On Barrel Length: How long is long enough?
 

Rainy day reading and I stumbled upon some good stuff on the history of shotgunning for game birds. In his history of shooting, E. D. Cuming notes that J. Sprint writes in his book Experienc'd Fowler(1700) that he and his contemporaries used "flint-lock guns" with a barrel of five and a half feet, with "cleverly made tapers." He notes the more muscular, among "the brethren" used barrels of six feet. Apparently they used rests (who wouldn't need a rest at that length). It seems it was a two man job sighting and shooting.

As Cuming quotes Sprint, "Your preparations completed, the other man fired at the birds sitting, and you loosed off 'as soon as ever he...has pulled the tricker and flashes in the pan, or at least if you are very near as soon as you hear the report of his piece."

Cuming goes on to describe the introduction of "setting dogs" and the shortening of barrels (to 4 feet!).

I thought you long barrel aficionados might be interested in this early history of barrel length. Apparently, those of you who covet long barrels have precedent.

I find the preference for barrel length an interesting subject. Is it practical or emotional? Sometimes it seems to be what’s popular at the time and like any fad tastes change. Wide ties vs narrow ties. Wide lapels vs narrow lapels. But there is certainly a practical side to it as well. For skeet, quail, grouse I would think 26 to 28 inches would be optimal. However I’m not a skeet shooter and have never seen a grouse, so what do I know. For sporting clays, pheasant, ducks seems like 30 inches is about perfect. Of course I’m pitiful at SC’s and most of the ducks and pheasants I have taken aim at had nothing to fear. I will say with some personal conviction that 30 inches is my preference for doubles trap, 32” for singles and 34” for handicap. And 5 to 6 feet seems a bit extreme but I wouldn’t be surprised to see Randy Roberts running the sporting course with such a gun now that he knows they exist.

John, I agree that there must be an element of fad or fashion in the vogue of certain barrel lengths. I remember growing up that short barrels were quite popular. Certainly handling characteristics come into play, but a well balanced gun is a well balanced gun, no matter its barrel length. I can also see the advantage to barrel length as it pertains to weight and the inertia of the gun movement. But that's perhaps as much about weight as barrel length. I've read Churchill's theory of shooting his 25 inch guns.

Now, the question is, will Reggie Bishop shoot at the bird to make it flush and Randy Roberts gets the follow-up shot or vice versa?:) And I wonder if any of those 6 foot guns are still around (and in whose safe)?

So, for me, I'll hedge my bets and get as many different barrel lengths as possible.:) Hey, it's a good excuse for acquisition...

For me it’s multiple factors that tend to draw me towards longer barrel Parkers. Form, function, style, novelty and rarity are all descriptors I might use. I am a tall guy and a longer barrel gun just feels better in my hands. I have a 30” straight stock 20 that to me is about the ultimate upland gun. It swings nicely, it’s well balanced and yeah it looks racy! I like oddities and have a 32” 20 on the 1 frame with a straight stock Monte Carlo, splinter and a Parker single trigger and factory 2 7/8” chambers. I don’t know what the person had in mind when he ordered it but he or she must have liked the unusual as well. I own one 26” Parker that is a beautiful gun but those short barrels put me in mind of a coach gun! I don’t shoot trap. Never been on a skeet field. I hunt turkeys and dove. I am threatening to start shooting some sporting clays. So for me I will continue to be inclined to lean towards the longer.

For most of earlier hunting life ( Pheasants and Ducks) I have primarily owned and used 26 inch doubles. When i gravitated to Parkers, my first was also a 26 inch repro 12. Years later I wound up with 2 of the 30 inch 12's and my sporting clays improved. But i still always drag out the 26 inch Repro
every time i hunt, and it connects impressively. . Old habits die hard for this old timer..

John I think it's a bit of both. Todays SC targets just keep getting further and further away as target setters try to dupe a shooting fraternity that continues to improve. The distances we shoot at now days certainly lend themselves to longer barreled guns. Plenty of tight targets to go around as well but I have never felt handicapped with a 32" or 34" gun. Emotional, you betcha. I like the long barreled guns for aesthetic and practical reasons. They just look cool and racy to my eye and I am drawn to them. While not a straight stock guy I will admit that a straight stock with long barrels is really svelte to my eyes. I won't enjoy shooting it as much as a PG but it looks way cool.

I'm not sure that I would call this a fad any longer. It may have been a fad when the SC game was in its infancy but it's here to stay now IMO. Shooters like the long barrels on the SC course. I am not sure when the last time I saw anything under 30" on the course, most are 32". Granted they are modern guns but I believe this preference will carry over to the SxS market when these boys go shopping. Let's not forget the hunters either. Folks have come to appreciate those long barrels in the dove fields, upland coverts, prairies, duck blinds and just about any place they can be used.

Gotta go, Polaris is calling me back. Seems I stumped their engineers when I requested a gun caddy for 60" barrels :) :bigbye:

one thing to remember is that in those early days the quality of black powder was variable

a longer barrel allowed a more complete burn and in those days, velocity

Fowlers aside - the longest original flintlock rifle I am aware of had a 54" barrel - add the stock length and the shooter would need to find a tree stump to load from - I actually saw a guy cleaning a reproduction of it - he was standing on a picnic table :rotf:

please excuse the glare - this duck hunting print was originally done about 1745- this reprint was done when the artist's son joined him in business so third to last quarter of the 1700's - the gun looks to me to be about as long s the hunter is tall. most original fowlers I have handled had barrels in the 42 to 48 inch range

I agree with Randy and Reggie on their points but for me it's balance first and good triggers next. Way back when I shot a lot of 26" and 28" guns at sporting clays they were still choked M/F and I did reasonably well with them. But they balanced well and they fit well enough to get by. But as I got older and hopefully smarter I found that longer barrels did help and that the fundamentals of good shooting didn't change. The longer barrels helped with consistency. There is something magical about a straight grip smallbore that just might make me shoot a tad better. Not always but it doesn't matter. They are just cool.

In the clay target shooting sports the target flies a predictable path, a pre-mounted gun is allowed and the break point can be decided in advance. Long barrels and a steady deliberate swing is best at that game. Hunting birds is a different story. As a bird's flight path becomes more unpredictable shorter barrels work because the swing is shorter and taken quicker. Ducks fly a more predicable path versus quail. I really wouldn't want to hunt wild quail with my 32" duck gun but it works fine for sporting clays. Just like my 26" 20ga Fox works great on quail, but it's more difficult to shoot sporting clays or ducks with. Just one of the reasons to own a bunch of Parkers.

I'm in the mood for a stupid analogy, so here goes:
Long barrels on a shotgun are like long legs on a woman. Covers longer distances easier, and looks good doing it.

Okay, I'll duck now.
:corn: