browningguy
Member
Actually, it's science, not mumbo jumbo. If you don't think it's important that's quite ok, but please don't confuse opinion with fact.
Short vs. Long action
- Thread starter Squeaky Wheel
- Start date
- Status
Actually, it's science, not mumbo jumbo. If you don't think it's important that's quite ok, but please don't confuse opinion with fact.
MachIVshooter
Member
Show me. I wanna know how it makes any bit of difference when the locking lugs are at the front on either in any modern rifle. The rear of the receiver only serves to keep the bolt from falling out of the gun and a place for rear scope mounts to attach, so what does it matter how much distance is between the two points?
^^^It also depends on what style of action you're talking about. The difference in stiffness between a long and short action is going to be negligible when you're talking about closed top actions with the minimum amount of material removed. When you start talking about actions that have the whole top of the receiver cut off the difference can be significant in absolute rigidity, but still likely insignificant to PRACTICAL accuracy. Benchrest accuracy may be a different story, but so much of benchrest is mental hocus pocus that who can really say. Much of the things make a difference only because they seem logical in the mind of the shooter.
That said, short actions make the most sense for benchrest because there is a weight limit for most classes and every fraction of an ounce matters.
That said, short actions make the most sense for benchrest because there is a weight limit for most classes and every fraction of an ounce matters.
If you think about what is the difference in length between long and short action? Maybe 1". I have both and never notice the difference at all.
MachIVshooter
Member
Not even on a Remington, and they use their long action for magnums, too.
Model 7 based 673 guide gun in .350 Rem Mag and 700 BDL SS .375 RUM. 2-5/8" vs. 3-1/4" ports, the difference in bolt throw is 15/16"
And note my earlier point about the rear of the receiver; Notice how much smaller it is on the SA gun? Could that be because, as I said, it doesn't really matter?
Last edited:
Lightweight rifles are a lot like fast cars. Not everybody wants or needs them. It depends on your hunting style and location. I do almost all of my hunting on North Georgia mountain public land. I often walk 20-30 miles on a weekend hunt in pretty steep terrain. During Spring and Summer I backpack quite often in the same areas and my backpacking habits carry over to my hunting habits.
EVERYTHING I carry gets put on postal scales and any time a lighter weight item can be substituted and do the same job it is chosen. Three or 4 oz. by itself does not seem like much until you start adding things up. By choosing the lightest rifle, mounts, scope, and sling I can save 3-4 lbs. easily over the heaviest options in the same caliber. My go-to rifle (Kimber 308) is under 6 lbs including the scope and mounts. My heaviest rifle (300 WSM) is still just 7.5 lbs including scope and mounts.
When I start weighing my pack, boots, knife, watch, compass, binoculars, jacket, pants, underwear, food, rainwear, or anything else I may carry in a days hunt I can reduce what I'm carrying by 10 lbs or more just by making better choices.
I agree that just 2-3 oz on the rifle does not matter much. In fact if I'm carrying on my shoulder with a sling I cannot really tell the diffference between my 7.5 lb. 300 mag and my sub 6 lb. 308. The difference is that the 308 is almost always in my hands ready for a surprise snap shot if it were to happen. The 300 is more likely to be on my shoulder and not in my hands when needed.
I understand that to a lot of guys this is simply not important. But a short action can be built a half pound or more lighter than a long action. Just because some gunmakers choose not to do so does not mean others have to do the same thing. If that 1/2 lb. isn't important to you then don't buy that rifle. It is important to me.
I'm 63 and still carry a long action with heavy barrel. I own both though but prefer long action.
browningguy
Member
If you have Abaqus or Ansys you can build and run the models yourself, if not you can come to my office in Houston and I will see if one of our PhD analysts would run it for you. Assuming a free floated barrel a less stiff action will allow the action to move in a less predictable way in the stock, potentially leading to decreased accuracy. The action is of course connected to the barrel and exerts a force on the end of the barrel where it is threaded. If we can get the action to have less horizontal or vertical motion/vibration (by making it stiffer) then we can potentially affect the accuracy.
But what we are talking about is whether action length affects the stiffness of the action. And the answer is an indisputable fact that can be shown with any finite element analysis program. We can even vary the mesh size we use and it will still show the same results.
As I stated before if you if you want to believe it doesn't matter to accuracy then that is fine. Really the only argument anyone can make is does it make enough difference in a hunting rifle to matter, and I would venture to say that the great majority of the time the answer is no. But since I do have a basic understanding of physics and math I can't say it would never make a difference.
Maybe it isn't as stiff when running formulas but I have to ask just how much would it effect accuracy in the real world?
Short actions are used in benchrest but I would think it is the cartridge used that dictates the action of the rifle. How about Long range shooting to 1000 yards, I don't see short actions taking all the honors.
I guess anything can be argued but I like real life results, they don't lie.
Gtscotty
Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2007
- Messages
- 3,635
browningguy,
I'll admit that its been a while since I have worked any FEA models myself, but it sounds like you are in a unique position to put this discussion to bed once and for all. Why don't you go ahead and get your PhD analysts crackin' on the short action vs long action issue? We'll be waiting with bated breath.
I think folks were talking about whether the miniscule difference in stiffness between short and long action makes any measurable performance difference... for 99.98% of shooters, it doesn't... The difference in action design (open top vs circular cross section), along with stock design and a hundred other factors will probably have a much larger effect on performance than an additional .6 inches of action length.Therefore in a general discussion of long vs short action, especially where the OP started off mentioning M1A rifles (a far cry from the benchrest world) I would argue that the difference in stiffness and therefore accuracy is so small as to not be worth mentioning.
Weight differences, on the other hand, people can cuss and discuss till the cows come home, but If the older gentleman from Montana can carry a long action rifle all throughout those mountains, I don't guess I have much of an excuse.
You're not the only one on these boards who has done a math problem or two, but an equation (or even a series of equations) doesn't always tell the whole story.
I'll admit that its been a while since I have worked any FEA models myself, but it sounds like you are in a unique position to put this discussion to bed once and for all. Why don't you go ahead and get your PhD analysts crackin' on the short action vs long action issue? We'll be waiting with bated breath.
I think folks were talking about whether the miniscule difference in stiffness between short and long action makes any measurable performance difference... for 99.98% of shooters, it doesn't... The difference in action design (open top vs circular cross section), along with stock design and a hundred other factors will probably have a much larger effect on performance than an additional .6 inches of action length.Therefore in a general discussion of long vs short action, especially where the OP started off mentioning M1A rifles (a far cry from the benchrest world) I would argue that the difference in stiffness and therefore accuracy is so small as to not be worth mentioning.
Weight differences, on the other hand, people can cuss and discuss till the cows come home, but If the older gentleman from Montana can carry a long action rifle all throughout those mountains, I don't guess I have much of an excuse.
You're not the only one on these boards who has done a math problem or two, but an equation (or even a series of equations) doesn't always tell the whole story.
kaferhaus
Member
No, but you'd be comparing apples to oranges. Those actions are mostly single shot actions with top bridges and solid bottoms (no mag cut out). However, "Short actions" do pretty much rule 1000yd bench rest as well. Most records are held with a 6BR or variations thereof. All short action rounds.
I work for a major aerospace mfg company and was talking to the engineers today at lunch time. When I showed 2 of them the above they said you'd never notice a difference between long and short action stiffness at the pressure guns operate. They also brought up that the stress of firing is on the bolt and lugs and has nothing to do with stiffness of the action.
Last edited:
kaferhaus
Member
Boy are you off base.... this discussion is not about strength regarding the handling of "pressure", it's about rigidity and accuracy.
your engineers are correct, but you asked the wrong question and unless they're familiar with barrel harmonics and what affects them then they'd have no basis for giving a educated answer in the first place.
Then you'll have to explain to me what is being talked about in regards to rigidity. They went on for at least 45 minutes on the subject and brought up many things, bottom line was it most likely makes no difference.
Another item brought up is the amount of space between the screws that hold the action to the stock. Close together is not conducive to accuracy as in a short action. They did go on to say that in a custom benchrest action things are different.
But we aren't talking custom benchrest are we? These are run of the mill standard hunting rifles not $2000 actions.
Last edited:
There is a difference in accuracy between short and long actions. Part of it is due to a stiffer action. Part of it is due to the shorter cartridge.
None of it is going to be enough to be noticeable in a sporter rifle, but in a benchrest rifle, where everything is important, there's a definite difference.
In a sporter, the main advantage is the lighter weight and better handling you get with a short action. Sure it's only a few ounces, but when building a light weight rifle a quarter pound is a lot to take off in one chunk.
Compare a short action BLR to a long action and you'll get a good idea of what the handling issue is about.
None of it is going to be enough to be noticeable in a sporter rifle, but in a benchrest rifle, where everything is important, there's a definite difference.
In a sporter, the main advantage is the lighter weight and better handling you get with a short action. Sure it's only a few ounces, but when building a light weight rifle a quarter pound is a lot to take off in one chunk.
Compare a short action BLR to a long action and you'll get a good idea of what the handling issue is about.
MachIVshooter
Member
Here we go................
the big advantage of a short action, as far as i can see, is a dollar or two lees money at the manufacturers level. in all reality, i can not see any PRACTICAL advantage or disadvantage between a short action all the way up to magnum length action. the time difference between short and magnum length to re-chamber a round would have to be measured in nano seconds.
- Status
