5 1/2 inch or 8 inch remi??

Johnywinslow · May 23, 2007, 12:09 AM

I was hoping some of u seasoned BP shooters could tell me if there is a big FPS differance between the 5 1/2 in and 8 inch barrels when it comes to accuracy and volocity, I understand there will be less barrel to burn powder but is the difference dramatic?

arcticap · May 23, 2007, 03:53 AM

Low velocity is often the key to better accuracy. Why add unnecessary recoil?
I've read at least one post where someone has said that their favorite gun is a Ruger 5.5" model:

Here's a fired target from a 5.5" Remington:

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=265152

One fellow says here that he shoots his 5.5" Ruger into 1/2 inch at 50 yards:

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=277257

Hafoc · May 23, 2007, 10:58 PM

I have an 8 inch Remington repro. I only got it recently, but I've been surprised by its accuracy. I'm not a good shot, but I'm hitting very well (for me) at 25 yards with this thing.

I don't know which would be more intrinsically accurate. You'd have to bolt a long- barrel and short-barrel Remington to a machine rest to discover that. Or preferably several examples of each, since there's going to be some variation in accuracy between one revolver and other, apparently identical ones.

The idea that a short barreled revolver recoils less because it shoots bullets at a lower velocity is an interesting one. I suppose that might be true in theory. But the longer barrel adds weight to the revolver, and heavier guns recoil less severely, so you could argue the longer barrel would recoil less.

In any case, with cap and ball revolvers your variation in how much powder you load, and what kind of powder you load, will make a bigger difference in velocity than a couple inches of barrel length will.

Traditionally, target weapons have had long barrels. The longer sight radius of the longer barrel means that when you line up the sights to the best of your ability, you will be aiming the barrel more precisely with the long barrel than you would with the short one. It's a matter of trigonometry, very basic, but I'm having trouble describing it. No doubt somebody can direct you to an article that will make it clear.

Note that I'm not saying one or the other is actually more accurate, in an absolute sense. The greater sight radius improves YOUR accuracy, not necessarily the gun's.

But "longer barrels are more accurate" is one of these "if all else is equal" kind of deals, and all else is never equal. And a 5.5 inch barrel is not at all short, by modern standards. If I were you I'd get whichever one felt better in my hand, or whichever one appeared to be better made. Get the one you like. "If all else is equal," you'll shoot better with the one you like, whichever it is.

O.S.O.K. · May 24, 2007, 08:33 AM

I would guess that the difference in velocity would be around 100 fps less for the shorter barrel.

Recoil is slightly greater in the shorter barrel as well as is muzzle blast given the same charge loads.

The reason is that the longer barreled revolver weighs more. And, its weight is out on the barrel in front of the balance point, so it holds on target for the next shot a little better too. It also allows more of the powder to combust before exiting the muzzle - accounting for the muzzle blast difference. This is not a big thing though - my 1860 snubby doesn't have nearly as much muzzle blast as I would expect.

Recoil isn't a big thing either - it is so minimal anyway. It certainly looks exciting though

The accuracy of both should be the same, but the longer barrel afords a longer sight radius and thus, a better chance of minimizing sighting errors.

The 5 1/2" model is thus for basically one reason - it carries better. Though they also tend to "point" quicker for close-in multiple target engagement.

Not dissing the 5 1/2" models at all - my two CAS guns are Ruger Vaquero 45's with 4 3/4" barrels and they shoot great.

arcticap · May 24, 2007, 02:50 PM

There is also a notion known as "lag time". It's the amount of time that it takes for the projectile to pass through and exit the barrel. The longer barrel has a longer lag time, which requires that the muzzle be held slightly steadier for a longer period of time so that the sights can remain on target & so the projectile will impact closer to the point of aim. Thus, it's really a matter of personal preference which barrel length and barrel weight one prefers. Some folks just may shoot a shorter barrel better while others might shoot the longer barrel better. Lag time has a subtle way of negating some of the effect of having a shorter or less accurate sighting plane (the distance between the front and rear sight).
That's why some can shoot a medium length barrel just as well as others shoot a longer barrel.
Because every gun is unique, I agree that testing using a machine rest would help to prove any difference in accuracy by eliminating most human factors.

O.S.O.K. · May 24, 2007, 06:53 PM

I've personally never found lag time to be detectible between different handgun barrel lengths.

Think about it- if the projectile has an average velocity in the barrel (I say average as it's accelerating) of 900 feet per second, that would be 10,800 inches per second. So a barrel that's 2 1/2" longer would hold that projectile .00023 seconds longer.

Again, I think the greater affector of accuracy is the sight radius and being able to "see" better if you are on or off target.

Good conversation here.

arcticap · May 24, 2007, 10:52 PM

Your right, lag time might not be as detectable in a pistol as in a rifle. But especially for people who are one handed pistol shooters, there's definitely a lag between the time that the finger reaches for and releases the trigger and the bullet exits the barrel. Maybe there's not that much of a difference in time, but there's a difference in the balance of the gun that affects muzzle stability and holdability during "the event". It happens in a flash, the gun moves as the trigger is released before the boom even starts, no man can hold a gun rock steady. It's at that point, that the faster the bullet exits and the steadier the muzzle can be held, accuracy results.
I know a fellow air pistol shooter who bought a device that's comprised of a sensor that attaches to the grip, and which is wired to a computer screen & program. It simulates and records all of the muzzle movement on the computer screen starting just prior to releasing the trigger, and then records everything up until the projected impact of the "make believe" projectile, all based on the motion of the sensor. That's really when the lag time really starts, and the longer the barrel, the tougher it can be to keep the gun steady during the entire process.
One second the sights are seemingly on the bullseye, then in the next millisecond, the brain tries to release the trigger while holding the gun steady. Air pistols have a relatively long barrel and lag time, and guns with much heavier triggers make it even that much more difficult to shoot while holding steady. So, maybe it's not classic lag time due to waiting for the bullet to exit the muzzle, but the extended lag time waiting for the completion of "the entire event" and trying to control it.
It's mostly about isolating the trigger, and not pushing the muzzle away from the bullseye while releasing the trigger. And these air pistols have very ergonomic, anatomical grips. It's shooting that involves a lot of follow through after the shot, with a velocity of about 550 feet per second. .22lr pistol shooting is similar too, trying to control the muzzle of a 5.5 inch barrel versus a 7.25 inch barrel, especially with one hand. I've shot both models, and controlling each while shooting one handed is very different. The longer one is more resistent to recoil while firing, but keeping it steady while releasing the trigger is tougher, for me anyway. Even the famous S&W Model 41 target .22 comes with either a long barrel or a shorter, heavier target barrel that most target shooters use. And when a red dot scope is mounted on a pistol, each movement becomes illuminated and visible to the shooter. Sometimes the best any shooter can do is to hold the sights to moving around in the target black and trying to shoot into that area, rather than to try to hold them perfectly steady enough to shoot a perfect bullseye. So the overall holdability of the pistol is really important too.
In theory, the muzzle is usually moving away from the bullseye as the trigger is pulled due to hand movement, and so the faster the bullet exits the barrel, the closer the bullet will impact to the point of aim, if all else was equal, which it's not. It might be different for benchrest shooters, and sights, inherant gun accuracy, barrel weight, trigger pull weight etc.... will always be aditional factors contributing to overall shooting accruacy.

O.S.O.K. · May 25, 2007, 03:17 PM

and I have good results by gripping tighter with my left hand (I'm a righty) and relaxing my right hand's grip - allowing the trigger finger to be somewhat isolated from the grip. This works well for any handgun.

marcseatac · May 25, 2007, 07:30 PM

I like a righthanded grip with the left hand palm supporting the bottom of the grips wrapped around the right hand, thumbs touching. Works on any kind of pistol.

sundance44s · May 30, 2007, 09:48 AM

Remember reading a crono post once on the 5 1/2 inch barrel vs the 8 inch barrel on a Remmie 1858 .... the 5 1/2 inch barrel threw the same load 150 fps slower than the 8 inch barrel . I also read a test on fireing just the cylinder ..out of the pistol ..with 30grs of powder the ball flew at 150 fps out of the cylinder ...hardly deadly but might put an eye out ...thats the problem with the short barreled derringers , grossly under powered not enough barrel to get the steam up ....

May 23, 2007, 12:09 AM	#1
Johnywinslow Senior Member Join Date: May 20, 2007 Posts: 131	5 1/2 inch or 8 inch remi?? I was hoping some of u seasoned BP shooters could tell me if there is a big FPS differance between the 5 1/2 in and 8 inch barrels when it comes to accuracy and volocity, I understand there will be less barrel to burn powder but is the difference dramatic?

May 24, 2007, 08:33 AM	#4
O.S.O.K. Senior Member Join Date: March 25, 2007 Posts: 122	my 2 I would guess that the difference in velocity would be around 100 fps less for the shorter barrel. Recoil is slightly greater in the shorter barrel as well as is muzzle blast given the same charge loads. The reason is that the longer barreled revolver weighs more. And, its weight is out on the barrel in front of the balance point, so it holds on target for the next shot a little better too. It also allows more of the powder to combust before exiting the muzzle - accounting for the muzzle blast difference. This is not a big thing though - my 1860 snubby doesn't have nearly as much muzzle blast as I would expect. Recoil isn't a big thing either - it is so minimal anyway. It certainly looks exciting though The accuracy of both should be the same, but the longer barrel afords a longer sight radius and thus, a better chance of minimizing sighting errors. The 5 1/2" model is thus for basically one reason - it carries better. Though they also tend to "point" quicker for close-in multiple target engagement. Not dissing the 5 1/2" models at all - my two CAS guns are Ruger Vaquero 45's with 4 3/4" barrels and they shoot great.

May 24, 2007, 06:53 PM	#6
O.S.O.K. Senior Member Join Date: March 25, 2007 Posts: 122	Lag time I've personally never found lag time to be detectible between different handgun barrel lengths. Think about it- if the projectile has an average velocity in the barrel (I say average as it's accelerating) of 900 feet per second, that would be 10,800 inches per second. So a barrel that's 2 1/2" longer would hold that projectile .00023 seconds longer. Again, I think the greater affector of accuracy is the sight radius and being able to "see" better if you are on or off target. Good conversation here.

May 24, 2007, 10:52 PM	#7
arcticap Senior Member Join Date: March 15, 2005 Location: Central Connecticut Posts: 3,166	Your right, lag time might not be as detectable in a pistol as in a rifle. But especially for people who are one handed pistol shooters, there's definitely a lag between the time that the finger reaches for and releases the trigger and the bullet exits the barrel. Maybe there's not that much of a difference in time, but there's a difference in the balance of the gun that affects muzzle stability and holdability during "the event". It happens in a flash, the gun moves as the trigger is released before the boom even starts, no man can hold a gun rock steady. It's at that point, that the faster the bullet exits and the steadier the muzzle can be held, accuracy results. I know a fellow air pistol shooter who bought a device that's comprised of a sensor that attaches to the grip, and which is wired to a computer screen & program. It simulates and records all of the muzzle movement on the computer screen starting just prior to releasing the trigger, and then records everything up until the projected impact of the "make believe" projectile, all based on the motion of the sensor. That's really when the lag time really starts, and the longer the barrel, the tougher it can be to keep the gun steady during the entire process. One second the sights are seemingly on the bullseye, then in the next millisecond, the brain tries to release the trigger while holding the gun steady. Air pistols have a relatively long barrel and lag time, and guns with much heavier triggers make it even that much more difficult to shoot while holding steady. So, maybe it's not classic lag time due to waiting for the bullet to exit the muzzle, but the extended lag time waiting for the completion of "the entire event" and trying to control it. It's mostly about isolating the trigger, and not pushing the muzzle away from the bullseye while releasing the trigger. And these air pistols have very ergonomic, anatomical grips. It's shooting that involves a lot of follow through after the shot, with a velocity of about 550 feet per second. .22lr pistol shooting is similar too, trying to control the muzzle of a 5.5 inch barrel versus a 7.25 inch barrel, especially with one hand. I've shot both models, and controlling each while shooting one handed is very different. The longer one is more resistent to recoil while firing, but keeping it steady while releasing the trigger is tougher, for me anyway. Even the famous S&W Model 41 target .22 comes with either a long barrel or a shorter, heavier target barrel that most target shooters use. And when a red dot scope is mounted on a pistol, each movement becomes illuminated and visible to the shooter. Sometimes the best any shooter can do is to hold the sights to moving around in the target black and trying to shoot into that area, rather than to try to hold them perfectly steady enough to shoot a perfect bullseye. So the overall holdability of the pistol is really important too. In theory, the muzzle is usually moving away from the bullseye as the trigger is pulled due to hand movement, and so the faster the bullet exits the barrel, the closer the bullet will impact to the point of aim, if all else was equal, which it's not. It might be different for benchrest shooters, and sights, inherant gun accuracy, barrel weight, trigger pull weight etc.... will always be aditional factors contributing to overall shooting accruacy. Last edited by arcticap; May 26, 2007 at 02:45 AM.

May 25, 2007, 03:17 PM	#8
O.S.O.K. Senior Member Join Date: March 25, 2007 Posts: 122	I shoot 2 handed and I have good results by gripping tighter with my left hand (I'm a righty) and relaxing my right hand's grip - allowing the trigger finger to be somewhat isolated from the grip. This works well for any handgun.

May 23, 2007, 03:53 AM	#2
arcticap Senior Member Join Date: March 15, 2005 Location: Central Connecticut Posts: 3,166	Low velocity is often the key to better accuracy. Why add unnecessary recoil? I've read at least one post where someone has said that their favorite gun is a Ruger 5.5" model: Here's a fired target from a 5.5" Remington: http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=265152 One fellow says here that he shoots his 5.5" Ruger into 1/2 inch at 50 yards: http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=277257

May 23, 2007, 10:58 PM	#3
Hafoc Senior Member Join Date: August 20, 2005 Posts: 552	I have an 8 inch Remington repro. I only got it recently, but I've been surprised by its accuracy. I'm not a good shot, but I'm hitting very well (for me) at 25 yards with this thing. I don't know which would be more intrinsically accurate. You'd have to bolt a long- barrel and short-barrel Remington to a machine rest to discover that. Or preferably several examples of each, since there's going to be some variation in accuracy between one revolver and other, apparently identical ones. The idea that a short barreled revolver recoils less because it shoots bullets at a lower velocity is an interesting one. I suppose that might be true in theory. But the longer barrel adds weight to the revolver, and heavier guns recoil less severely, so you could argue the longer barrel would recoil less. In any case, with cap and ball revolvers your variation in how much powder you load, and what kind of powder you load, will make a bigger difference in velocity than a couple inches of barrel length will. Traditionally, target weapons have had long barrels. The longer sight radius of the longer barrel means that when you line up the sights to the best of your ability, you will be aiming the barrel more precisely with the long barrel than you would with the short one. It's a matter of trigonometry, very basic, but I'm having trouble describing it. No doubt somebody can direct you to an article that will make it clear. Note that I'm not saying one or the other is actually more accurate, in an absolute sense. The greater sight radius improves YOUR accuracy, not necessarily the gun's. But "longer barrels are more accurate" is one of these "if all else is equal" kind of deals, and all else is never equal. And a 5.5 inch barrel is not at all short, by modern standards. If I were you I'd get whichever one felt better in my hand, or whichever one appeared to be better made. Get the one you like. "If all else is equal," you'll shoot better with the one you like, whichever it is.

May 24, 2007, 02:50 PM	#5
arcticap Senior Member Join Date: March 15, 2005 Location: Central Connecticut Posts: 3,166	There is also a notion known as "lag time". It's the amount of time that it takes for the projectile to pass through and exit the barrel. The longer barrel has a longer lag time, which requires that the muzzle be held slightly steadier for a longer period of time so that the sights can remain on target & so the projectile will impact closer to the point of aim. Thus, it's really a matter of personal preference which barrel length and barrel weight one prefers. Some folks just may shoot a shorter barrel better while others might shoot the longer barrel better. Lag time has a subtle way of negating some of the effect of having a shorter or less accurate sighting plane (the distance between the front and rear sight). That's why some can shoot a medium length barrel just as well as others shoot a longer barrel. Because every gun is unique, I agree that testing using a machine rest would help to prove any difference in accuracy by eliminating most human factors.

May 25, 2007, 07:30 PM	#9
marcseatac Senior Member Join Date: October 7, 2006 Posts: 225	I like a righthanded grip with the left hand palm supporting the bottom of the grips wrapped around the right hand, thumbs touching. Works on any kind of pistol.

May 30, 2007, 09:48 AM	#10
sundance44s Senior Member Join Date: February 6, 2006 Location: Hernando , Ms. Posts: 579	Remember reading a crono post once on the 5 1/2 inch barrel vs the 8 inch barrel on a Remmie 1858 .... the 5 1/2 inch barrel threw the same load 150 fps slower than the 8 inch barrel . I also read a test on fireing just the cylinder ..out of the pistol ..with 30grs of powder the ball flew at 150 fps out of the cylinder ...hardly deadly but might put an eye out ...thats the problem with the short barreled derringers , grossly under powered not enough barrel to get the steam up ....