Guide gun vs 22" standard

[DC]

I must be missing something.  I know that the guide gun in 45.70 is very popular.  I guess I am puzzeled about why people choose it over the longer 22" standard version.  I would think that you give up some velocity with a barrel length that is 3.75" shorter than another and pick up quite a bit more recoil. 

Please don't misunderstand, I don't thing that there is anything wrong with the 18 1/2 guide gun, in fact I owned one at one time I just am thinking that you give up more than you get. 
I would love to hear what you all have to say about it.

[GatCat]

I think it is mostly a matter of how much easier it is carry the guide gun; it is simply handier.The little that is lost in velocity is really not much of an issue, a "rainbow" is a "rainbow". The recoil I don't know about; I realize that the "jet" effect in shorter barrels is more, but yet in the longer barrel pressure is kept in the barrel longer, possibly creating more, or longer, recoil. I don't know if I have every read or heard of any definative facts on barrel length vs. recoil. Be interesting to get some real facts on that!
Mark

[WyoStillhunter]

I have a 22" bbl. on my 444S (1977) Marlin.  I have handled guide guns but not shot one or hunted with one.  I find the 22" plenty handy enough and I hunt in some pretty thick stuff.  The 22" balances well and settles down quickly for offhand shooting.  If I were to buy a 45-70 or 450 Marlin I would get the longer barrel.  Of course I am not a bush pilot, wrangler, or hunting guide.  I can see where a GG would really fit the bill for some folks like that.

22" .444S in some pretty thick cover:

[bearmgc]

I like the shorter barrel in my 444Marlin Outfitter gun, and it is my primary woods gun for deer and elk. That said, I used a 22in 45-70 for years elk hunting, sold it and kept the shorter 444Marlin outfitter. Thinkin its just a personal preference thing.

[Old Grizz]

I would say it's personal preference as to which one to own. I have the 22" and 18.5" and personally I see no difference in their performance except the 18.5" handles a little bit better in brush and thick wooded areas.

[Chas.]

I've never compared them before but MSRP for the 1895G is $630 and MSRP for the 1895 is $619 making the 1895G just a tad more expensive.  Not sure I understand that.

[R Jones]

Mine has the 22 " barrel. I don't think it would make a nickels worth of difference over the 18.5 barrel.   R Jones

[BBF]

I believe one of them got a straight stock the other is a pistol grip type. That does make a difference to me.

[DC]

 I too have noticed that the Guide is more expensive.  I too can't figure out why that would be.
They do have a different grip as well.  Which do you prefer?

[Old Grizz]

DC,
I have both pistol grips and straight grips but really don't prefer on over another. I would guess the Guide gun is a little more popular causing the price to be a little more. Maybe it has something to do with the ballard rifleing vs. the micro but thats just a guess.

[tanoose]

DC my opinion is you wont see a difference in the field i beleive its just a matter of prefrence. I myself love 20" barrels so i guess my next 45/70 will be a XLR and i will cut off 4" replace the stock with a synthetic stock and throw on a williams peep sight and i'd be ready to go.

[kyelkhunter3006]

That'll be a sweet gun.  I'd like to have a .35 Rem with a 21" or 22" barrel.....I keep eyeing those XLR rifles and debating if I want to buy it, then chop 2" off the barrel and have the sight remounted.  I'd scope it, but a lever gun just has to have sights on it, IMO.  I like the laminate stocks, but I think that I'd have to get it dura-coated/teflon/something and make it black to be "just right".

[robert4570]

I currently own both and like hunting with both. I find the guide gun easier to carry due to the straight grip and also for sitting in a stand or ground blind .
Over all the  GG seems easier to manuever especially if your doing alot of still hunting . Recoil ....couldnt tell the difference between the two .
For me its just a matter of preference really, GG.
 

I also have a 444SS which is great rifle as well.
Usually, if I cant decide I eventually wind up buying both.

[tanoose]

Im ok with scopes on levers but i just love peep sights . My BLR in 358 has a leupold 1.5x5  and it balances well . I beleive this would be a good scope on a 1895  as is the leupold 1x4

[kyelkhunter3006]

Yep, the straight tube scopes are great for levers, the 1-4, 1.5-5 Leupolds, the Weaver K2.5 and V3, and the Nikon 1.5-4.5 would all be ideal.

[DC]

Thanks for all your input. I ended up buying a very slightly used 45-70CB. While it has a 26 barrel, the barrel is tapered so the extra weightis not real great.  It has a Marbles tang sight on it now and the factory blade/bead on the front.  I have a 3x9 scope I am toying with putting on it.  I have seen some photos of guys with their trophy's with what look to be 3x9s.  I hope that it is not too much scope for the rifle however.
What about rings?  Any suggestions?

[kyelkhunter3006]

I don't like putting scope like the 3-9's etc, on lever guns UNLESS they are the ultra compact kind.  I like a small scope that I can mount low on the gun (no see thru rings).  The reason is because lever guns have a very thin (compared to bolt actions), high receiver that makes them a bit more susceptible to the side to side wobbles, and having a heavy scope in high mounts just makes it worse when you're trying to hold it steady.

A scope that's 9x or 10x isn't too much power for the range of the 45-70, after all, it's shot out to 600yds and even more during competition.  Range isn't an issue with it, trajectory is the issue.

I like scopes with objectives of 32mm or less for 99% of my guns.  A 2-7x32 would be ok, as would the compact scopes of Burris, really the only company that makes compact scopes that have more than 9x at the high end.

What are you planning on using the gun for?  IMO, I'd go with one of the scopes in the previous posts above, or maybe a straight 4x scope like a Nikon ProStaff 4x32, the Sightron 4x32, or the Leupold 4x33.  All of them are compact, won't affect the balance of the rifle very much, and have good enough glass for any shooting you'll realistically do with the 45-70.  More importantly is that all have at least 4" of eye relief.   

[A.J.]

I put a Pentax Gameseeker 1.75-5x22 scope on mine. It's a compact straight tube, has multiple reticles for shooting "way out yonder", and only costs around $100 for a pretty good scope (even though it IS Chinese).

[Lloyd Smale]

I prefer a peep sight on a lever gun but have scoped some in the past. I like a GOOD quality vairable with a straight tube and low end power of no more the 2x. Most of the hunting you will do with them will be up close and you dont need any more the a 5x on the top end of a vairable. this is not a place to cut corners though. A 4570 produce quite a bit of recoil and will put a pounding on a scope. Lever guns to me are used as working guns too and take a little more beating then the other rifles. they bounce around more in my vechiles and can sometimes be carried horseback so the scopes take a little beating that way as well. Buy the best scope you can afford and also look at top end mounts for your scope. I like a mount like the quick detachable leupold mount and used with something like a 1.5x5 or a 1x4 leupold there about indestructable

[sabretip]

The velocity difference between my 18.5 inch GG and the 22 inch 1895 is not that big,the GG gets 1630 fps and the 1895 gets 1710 fps with the same loads.
Both were fed 420 gc cast bullets and were shot over the same chrony.