Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Abe E.S. Corpus SASS #87667

Removing Metal from '66/'73 Barrel

Recommended Posts

I have heard that some folks lighten up a '66 or '73 by removing some steel from the underside of the barrel that is underneath the forend.

 

Does anyone have a photo of this mod?

 

If you have an opinion (pro or con) on the topic, chime in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buy a rifle with a round barrel . Maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything that's old is new again. Some years ago there was a "fad" thing going around that it was a good idea to "lighten" the octagonal barrel to make it "faster." Several rifle builders were milling a slot in the bottom flat of the barrel so it would be covered by the Magazine tube. Fortunately, that craze passed quickly. It's actually not real practical nor effective. My bust suggestion would be to write me a check for the cost of the machine work. That way one of us would be happy :-)

 

Coffinmaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is done by milling some material form underneath the forearm. In a 20" 73' it actually made for a very fast handling rifle. It's completely changes the balance point. A worthwhile mod for some and maybe not for others. They do feel different and pretty cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard that some folks lighten up a '66 or '73 by removing some steel from the underside of the barrel that is underneath the forend.

 

Does anyone have a photo of this mod?

 

If you have an opinion (pro or con) on the topic, chime in.

 

 

You asked.

I think it is stupid.

If your rifle is to heavy. Buy one that is lighter. Like a round barrel carbine.

 

I mean really. If you do it right. You only have to hold it up a few seconds. :huh:

 

But that is just my opinion. And not worth much.

I am sure that I do things that others think are stupid.

 

Remember. You ask for pro and CON.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my Go-To rifle has it done...since 2004.

 

Love that old rifle...serves me well...love the feel.

 

But...I've been called stoopid before...I can take it.

 

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not like it matters but I don't have any problem holding up my '73 for a few seconds on each stage. By sheer force of will, I press through. :)

 

I was wondering if this would be a worthwhile mod for my wife's '66. She developed a back problem and has difficulty lifting things, so she's not been shooting for a while.

 

Prior to posting the question, I've heard some folks say that it makes a difference, and one or two state that it was not worth doing. Not surprised to see a difference of opinion on the Wire. Thanks for the responses.

 

Again, if anyone has a photo, I'd appreciate seeing exactly how this is done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my Go-To rifle has it done...since 2004.

 

Love that old rifle...serves me well...love the feel.

 

But...I've been called stoopid before...I can take it.

 

;)

 

 

Well. You know me.

I probably could not tell any difference. As I am more like a bull in a china closet.

And have been called stupid and worse more than once. :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not like it matters but I don't have any problem holding up my '73 for a few seconds on each stage. By sheer force of will, I press through. :)

 

I was wondering if this would be a worthwhile mod for my wife's '66. She developed a back problem and has difficulty lifting things, so she's not been shooting for a while.

 

Prior to posting the question, I've heard some folks say that it makes a difference, and one or two state that it was not worth doing. Not surprised to see a difference of opinion on the Wire. Thanks for the responses.

 

Again, if anyone has a photo, I'd appreciate seeing exactly how this is done.

For what you are describing I think it would be worthwhile. I have spent a fair amount of time with one and actually put some ammo downrange with it. Again completely changes the balance point. Handles a bit more like a Marlin actually. And even holding a rifle for just 2 seconds I can tell you if one balances better than another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not like it matters but I don't have any problem holding up my '73 for a few seconds on each stage. By sheer force of will, I press through. :)

 

I was wondering if this would be a worthwhile mod for my wife's '66. She developed a back problem and has difficulty lifting things, so she's not been shooting for a while.

 

Prior to posting the question, I've heard some folks say that it makes a difference, and one or two state that it was not worth doing. Not surprised to see a difference of opinion on the Wire. Thanks for the responses.

 

Again, if anyone has a photo, I'd appreciate seeing exactly how this is done.

And I don't have any issues holding up a non-modified barrel...come on, give me a break.

 

:wacko:

 

And AA...I'm in the same boat as you... ;):P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deuce and Phantom know a lot more than I do.

 

So you might take it from them.

 

 

Personally. I would just get her a Marlin Carbine.

 

 

P.S. I will have to get ahold of Phantoms rifle and see if it changes my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't trying to be a smart ass with my first post. But let me expand on my thought. Unless she's really in love with That gun I would consider selling the gun and buying a marlin or 73 round barrel carbine. I don't think the little bit of weight you get off the gun milling the barrel is going to make enough of a difference to someone that hasn't been shooting due to a bad back. Which ever way you go good luck and hope she makes it back to the range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deuce and Phantom know a lot more than I do.

 

So you might take it from them.

 

 

Personally. I would just get her a Marlin Carbine.

 

 

P.S. I will have to get ahold of Phantoms rifle and see if it changes my mind.

Try it out at CAC...and the stock is extended...so it'll probably fit you perfectly!

 

;)

 

Oh, and Deuce knows about a 1000 times more then I about rifles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much weight is actually removed from a 20" short rifle with this mod??? 6-8 ounces???

 

I guess I would sell the rifle and replace it with another of lighter weight.. Half round barrel, carbine, or the little 16 1/8th" inch carbine like I had done for my wife, short fast and light..

 

I even like her little trapper carbine, it is the fastest 1st shot off a prop I've ever seen..

 

Spades H.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If she needs a lighter rifle...
And yer considering having that modification done..
Could you also make it an 18" barrel length?

Which would make it lighter yet..
Would it still be a SASS legal rifle?

Rance
Just thinkin'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much weight is actually removed from a 20" short rifle with this mod??? 6-8 ounces???

 

I guess I would sell the rifle and replace it with another of lighter weight.. Half round barrel, carbine, or the little 16 1/8th" inch carbine like I had done for my wife, short fast and light..

 

I even like her little trapper carbine, it is the fastest 1st shot off a prop I've ever seen..

 

Spades H.

 

Best I can figure, if you skim ~1/8" thick, wrapping around approximately 1 1/2" around the barrel, for a length of 8" under the forend, you're looking at just over 6.5oz of steel removed, from approximately the midpoint of the rifle (center of balance).

 

Sometimes physics helps a gun handle faster, sometimes voodoo...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If she needs a lighter rifle...

And yer considering having that modification done..

Could you also make it an 18" barrel length?

Would it still be a SASS legal rifle?

 

Rance

Just thinkin'

 

I started as a 20" octagon barrel. I had it shortened to about 17", which helped with the weight. It's SASS legal as long as it's 16".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I could find someone locally that would and could do it, I'd have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is intended to balance the rifle. Lighter is just a good consequence. I have a 22" 1873 Border Deluxe that has been lightened. I also have a 20" 1873 Border Deluxe that has not been lightened. The balance is different. The 20" is noticeably barrel heavy. Like Phantom, I dearly love the fast handling 22".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much weight is actually removed from a 20" short rifle with this mod??? 6-8 ounces???

 

I guess I would sell the rifle and replace it with another of lighter weight.. Half round barrel, carbine, or the little 16 1/8th" inch carbine like I had done for my wife, short fast and light..

 

I even like her little trapper carbine, it is the fastest 1st shot off a prop I've ever seen..

 

Spades H.

1/2 pound out of a 20" octagon barrel. It's a balance point difference as much as a weight loss. Carbines and trappers balance horribly. When this is done it totally changes the way the gun swings. Holding the gun down to your side you really can't tell anything. When you start swinging from target to target that is when it shows. If you are not a serious competitor or have a physical problem don't do it.

 

If you think just substituting a carbine for this mod is the answer you just don't understand what the mod does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that my 73/32-20 is heavier than heck. I handled a friends who had this "lightening" done. what a difference. The balance was right and it felt much better.

IKe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to take a wild guess and say her 66 is in one of the smaller calibers? Moving up to a .44 or .45 would lighten the barrel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Maybe I Am The Stupid One. :huh:

 

 

Did not even think about a balance thing. Just weight.

And just going by weight only. Just did not seem to make any sense to me

if you could just get a different rifle that weighed less.

 

So I will take a look at Phantoms in a few weeks. See if that changes my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anvil Al, your so strong, you may require a 24" barrel. Then lighten it to balance it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You might gain four ounces (4 oz.) by going from octagonal to round barrel, but I doubt it. That's always been my presumption, anyway, If anyone knows better, speak up.

 

A "carbine", I believe, will actually have a longer length of pull (lop) than a "rifle" syle of the Uberti Win73.

 

As noted above, a caliber .45 or 44 will be noticably lighter than the .357mag (.38 shooter). Just get the rifle in an 18" barrel length. they are available new, with a bit of a wait.

 

You can probably come up with a formula to determine the weight savings by milling the barrel, based on the OD of the barrel vs. your intended mill-down OD. Fluting the barrel would probably save less weight than milling down the entire barrel (or even a major section of it) AND, a fluted barrel may prove to be an illegal modification anyway. But, even if it is not illegal, the effort of finding out by going through that process probably eliminates the idea anyway.

 

Balance is a significant consideration. You might save some weight by having the stock drilled, but my guess is it would be coming off the wrong end of the rifle and wouldn't be enough to matter, since the weight problem as I see it, is the balance of the weapon on the front, less-supported end. My 18", Uberti Win73 octagon barreled rifle, in .357 caliber is pretty well balanced with that shorter barrel, however it was heavy enough for a 22 year old cutie about 5.6, 125 lbs, without back problems, who I was teaching to shoot cowboy, to make note of it and have to stop for a minute or two. Of course, she was hold the rifle longer than we take to shoot stages, so that's a consideration, too.

 

Try to borrow someone's 18" rifle (not carbine) and have her fire it. Remember, length of pull can add to the balance problem and the the stress on your wife's back.

 

Recommendation? I believe there might be a 16" barreled Uberti "brush rifle" available out there somewhere. You might have to have someone work the magazine or get you a shorter spring(?) to make that magazine hold ten (10) rounds of .38 special. Remember to use overall length (oal) of the ammo you are reloading as a benchmarke for reviewing that magazine tube.

 

Best wishes.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's for Momma, give her what she wants!

I personally love the way my lighter carbine handles.

👍👍👍

Miss Behavin' shoots a 16" carbine with this mod. It's a lite little sucker. Still a few ounces heavier than a 18" marlin carbine.

I swear she can pick up on an extra ounce of weight difference in a rifle or shotgun.

Regards,

Ringer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But no one has a picture?

To much work to pull the forearm and mag tube off just for a picture. Picture all the flats milled down under the forearm then a channel milled under the mag tube.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I'm reading this right, folks are saying that removing ~6oz from the middle of the rifle makes a "barrel heavy rifle" balance more rearward? I just can't fathom that.

 

The center of balance on my 20" is right at the end of the receiver, maybe an inch into the forend. The mass we're talking about removing starts there and only extends about 8". So the resultant torque is 0.14 ft.lbs.

 

Relatively speaking, taking 2" off of the end of the barrel will remove ~4.5oz, that will result in a torque change of 0.44ft.lbs. at center. Relatively speaking, taking 1/2" off of the barrel would give the same change in balance as skimming the entire belly under the forend.

 

And considering that most of my shooting is done with the FORWARD hand supporting the rifle and the rear hand cycling the action, then you're actually talking about making the rifle feel MORE barrel heavy, since you're taking weight out of the barrel on the wrong side.

 

I've done a lot of barrel modifications to dozens of firearms (suppose it has to be over a hundred by now), and the physics and physiology of shooters (engineer by trade and education, with another degree in physics as well) is a passion of mine, I just don't see how this one is anything more than voodoo...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I'm reading this right, folks are saying that removing ~6oz from the middle of the rifle makes a "barrel heavy rifle" balance more rearward? I just can't fathom that.

 

The center of balance on my 20" is right at the end of the receiver, maybe an inch into the forend. The mass we're talking about removing starts there and only extends about 8". So the resultant torque is 0.14 ft.lbs.

 

Relatively speaking, taking 2" off of the end of the barrel will remove ~4.5oz, that will result in a torque change of 0.44ft.lbs. at center. Relatively speaking, taking 1/2" off of the barrel would give the same change in balance as skimming the entire belly under the forend.

 

And considering that most of my shooting is done with the FORWARD hand supporting the rifle and the rear hand cycling the action, then you're actually talking about making the rifle feel MORE barrel heavy, since you're taking weight out of the barrel on the wrong side.

 

I've done a lot of barrel modifications to dozens of firearms (suppose it has to be over a hundred by now), and the physics and physiology of shooters (engineer by trade and education, with another degree in physics as well) is a passion of mine, I just don't see how this one is anything more than voodoo...

Start running sub 2.5 second rifle runs on more than 3 target scenarios and you'll understand what the difference is. If physics is what everyone went by the half round half octagon rifles would handle like a dream but they don't. Trust me I've tried them all. This same thing holds true between solid frame and take down 97's. The weight change is behind the forward hand and those two guns point totally different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shortening the rifle barrel is very noticeable because that extra few ounces at the end is magnified. (Length times weight).

 

I started there and it helped me a lot. I had a 20 inch barrel cut down by almost 2 inches. (Thanks, Swift Stoney!!!)

 

I have not done the other mode, but realize that it would lighten the rifle right in the middle.

Although you do not get the (length) factor, it would change the overall weight which surprisingly would change the balance, especially for moving the rifle.

 

When folks are stronger, they don't notice slight differences that much - except perhaps at "mach" speeds :D

 

But when we are relative weaker or more "fragile" due to physical problems, we really notice slight differences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gender:Male

Location:Kansas

SASS# Guest

 

And this is convincing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I switched from a Marlin to a 73 because it was heavy and stayed on target better ...but what do I know!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.