Author Topic: To cut or not... (Read 7618 times)

jsm88011 · « **on:** February 12, 2014, 03:39:03 PM »

I have a factory new Handi in 357, synthetic stock. I'm fine with an all weather stock but it's lighter than my wood one, and the balance is less than ideal (front heavy, right?). I've never cut down a barrel and I find myself considering it if only to improve the balance. I notice many here have cut them down and was wondering where the sweet spot is. 18 inches? What are the trade-offs? Sorry if I missed a FAQ somewhere. Thanks.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Badnews Bob · « **Reply #1 on:** February 12, 2014, 03:52:37 PM »

Just my Two cents here, So take it for what it is. I am not a fan of cutting rifles, I would add weight to the butt stock or replace it with wood. A lot of the fellers like shotries and that magnum you can cut to 16.5 inches no problem, It will still shoot very well. But that's not for me.

twoshooter · « **Reply #2 on:** February 12, 2014, 04:29:34 PM »

To cut or not is up to you, but if you do - I would go to 16.5" ( leave enough extra to square and re-crown). Get the OAL down to 30 to 32 " and it will handle very well. Stopping at 18" really does not gain velocity, just keeps from maximizing the increase in handling capability.

tacklebury · « **Reply #3 on:** February 12, 2014, 04:34:00 PM »

As stated, with the .357 case capacity and most pistol powder loads, 16.5" works well. You actually start going down hill on velocities after 18 if memory serves.

Dinny · « **Reply #4 on:** February 12, 2014, 04:34:12 PM »

My first shortie was a 18" 357 Mag rechambered to 357 Max. Balance is great and it shoots very well. I agree with cutting it long for squaring and crowning.

Thanks, Dinny

jeepmann1948 · « **Reply #5 on:** February 12, 2014, 05:16:44 PM »

My Fine friend from the Frozen North will be along to extol the virtues of the properly circumcised Handi.
Personally I love the 16 1/2 or so length with the synthetic stocks, makes for a fine carry and shooting instrument.An added virtue is it carries in a vehicle very well, and comes out quick too!
The down side is you will have a shorter sight radius with open sights, with a scope it will not matter.
As one matures they appreciate the lighter weight (even though it is measured in ounces)A light weight firearm with a comfortable sling makes a day in the woods much more fun to them old geezers

It all boils down to personal preference
Happy Trails
George

nanuk-O-dah-Nort · « **Reply #6 on:** February 12, 2014, 07:54:59 PM »

isn't it great to lose sleep over decisions like these???

if you do cut it, save the cutoff and consider getting it turned to fit a shotgun chamber, ream to Maxi and you have a great carry along companion to your shotty.

petemi · « **Reply #7 on:** February 13, 2014, 12:28:43 AM »

I have four 16.5 inch Handis, 2 maxis, a .445 and a .45-70. I also have two 18 inch, a .38-55 and a .356/.358. Would I do it again...HECK YES. I think da tirty tirty is gonna be the next 16.5 incher. We also have four 20 inch factory shorties. three superlights and a BC carbine. Did I loose anything chopping them. Absolutely nothing in the pistol calibers. As for the others, the shorty .45.70 is running a 300 gr. bullet 2300 fps, the .38-55 moves a 213 gr. at 2275 and the .356 pushes a 200 gr. at 2600. Did I loose anything

Usually, a slightly faster burning powder will give you back anything you thought you may have lost.

Pete

redleg11b · « **Reply #8 on:** February 13, 2014, 01:01:51 AM »

I cut most of my rifles because of personal preference. My .223 is 18", the .357 will eventually be 16.5". I like carbine length for the balance and handling. It also makes it easier to slip through brush slung or in the hand. If you prime concern is balance, try some weight in the buttstock to see if you prefer that. I didn't cut a Savage 93R17 I used to have and it was very muzzle heavy. I loaded teh buttstock with course sand and it balanced perfectly. Do not use sand in the Handi without it being in a heavy duty plastic bag to keep it off of the stock screw.

I do like tthe chop and make a shotgun adapter. I may keep that in mind for when I chop my .357.

Lpete · « **Reply #9 on:** February 13, 2014, 03:06:15 AM »

The one real shorty I have now is a 44 mag on a Survivor stock set. I had it cut to 18.5", and it's about as perfect a length for me as can be. My new .223 is slated for the 18.5" barrel, as soon as all the bugs are worked out. I feel that if the barrel is 16.5", it would make my rifle feel too butt heavy (kinda' like my ol' lady, but anyway, that's another story best left untold).

pelican717 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 13, 2014, 05:31:35 AM »

Careful there Lpete, you don't want to be the one getting shortened!

OldSchoolRanger · « **Reply #11 on:** February 13, 2014, 06:04:51 AM »

Quote from: Lpete on February 13, 2014, 03:06:15 AM

The one real shorty I have now is a 44 mag on a Survivor stock set. I had it cut to 18.5", and it's about as perfect a length for me as can be. My new .223 is slated for the 18.5" barrel, as soon as all the bugs are worked out. I feel that if the barrel is 16.5", it would make my rifle feel too butt heavy (kinda' like my ol' lady, but anyway, that's another story best left untold).

Now that's a brave man!

Not too smart tho!

Quote from: pelican717 on February 13, 2014, 05:31:35 AM

Careful there Lpete, you don't want to be the one getting shortened!

wea5el · « **Reply #12 on:** February 23, 2014, 12:30:14 PM »

Looking to do the same thing and finally shorten the NEF 357 max. Currently it's at the stock 22 inch length. Any reason not to go directly to 16.5 inches except for sight radius? Does 357 max gain anything in 18 vs 16.5? Sounds like no, but I can always take more off. It's hard to stretch it back longer:-). Thanks.

jsm88011 · « **Reply #13 on:** February 23, 2014, 01:13:57 PM »

The consensus seems to be nothing lost in shortening the 357. I'm taking mine down to 16.5-17.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

jeepmann1948 · « **Reply #14 on:** February 23, 2014, 08:04:00 PM »

As has been said many many times the 357 & Maxie actually start losing velocity after 16" of barrel length,albeit very small amounts. The only advantage of a long barrel is if open sights are used (to obtain a longer sight radius)
George

YRUpunting? · « **Reply #15 on:** February 23, 2014, 11:20:34 PM »

The other trade off that seems to be ignored in threads like this is it's going to be A LOT louder with much more muzzle blast.

cwlongshot · « **Reply #16 on:** February 23, 2014, 11:29:43 PM »

Quote from: YRUpunting? on February 23, 2014, 11:20:34 PM

The other trade off that seems to be ignored in threads like this is it's going to be A LOT louder with much more muzzle blast.

I agree that most folks seem to forget this point!

BUT must say it's not bad with there pistol calibers. 357,44&45.

I suggest you chop one inch or so st a time to see what YOU like. As you approach 17" you can decide to take another 1/2" or just add couple ounces to the butt.

I have a 454. @ 18" and a maxi @ 17" I like both for balance. My maxi is a factory maxi and it's a LWT barrel before they called them LET barrels.

CW

CW

gcrank1 · « **Reply #17 on:** February 24, 2014, 01:35:06 AM »

It will be hard to make anything from the 1" cutoffs though.........
Do you really want to keep the syn. stock, if so I think I'd go the 16.6". The gun is a chunk, and with wood (that I like) more of a chunk, and with the scope (even a small one) more so. My wood stocked 22" 357 c/w an old El Paso Weaver 2.5X goes 7.75ish# ....I have bolt repeaters that are less. If I put it all on a diet with syn stocks, open/iron sights and a bob I wonder what it would weigh?

Badnews Bob · « **Reply #18 on:** February 24, 2014, 02:17:55 AM »

I don't mind the way mine is at full size, I like the longer sight radius, Mine is staying full size,

petemi · « **Reply #19 on:** February 24, 2014, 02:42:04 AM »

Bob, you could put a receiver peep on it, chop off five inches and still have the same sight radius....and a Handier Handi.

Pete

clearwater · « **Reply #20 on:** February 24, 2014, 03:38:24 AM »

Quote from: jsm88011 on February 12, 2014, 03:39:03 PM

I have a factory new Handi in 357, synthetic stock. I'm fine with an all weather stock but it's lighter than my wood one, and the balance is less than ideal (front heavy, right?). I've never cut down a barrel and I find myself considering it if only to improve the balance. I notice many here have cut them down and was wondering where the sweet spot is. 18 inches? What are the trade-offs? Sorry if I missed a FAQ somewhere. Thanks.

Before I cut mine to 16.5", when I shot 38 long colt or light 38 special cast loads in the 22", barrel people would come from all over the range to check out the gun, cause they though I was shooting a suppressed gun.

It is noisier when shortened.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #21 on:** February 24, 2014, 03:44:32 AM »

Quote from: jsm88011 on February 23, 2014, 01:13:57 PM

The consensus seems to be nothing lost in shortening the 357. I'm taking mine down to 16.5-17.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well other than more flash and bigger bang.

petemi · « **Reply #22 on:** February 24, 2014, 04:11:22 AM »

I understand the flash, but I don't understand the bang. I think it is louder for the shooter because the muzzle is closer to his ears. I wonder if it is any louder for someone 25 feet away? People also say shorties kick harder....someone please explain that one. I would believe it would recoil less because the pressure is released earlier. Frankly, except for flash and bang (for me) I don't see any difference between a short or standard barrel.

Pete

Badnews Bob · « **Reply #23 on:** February 24, 2014, 04:15:54 AM »

Quote from: petemi on February 24, 2014, 02:42:04 AM

Bob, you could put a receiver peep on it, chop off five inches and still have the same sight radius....and a Handier Handi.

Pete

That's a good ideer there Shipmate but I already have receiver Peeps on mine................

petemi · « **Reply #24 on:** February 24, 2014, 04:25:19 AM »

Now I understand Bob, I've got it figured out. What we need is about a 24 -30 inch shotgun ventilated rib with the sights mounted and a Shortie 16.5 inch barrel under it

Pete

Badnews Bob · « **Reply #25 on:** February 24, 2014, 06:22:54 AM »

That'll work. Or a 5" 50 deck gun.

petemi · « **Reply #26 on:** February 24, 2014, 07:46:01 AM »

Hey Squid, you are much appreciated.

Pete

Spanky · « **Reply #27 on:** February 24, 2014, 09:31:40 AM »

It's a real shame that all these good barrels are getting chopped up... just for the sake of chopping them up.

Spanky

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #28 on:** February 24, 2014, 09:48:01 AM »

Ego is what drives a person to shorten a rifle. Anyone who has spent much of his life hunting knows that length is no more a hindrance to killing game than what you carry for lunch. It's a waste of money and removes much of what the rifle was meant to be. Balance can better be achieved by adding weight to the stock. A short barrel is a "cool" factor driven by ego and nothing else. Especially with a Handi. They are not combat weapons. You don't have to bring them up quickly in a small residential room. The modern trend to take short barreled weapons into the woods is just plain stupid. No advantage can be had.

In all my many years of hunting large game and small, I lost not a single animal because of barrel length. If a man had to trek many miles through rough country to get at his quarry, then a shorter (lighter) rifle might be of some small merit.

Just my opinion.

petemi · « **Reply #29 on:** February 24, 2014, 10:04:48 AM »

They're not getting chopped up for ego or any reason other than practicality. They work, they loose nothing. They're lighter, faster to swing, less cumbersome in brush.

Why would a sane person add a pound or two in weight to a rifle he'd carry all day when he could shorten it, lighten it, and improve balance and handling?

I invite Mike and Spanky to come up this Spring and shoot all the Shorties and Superlights, carry them around in my woods for a half a day, and then we'll resume this discussion.

Not to be rude, but if you haven't done it, you know nothing about it.

Pete