Most effective short barreled big game stopper

[LoonWulf]

I have a czech mauser that could use a new barrel. I’ve thought about rebarreling that to 375 raptor as the intermediate mag length would be great for it. A guy only needs so many deer rifles though and I have about 10 more than that.

My dream rifle would be to get a now defunct DPMS GII and have an 18” 338 federal barrel made for it, but same problem preventing me from acting on that idea.

well, it's not a deer rifle, it's a bear and short-range elk rifle!

 

[Nature Boy]

How about my .358 Win BLR?



Particularly when loaded with a 250gn Hornady Interlock

 

[someguy2800]

well, it's not a deer rifle, it's a bear and short-range elk rifle!

We are sorely lacking in elk here in northern minnesota. We do have black bear but generally not very big. I did get a 19-1/2” inch male with my 444 marlin that I wound rather not have chewing on me or mine though.

 

[squarepants33889]

Well Square-pants said if you were hunting bear in heavy brush with a bolt action rifle. So that would be what we be talking about. And I say again, .350 Remington Magnum! Mine has a 20" barrel, but heavy brush or not, I'd go with a 22" if there was some way I could add two inches to mine. On the other hand, if I had such an opportunity I'd take it like it is.

No kidding? I was thinking the 20" would be so nice and handy. What makes you think you'd like the extra two inches?

 

[xphunter]

No kidding? I was thinking the 20" would be so nice and handy. What makes you think you'd like the extra two inches?

2 inches more barrel will be about 60 fps higher MV...Animal won't be able to tell the difference

 

[Ugly Sauce]

No kidding? I was thinking the 20" would be so nice and handy. What makes you think you'd like the extra two inches?

I think that for me personally, a 22" would be just as handy. For you, maybe not. ! Just a personal thing. I've hunted heavy brush forest most of my life with much longer barrels than 22", and have never found the short barrels to have any actual advantage. They certainly "seem" to handle faster, but I've never found even a 30" barrel to actually slow me down as far as getting on target, or threading my way through heavy brush. But I would not say that is true for everyone. Having said all that, my .350 has a 20" barrel. !!! Also, to my eye, a 22" barrel on a bolt gun just has a better "look", which has nothing to do with anything. If you think 20" would be more nice and handy, then you are right.

I could also say, that with a blindfold on, I'm not sure how someone could tell whether they were holding a rifle with a 20" or 22" barrel. Yeah yeah, I don't hunt with a blindfold on either. Seems like it sometimes when I don't see any game. But even looking at a rifle, depending on the length of the action, sometimes it is hard to make a good guess as to barrel length. I have a single shot with a 26" barrel, and you have to get out a tape measure to believe it. I can hand it to anyone, and they will guess that it's a 24" at most.

On ballistics, one can argue that 60fps is not enough difference to make a difference, but I think any/every little difference "helps". But again, that's a personal judgement. And, how far can you take it? Maybe an 18" barrel is just "as good" as far as ballistics. How about a 16", or 14"? However, I would agree, 60fps is not something to worry about, but would we worry or debate that an extra 60fps is a bad thing? !! But if one thinks the boost in confidence of the rifle being more handy is greater than 60fps, then the confidence is more important.

Anyhow, that's where I'm coming from on that. I was only speaking in terms of personal opinion, and nothing to back up with hard facts. Kind of a "Mary Anne vs. Ginger" thing.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

2 inches more barrel will be about 60 fps higher MV...Animal won't be able to tell the difference

True, and I know you said "about", but I will mention that 60fps is a very general estimate. Depending on the barrel, type of powder, projectile, charge weight, etc., temperature, etc., that could vary anywhere from less than 60fps to 100fps or more. Also, variations in velocity depending on barrel length are not linear or consistent inch by inch. So, just saying, one would have to shoot the same load over a chronograph with a 22" barrel, and then cut off two inches and shoot again to actually know what the difference is with that specific rifle. Again, just a personal decision or judgement as to how much handiness one will sacrifice for for velocity, or how much velocity one will sacrifice for handiness.

 

[Chuck R.]

2 inches more barrel will be about 60 fps higher MV...Animal won't be able to tell the difference

Agreed, and it's easily calculated and compared in energy and drop using a ballistic app.

I like looking at it against some measure of effectiveness like the increase or decrease in MPBR against a given kill zone, or against the recommended kinetic energy. I don't really subscribe to either, but it does help demonstrate the "effect" of the delta in velocity. Usually the MV loss from a few inches is less than 30yds worth of advantage for each.

For example, based on a 6" kill zone and using the extreme of 70FPS loss in MV for -2" and my 120 NBT load:

My .260Rm with an estimated 22" barrel MV of 2993 (+70 Fps estimated) has a MPBR of 301yds. At 500yds it has 2043 Fps 1112 ft lbs remaining.

My .260Rm with it's 20" barrel gets 2923FPS and a MPBR of 294yds. At 500yds it has 1984 Fps and 1049 ft lbs remaining.

A whopping 7yd loss. Wind drift for the longer tube at 500 is 14", while the shorter tube is 14.5"

IF we're chasing the 1000 ft lbs of energy that some authors recommend for whitetail, the 2" of extra barrel gets me to 550 yds, for a 50yd increase in effective range over the 20" barrel.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

What bear? Black or Brown?

Good question. I was assuming Grizz. If it's black bear we are after a .30-30 with a 16" barrel would be fine. !!!

 

[xphunter]

True, and I know you said "about", but I will mention that 60fps is a very general estimate. Depending on the barrel, type of powder, projectile, charge weight, etc., temperature, etc., that could vary anywhere from less than 60fps to 100fps or more. Also, variations in velocity depending on barrel length are not linear or consistent inch by inch.

I have a lot of barrels in quite a few chamberings that are 15, 16, 17, and 18 inches long.
There are more similarities than you would think.
Since he is asking about having a shorter barrel in the 20" range (Maybe 22"), then the guesswork...It is guesswork, and it won't be that far off.
In bigger magnum cases I guesstimate 30-35 fps per inch, but 30 fps per inch has been an accurate benchmark.
You can certainly create a greater spread of numbers by using the faster powders of XYZ chambering, and then having another gun and using the slower powders.
My point has been whether he has a 20" or a 22" barrel for short range hunting, it's not going to matter for bullet performance in the short range hunting scenario.
Like a 18" 338 Lapua Improved with a 300 grain bullet (Retumbo) at just under 2700 fps, would do a great job of killing at short range.
If you had a barrel, 2" or 4" longer, it would go faster.
In my way of thinking, the biggest issue is NOT a 18", 20", or 22" barrel, (Assuming he picks a reasonable chambering for what type of bear he is going after) but rather did he pick the the right bullet for the job, and can he place it properly on demand?

 

[The old gunsmith]

There is a big difference between a short range hunting rifle and a stopping rifle. A stopping rifle is intended to put a charging animal down at a distance of feet. Some of the posters mention 7mm-08, 308, etc. and they are fine hunting rounds but certainly not stopping rounds.

 

[Archie]

"Most effective short barreled big game stopper" is the title.
My first observation is "What is meant by 'big game'? Deer counts by legal consideration (state game laws and such). But moving up the category one finds moose, caribou, Kodiak Bear, and then the really large stuff from Africa. In my mind, those groupings differ in what is required to hunt them 'safely' and humanely and effectively.

Since some physics theory has already been introduced, allow me a small lecture.

The term 'overbore' is pretty much obsolete. It was the term used to indicate that a particular cartridge could not be loaded fully as the propellent powder could not be (safely) burned in the barrel. The term became obsolete when powder development slowed the burn rate of propellent. As a readily understood example, one can load a large cartridge case with more IMR 4350 than with Unique. More IMR 4350 than with IMR 4320.

The ruling mechanical factor in all this is 'Expansion Ratio'. It is the volume of space in the cartridge case with a bullet seated, compared to the total volume of the firearm down the bore of the barrel AND the space in the cartridge case already mentioned. Because the volume of a bigger diameter bore increases (moving inch by inch down the barrel) much faster than a smaller diameter bore, the expansion ratio is larger in a 'big bore' than a smaller bore (barrel length being the same).
However, using a larger volume cartridge (bigger powder space) reduces the expansion ratio. A smaller volume cartridge increases the expansion ratio.
However, that can be illusionary as well. A .22 Hornet has great efficiency. The velocity obtained from a very small amount of powder is marvelous. But it only shoots a 45 grain .224" bullet and that is NOT going to serve for game larger than a coyote or perhaps a wolf. It would be dangerous to shoot a bear, as it might attract said bear's attention.

I would desire a larger bore rifle with a moderately sized case.

The .338" or .358" caliber rifles seem to be okay for the larger critters in the Continental United States. However, I submit the heavy bullets should be shot at lesser velocities to curb excessive recoil and make shots more certain. I rather like .35 Whelen and think a .338-06 (.33 Whelen?) would be most utile.

These of course would not serve for African big game hunting. Last I heard the .375 H&H Magnum was the usual minimum for large game in most parts of Africa.

Barrel lengths should be short but reasonable. 18 or 20 inches suggests itself to me. The late Elmer Keith (based on his experience killing dinner, not a laboratory study) suggested a muzzle velocity of 2100 to 2300 fps to penetrate and kill the game, not blow up the bullet (which have improved in that regard) and beat one up less than a higher velocity.

I won't give any specific suggestions as you are all big kids and need to decide on your own. I will say I have a .35 Whelen and a .375 Ruger for my 'large rifles'. And in the spirit of openness, I haven't shot any game with either.

 

[H&Hhunter]

The most efficient compact charge stopper I’ve ever played with is a .500 NE double using a flat nosed monolithic 570 Gr solid at 2100FPS or so. On thick skinned game you can’t do much better in regards to stopping power vs a rifle you can stand to carry all day.

But that’s really a rig that’s set up for truly dangerous thick skinned critters like elephant.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

But that’s really a rig that’s set up for truly dangerous thick skinned critters like elephant.

Or a 1955 Buick.

 

[H&Hhunter]

Or a 1955 Buick.

Having seen what an African bull elephant can do to a FJ-70 Toyota truck, I’ll take the .500NE. However if the mission was to also stop a 1955 Buick, the .500 with proper solids would still be a good choice!

 

[jeepnik]

As several others have said, 45-70. Stuff a Garrett 500 gr flatnose solid in it and it will literally stop anything that walks on this planet. From my 1895 GS they run an average of 1531 fps. That's just over 2600 foot pounds. That said, I generaly find that a 300 gr bullet is plenty. But if you knew you were going to face an onery Rhino that 500 gr bullet would certainly be appropriate.

 

[ExAgoradzo]

3Crows beat me to it. I call my 1895 Mjolnir. Perhaps a little arrogant, but effective with some Corbon pills.

Greg

 

[3Crows]

You guys have to remember that old Buick was probably four times heavier than even a Kodiak and iron and steel is tougher than bone and gristle. But a Buick is quite a bit lighter than an African elephant, half as much maybe. Maybe it is time to update the TKO to use Buicks instead of knocking out an elephant .

3C

 

[H&Hhunter]

You guys have to remember that old Buick was probably four times heavier than even a Kodiak and iron and steel is tougher than bone and gristle. But a Buick is quite a bit lighter than an African elephant, half as much maybe. Maybe it is time to update the TKO to use Buicks instead of knocking out an elephant .

3C

I mean a GAU-8 with attached A-10 Warthog would be the best Buick stopper. But they are not real handy to carry on your shoulder.

 

[someguy2800]

You’ll have to define what kind of buick. I’m going to guess it will be a lot harder to stop an old 3800 then what we have today. And if it’s a straight 8 your going to need a mini gun or a javelin!

 

[Ugly Sauce]

But they are not real handy to carry on your shoulder.

We'll attach one to a Jeep.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Maybe it is time to update the TKO to use Buicks instead of knocking out an elephant

I would update it to the Chrysler Imperial. That would equal about two African Bull Elephants.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

You’ll have to define what kind of buick.

I think we're talking mid-1950's, early 1960's. Yeah, modern cars, a .30-30 will do.

 

[3Crows]

You’ll have to define what kind of buick. I’m going to guess it will be a lot harder to stop an old 3800 then what we have today. And if it’s a straight 8 your going to need a mini gun or a javelin!

This Buick thing I think originated with me and I defined as the Buick your grandma had, 6000 pounds and a V8 iron block. I was just teasing. The Chrysler Imperial suggested would be a good one too. These cars were really horrible things in terms of safety and that has been demonstrated by running them into modern counterparts. I was not being serious to replace the TKO with a BKO, or maybe I was! .

It seems to me that the rifle the OP is describing, aside from being a bolt gun with a short barrel of 20 inches, would need a caliber of greater than .30 because when the talk is of stopping a dangerous game animal as opposed to ethically harvesting (killing) then I just do not think of .30 calibers as stoppers. At least a .35 caliber maybe.

3C

 

[troy fairweather]

Remember reading a bear derailed a train years ago, must have been one Tough son of a gun.