Rifle barrel length question

Rifle barrel length

  • 20"

    Votes: 36 83.7%

  • 18"

    Votes: 7 16.3%

  • 16.5"

    Votes: 1 2.3%
  • Total voters
    43
Status
Not open for further replies.
P.B.Walsh

P.B.Walsh

Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
2,287
Location
Tuscaloosa,Alabama
I currently have a Remington 700 SPS-V .308, 26"x.750" rifle and am looking to get the barrel cut. The maximum range that I have access to is around 500 yards. This rifle is my hunting rifle/ target rifle/ do anything rifle. So my question is this, if most of my shots are 150 or less yards (while hunting), is a 20" barrel necesary for anything less than 300 yards? Because that would be the max range I would shoot at a whitetailed deer because of my limited skill. Would an 18" or 16.5" barrel be better?

I plan on adding some sort of muzzel brake if ya'll wanted to know, can ya'll give me suggestions for a good, cheap brake?

My rifle only weighs about 12 pounds, so weight is not a problem.

Sorry if my words may seem a bit confusing, just kind of thinking out loud. :)

Thank you in advance,
P.B.Walsh
 
I would not cut the barrel less then 22", or a obsolute minium of 20".

Going shorter then that & adding a muzzle break will really make it LOUD!
And make the balance crazy.

Going to 18" or 16.5" will make it a 30-30.

rc
 
If it shoots fine I'd leave it alone.
I hate muzzle brakes near me. Also not allowed in competition.
 
Going to 18" or 16.5" will make it a 30-30.
Click to expand...

I disagree, even in a 15" handgun 308winchester outperforms a 20" 30-30 by a considerable margin

30wcf tops out around 2350fps with 150grn bullets from a 20" barrel

308win can still crank out almost 2700fps in a 15" hand cannon.

My line of thinking is if I want a 20" barrel I'll just buy a rifle with a 20" barrel. If I want build a handy carbine I'm going to go short enough to make the expense worthwile, so I voted for 18"
 
Last edited:
My Savage 10FP .308 has a 20" barrel, shoots great, and my fps hasn't seemed to suffer. Short of looking kinda funny, I have no problems:)
IMG_2751.jpg
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't go less than 20" either for several reasons.

I despise muzzle brakes. I'd stick with the 26" barrel instead, less noise and reasonable recoil. A good recoil pad like a Limbsaver would be cheaper and quieter than a muzzle brake. Another thing that helps me a lot is a PAST recoil shield - or a heavy leather jacket. This may sound wierd, but using ear plugs and ear muffs together makes recoil a lot more manageable too.

I have a 260 that I cut to 20" from 24". I think that 20" is about as short as you'd want to go unless you're really hunting thick brush. If that's the case I'd think a 20" lever gun would beat a bolt gun anyhow. For the cost of a muzzle brake and barrel work you could probably find a nice used Marlin 336.
 
The only reason I want a muzzel brake is because I despise my crown bumping up against stuff and I figure if the brake will take the minor impact, then the crown will not suffer any damage.

Is there any truth to this logic?

How much velocity am I losing from 20"-18.5"-18"?


*EDIT* Can a moderator change "varrel" to barrel"?

Thanks,
P.B.Walsh
 
Well, I have hunting rifles I've used since 1962 with no muzzle or crown damage, ever.

Unless you are really clumsy, and jam your rifle into hard things a lot, I wouldn't worry about it!

Almost all crowns are recessed enough anymore that the muzzle itself will take any impact without harm to the crown.


And I would again urge you to consider the balance of a gun with too short a barrel.
Most folks like to carry a hunting rifle with their hand around the stock right in front of the trigger guard.

A 700 with an 18" barrel will be butt heavy and want to drag on the ground when carried that way..

rc
 
I agree with rc model

There is wisdom telling you what would most likely be best. You can heed wisdom, or you can do as you please and perhaps learn the hard way that he may have been right.

Once the barrel is cut, too late (unless you add lead weight to the butt -- which then defeats the purpose).:scrutiny:
 
I carried a 26" '06 around for some 30 years. I don't recall banging the crown. Besides, whatever banging occurred was to the outer rim, not the center where it matters.

Before I went to chopping a barrel, I'd trade off for a rifle which came as "short, light and handy".

Seems to me after all those years with my 9.5-pound critter, I'd think that any walking hunt with 12 pounds would be zilch for pleasure. And after my legs quit on me, getting sorta old and tired, I went to a 700Ti at 6.5 pounds ready to shoot Bambi. :)
 
I, also, wouldn't go below a 22" barrel length in caliber 308. I've watched a friend shoot his 18" 308. I don't know what kind of velocity he's losing; however, that rifle has significant bullet drop and loss of accuracy after, about, 150 yards.

We used to shoot at deer across a steep ravine. Up close and inside 100-125 yards he was fine; however, his short-barreled 308 couldn't make it all the way across the 200-250 yard width of that ravine without really excessive bullet drop with no real expectation of being able to hit the quarry.

Me and my 25 + inch barreled 30-06 Sako Finnbear, never had a problem.
 
Ghost Walker said:
I, also, wouldn't go below a 22" barrel length in caliber 308. I've watched a friend shoot his 18" 308. I don't know what kind of velocity he's losing; however, that rifle has significant bullet drop and loss of accuracy after, about, 150 yards.

We used to shoot at deer across a steep ravine. Up close and inside 100-125 yards he was fine; however, his short-barreled 308 couldn't make it all the way across the 200-250 yard width of that ravine without really excessive bullet drop with no real expectation of being able to hit the quarry.

Me and my 25 + inch barreled 30-06 Sako Finnbear, never had a problem.
Click to expand...
I agree.
Sometimes people just have to "experience it" though.
Some people (me included) learn by doing.
I could tell you some stories where I shouldn't have done thus and so and some of the funny predicaments I got myself into when I was younger.
 
hey pb

with my P model i went down to 24". somebody can correct me if i'm wrong, but the last book i read said that most ballistic tables are based off of a 24" barrel. so if you get shorter than that youll have to start WAGing, or making your own. added a lil bit of stiffness, almost didnt lose any fps/flbs, and the manueverability is fine (slung up doesnt go past my head).

but do what you want. if you are adding that brake youll have to decide what overall length is acceptable. and when i say acceptable, i dont mean slung on your back, but in a hard case. if i were picking a brake, i would go through yankee hill, mostly because they have brakes that act as quick detaches for suppressors. great customer service too.

good luck!

edit: and take a look at this http://www.stubbygear.com/product.asp?productid=7286
 
Last edited:
rcmodel speaks wisely.

First off, you do NOT want a brake on any hunting rifle, regardless of barrel length. It adds weight AND noise (and expense), for absolutely no gain in the hunting woods or elsewhere for that rifle you describe.

Second, if you MUST, the answer is 22" or maybe 20" for your use, IMO. Heck, split the difference and go with 21".

Third, when you say "weight is not a problem", I take it that you mean, no matter how much barrel you cut off, it's still going to be an inordinately heavy hunting rifle. If that's what you meant, then you are right on the money, and as such, it doesn't make any sense to cut it less than 22", or maybe 20".

Personally, for that rifle, I'd leave it as is, and get a second rifle for hunting. Or *maybe* I'd cut it to 24" - maybe. Velocity helps buck the wind at ALL distances.

The only reason I want a muzzel brake is because I despise my crown bumping up against stuff and I figure if the brake will take the minor impact, then the crown will not suffer any damage.

Is there any truth to this logic?
Click to expand...

I suppose there is truth to that, but if you must do that, make it a FLASH HIDER, *not* a loudener (brake).
 
Last edited:
kis2 has a point.

I am a fan of 24" bbls for several reasons. They lose very little velocity over the 26", they are the length of choice for most manuals for their universal receivers, and they really don't seem to get in my way. If I were mucking around in the jungle I might feel differently, but the only place I did that was in south Louisiana a bunch of years ago. If I were humping it in the mountains, I would sure want a long barrel for max velocities across long distances, and might consider a longer one. As it is, it's yours to hump, so hump what you want :cool:
 
I bought same gun for my son to use deer hunting. My local benchrest smith cut (and re-crowned barrel with recessed/protected crown) to 22" for $55. Shoots like a dream. His very strong advice was not to go shorter than 22". I figure we can always cut another inch or two off if we somehow manage to damage the crown.
 
I can't just go buy another rifle, so that is kinda out of the question because I need a new scope.

For weight, I mean that 12 pounds isn't too much because I made my sling to be used as a two point rifle sling, so the only time I will bring it up is to fire.

I posted this question at www.snipershide.com also and their leaning towards 18"-20" barrels because I don't ever shoot from mountain top to mountain top and most of my shots are <150 yards.

I think for me 20" would be a safe option.

Now, where could I get a flash hider for my rifle, preferably one that is in-line with my barrel.

Thanks,
P.B.Walsh
 
This discussion has come up a fair bit on the Sniper's Hide boards, and it almost always starts a fight.

A lot of the guys on there have 18-20 inch barrels. From what I can tell, on a cartridge .308-length or shorter the performance and accuracy do not significantly deteriorate. A shorter barrel is stiffer and therefore aids accuracy. However, those who claim you lose no velocity are not telling the whole truth. You do lose velocity with a shorter barrel - its just that some cartridges lose more than others.

For a .308-length cartridge I wouldn't cut it down to more than 20 inches for general-purpose use - just to stay on the safe side. I've seen ridiculous claims on Snipers Hide, such as the idea that you can cut a .308 to 12 inches and experience no noticeable loss in performance. Even the little .223 Remington has noticeable performance loss going from 20 to 16 inches. You want to be especially careful for hunting applications, as loss of velocity equals loss of energy.

With cartridges .30-06 length or longer, cutting the barrel is a poor decision. Longer cartridges typically require slower-burning powders to maximize velocity and therefore performance. A short barrel will waste powder and fail to extract the velocity advantages that a .30-06 or magnum can offer over a .308.

Much of the support for cutting the barrel has come from the tactical sniping community. Bear in mind that there are two interests the tactical guys have that you may not. The first is portability. A shorter barrel means a lighter and more portable rifle, all the better to hump across miles of rough terrain when you're already weighed down with gear. In addition, a shorter barrel makes the weapon better to maneuver when a suppressor is mounted. A 26-inch barrel with a suppressor mounted is a really long piece.

OTOH for pure competition shooting at long range like F-Class nobody is chopping the barrel. Why? Because in competition every edge is necessary and the weight brought on by a long barrel isn't a concern.

I have a Remington 700 SPS-V with a 26-inch barrel. I don't intend on mounting a suppressor, and the accuracy differences between 20 inches and 26 inches are negligent enough that I am not motivated to cut the barrel.
 
Back in the '70s a friend had one of those Remington bolt action carbines in .308 with the synthetic stock and a short barrel (16.5"?) it kicked like H*LL and the muzzle blast was very unpleasant. What is the reason you wish to cut the barrel? you won't save any real weight on a 12 lb rifle. If you add a flash hider you end up cutting 6" and adding 2"- not worth it. IMHO I would not recommend going less than 22" if you really had to do it.
 
45Badger said:
I bought same gun for my son to use deer hunting. My local benchrest smith cut (and re-crowned barrel with recessed/protected crown) to 22" for $55. Shoots like a dream. His very strong advice was not to go shorter than 22". I figure we can always cut another inch or two off if we somehow manage to damage the crown.
Click to expand...
Yeah, or just cut a piece out of the middle if you want it shorter still, and weld the crowned end back on!
Epoxy works good, too!
Then you could be on one of the pages for Redneck of the Year Calendar!

I'm just pullin' your leg!
I agree, not any shorter than 22"!
 
Good cheap muzzle break? I think 'good' and 'cheap' are not going to happen together.
Plus you add the cost of threading the barrel.


The Weatherby rifle web site has a ballistics page for its Magnum ammunition with the following statement: "Listed velocities were determined using 26 inch barrels. Velocities from shorter barrels will be reduced by 30 to 65 feet-per-second per inch of barrel removed."

If your experience is similar, you won't lose much by cutting to 20 or 22 inches. Spend the money to get it recrowned, or is likely to lose accuracy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P.B.Walsh
  • Locked
Cut to 18" or 20" for a .308, that is the question.
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
Maverick223
Maverick223
P.B.Walsh
  • Locked
  • Poll
A look at two rifles.
2 3
Replies
54
Views
2K
Art Eatman
A
F
  • Locked
Barrel length
Replies
1
Views
378
MAX100
M
P.B.Walsh
  • Locked
Got some questions on "THE RIFLE" for me.
Replies
22
Views
1K
P.B.Walsh
P.B.Walsh
thomis
  • Locked
.308 rifle barrel lengths
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
jmr40
jmr40
Back
Top