Done

[COSteve]

Done

[.45colt]

Yep,the little model 92 short rifle .357 Emf that I gave to My Daughter is a heafty chunk of steel with the octagon barrel and the little .357 hole in it. but Boy does it shoot. .

[Terry Murbach]

I HATE OCTOGONAL BARRELS BECAUSE I HATE LUGGING THE darn THINGS AROUND. GIMME THAT SLEEK ROUND BARREL ANYDAY.
BUT I DO HAVE TWO RIFLES WITH OCTOGONAL BARRELS THAT ARE SLEEK AS ALL GITTOUT AND POINT LIKE RADAR AS BOTH HAVE BEAUTIFULLY TAPERED BARRELS THAT TAKES AWAY ALL THAT UNNESSESSARY AUVOURDUPOIS, THE MARLIN CL AND THE BROWNING HI-GRADE 24" BL22 RIFLE.
I DO HAVE A UB. 24" 357MAG RIFLE THAT FEELS LIKE YOU ARE CARRYING 12' OF RE-BAR ANYWHERE YOU TAKE IT. IT IS PRETTY THOUGH, AND IS THE ONLY 357MAG RIFLE I HAVE. ALL THE REST ARE RB CARBINES.

[Griff]

While at the other end of the spectrum, I prefer an octagon barrel. I haven't put either on the scale, but I suspect the 20" octagon barreled .45Colt Rossi 1892 is just as weighty as my 24-¼" Uberti 1873. I'll have to compare them when I get home...

Take the furniture off to get feel for the difference in metal weights. Also, that solid brass carrier is a chunk of weight by itsownself! Are you sure the barrel profiles are the same?

[hightime]

Anybody have the weight on a 1894 Marlin in 45. I'll bet that's light. I'm amazed how light my '95 Cowboy in 45-70 is for a big gun.

Owen

[Pisgah]

No question my Hartford (Rossi) .45 with 24 " octagon barrel is heavy, but it's balance and slimness make it very easy for me to carry. One thing that can cause subtantial weight differences between even identical rifles, and a factor that people sometimes fail to take in to consideration, is wood density. A friend of mine has the same rifle in .357, and common sense would seem to say it should weigh a bit more than my .45; in fact, my rifle outweighs his by 4 ounces, and the only thing I can think of to account for this is wood.

[Griff]

Anybody have the weight on a 1894 Marlin in 45. I'll bet that's light. I'm amazed how light my '95 Cowboy in 45-70 is for a big gun.
Owen

Mine is, but it ain't fully assembled yet...

I haven't put either on the scale, but I suspect the 20" octagon barreled .45Colt Rossi 1892 is just as weighty as my 24-¼" Uberti 1873. I'll have to compare them when I get home...

And I'd have been wrong! The 20" octagon barreled 1892 Rossi in .45 Colt weighs in at 6-¾ lbs empty, while the 24-¼" octagon barreled 1873 weighs 7-½ lbs. That's weighed on my old style balance beam scale, which only has markings at ¼ lb increments.

[Sixgun]

That got me thinkin' and as I have a fetish for scales, I decided to check it out.

Two 1892's made 3 years apart, one on the left is a 32-20 and the one on the right is a 44-40. Both weigh exactly 7 pounds 12 oz.


1881 Marlin with 30" buffalo barrel 40-60 Marlin--11 lb. 12 oz.
1893 Marlin with 26" bl. 38-55--8 lb. 3 oz.
1873 Win 44-40 24" Bl. 8 lb. 12 oz.
1894 Mar. 44-40 24" bl. 7lb 4 oz.
1892 SRC 38-40 6 lb. even


1892 src--stripped action with barrel only. 2 lb. 12oz.

[Canuck Bob]

My Winoku 92 has a 24" octagon barrel in 32-20 and is a take down deluxe. It is quite heavy due to the small caliber barrel. My rifle weighs 8 lbs. 3 oz. unloaded and quite barrelheavy.

[COSteve]

Done

[Old Savage]

it all goes to personal preference in weight and balance. The 24" round barrel 94 in the 30-30 is an interesting compromise in weight, balance and velocity.

[olyinaz]

Yes, it sure does make a difference and it's why I dislike those long barrel Rossi octagons, especially in .357. They're just too unbalanced.

Still, sometimes you want the avoirdupois! I looked for a full length octagonal for my '86 in .45-70 vs. the lightweight model. Surely if I were a hunter that math would have been different.

[cshold]

Thanks Steve,
This post motivated me to do a little very primitive gun weighing myself.
I used my Grandparents vintage WWII food scale. USA made & still works.



1893 Winchester Model 1873 38wcf. {8.13 lbs.}


19teens/twenties? [D 27..] Marlin Model 1893 30wcf. {8.1 lbs.}


1907 Winchester Model 1894 25-35wcf. {7.9 lbs.}



1900 Parker GH 12ga. #1 frame 30” Damascus {7.7 lbs.} (note Parker factory letter says 7 lbs.)





1908 Parker VH 16ga. #0 frame 26” barrels {6.4 lbs.} (Note: Parker factory letter says 5.13 lbs.)





1961 Winchester Model 1894 30-30 Weaver K3W & sling {8.4 lbs.}

[Canuck Bob]

My 70s 444S Williams FP, unloaded and no sling 7 lbs. 9 oz..
50s Winchester 94, 32 Special, Lyman steel receiver sight 6 lbs. 12 oz..
Lee Enfield No.5, Jungle Carbine, 7 lbs.3 oz.
All rifles unloaded and no slings.

The 444 has the nicest handling for a hunting rifle IMO. The Winchester is amazingly handy but a little light and could us some weight forward. My 92 32-20 24" octagon is quite heavy and barrel heavy. The No.5 is okay but its a bolt action and can't compare to the handling of a traditional lever, nothing can IMO.

[Nate Kiowa Jones]

While at the other end of the spectrum, I prefer an octagon barrel. I haven't put either on the scale, but I suspect the 20" octagon barreled .45Colt Rossi 1892 is just as weighty as my 24-¼" Uberti 1873. I'll have to compare them when I get home...

Take the furniture off to get feel for the difference in metal weights. Also, that solid brass carrier is a chunk of weight by itsownself! Are you sure the barrel profiles are the same?

The Rossi is a straight oct where the Uberti is tapered. In small bore it makes a big difference. The 24" Rossi oct in 45lc is not that front heavy and seems to balance in the hand well but the 357mag is way too front heavy for my taste.
I have some original oct 24" Win 92's in 32-20. They balance well. The only Rossi that has that feel is the limited run of half round/half oct 24's they made in the late 90's. The 20" oct Rossi feel more like the 24" original. It just looks funny with the really long forewood. There's more wood than barrel. It's not proportional.


I cut this one back for a customer. the barrel is a 20" oct. I think it looks more proportional

[Canuck Bob]

I wish the darn border didn't seperate us Nate! My Winoku could sure use your touch of magic. My straight octagon 24" barrel in 32-20 cal is far too muzzle heavy for me. I do like the long barrel though.

I have toyed with the idea of doing my 24" take down 32-20 into a half round. The problem is the mount ring for the front of the tube mag is designed for the straight octagon. It looks like the lever that tightens the tube to the action could be reworked to function fully under the barrel. I could then shorten the tube to the button position, dovetail the tube hanger and have the barrel turned forward of that to round. Do you think this is a workable plan, Steve? I can find good machinist smiths locally but they seem to be bolt action men.