 in .45 Colt.

The velocity differences vs barrel length are very much dependent upon the powder chosen and bullet weight. I believe that much of the confusion and such is the result that most commercial pistol rounds are by design formulated to work optimally in a barrel of 4" - 7" so they may not be optimal for a longer barrel found in a levergun. Further, most commercial .45 Colt loads are 'Cowboy' loads specifically formulated for lower velocity so they would not show much if any velocity gains in a longer barrel.

I studied BBI's data with special attention to the brand of ammo tested and most if not all commercial ammo used was developed specifically for use in a pistol, not a levergun. So, the short answer is; if you want best velocities in your leverguns you have to handload using 'magnum' powders if possible as you won't get best velocities from most commercial ammo.

You will note that the Uberti data only uses Unique powder and not any 'magnum' loads. That's because, after a discussion with Steve of Steve's Guns back in 2013, before I got my .45 Colts, he advised to keep the loads for the '66/'73's toggle link actions at or below the 14,000psi level of standard .45 Colt loads to ensure that I didn't damage the links. That said, on to the data (click on the image to enlarge it):

Levergun Ballistic Data.jpg

Note that in every case, the 24" barreled Rifle produced higher velocities than the Carbines.

[AJMD429]

You fellers with the 16-inchers: Have any of you ever mounted a sling and carried them this way? Seems like they would be very out of the way and easy to pack so equipped. This would not be as handy as simply packing a .357 sixgun in a holster, but the little carbine would be much easier to put to accurate use at distance -- at least in my clumsy hands. Just day-dreaming here, waiting for the Canadian air to arrive this afternoon.

A single-point sling on a saddle-ring works pretty well for carrying, then an extra snap/stud on the forend you can clip together helps if you need more stability but less speed. Just like the setup folks use on their M-4s and ARs, and works well.

I guess the saddle ring was the original "tactical single point sling"...

CoSteve.... I never saw Miles Per Hour in load data before; kinda cool....!

[COSteve]

CoSteve.... I never saw Miles Per Hour in load data before; kinda cool....!

I just got a 'wild hair' one day and added it for fun.

[Grizz]

CoSteve.... I never saw Miles Per Hour in load data before; kinda cool....!

I just got a 'wild hair' one day and added it for fun.

That's good info Steve. Thanks. I still have from my subsistance hunting days some 357 reloads that wound up too too for the Model 66, and I saved them until I had a carbine to shoot them from for chrono data etc. Then of course I misplaced that box of that ammo. Sheesh. I'll find it eventually. Too many moves in the interim.

Are your rifle loads too too much for hand guns?

[Bill in Oregon]

Good data, Steve. Thanks for sharing it.
Doc, the single-point concept almost sounds like "dragoon carry."