I've always been under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that, ceteris paribus, a longer barrel will stabilize a given bullet "better than" (or more likely to stabilize) a shorter barrel, with a given twist rate. For example, take the Saiga .308s - 1 has a 16" bbl, and the other has a 21.5" bbl. Both have a 1 in 12ish/13ish twist (rather than a 1 in 10 like a lot of .308s). Assume for a moment that the 16" bbl will NOT stabilize (be accurate with) 174 gr bullets, let's say (which is probably true). Given that 'fact', is it or is it not the case that the 21.5" bbl COULD POSSIBLY BE / WOULD IN FACT BE more likely to stabilize that 174 grainer? Or is rifling twist rate is rifling twist rate is rifling twist rate - same results, regardless of barrel length? The basis of my homegrown theory is just that with more barrel length, the bullet has more time in the barrel to get up to, or close to, what I'm going to call "terminal rate" of bullet spin, whereas with a shorter barrel, the 'slippage' factor so to speak might prevent it from getting up to the 'terminal rate'. In other words, at what length of barrel does the bullet typically achieve the maximum 'terminal rate' of bullet spin - early on or later on in barrel length? See what I'm saying? This all from someone who has never even taken a single engineering or physics class. But I feel that I have a decent instinct for physics.