short action ? long action?
- Thread starter Sierra1500
- Start date
I agree that the differences between short and long action rifles are very slight. And in fact with some rifles, traditional mauser actions for instance the two actions are the same length with some "dead" or unused space in the short action chamberings so its a moot point.
Most modern rifles however make two (or more) lengths of actions and cooresponding bolts that fit into them. So in this case the ratio of material thickness to length is quite different between LA and SA with the SA being indeed stiffer. So the short action is a bit stronger.
The real difference though although small to measure definitely shows up to me in how they cycle. The last new rifle I bought was a Ruger mk11 and the short action definitely worked quicker and just felt right to me so I bought a 308 rather than a 30-06.
Now lets talk scopes. While there's only about a half inch difference in the SA/ LA receivers on the Ruger it shows up big time if you, like me, prefer a shorter or more compact scope. If you can even get such a scope to fit a LA rifle, there will be next to no room to adjust the thing further forward or backward to get it to sit just right for you. And like said it might not even be able to fit at all as the distance between the scope mounts on the LA is greater than the distance between the "bells".
Lets look at the much teased Browning Lever Rifle in long action. They look like s**t in a long action and cycling the things is about like working a come along. Have a look at and cycle one in the short action and the gods all smile and all is well in form and in function.
Small differences on paper yes. But when I used to play a lot of pool back when I measured my favorite cues in half ounce increments. When a hockey player buys his stick its the slightest differences that makes the choice.
Discuss!!
Most modern rifles however make two (or more) lengths of actions and cooresponding bolts that fit into them. So in this case the ratio of material thickness to length is quite different between LA and SA with the SA being indeed stiffer. So the short action is a bit stronger.
The real difference though although small to measure definitely shows up to me in how they cycle. The last new rifle I bought was a Ruger mk11 and the short action definitely worked quicker and just felt right to me so I bought a 308 rather than a 30-06.
Now lets talk scopes. While there's only about a half inch difference in the SA/ LA receivers on the Ruger it shows up big time if you, like me, prefer a shorter or more compact scope. If you can even get such a scope to fit a LA rifle, there will be next to no room to adjust the thing further forward or backward to get it to sit just right for you. And like said it might not even be able to fit at all as the distance between the scope mounts on the LA is greater than the distance between the "bells".
Lets look at the much teased Browning Lever Rifle in long action. They look like s**t in a long action and cycling the things is about like working a come along. Have a look at and cycle one in the short action and the gods all smile and all is well in form and in function.
Small differences on paper yes. But when I used to play a lot of pool back when I measured my favorite cues in half ounce increments. When a hockey player buys his stick its the slightest differences that makes the choice.
Discuss!!
Last edited:
So the long action guys say that although the short actions are stiffer and lighter and more accurate and cycle quicker..... the difference is slight so it doesn't count.... Yah Right.
The question was not about opinions or degrees of difference it was a very simple question of what is better.
If you can prove a long action to be better in any way than a short action by any measurable degree than why not just make the argument.
How about I help you fella's....
A long action is better because they are heavier which allows for more weight to negate recoil... A long action is better because they allow for chambering larger cartridges which have more case capacity and are faster and flatter shooting in many cases.
A long action is better because thats the only action I can get a 30-06 in...
The question was not about opinions or degrees of difference it was a very simple question of what is better.
If you can prove a long action to be better in any way than a short action by any measurable degree than why not just make the argument.
How about I help you fella's....
A long action is better because they are heavier which allows for more weight to negate recoil... A long action is better because they allow for chambering larger cartridges which have more case capacity and are faster and flatter shooting in many cases.
A long action is better because thats the only action I can get a 30-06 in...
BC Bigbore
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- BC's Peace Country
That was the original question posted.
todbartell said:
That in a nutshell is the answer to the question posted.
This was posted just to be a s**tdisturber
- Location
- AB foothills
SuperCub said:^^ I think you're bi-polar sometimes.
Sometimes
?????I think Bigredd will argue with himself just for sh*ts and giggles some days
(notice the smilies)
- Location
- AB foothills
The best thing about the hunting and sporting arms section of this forum, it is a constant fight over basicly nothing day in and day out
It will never end
It will never end
BC Bigbore
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- BC's Peace Country
Amen to that
Amphibious said:
At least I can make an argument... and debate intelligently. You on the other hand simply jump in and criticise, throw jibes and meaningless insults.
For a fellow with such strong opinions you are woefully lacking in substance.
I suppose it is comforting for you to be mercifully bereft of the ravages of acumen.
crazy_davey said:
I can't help myself... the "special needs" member has no concept of what a debate is. They think it is cool to jump all over a debate with name calling and insults.
If someone can see both sides of a debate he is better able to make his argument. On the other hand if a person is crippled by ineptitude he has no recourse but to fling insults.
As far as the original question goes... he did ask which one was better!
Opinions are varied... so are their worth.
BC Bigbore
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- BC's Peace Country
You are wrong there my intellectual friend
I'm afraid it was Powder Burner who was the s**t disturber that started this little debate Alas, we have all had our fun and poked jabs with good humour Now we can relax as we all know that long actions are better I bid you all farewell until next week...BCBBIGREDD said:At least I can make an argument... and debate intelligently. You on the other hand simply jump in and criticise, throw jibes and meaningless insults.
Oh I'm sorry if you feel insulted when told that your repetative reguritation of firearm marketing media is unfounded. I'm sure there is a little gun shop lacky someplace to give you a nice pat on the back, hand you a box of WSSM and tell you it will be alright.
the only jibs I make are to knock down your "claims" that something is better when it is clearly not, only different. usually replying like this would be a waste of my precious time, but your posts are one step up from scratching my ass while I wait for the coffee to finish perking
crazy_davey said:The best thing about the hunting and sporting arms section of this forum, it is a constant fight over basicly nothing day in and day out
It will never end
And people wonder why Canadian gun owners are slowly loosing their rights.
"Divided we fall"
Cheers!!
