doublegunshop.com - home
Posted By: ksauers1 Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/04/23 08:37 PM
How many of you guys use them and for what mainly? I’m not a fan of 26 inchers. Do you much difference from 28’s?
Posted By: steve voss Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/04/23 09:06 PM
At 6'2" and 235 lbs 27 inchers are still too short. 28s I can deal with, but prefer 29s and 30s.
Posted By: eeb Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/04/23 09:16 PM
A friend has a Lang pigeon gun with 27” barrels with a weight close to 8 lbs. The combination of short barrels and heavy weight gives it excellent balance. You don’t notice the barrel length
Posted By: BrentD, Prof Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/04/23 09:20 PM
After a long time believing 28 was a rock bottom minimum, I came to the conclusion I'd only been cheating myself. One's height had nothing to do with it. One's preconceptions and acclimation have everything to do with it.
Posted By: ed good Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/04/23 10:38 PM
hits ah frenchie thang...

jes tryin to be differ ant...
Posted By: old colonel Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/04/23 10:59 PM
Of 17 guns I have 4 guns with 27inch barrels. Only two shorter.

I have found 27 inch barrels linked with good balance is not a problem.

If I had a dream pair of 16’s they would have 27 inch barrels and maybe a second set of 29 inch barrels too.
Posted By: Stanton Hillis Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/05/23 12:46 AM
Fine for quail, woodcock, maybe grouse (dunno). Five inches too short for me for dove, duck, sporting clays.

Edited to add: The question of barrel length is not, for me, what can I get by with using, but what do I use BEST. A lifetime of shooting flying has convinced me I shoot better averages, in most situations, with longer barrels. The best woodcock day I ever had was shooting a 30" barreled 28 gauge. Different strokes for different folks.
Posted By: Researcher Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/05/23 01:57 AM
IMO the balance and dynamics of the gun are more important than the barrel length.
Posted By: eightbore Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/05/23 04:50 AM
I came in second at a semi major sporting clays event with a 26" Parker, not because I preferred the 26" barrels, but I had inadvertently left the 30" barrels at home. Silly me.
Posted By: Owenjj3 Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/05/23 11:11 AM
I “compromised” on my 16 bore round action and bought a gun with 27” barrels. 28” is my minimum, ordinarily. Sometimes it is necessary to compromise on a desired aspect of a gun in order to acquire an obscure caliber or configuration. The gun is well balanced, lightweight 6lbs., completely hand made, and engraved by a well known engraver, And I shoot it very well. But when I carry it, it just feels stubby. I can’t quantify or measure the feeling, which may be unwarranted, but it is there. I don’t think I will buy another 27” gun…
Posted By: Stanton Hillis Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/05/23 11:20 AM
Originally Posted by Researcher
IMO the balance and dynamics of the gun are more important than the barrel length.

Totally agree, But, consider that the balance and dynamics may better for a person, with longer barrels. A person with long arms, like myself (35" sleeve) naturally places the front hand farther out on the forend, which means it's farther out from the center of balance. By doing so the perceived MOI is changed and a 30" barrel may feel the same to that person as a 26" might to a shorter armed individual.

Shorter barrels are not exclusively indicative of quick (or good) handling. There are many other factors that go into that, only one of which I just indicated above.
Posted By: bsteele Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/05/23 12:07 PM
I have a Belgian 12ga SLE “best” gun with the metric equivalent of 27” (it’s 27-1/4” I think) and as much as I’d like to not like that gun I shoot it about as well as anything. It’s choked pretty tight with about 5” of taper and just flat-out kills birds.

Taught me not to judge a gun by its barrel length.
Posted By: Jimmy W Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/05/23 12:58 PM
I think it also depends on what you are shooting. For skeet and sporting clays I would want shorter barrels with more open chokes for quicker movement. For trap and hunting, I would want longer barrels and a tighter choke because I am a slow puller/shooter- almost to the point of aiming. Stanton has a good point, too. Shooting trap, I wear an eye patch because I am extremely left eyed dominant. So, I think it also depends on the style of the individual's shooting.
Posted By: Wonko the Sane Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/05/23 02:10 PM
My first pigeon gun was a 70cm barreled Perazzi Mirage. It had 1.35kg barrels and was just light speed fast. I used it for pigeons and bunker. The top barrel could absolutely destroy pigeons at the fence. My best scores with it were 29/30 over pigeons and 24/25 93/100 at the bunker. Nothing wrong with short barrels AFAIC.

Have a day
Posted By: mc Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/05/23 05:16 PM
I was hunting grouse in Canada had trouble with the safe on the gun I was using so I switched to a single trigger g.lewis 26 inch 12 bore I had zero trouble I'm 6 '2 '' and overweight a great great gun that killed grouse and sharptail that gun changed my mind on short barrels.
Posted By: Drew Hause Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/05/23 05:36 PM
Short barrels worked out OK for Homer Clark. He won the 1949 Live Bird World Championship, in Madrid, and again in 1951 in Monte Carlo with his Ithaca Magnum frame NID 5E.
The barrels left Ithaca at 30", were later cut, and by his win in 1949 had been jug choked and cut again to 25 1/4".
https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=582111

[Linked Image from photos.smugmug.com]

Making his last winning kill in Madrid 1949 at 3 minutes

Posted By: Stanton Hillis Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/05/23 08:13 PM
First time I ever watched flyers released from those kind of traps. With nothing to propel the bird they sometimes sit on the ground for a second or two giving the shooter immensely better odds of getting on it before it's nearly to the fence. Barnabee traps in use today propel the bird upwards and give it an electrical shock to "get it going". It would seem to be a huge difference!

Maybe Paul (mel5141) will read this thread and comment on the difference.
Posted By: Sandlapper Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/05/23 08:34 PM
I have three guns with 27" barrels; a E.J. Churchill 12 bore O/U, a Scott Premier 12 bore light game gun w/ two sets of 27 1/4" barrels, IC/Mod & Mod/Full, and a Scott Premier 16 bore with 27 1/4" Cyl/Mod bbls. I love them; super fast handling and I'm 6'4" w/ 35" sleeve length. Trends in shotgunning are strange; used to be that everyone wanted 26" barrels for quail guns and light weight. Clays shooting has changed the whole picture. Now, you can hardly give away a short barrelled shotgun, particularly a 12. I've never felt at a disadvantage using one. Sandlapper
Posted By: BrentD, Prof Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/05/23 08:42 PM
Originally Posted by sandlapper
I have three guns with 27" barrels; a E.J. Churchill 12 bore O/U, a Scott Premier 12 bore light game gun w/ two sets of 27 1/4" barrels, IC/Mod & Mod/Full, and a Scott Premier 16 bore with 27 1/4" Cyl/Mod bbls. I love them; super fast handling and I'm 6'4" w/ 35" sleeve length. Trends in shotgunning are strange; used to be that everyone wanted 26" barrels for quail guns and light weight. Clays shooting has changed the whole picture. Now, you can hardly give away a short barrelled shotgun, particularly a 12. I've never felt at a disadvantage using one. Sandlapper

I think trends in shooting are no different than trends in clothing. Some are more susceptible to the latest hot fashions. Lots of people jump on a bandwagon lead by a few vocal "experts" and ride for a while before another bandwagon comes along that suddenly looks more attractive. If I can track a bird across the yard with just my finger at the end of my extended arm, I can probably track a bird with a pair of 26" barrels. And so it is.
Posted By: keith Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/06/23 08:19 PM
It would be interesting to see how many guys here could look at a shotgun from 6 feet away, or even hold it in their hands, and know at a glance if it had 27" or 28" barrels without actually using a tape measure.

Barrel length is but one of many factors that may have an effect upon the ability of a shooter to regularly hit a moving target. Guys have mentioned other factors like balance and dynamics, moment of inertia, gun weight, and choke boring. But nobody mentioned gun fit, which I feel may be the hardest thing to overcome while attempting to hit a fast moving target, if it isn't close to correct.
Posted By: sxsman1 Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/07/23 05:35 AM
I can't believe that so many of you think that 1" of barrel legnth will make a big differance in the handling of a shotgun.
Most of you probably wouldn't notice.
Posted By: Vol423 Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/07/23 10:27 PM
I can use any barrel length as long as it's 28". Seriously 30" feels too long but I can get by with 26".
Posted By: 67galaxie Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/08/23 12:37 AM
It depends on if the gun is balanced and the lop is right for me. Being a big guy a don't mind long barrels either
Posted By: AZMike Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/09/23 08:30 PM
I bought a Remington 3200 "Live Bird Gun" from the early 80's that has 27 5/8" barrels. It would not be a length I'd choose but I found that I enjoy the way it handles and hit long yardage targets pretty well with it. I am going to try it for ZZ birds next week as it has plenty of choke.
Posted By: ksauers1 Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/09/23 08:59 PM
Originally Posted by keith
It would be interesting to see how many guys here could look at a shotgun from 6 feet away, or even hold it in their hands, and know at a glance if it had 27" or 28" barrels without actually using a tape measure.

Barrel length is but one of many factors that may have an effect upon the ability of a shooter to regularly hit a moving target. Guys have mentioned other factors like balance and dynamics, moment of inertia, gun weight, and choke boring. But nobody mentioned gun fit, which I feel may be the hardest thing to overcome while attempting to hit a fast moving target, if it isn't close to correct.

I just found that out. Now it’s really funny that I asked that question. I’ve been looking at a 12 with27” barrels I just bought a WC Scott sidelock 16. I handled it a couple of times in the gun shop. The tag said 28’s. It was laying next to another of my 16’s. Da Mn it was shorter. Got out the tape measure. 27”. I doubt I would have ever noticed
Posted By: DoubleTake Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/09/23 10:13 PM
I have two Webley & Scott boxlocks, one 27” and the other 28”. I shoot the 27” better.
Posted By: keith Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/10/23 12:45 PM
ksauers1, aside from a pocket knife, there are three things I always have in my pocket, and would feel naked without. One is a little 6 ft. Stanley tape measure that is about the size of two stacked silver dollars. Then there is a little folding pocket magnifier that helps with small details, proof marks, etc. And on my key ring I have one of those tapered bore and choke guages.

I've learned that there are lot of old doubles that have had their barrels trimmed either to remove muzzle damage, or to have more open chokes. Some guns can have an inch or more cut off, and the barrels still touch without any gap between. The first double I ever bought was a OO grade L.C. Smith. I owned it for about 10 years before I realized it had 27" barrels, exactly the way you described.

I know the tapered bore and choke gauge is not as accurate as a bore micrometer. But it is something I always have on me, and is a whole lot better than just guessing.
Posted By: GLS Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/10/23 06:06 PM
I experienced the negative bias on a 27" barreled H. Atkin BLE 12 ga. that I sold via auction this past spring. Barrel length and gauge were the negatives. It was lettered from the current records holder as being made and sold for a particular individual in 1938 with 27" barrels, one of a matched pair. It had simple border engraving and straight grained wood. Nothering fancy but with bright original case coloring remaining. It was in excellent original shape. Someone got lucky on it as it sold below $1K. Things more than evened out for me with other guns in the auction, however, but they were all subgauges. Gil
Posted By: Jimmy W Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/10/23 06:18 PM
I don't pay any attention to barrel lengths when I shoot a gun. A barrel is a barrel to me.😊 To clarify: I used to have a Parker 12 gauge that someone cut the barrels back to 18" for a cowboy shooter. My buddy had a Stoeger with 18" barrels and we'd break skeet targets as easily with them as we did our other guns- mine a Citori with 28" barrels. Or, I'd take my Beretta 686, O/U trap gun, pull a Tom Knapp by sliding the buttstock up in my arm, aligning the beads and break targets with the 30" barrels. I don't brag about being good, but you learn to adapt. Never shot grouse, so I heard that's like being in another world as difficulty goes. Good luck.
Posted By: dukxdog Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/11/23 06:42 PM
I bought a really sweet Lindner made Charles Daly 12ga "Featherweight" with 26" barrels for a cheap price that KSauers1 passed on earlier in the week because of the barrel length.

Thing is, he never even told me he had seen and held the gun before I bought it frown
Posted By: oskar Re: Opinions on 27” barrels - 10/15/23 06:06 PM
One of my favorite upland shotguns is a Bernardelli Elos 12ga with 25" IC/IM barrels but I'm just as comfortable with a Husqvarna 29 1/2" 12ga hammer shotgun choked the same.

In the 1970s my Win 101 skeet shotgun had 26" barrels and my trap 101 wore 30"
© The DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com