Advise on barrel length

Comeraghshooter

Looking for some advice here lads.

I recently changed the setup of my rifle in order to reduce the weight as much as possible.
The reason for this is I use the rifle for mostly hunting and the terrain I cover can be tough with a heavy rifle.
I changed from:

AICS Stock to Bell & Carlson Stock
Nightforce Scope to Zeiss Scope

These changes dropped the weight big time but the rifle is still very front heavy & long.
So I think I’m going to cut the barrel down from 26 to 20 inches and change the ASE Moderator for a Roedale.
This should make the rifle balance better and small bit lighter.

*My question is by cutting the barrel down to 20 is this going to cause any big problems for me?
I rarely shoot past 250 – 300M.
It’s a 1/9 twist.

New Setup (Scope in picture has been replaced by slightly bigger Zeiss 6.5-20)


Old Setup



Thanks
CS

CJhaughey

What calibre is the rifle?
Some calibres need a certain barrel length to work properly, 25-06 springs to mind.

Comeraghshooter

CJhaughey wrote: »

What calibre is the rifle?
Some calibres need a certain barrel length to work properly, 25-06 springs to mind.

It's a .223

De_Tomaso

In .308 I personally prefer 20 inch barrel over 26 inch one. You maybe loss some speed but it will not be crucial.

On the other hand for rifles chambered in .22-250 or .25-06 could be a problem.

Tackleberrywho

Comeraghshooter wrote: »

It's a .223

I would go no shorter than 22" on a .223.
I have my .223 24" but it is custom, the factory 26" was accurate but the Custom 24" barrel is just as accurate if not more, and much easier handle.

I have my .308 20" but considering re-barrelling it 22" for increased accuracy

The Tikkas are some of the shorter barrels




Tikka Barrel length
T3 570 mm (22 7/16")
T3 MT 510 mm (20")
T3 Mag 620 mm (24 3/8" )

landkeeper

my 223 is 20" and is fine i also know a 700 remmy with a 20" 1-12 and it's nigh on a one hole gun out to 600 yrds
read through this

http://www.accuratereloading.com/223sb.html

tac foley

Here'yare - you figure it out -

.223Rem 50gr in a 24" bbl @3080 fps - In a 20-22" bbl -46fps
22-24" bbl -48fps
24-26" bbl -42fps
26-28" bbl -38fps

So, very roughly, it's a loss of 20fps per inch shortened.

tac

Tackleberrywho

tac foley wrote: »

Here'yare - you figure it out -

.223Rem 50gr in a 24" bbl @3080 fps - In a 20-22" bbl -46fps
22-24" bbl -48fps
24-26" bbl -42fps
26-28" bbl -38fps

So, very roughly, it's a loss of 20fps per inch shortened.

tac

Or ~ 2-3 inch more drop @300 yards when 20" vs 26"

For Foxing I would not care, for bunnies I would want at least 24"
For Punching paper .223 then 28"

Comeraghshooter

tac foley wrote: »

Here'yare - you figure it out -

.223Rem 50gr in a 24" bbl @3080 fps - In a 20-22" bbl -46fps
22-24" bbl -48fps
24-26" bbl -42fps
26-28" bbl -38fps

So, very roughly, it's a loss of 20fps per inch shortened.

tac

Those figures don't sound too bad, id be roughly loosing about 120fps.

dev110

I think you should go for it.

As you said you only shoot out to 250-300 yards which isn't going to make much difference in drop. A few clicks that you will learn after just shooting a group at 300.
Where as Tack is making it sound like it will be a massive condition and could be two foot or something :rolleyes:

You will have a lovely set up when finished and will be able to carry it around all day with no trouble.

dev110

Something I just taught of.

Do you use 75gr bullets?
If so would they be able to stabilize in that short of a barrel?

Comeraghshooter

dev110 wrote: »

Something I just taught of.

Do you use 75gr bullets?
If so would they be able to stabilize in that short of a barrel?

I normally use 55gr V-Max haven't really tried the heavier bullets in it.
I suppose my main concern is that the rifle will still group after the chop, i don't mind compensating for bullet drop.

dev110

Comeraghshooter wrote: »

I normally use 55gr V-Max haven't really tried the heavier bullets in it.
I suppose my main concern is that the rifle will still group after the chop, i don't mind compensating for bullet drop.

It should still group. The 55gr should stabilize and it will still group. All you are loosing is the fps.

deeksofdoom

Your main problem is the weight of you mod, if I were you I'ld try a lighter mod before cutting thee barrel. In fairness if your not happy with chopping the barrel its not going to as easy to sort out

BELOWaverageIQ

The gereral feeling is that a bullet needs two full revolutions down the barrel in order to stabilise properly, you have a 1in9, therefore min of 18inch barrel required to stabilise so 20inch is ok.

clivej

BELOWaverageIQ wrote: »

The gereral feeling is that a bullet needs two full revolutions down the barrel in order to stabilise properly, you have a 1in9, therefore min of 18inch barrel required to stabilise so 20inch is ok.

I like that quote as I've never heard of it before.

I'm in mind to chop my CZ varmint down to at least 20" if not a little more.

BELOWaverageIQ

That being said, I have a .223 with a 1:12 20inch barrel, (shooting 40grners) and anyone that shoots it reckons it's the most accurate gun they have ever seen.

virminhunter

BELOWaverageIQ wrote: »

The gereral feeling is that a bullet needs two full revolutions down the barrel in order to stabilise properly, you have a 1in9, therefore min of 18inch barrel required to stabilise so 20inch is ok.

this one has been floating around in my head recently, barrel length is measured from the crown to(sorry havent got the right terminology) say on a cz around halfway on the front dovetail, when a round is loaded in the chamber the bullet is well ahead of this point i.e. an 18inch barrel doesn't mean the bullet is going to engage 18inches of rifleing. or when you say 20inch is ok do you mean thats the minimum length to get 2 full revolutions in a 1in9 twist barrel?



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

BELOWaverageIQ

That's a very good point vermin hunter but I'd say your right you would need a 20" barrel to get two full revolutions in a 1:9 twist.
Take a Tikka tactical .223 20" 1:9 as standard.

landkeeper

mmmm interesting that link i posted up would suggest otherwise
however im not going to cut down mine inch by inch to see whether he right or wrong

BELOWaverageIQ

landkeeper wrote: »

mmmm interesting that link i posted up would suggest otherwise
however im not going to cut down mine inch by inch to see whether he right or wrong

Save the pieces of barrel for me, I'll make a knuckle duster to knock some sence into you

The other element in the link you posted was the fact that he was loading and therefore could create his rounds to suit whatever barrel length.

landkeeper

no if you read it he has 14 different loads all with the same bullet which he tests at 1" barrell cuts

ormondprop

Are they the group sizes on the right?
If so its interesting to see that (with the exception of 19") the rifle gets more accurate at 100 yards the more you cut it until it reaches its peak at 17" witj a group of .217" although the velocity is only 2577 fps

Although from the info if i was to pick a length for lamping i'd have to go for 15" with a velocity 2914 fps giving group size of .233" thats seriously impressive,

I know it would prob be illegal due to its short length and we cant reload so might never get an accurate round to fire out of it

Cass

ormondprop wrote: »

I know it would prob be illegal due to its short length ............

Correct.

Section 12(A)(1) & (2) (65/2006 amended) refers to shortening a barrel to less than 50cm as being an offence unless done by a registered firearms dealer to replace a fault with the existing barrel. Because you want it shorter than 50cm (20") is not a good reason, and you will fall foul of the law.

clivej

Ezridax wrote: »

Correct.

Section 12(A)(1) & (2) (65/2006 amended) refers to shortening a barrel to less than 50cm as being an offence unless done by a registered firearms dealer to replace a fault with the existing barrel. Because you want it shorter than 50cm (20") is not a good reason, and you will fall foul of the law.

So then if a fault is put on barrel and therefore it would need to be shortened that would be a legitimate reason to have a barrel cut to less than 20" but more than 12 1/2" at which stage it becomes a long barrel pistol???

Cass

A list of faults is not specified, but i assume it would cover bulging of the barrel, external damage, "accident", etc. Under those conditions where the safety of the shooter is jeopardised then yes that would be deemed a valid reason to have it shorter than 50cm.

Tackleberrywho

19.685004 Inches is 50cm

So 20" is just above the lower limit and legal.
As said, I have had no problems with a 24" new barrel which although is shorter by 2" than my old 26" the 1/8 twist magically loves almost all grain rounds I have fed it.
Not tried 35 or 40 grain in it yet though.
50,53,55,75 all sing through it @ 24".

I have mostly used her out to 400 yards and no real obvious difference other than the custom barrel stabilizes the rounds better and all grains are less prone to wind drift.

landkeeper

i think you could still come unstuck even if you bent it for example and got it cropped to rescue it
(6) It is an offence for a person (except a registered firearms dealer) to possess without lawful authority or reasonable excuse—



(b) a rifle the barrel of which is less than 50 centimetres in length,

Cass

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

19.685004 Inches is 50cm

Go into a gunsmith and ask him to cut it to 19.685004 inches. See how fast he tells you to locate the door and use it.

landkeeper wrote:

i think you could still come unstuck even if you bent it for example and got it cropped to rescue it
(6) It is an offence for a person (except a registered firearms dealer) to possess without lawful authority or reasonable excuse—



(b) a rifle the barrel of which is less than 50 centimetres in length,

Don't get me started on that hash of a law. You cannot possess a rifle less than 20" without lawful authority. Your firearms license is your lawful authority, and as the FCA1 does not ask for barrel length you can get the license for it. So now you are both legal, yet illegal. Its a piss poor piece of legislation and will require a court action to clarify, but as none are forthcoming we woek with what we have.

Tackleberrywho

I plan on turning my .308 into something similar to this.
Except in a min of 19.7" though
http://www.remingtoncustom.com/TargetTactical_xm3.aspx

Now these guys claim sub MOA @ 1000 yards with 18.5"

Which is a fair statement, considering anyone I know who shoots 1000 yards wants min of 30"

OP
If you want it, make your .223 20", put a good Match Crown on it also to improve accuracy.

Cass

Sub MOA strikes at 1000 yards. To me that seems like one, two possibly three shots within the 10inch target, but the rest .................. who knows.

Not getting into that though as its a debate for another day.

Fact is pretty much every rifle, hunters, and target alike could strike at least one sub MOA group (of three or so shots) at 1,000 yards. All depends on conditions etc.

For stability at that distance though is where the 30" barrel comes into play. It maintains the bullets speed/stability which is vital to achieve these groups at 1,000 yards. However what possible speeds could be achieved using a .308 case out of an 18.5 inch barrel to achieve this group?

Nice rifle though and out to say 300 - 400 yards would be a great, compact, light rifle.

Tackleberrywho

Well all I need is the Barrel and cheek riser and I am there.
For Hunting Less is deffo more, but still want to be well capable of 400 yards to be very good at 200 & 300.

One point I did notice
On their 20" Tactical Rifles they are 1/12
and on the 18.5" Tactical Rifles they are 1/10

I have noticed that the .223's seem to be made in shorter barrels with faster twists too.
Could of course be mere coincidence

FISMA

ComeraghShooter,
What exactly is the issue, or is it a combination of: (a) the rifle is unbalanced, (b) the rifle is just too heavy, or (c) the rifle is too long and awkward.

I am a bit of a purist. I would never consider cutting a barrel. That's alright for me as in the states, rifles are easy to come by.

I just do not like doing anything to my rifle on which the engineers have not signed off. I have seen one too many times where changes in the field (no pun intended) to the original specs caused failure.

I am sure there are some fine machinists who are on par with the best of the factory boys, well able to cut, crown, and all. However, if it were me, I would either buy the custom rig or send the kit to the factory.

How heavy is the rifle? What about a counter weight in the back?

Given your range, if you are shooting for the pot, I doubt you'll have any problems. However, again, it is just against my religion to cut barrels.

Slan

Comeraghshooter

FISMA wrote: »

ComeraghShooter,
What exactly is the issue, or is it a combination of: (a) the rifle is unbalanced, (b) the rifle is just too heavy, or (c) the rifle is too long and awkward.

I am a bit of a purist. I would never consider cutting a barrel. That's alright for me as in the states, rifles are easy to come by.

I just do not like doing anything to my rifle on which the engineers have not signed off. I have seen one too many times where changes in the field (no pun intended) to the original specs caused failure.

I am sure there are some fine machinists who are on par with the best of the factory boys, well able to cut, crown, and all. However, if it were me, I would either buy the custom rig or send the kit to the factory.

How heavy is the rifle? What about a counter weight in the back?

Given your range, if you are shooting for the pot, I doubt you'll have any problems. However, again, it is just against my religion to cut barrels.

Slan

Hi FISMA

It's a combination of A & C, its front heavy and long and awkward.
I know im not going to safe much weight by chopping off 6 inches but i say the difference in balance should be big enough.

Not sure what the weight is but i don't think i would add a counter weight to it as it would defeat the purpose of trying to make the rifle light and compact.

CS

Tackleberrywho

Comeraghshooter wrote: »

Hi FISMA

It's a combination of A & C, its front heavy and long and awkward.
I know im not going to safe much weight by chopping off 4 inches but i say the difference in balance should be big enough.

Not sure what the weight is but i don't think i would add a counter weight to it as it would defeat the purpose of trying to make the rifle light and compact.

CS

I had a 26" barrel that was fluted and tapered. I had a 24" barrel fitted that was not fluted and has a wider profile, the weight of rig on the scales? Almost the same.
The difference in felt weight is amazing (law of the lever, especially with ASE S5 mod on end of barrel)

I was never more happy with a decesion I made

clivej

The RPA Woodland Stalker has been specifically designed for the stalker who wants a compact rifle without any compromise on accuracy. Extremely easy to carry the RPA Woodland Stalker has all the benefits associated with the RPA Hunter rifles plus the following additional features.
The RPA Woodland Stalker has a reduced 16” fluted barrel threaded for a sound moderator, which is included in the standard specification. Available in .308 Win and .243 Win calibers with a choice of 3 or 10 shot magazines.
About £3000

Comeraghshooter

^^
You would carry that all day, very tidy!

tac foley

There ya go - £3000 + a nice 1500eu Swarovski scope, plus a couple hundred eu bipod of course, and you're all set to go...

Hey, it's only money, right?

Makes my $89.95 K31 + SP mount and rings [$75] + Weaver K4 [$25] look quite a bargain.

tac

virminhunter

like clivej's post here's one that caught my eye, its a gunsite ruger scout rifle

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTrWAr4hLBA

clivej

virminhunter wrote: »

like clivej's post here's one that caught my eye, its a gunsite ruger scout rifle

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTrWAr4hLBA

Great vid now included

Tackleberrywho

Neither legal here though.
Both shorter than 19.7"

dev110

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Neither legal here though.
Both shorter than 19.7"

I think what they are trying to show is that accuracy isn't lost when you cut down the barrel.

The video will tell you if you would watch it :rolleyes:

Tackleberrywho

dev110 wrote: »

I think what they are trying to show is that accuracy isn't lost when you cut down the barrel.

The video will tell you if you would watch it :rolleyes:

Rifle can't be legally purchased here.....
We all know accuracy is not lost over medium to short distance chopping a barrel, fps is lost and Energy.

dev110

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I would go no shorter than 22" on a .223.
I have my .223 24" but it is custom, the factory 26" was accurate but the Custom 24" barrel is just as accurate if not more, and much easier handle.

I have my .308 20" but considering re-barrelling it 22" for increased accuracy

The Tikkas are some of the shorter barrels




Tikka Barrel length
T3 570 mm (22 7/16")
T3 MT 510 mm (20")
T3 Mag 620 mm (24 3/8" )

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Or ~ 2-3 inch more drop @300 yards when 20" vs 26"

For Foxing I would not care, for bunnies I would want at least 24"
For Punching paper .223 then 28"

Ezridax wrote: »

Correct.

Section 12(A)(1) & (2) (65/2006 amended) refers to shortening a barrel to less than 50cm as being an offence unless done by a registered firearms dealer to replace a fault with the existing barrel. Because you want it shorter than 50cm (20") is not a good reason, and you will fall foul of the law.

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Rifle can't be legally purchased here.....
We all know accuracy is not lost over medium to short distance chopping a barrel, fps is lost and Energy.

So your gone back to reciting things that have already been posted on this thread as per usual

From previous posts it seems like you want to re-barrel your .308 for increased accuracy but in the last post you say accuracy is not lost over medium and short distances chopping the barrel so why then are you going to re-barrel your .308 if you won't get any extra accuracy

Sparks

Ezridax wrote: »

Section 12(A)(1) & (2) (65/2006 amended) refers to shortening a barrel to less than 50cm as being an offence unless done by a registered firearms dealer to replace a fault with the existing barrel. Because you want it shorter than 50cm (20") is not a good reason, and you will fall foul of the law.

Not to mention that that exemption says the dealer must immediately build the barrel back up above 50cm after cutting it down past it (it's rather quiet on the technical point of how the dealer is meant to safely do that...)

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Rifle can't be legally purchased here.....

That's the thing. We don't know that for sure.

• We know, because it's clear in the Act, that you can't cut down the barrel to less than 50cm from more than 50cm.
• We don't know if your licence counts as legal authority under the act to possess a rifle with a barrel shorter than 50cm.

The latter is a nasty grey area in the firearms act, and will need a test case in the high court to set precedent, at a minimum. And people can say what they wish on that - the AG, the Minister, the Commissioner or any Garda member included - and it won't matter at all. It's in the Act, and the Act trumps all of those - as I understand it, only the interpretation of the Act by a Judge could settle the matter without rewriting the law.

And no, the existance of licences for such firearms does not prove anything, as a licence issued for a firearm by a Garda can be invalid quiet easily, and the Act says the onus is on the applicant to get the right licence, not the Garda to issue the right licence - so if you got a licence for a new centerfire pistol from your local brother-in-law Super for example, it wouldn't be worth the paper it was printed on because it would be invalid under the Act.

CJhaughey

If you have seen some of the new PSE stocks you may have gone for one of them, they are extremely lightweight and stiff.
That and a modest barrel chop and a light weight mod would probably make a big difference to your rifle.
Those tactical stocks are fine if you don't have to carry the rifle.

Tackleberrywho

dev110 wrote: »

So your gone back to reciting things that have already been posted on this thread as per usual

From previous posts it seems like you want to re-barrel your .308 for increased accuracy but in the last post you say accuracy is not lost over medium and short distances chopping the barrel so why then are you going to re-barrel your .308 if you won't get any extra accuracy

I mentioned I re-barrelled my .223 for increased accuracy, and also shortened it and accuracy was not affected.

I mentioned I am going to re-barrel my .308 for increased accuracy as Trueflite barrels are better than factory barrels.

It assumed that most people would have understood that.......

I mentioned that sub 19.7" Factory Rifles are not legal here so no point in looking at them.

The OP asked for advise on barrel length, that is all I gave..
and as far as I can see he is happy with my advise and is taking it on board.

dev110

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I mentioned I re-barrelled my .223 for increased accuracy, and also shortened it and accuracy was not affected.

I mentioned I am going to re-barrel my .308 for increased accuracy as Trueflite barrels are better than factory barrels.

It assumed that most people would have understood that.......

I mentioned that sub 19.7" Factory Rifles are not legal here so no point in looking at them.

The OP asked for advise on barrel length, that is all I gave..
and as far as I can see he is happy with my advise and is taking it on board.

Basically you are after saying that you spent money on re-barreling and it didn't improve accuracy?? What was the point in re-barreling then?

Sparks

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I mentioned that sub 19.7" Factory Rifles are not legal here so no point in looking at them.

Once again, we don't know that.
Nobody does, unfortunately.

Tackleberrywho

dev110 wrote: »

Basically you are after saying that you spent money on re-barreling and it didn't improve accuracy?? What was the point in re-barreling then?

I said a shorter barrel did not affect accuracy.
I rebarrelled my rifle to take rounds from 50-75 grains and sing with all of them.
Which it does.

The Old barrel only liked 55grains which are not suitable for shooting past 400 yards due to a low BC.

dev110

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I said a shorter barrel did not affect accuracy.
I rebarrelled my rifle to take rounds from 50-75 grains and sing with all of them.
Which it does.

The Old barrel only liked 55grains which are not suitable for shooting past 400 yards due to a low BC.

At what distance 25 yards???:rolleyes: