Talk:Henry 1860

How effective is the .44 Rimfire? From what I've read it seems it is almost useless beyond 100 yards.

Well, not overly. It's really just a handgun round, ballistically it's similar to a 200 grain .45ACP - and the flat-nosed bullets give it a lower ballistic coefficient, which means velocity will drop faster and the trajectory will be more curved. The contemporary 56-56 Spencer round was actually alot better, as it approached the effectiveness of a muzzle-loading .58 cal Springfield. It's worth noting that alot of the Western-era rifles, for which the Henry really set the pattern, were at the time called carbines, regardless of barrel length, because they fired what were really handgun rounds. - Nyles

So why were these and the Winchester 1866 popular? Was it just about capacity and rate of fire?

Sure. Bear in mind the Henry was popularised in the Civil War. A regiment with Henrys would be outranged by a Confederate unit with Enfields or Springfields, but once that distance was closed they would have a huge firepower advantage, enough to break up the formation. On the civilian side, 15 shots was a huge advantge over the muzzle-loaders previously available, and the reality is that not many hunters will ever take a shot at more than 150 yards, espescially in the era before scopes were popularised. Actual rifle caliber repeaters (the Spencer aside, though calling it rifle caliber is a bit of grey area) didn't hit the market until 1876 with the Winchester 76, and there wasn't a really successful one until the Winchester 1886. It's alot easier to build a repeater to handle a handgun cartridge - it makes the gun smaller, it doesn't have to be as strong and won't be subjected to as much force, making it alot more reliable. - Nyles