Henry 44 lever action, 16 vs 20" barrels?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I vote the 16" also. Really fast handling and nice balance. FWIW, 18" would be the best of both worlds, but they don't offer it that way.
 
I like the 20" with the octagonal barrel. Makes shots of a couple hundred yards really fun. I've never shot a 16" model but I really like the feel of the 20" I have (granted, it's a 357).
 
I have a Marlin with the 20" barrel. I like it just fine, but it weighs closer to 6 lbs than 8 lbs. With Henry I'd buy the 16" version for the weight reduction alone.
 
I bought the 16", in steel though not the CCH. I held both at the LGS and the 16" balanced better in my hands, and does so with a tube full also.
 
I bought my brother a Winchester Trapper in .45 Colt (16" barrel,) and it's about the handiest rifle evarrr. I used to take it with me when I was camping, and it's just a fun rifle to shoot. I've got a Marlin 1894 in .41MAG (20" barrel) and it's pretty darned handy in and of itself. I have, however, considered whacking the barrel and magazine to 16"... I liked the Trapper that much. In the end, I changed my mind and kept the 20" barrel... I've started using the Marlin to shoot steel pipe at distance, and that 20" barrel makes a difference there, I've gotten it out to 600yds and there is no way I could do that with a 16". YMMV. I guess it depends on what you want it for...
 
I agree with most that a 16 inch lever gun is very handy. I have a 16-inch Rossi M92 in 44 Mag and its a very light handy little carbine.

LxHPwMGm.jpg

JMHO but as good a gun as the Henry's are reported to be I have little interest in any of the models without the side gate loading unless its a replica of the original Henry. If there is a wood/plastic forearm on it better have a side-gate loading port or I am not interested. It is an iconic and a very useful feature of a lever gun. YMMV
 
The 20" will yield higher velocity. Magnum revolver cartridges usually peak around 18-20".

I'm the opposite. I've had them and find no reason to choose a 16" over a 20". A 20" carbine is plenty handy with a longer sight radius and reduced muzzle blast over a 16".
 
The 20" Henry's are chunky, I think a 16" is going to handle a lot better. The only problem I have with a 16" Henry is the lack of the loading gate means you'll be spending a lot of time reloading. I don't mind doing it with the 20" cuz they hold more and because Henry is finally making side gated rifles, I would hold off on this purchase because I think it's inevitable they'll be coming out with a side gate in a traditional look as currently the only .44 Mag they have with a gate is the tactical Big Boy X with polymer furniture.

Unless you don't mind that look on a lever action.
 
Go look at ballisticsbytheinch.com and you'll see marginal gains from 16" to 18" with .357 mag, .41 mag, and .44 mag. Some loads even lose velocity.

I have a 20" Henry in .357 mag. And the velocities I get are pretty close to what some get from an 18", and not with low E.S. or S.D. either (though the same load is more consistent in a revolver barrel).

Basically, I think 20" is too long. Though the extra capacity is nice, I don't think it's worth it. If I had to do it again, I'd go with the 16".

If anyone has data to the contrary, I would honestly like to see it.
 
BBTI only tested self defense loads. I don't even see their .44 tests as useful. I've always noticed gains from 16-20". With most loads, 18" seems to be the sweet spot but your choices are usually 16" or 20". As I said, it's not a huge difference either way but if given the choice, I'll take the added sight radius and reduced muzzle blast of the 20".
 
Finally picked up a .45LC in 1894 Marlin Cowboy... 20 inch barrel. I do prefer 20 inch and shorter. I did have a .44 mag in Winchester 94 Trapper but was not at all impressed with its accuracy. In may ways these carbines are the original "mountain rifle".
 
I walked by the rifle rack yesterday and took notice of something. The longest flintlock I own, which are the rifles I hunt with regularly, was standing right next to my 20" Marlin 1894CB. I put a tape measure to it and it is 2ft longer. Not two inches, two FEET. Which is probably why I view the 4" difference between a 16" and 20" levergun as negligible.
 
In the end, I landed up getting the Henry Big Boy carbine in 44 magnum (H006R, if you're looking). It's a really nice "little" rifle, I can't wait to get it out and shoot it.

...now for me to "cool down" according to the state of Illinois.
 
I prefer the 20. It isn't about the length of the barrel, but the length of the magazine. A mag for 10 would look funny on a 16 inch barrel.
 
Magazine capacity, sight radius and balance are the three factors to consider. Balance is overlooked at times when selecting barrel length. The balance point needs to be slightly in front of the lever, loaded, for comfortable carrying.
 
If you ever wanted to shoot cowboy action (it’s fun), you need a ten round magazine capacity.

Some of the pistol caliber lever action rifles will hold a round or two than their “rating”, especially if a shorter Special rather than the longer Magnum cartridge is used.

This is not a factor for every purchaser, of course, but it is for some.
 
I had a 20” Rossi .357 mag, and I now have a 16” version. To me, the 16” just seems scaled right for the 1892 or similarly sized “pistol caliber” lever action.

The 20”, to me, just looks and feels a tad long for the smaller 1892 action size... especially in .357. With the Win 1894 or Marlin 336/1895 the 18-20 (max 22” ) is about the perfect blend of sight radius, portability and shootability.

Again, merely my aesthetic opinion, once you go to 24” and up the barrels are just too long on a lever gun unless it’s a gigantic win 1886 or win 71 sized action... and then you have a real cannon. I had a win 1894 Legacy in .45 Colt with a 24” barrel and that just felt silly for that caliber...Way too much weight out front for a .45 Colt. Along the same lines the 26” barrel on my marlin 1895 CB is another rather gangly gun to tote with a tube full of 450 gr 45/70 rounds.

For sheer handy toteability I’d be really happy with a 14” barrel on my 1892-sized pistol caliber rifles like the El Tigre’s had... but the State of Ca wouldn’t be :(.

You have a good dilemma there! I say choose what looks and feels best for you and go for it :thumbup:.

Stay safe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcb
Interestingly enough 44 Special, per SAAMI spec can be longer than 44 Remington Mag. 1.615 vs 1.610... Yeah not much be technically... So at least with 44 Special its probably only going to get you more than one more round best case with most 8-round 44 Mag carbine tubes. Even 44 Russian may or may not get you 10 rds in an 8-round 44 Mag magazine.
 
CraigC said:
I always thought the 1895CB handled beautifully and never felt as long as it was.
Click to expand...
With the 450 to 500 grainers, to me, the long barrel and full-length magazine get awfully nose heavy. With the 350 and 405s it’s a bit better in the hand. :)

Especially compared to my guide gun, that’s a dream to tote.

Stay safe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Huntolive
  • Locked
Lever Action 44 Magnum?
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
RainDodger
RainDodger
V
  • Locked
Pistol cartridge lever gun barrel length: 16" vs. 20"
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
19-3Ben
1
M
  • Locked
16" vs. 20" barrel for 7.62 - which is better?
Replies
22
Views
6K
Nightcrawler
N
Zaydok Allen
  • Locked
Henry .357 Lever Action
2 3
Replies
53
Views
3K
Art Eatman
A
Zaydok Allen
  • Locked
Please share your thoughts on the Henry Big boy 44 Magnum.
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
MidRoad
MidRoad
Back
Top