357 : 20" or 24"?

[BrazilianSnowMan]

Hello to all.
Im going to buy an Inox Puma .357.
There are 2 to choose from: 20 inches, normal barrel and a 24 inches and bull octagonal barrel. The 20" is more than 2 pounds lighter.

My intended use is for teaching classes and HD in some situations.

What are your opinions, gentlemen?
Any input is appreciated.

 

[Charlie98]

20"... but only if they don't have a 16".

 

[Ohen Cepel]

I would go shorter and lighter. Recoil is mild enough with a .357 and not much, if any, velocity gain at barrel lengths that long.

Also, I think the heavier option my be harder to teach novices with as it is likely rather front heavy.

 

[valnar]

Depending on the load, most powder is burned up well before 20", let alone 24". I think 20" is too long.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

 

[BrazilianSnowMan]

 

[BrazilianSnowMan]

There is a 3rd option.
16.5"

Is it better?

 

[Ohen Cepel]

Yes, I would likely go 16.5in if possible. Will be lighter, handier, and the only thing you may give up is a round or 2 in the tube.

 

[someguy2800]

I would get the 20" for the extra 2 rounds in the magazine.

 

[CraigC]

I default to the 20" carbine. With max loads, it will yield more velocity and I like that length better. IMHO, 16" leverguns are overrated.

The 24" octagon would be way too heavy. Save that length/profile for the big bores.

 

[Varminterror]

20” - 24’s carry too long for what I want to do with leverguns, and 16’s don’t hold as well on target. So make mine 20”.

And when it comes to revolver cartridge leverguns, also…

Make Mine a Marlin.

 

[bearcreek]

My intended use is for teaching classes and HD in some situations.

What is the subject matter of the classes?

There is a 3rd option.
16.5"

Is it better?

It's better if you need/want to fit it in smaller spaces. It's not better if you want the most stable, highest velocity option.

Make Mine a Marlin.

Wouldn't surprise me if Marlin's are tough to come by in Brazil.

 

[adcoch1]

I have a 24" octagon barrel on my Rossi 357, and that gun is a hog! I love it, but it's way too heavy. I've contemplated cutting it down to 18"-20" just to help it handle a little faster. But it's a pleasure to shoot.

 

[Beck]

20" is hands down the best choice for the stated purposes. I have a 20" Rossi that's about 30 years old. Great size and feel for teaching and HD.

 

[Riomouse911]

I had a 24” .45 Colt 1894 Winchester. It was pretty front heavy and, honestly, 24” felt way too big for the cartridge.

I’ve had 20” and 16” .357 Rossi ‘92 rifles. Of them I prefer the 16”, it is a nice, compact rifle to carry and is much handier in a SD-HD situation if one has to move down a hallway or hold it one handed for a little bit while you hit 911 on the phone. The 20” is very good as well, I just found the 16” to be a tad handier for my purposes. (And the Win 1892 style is a much smoother action for pistol cartridges than the Win 1894 is.)

Put on a peep sight and the guns shoot even better, especially at or past 100 yards/meters.

Let us know what you choose and how it shoots for you when you do.

Stay safe.

 

[P Flados]

I prefer 16" for this type of application, but 20" is definitely better than 24" in a 357. A 16" holds plenty of ammo for normal needs, and anything longer 16" is more likely to give reduction in velocity than it is to give an increase in velocity (depending on load, as shown by testing - see link in post 4). A 16" is "handier" and much more appropriate if ever used for Home defense.

 

[Dave DeLaurant]

Only good reason I can see for the longer barrel would be a longer magazine -- does the 24" hold more rounds? And do you want/need more capacity?

 

[Ugly Sauce]

I prefer long barrels, but in this case I don't see an advantage to the 24", considering the caliber. A 20" holds plenty of rounds, so if the 24" holds two more, that's one pound per extra cartridge! Not a good trade off. I wonder how many .357 cartridges weigh two pounds? Probably a bunch.

Two extra rounds in the 20", compared to a 16", with hardly any weight gain, is a good trade off. And, as someone mentioned, the "handiness" of the 16" barrel is highly over rated. The 20" is short, light, and "handy". In my Rossi .357", I load 200 grain bullets over heavy charges of WW296, and I believe that will give a slight velocity advantage over the 16". With lighter bullets and faster burning powders, maybe not much if any. ?

I think my Rossi 20" will hold 12 rounds in the mag, and one in the chamber, (?) that's a lot of ammo, for exploring, map and compass fun, hiking and "woods bumming" I feel fine with that as my total ammo load, for the rifle. (always have a side-arm) Even for hunting I wouldn't bother packing any extra ammo. For paper punching or plinking...ammo capacity would have no meaning.

 

[Jim Watson]

The 20" is more than 2 pounds lighter. My intended use is for teaching classes...

Reason enough. The small .357 hole in an octagon barrel makes for a heavy rifle. One gunsmith cuts flutes or flats under the forearm of his CAS race guns for quicker handling.

 

[ColtPythonElite]

I have a 16" round barrel. It's light and fun. I had a 24" octagon. It was heavy and more awkward. I never shot it. I let someone else have it.

 

[BrazilianSnowMan]

I just closed the deal on the 20".

The 24" is bigger, heavier and I didnt like the 16.5"(no need for tactical looks on a lever action).

Thank you all for the input, I really appreciate.

 

[chicharrones]

I prefer long barrels, but in this case I don't see an advantage to the 24", considering the caliber. A 20" holds plenty of rounds, so if the 24" holds two more, that's one pound per extra cartridge! Not a good trade off. I wonder how many .357 cartridges weigh two pounds? Probably a bunch.

Two extra rounds in the 20", compared to a 16", with hardly any weight gain, is a good trade off. And, as someone mentioned, the "handiness" of the 16" barrel is highly over rated. The 20" is short, light, and "handy". In my Rossi .357", I load 200 grain bullets over heavy charges of WW296, and I believe that will give a slight velocity advantage over the 16". With lighter bullets and faster burning powders, maybe not much if any. ?

I think my Rossi 20" will hold 12 rounds in the mag, and one in the chamber, (?) that's a lot of ammo, for exploring, map and compass fun, hiking and "woods bumming" I feel fine with that as my total ammo load, for the rifle. (always have a side-arm) Even for hunting I wouldn't bother packing any extra ammo. For paper punching or plinking...ammo capacity would have no meaning.

Stuff that mag tube up and let us know. Rossi's website says 10 .357s in a 20 incher.

 

[chicharrones]

BTW, a 16" barrel lever gun being overrated is something I don't think I've noticed folks saying before this thread.

I'm probably blind to the situation as I pick 16" barreled carbines mostly for size reasons without going the braced "pistol" or SBR route. Those SBR levergun packages at Grizzly Custom Guns always caught my eye. But I'll never have one, so 16 inchers it is.

 

[chicharrones]

I just closed the deal on the 20".

The 24" is bigger, heavier and I didnt like the 16.5"(no need for tactical looks on a lever action).

Thank you all for the input, I really appreciate.

Congrats on the pick, @BrazilianSnowMan .

 

[ilgac]

BTW, a 16" barrel lever gun being overrated is something I don't think I've noticed folks saying before this thread.

I'm probably blind to the situation as I pick 16" barreled carbines mostly for size reasons without going the braced "pistol" or SBR route. Those SBR levergun packages at Grizzly Custom Guns always caught my eye. But I'll never have one, so 16 inchers it is.

I agree, I’ve never considered 16” overrated.
Certainly not in .38/.357

 

[Rodfac]

I've never liked 24" bbl's on lever guns; Winchester or Marlin...always found them a trifle nose heavy, and the 20 inchers were just right; hell they even "looked" just right, as opposed to say, Marlin's 18-1/2" bbl'd 1894 in .357, which to my eye appeared stubby.

All that until I bought an 1894 JM .357 and found that the inch and a quarter shorter bbl. handled beautifully, especially in an moderately obstructed deer stand to say nothing of our northern KY thickets. Now, I'd opine that it's just as "just right" as the 20 inchers. (But the 24's are still too much of a good thing!) Best regards, Rod