Brass Or Steel Henry .327?

Accurate Molds used to have two designs in the catalog that would probably work well for larger game at BHN 16-19.
One was a 136 gr LFN. The other was a 148-ish gr WFN. Both were designed to use every bit of available length in the Blackhawk's cylinder. They would probably work in the Henry(s).

In my Henry, the maximum length that goes smoothly thru the action is 1.530" and the minimum appears to be 1.160"
 
Finally made my decision and placed an order.
Deviated from what I had originally intended and went with the carbine length 16.5 inch octagon barrel with the brass receiver.
Guess I'll know soon enough if I have any regrets.
The different opinions shared certainly helped me to think in some different directions and I do genuinely appreciate everyone's input.
 
My last range trip I took my 3" SP101 .327 and my 16.5" .38/.357 Henry BBS carbine. Pretty sure my next rifle purchase will be a BBS carbine in .327.
 
I can't get past the feeding tube, until that's gone I will never own one, but the brass sure looks nice !!!
 
So are the steel ones really steel and the brassite ones just Zamak 5? I am confused.

The only ones that are Brasslite/Zamak are the .22's. Everything else is either steel or brass.
 
Hawg has it.

The steel frames are 4140 forged, the centerfire brass frames are a solid alloy that's formulated for strength with just enough brass to create that "gold" look out of the box.
A non-typical brass formula, not the same as what Uberti uses.

The Brasslite is just a name for the gold-colored coating on the rimfires, over the Zamak 5 construction of receiver & receiver cover.
Denis
 
the centerfire brass frames are a solid alloy that's formulated for strength with just enough brass to create that "gold" look

Those are all English words, but I cannot get much information out of them.
Brass is copper-zinc alloy, right?
So how do you have "just enough brass" in a "solid alloy"? Are there other constituents or is it a layered or plated item?
 
I'll word this carefully, so as not to give anybody the wrong idea.

Just as an example of how strong Henry's brass is, as a part of in-house tests they took a Big Boy sample and modified the chamber to accept a certain hi-powered handgun round that used the same bullet diameter, but exceeded pressures established for the normal caliber by several thousand.
Not merely a hotter load in the caliber, and well beyond a proof load.

Tied the gun down, stood back, touched off one round.

The brass held.
The steel BARREL expanded beyond its normal elasticity recovery & stayed expanded.

Now- necessary commentary.

THIS DOES NOT MEAN IT'S OK TO DO THIS AT HOME!

THIS DOES NOT MEAN IT'S OK TO REAM OUT A BIG BOY'S CHAMBER TO SHOOT CALIBERS IT WAS NEVER INTENDED TO SHOOT!

THIS DOES NOT MEAN BIG BOY BARRELS ARE WEAK!
THIS DOES NOT MEAN HENRY BARRELS ARE INFERIOR IN ANY WAY!

The factory builds a fudge factor into their guns, with a safety margin engineered into them that makes them stronger than they actually need to be.

The guns are designed to handle the pressures involved in the calibers they're chambered for.
And they do.

Steel formulations in rifles, and not just Henry, can have the same types of elasticity under certain pressures that you see in brass cartridge cases.

On firing, the brass swells slightly, and typically returns to somewhere near its original size.

In the case of the one test round that expanded the barrel diameter slightly, where that barrel was designed to safely handle proof-load pressures in its normal chambering, slightly lower pressures could have possibly expanded it slightly & allowed it to return to size, while slightly higher pressures could have blown it.

The takeaway here is not that you can fiddle a brass Big Boy out of its normal chambering and take it up to power levels that'll kill bulldozers, but that the brass receiver is more than strong enough to handle what it was designed to handle, in its factory chambering.
Denis
 
Jim,
The term "solid" was used to differentiate the true "brass" in the centerfires from the "pseudo-brass" or Brasslite coating on the rimfires.
Sorry about the confusion.

The brass color you see on a Henry centerfire extends all the way through the receiver.
The brass color you see on a Henry rimfire does not.

The centerfires are "solid brass". :)
The rimfires are not, and not even brass at all.

As far as the brass alloy goes, yes- brass in itself is an alloy.
The formulation that Henry uses (proprietary) contains more of other elements added to increase strength.

I won't say what they are, but I was surprised that there's still enough "brass" (as such) to retain the gold color & age like brass does.

It is a solid construct, no layering, no plating.
Best I can say, hope it helps.

It's just a much more sophisticated mix than merely copper & zinc.
Denis
 
Yes, there are a multitude of copper alloys, some quite strong.
If you throw in other stuff besides zinc, it is more usually called a bronze, but hey, if you can keep the yaller color, everybody knows what brass looks like.
 
Brass is copper-zinc alloy, right?
So how do you have "just enough brass" in a "solid alloy"? Are there other constituents or is it a layered or plated item?
There are many other things that can be alloyed with copper and zinc, but still qualify as "brass".
And there are many different alloy percentages that still qualify as "brass".

Gilding Metal, for example, is a brass alloy. ...But contains just 5% zinc. It's 95% copper, but still "brass".
Muntz Metal, on the other hand, contains up to 45% zinc, plus some iron; but is still considered "brass".

Other "brass" alloys often include manganese, arsenic, tin, lead, nickel, aluminum, silicon, and phosphorus.


There are some "brass" casting alloys out there with such high zinc content (sometimes over 50%), backed by high percentages of tin, aluminum, lead, and/or nickel, that it is amazing that the alloys retain a brass color at all.
 
Easier to market it as "brass" than something like "A multi-elemented formulation of eight different metals which are stronger than conventional brass alloys but still retain a golden brass color." :)

We can all still call it brass.
Denis
 
Looking at the Henry in .327 and can't decide which to get, so I'd like some opinionated input.

I'm not interested in the shorter barreled carbine, I want the 20" version.
I really like the octagon barrel and brass receiver, but just can't get past that chrome fuel door on a rusted mid 80s Silverado looking brass barrel band.
Just really rubs me the wrong way.
Besides, the original Henrys didn't even have a hand guard much less any need for a barrel band.
The Big Boy Steel is cleaner looking with the forearm cap, and certainly useful with the sling swivels, but a thick rubber butt pad on a 7.5 lb .327 lever action? Why?
That just really rubs me the wrong way too.

So... seeing as how I doubt that Henry would build a Franken-Boy to suit me, and I am being a picky twit...
Which variant have others chosen, or would others choose?
Sway me one direction or the other please.
The Big Boy is more of a copy of a Marlin 336 with a straight stock, oct bbl, brass like receiver, and it's wood forearm (sans the loading gate) rather than the Winchester Model 1866 which did have a wood forearm, rd bbl, and a side loading gate (which is an update of the 1860 Henry without a side loading gate or wood forestock but with an oct bbl).

Henry Repeating Arm's Big Boy.

4H9zxeq.jpg


Marlin 336.

dR1D8EH.jpg


My suspicion is that Henry Repeating Arms' Big Boy model leverguns don't have a side loading gate because of a patent infringement issue with the Marlin 336 design first produced in 1942 and still protected somewhat.

Contrast the above with Henry Repeating Arm's copy of a Henry 1860 carbine. Note it doesn't have either a forestock or a loading gate.

yJIplDC.jpg


My Uberti copy of a Winchester 1866 Yellowboy carbine. The major advantage of the '66 was the addition of the side loading gate which allowed the inclusion of a wood forestock. That, and the introduction of the 44-40 centerfire cartridge in lieu of the 44 Rimfire cartridge the 1860 Henry was chambered in. (BTW, the 1866 was the very first rifle produced under the newly taken over by clothing manufacturer, Oliver Winchester, and renamed the Winchester Repeating Arms Company.)

mFbDrHT.jpg
 
All I can say is in December somebody said something about a possible "all weather" model in .327 and that's got me thinking about holding off on a steel .327 with 20 inch barrel.
 
The Henry centerfires have not had side gates entirely because Imperato decided he didn't previously want side gates.
It wasn't a protected patent issue, and there's no patent protection on a side gate today at all. :)
Denis
 
The major advantage of the '66 was the addition of the side loading gate which allowed the inclusion of a wood forestock. That, and the introduction of the 44-40 centerfire cartridge in lieu of the 44 Rimfire cartridge the 1860 Henry was chambered in.

The 1866 was never chambered in 44-40. It was originally chambered for the .44 Henry Flat rimfire that the 1860 Henry was chambered for. Towards the end of production it was chambered for the same cartridge but centerfire.
 
Back
Top