I know the brass model looks cool but at least check out the 357 Big Boy Steel model.
It's about 1-1/2 pounds lighter.
Printable View
I know the brass model looks cool but at least check out the 357 Big Boy Steel model.
It's about 1-1/2 pounds lighter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rizzo
When I bought my Big Boy Steel, I had that same discussion with several people that asked me why I didn't get the Brass framed Henry. It's one thing to read the numbers (weight in pounds/ounces), but it's another thing to handle one of each one, side by side. Luckily, my LGS where I ordered my rifle from, had some of each on the shelf (just not one in the caliber I wanted).
A couple more questions on the Brass frame 357 model. Has there been any feeding problems with hand loads that have a COL a little longer then factory rounds. any problems with SWC type bullet? Can a Receiver sight or scope be easily installed. My eyes are getting old :guntootsmiley:
Obviously you need one of each chambering!
Both the Steel and Brass are drilled and tapped for a scope or a receiver sight. Henry recommends the skinner sight. Skinner has a receiver sight and a barrel mount peep sight that replaces there rear factory buckhorn sight. As far as over all length that depends on the gun itself. Mine will feed them but not as well as it does when they dont exceed the recommended over all length. SWC also depends on the bullet itself. But Im not one who uses a swc on a lever gun to begin with because I dont think thats a good application for that type of bullet.
Truncated cone bullets work smooth as butter in about everything I have tried them. I like them and they are accurate too in my .45 acp and .357 magnum. I haven't tried them in a .45 colt yet. james
Why not consider .44 magnum or .45 Colt??
The .44 magnum version does what the .30-30 does out to 100 yards just as well.
or
The .45 Colt can be loaded to .44 magnum velocities with the same bullet weights, and with lower chamber pressures, thanks to it's greater case volume.
and
The .45 Colt Big Boy has a 1:16 twist, allowing it to shoot standard factory or low velocity cowboy loads with equal accuracy.
and
That same twist will stabilize heavier bullets with reasonable higher velocity loads similar to heavy bullet .44 magnum loads.
Just found this one at Wally World. Not the carbine but the wood was too good to pass up.Quote:
Originally Posted by JonB_in_Glencoe
Attachment 215555
Attachment not workingQuote:
Originally Posted by Cosmic_Charlie
GOOD GRAVY !Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmic_Charlie
at Walmart?
WOW, just wow
:shock:
O.k. Jon, here's the caveat - the fitting of the brass butt plate while not terrible is not good enough for one of Henry's high end rifles. I suspect this is why that wood wound up on a big boy. The fitment at the receiver is fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by JonB_in_Glencoe
LOL...Who would even look at the buttplate when that awesome tiger striping is lighting up the neurons in my brain, LOL.
:drinks:
In a year or two I'll get the masking tape and sanding blocks out and custom fit it back there.Quote:
Originally Posted by JonB_in_Glencoe
357 magnum is a handgun cartridge. It is my favorite handgun cartridge. 30-30 is a rifle cartridge. It may be my favorite rifle cartridge. For me the choice is obvious. A rifle cartridge goes with the rifle. Handgun goes with the handgun. Otherwise you are making very adverse ballistic compromises.
I found all that stuff about having same cartridge for a handgun and rifle pretty hopeless. Stuff that worked well in my Marlin 1894 didn't work well in my S&W model 28 and vice versa. It actually became hazardous. In fact, I no longer will own two firearms with different ammunition tolerances in the same chambering.
If all you want to do is plink, there are better cartridges than either. 22LR being perhaps the best.
And to my thinking 30-30 has it all over a 357 for plinking, mainly because of the smaller caliber and bullet weights that will work well. A 110 in a 30-30 can go fast or slow. Still accurate. Neck sizing a 30-30, which is all that is usually needed with light loads, is a two step process, no lube, just like 357 with carbide dies. 30-30 brass is cheap and plentiful. I've ran my 30-30 Mossberg 464 with everything from 32 caliber round balls to 170 grain flat points. Do yourself a favor and get a Steel big boy in 30-30. Or save a couple hundred, get a tang safety, and a loading gate and get a Mossberg 464.
And 44 magnum, let alone 357, doesn't perform equivalently to 30-30 out of a rifle. 30-30 has much greater powder capacity, (read: much greater energy), much flatter trajectory due to much higher velocity, much greater sectional density with typical bullet weights (read: penetration) and better ballistic coefficients. I've personally found 44 disappointing on deer. 30-30 is a more versitle cartridge by far compared to either 357 or 44.
The only advantage I see is that 357/44 are short so you get more in the magazine. 9 or 10 vs 6 with the same tube length. I don't really care about this because I've always found it simple to top off a tube magazine rifle with a loading gate. On a Henry that extra capacity may be worth considering.
Sorry to hear of your predicament with the caliber. For the record, my Henry, Ruger Blackhawk Bisley, Ruger Wiley Clapp, and Ruger LCR all show very good usage with the same load. In fact all, save the Wiley Clapp, perform best with the same loading, and the Wiley works more than good enough for intended purposes.Quote:
Originally Posted by curioushooter
There is no panacea with anything, there are trade offs, period. But for some the same caliber makes sense, others want something different from their tools.
I like plinking with a rifle. A 165 gr. boolit at 900 fps out of a 30-30 has some grunt compared to a .22 and it is easier to hit with than a revolver. It is also quieter. Not too much more expensive to shoot than a .22.
Look, no matter how well you think it may work to have a handgun and rifle in the same chambering, there will always be a ballistic compromise. It's simply physics. The slower high-density powders that make 357 and 44 kick behind in a rifle just make great big fireballs and booms out of short barrels. When I had a 44 Blackhawk and my Marlin 1894 in 44, I had the same trouble I did in 357. I could get a 265 cast bullet going 1650 fps in the rifle with a case crammed with win296. Out of the revolver it was just uncomfortable, loud, and not signifigantly greater velocity than standard 44 mag. And that Blackhawk had a 7.5" barrel!
Then you have the bullet seating depth problems. To get the bullet to cycle reliably and shoot accurately in the marlin I had to seat the bullet out far. So far that it would not allow the cylinder to rotate in the Blackhawk.
Then there are the throating issues
Rifle throats are nothing like revolver throats. If you find a bullet that works sweetly in the rifle, it is ususlly a bum in the revolver. At least that is my expedience. I found myself loading two completely different loads to get performance that I was satisfied with. That's the difference I think. What most people consider acceptable perfomance is not what I consider acceptable perfomance. If you are going to load two different loads of the same cartridge, might as well as get two different cartridges which is more flexible, safer, and allows for more exacting performance.
Oh, and I'll never forget the one and only deer I never recovered after shooting it. It was that 1894 with a scope with that load. Oh, I knew my holdover and nailed her right in the broadside, but at the distance I shot her that 44 went in as deeply as a nail I think. I would have never taken this shot with a handgun of course, but it being a rifle lured me into thinking it had rifle-like power. A 30-30 has never let me down this way. No deer I've shot with a 30-30 has made it 100 yards and has always left plenty of blood to follow.
for deer and other critters that big or bigger .30-30. for cans and up to deer at close range .357. also .357 throws in the .38 spl brass. that brings the price of shooting do to .22 price range.