Why not barrel length choices ?

[lilabner]

Wouldn't it be nice if they gave you a choice of barrel lengths - say 22 to 26 inches? Why do most rifle makers take flat shooting cartridges like the 25-06 and .270 and put them in rifles with a 22 inch barrel? It doesn't make sense. The long range magnums would be nice in 26 inch barrels. Is it that most shooters don't care that much about ballistics? Or have we gotten so wimpy we can't carry a long barrel rifle up the hill?

[R.W.Dale]

Wouldn't it be nice if they gave you a choice of barrel lengths - say 22 to 26 inches? Why do most rifle makers take flat shooting cartridges like the 25-06 and .270 and put them in rifles with a 22 inch barrel? It doesn't make sense. The long range magnums would be nice in 26 inch barrels. Is it that most shooters don't care that much about ballistics? Or have we gotten so wimpy we can't carry a long barrel rifle up the hill?

 I've found that bbl length doesn't make nearly the diffrence reloading manuals and gun rags would have you believe. Take 308 for example, In a 15" handgun vs a 24" rifle according to Hodgon's reloading data center with 150grn bullets and top charges of varget.

 Handgun 2675 fps

 Rifle 2937 fps

for a diffrence of only 262fps or the handgun only gives up 9% of it's velocity compared to a rifle with a 37.5% longer barrel.

 So with the difference in velocity being so little even at those extremes and 98% of shots being 300m or less why carry a 26" bbl

Is it that most shooters don't care that much about ballistics?

 I think it's quite the opposite, with the advent of cheap chronographs and even cheaper ballistics software it's one of those "back before we knew any better" type things.

[trotterlg]

I think lilabner was talking about the fast flat shooters, 22-250's 17 Remingtons and the large capacity magnums.  Run those same numbers on a .270 and see what you give up.  If short was good all rifles would have 16 inch barrels.  Larry

[R.W.Dale]

130grn bullet 270 win, H4895

15" handgun
2676 FPS

24" rifle
2922 fps

100grn 243win

15" handgun
2667 fps

24" rifle
2963 fps


practically the same as the results above

the difference between 22 or 26" almost meaningless inside 400yds

[DalesCarpentry]

Makes me think about cutting my Remington 700 SPS 243 Varmint. It is 26" now and if I would only lose 200 FPS or less by chopping it down to 20" or 22" I might just give that some real thought. Dale

[R.W.Dale]

Makes me think about cutting my Remington 700 SPS 243 Varmint. It is 26" now and if I would only lose 200 FPS or less by chopping it down to 20" or 22" I might just give that some real thought. Dale

 That's the fly in the ointment. You never really know just how much until you do the deed, because each barrel is an individual. This muddies the waters even further where you have "FAST" 22" barrels that might be outrunning "SLOW"  26" tubes

[DalesCarpentry]

This barrel does have a fast twist rate to it. The twist is 1 in 9 1/8". Dale

[trotterlg]

Guess the key word is "almost"  If not the best you can have is good enough for you, then cut off your barrel, in a sport that is measured in 1/10th of inches I'll take every 1/10 inch and 1 FPS I can get.  In gerneral you give up about 50fps for each inch in some "standard" rifle, more with the fast shooters and less with the slow ones.  I know I go to great lengths to gain 200fps with my 17's, so the thought of throwing away 200fps is kind of foreign to me.  Larry

[R.W.Dale]

  In gerneral you give up about 50fps for each inch

I see that number thrown around a lot but in my experiance the number is closer to half that. Again I think that "50fps per inch rule" is a holdover from the days before affordable chronographs.

http:// www. accurate reloading . com/223sb.html


 
check out the above linky for a cool test. ditch the spaces

[George Foster]

You can easily get 3100fps out of a 270 with the 130gr bullet and a 24" barrel and 3000fps out of a 243 24" barrel with the 100gr bullet.  All you need to do is use the slower burning powders than 4895.  Of course that is going to drop the velocity down in the pistol length barrels as you need the faster burning powders in those to get decent velocity.

[Hairtrigger]

For me it is more important how a rifle handles.
Long or short barrel affects the feel to me more than it affects the velocity

[R.W.Dale]

  Of course that is going to drop the velocity down in the pistol length barrels as you need the faster burning powders in those to get decent velocity.

 That is an often repeated and completely untrue MYTH!

 9 times in 10 the fastest powder with a longer bbl will still be the fastest in a shorter tube.

t 3100fps out of a 270 with the 130gr bullet and a 24" barrel and 3000fps out of a 243 24" barrel with the 100gr bullet.

I've never been able to get close to those speeds with those two examples within modern published data

[beemanbeme]

For the sake of argument, other than stroke your ego, what can a 130gr .270 bullet do at 3100fps that it can't at 2900fps? 

With a 300 yard zero, at 500 yards, your trajectory would be @ 6" flatter.  An amount few shooters could maintain unless shooting from a rigidly fixed position.  And you would gain about 100# of energy, which would still put you in the 30-30/150 yard bracket.

Is there a formula that gives you the optimum barrel length for a given cartridge?  Or bullet?

[lilabner]

Interesting viewpoints all. Seems to me that George hits the nail on the head. With the almost universal 22 inch barrel, you can select faster burning powders to minimize velocity loss. But, you are treading in more hazardous waters where pressures are concerned. A slow burning powder can generally yield significantly  higher velocities and lower pressures in the flat shooting cartridges, but only with a longer than ordinary barrel. I'll grant that if you don't handload for velocity, you probably won't realize much benefit from longer barrels. I find that I can hold steadier with a long sporter contour barrel than with a shorter sporter contour barrel. Muzzle heavy helps. You can achieve the same balance with a short bull barrel but in a hunting rifle where you don't need benchrest accuracy, it doesn't seem to make much sense. So, why don't they give us a choice? If rifle weight for mountain hunting or handling in thick woods are considerations, you could pick the short barrel and more power to you.

[jmayton]

So, why don't they give us a choice?

Answer = $$$

They can't afford it.  In a bolt action, it's too expensive and risky to produce the same action and set-up (caliber, stock, finish) in multiple lengths.  That may be why the AR platform is selling so well right now.  I can have a 14.5" for defense, a 16" for plinking or hunting, a 20" for DCM competition, a 24" for varmints and targets, and a 26" or 30" for high power....all on the same lower with no need to re-zero my optics.  Not that a bolt action is bad, it just doesn't have the modularity that other platforms do. 

Though I'd like to see options for barrel lengths, I just don't think it's gonna happen.

[flintlock]

Actually they do...Most of the 25-06s that I look at have a 24 inch barrel most .270s have a 22 inch barrel...

If you want a 20 inch barrel, go with the Model 7 Remington...

Want a 22 inch barrel on most, go with the 700...

Want a 7mm-08 with a 24 inch barrel, go with the CDL...

Now, you may not find the length barrel in a particular rifle or cartridge, but there is a good variety of different barrel lengths out there...

Another point, short action cartridges usually don't gain as much velocity per inch as the longer action cartridges...

[R.W.Dale]

you can select faster burning powders to minimize velocity loss.

again this is a MYTH that simply won't die. All of the powder that is going to burn in a rifle cartridge will do so in the first 3 or 4 inches of barrel and the fastest propellant <velocity wise> will almost always be the fastest regardless of barrel length. The TC crowd don't load their 308 hand cannons with WW296. There's a reason powders are matched to a cartridges bore case ratio and not barrel length.

But, you are treading in more hazardous waters where pressures are concerned

 Because you're already over pressure that's why.

[beemanbeme]

I don't believe I can buy into that slower powder/lower pressure/higher velocity theory.  Pressure is velocity.  At the big ammo factories where they order powder by the tons and the burn rate of the delivered stuff is not as controlled as our cannister powder, the white coat guys take samples into the lab and determine how much needs to be loaded into a 30-06 to produce xxx pressure.  And from that they quote velocity figures. (not very well, but they still do it )

[R.W.Dale]

I don't believe I can buy into that slower powder/lower pressure/higher velocity theory.  Pressure is velocity.

 But the amount of PRESSURE you can have is limited. If you're hitting your max pressure with IMR4831 what would you gain by using IMR4320? You'll just end up hitting that same max pressure at less velocity. Again all of the powder that is going to be burnt will have done so in the first 3 or 4 inches of bbl.

 Pressure isn't velocity by itself, VOLUME also plays a role You want to burn the highest volume of powder you can reliably combust because the more powder you burn the greater the volume of expanding gas you have to propel the bullet down the barrel at more speed.

 You could load a 308 with WW231 and stay within the cartridges pressure rating. But those 10 or 12 grains of powder aren't going to produce much volume to maintain a good push against the bullet on it's trip down the barrel so the velocity will suck.

[nomosendero]

Yes, plain economics does not allow gun companies to offer several barrel lengths in most cases.

Now, if it were true that All cartridges lost 20fps per inch reduction, then All of my rifles would have short barrels, period. Problem is, it is not true.

On the other hand, if ALL cartridges lost 50fps per inch reduction, then  ALL my rifles except maybe my 45-70 would have long barrels. Problem is, it is not true.

These are extremes, but I have seen very little loss, I mean less than 20fps (almost none sometimes) with a couple of rifles, a 45-70 &
a very nice looking 444 come to mind. But on the other hand, a friend of mine bought a 7mmMag Vanguard years ago with that stupid
20" tube(stupid for a 7mag) & it was a joke, not counting the muzzle blast. I have checked enough 25-06's to know the story there as well, esp. with the slowest powders & the heavier bullets. I agree about the slow powders vs fast vs barrel length talk to a degree, but when you combine the heavier bullets & slow powders in some of the so-called "overbore" rounds, it matters at that point as I found out with the 125 Wildcat bullet in 25-06AI. If you think you can do well with the 22-250AI or 6X284 with an 18" tube, then have fun.
Some of the companies like Rem who years ago got lazy & made a broad brush statement that 20fps covers it with rifle barrels have not helped much. In the std. rounds like the 308 this is not far off, in fact I have thought of cutting my 308 tube from 26" to 20" because
it doesn't lose much, as seen here:    http://www.6mmbr.com/308Win.html

So, what does this all mean? Research the cartridge you are interested in & the info is out there, but the so called xfps per inch no
matter what stuff, well forget about it.

[Brithunter]

Wouldn't it be nice if they gave you a choice of barrel lengths - say 22 to 26 inches? Why do most rifle makers take flat shooting cartridges like the 25-06 and .270 and put them in rifles with a 22 inch barrel? It doesn't make sense. The long range magnums would be nice in 26 inch barrels. Is it that most shooters don't care that much about ballistics? Or have we gotten so wimpy we can't carry a long barrel rifle up the hill?

Fashion!

   Shooters it seems cannot cope with long barrels hence the short action hype  well in rifles as it seems they still happily go a-field with 28" and ever 30" barrels even on Semi Autos in shotguns.

   Second it's cost and inventory holding costs especially. A company is not going to hold stock, which they would have to do if they offered all these different barrel lengths. God only knows how long say a 28" barrel would be in stock before Joe Bloggs decided he couldn't live without one 

[George Foster]

Published Data:

243 Win
24" Barrel
100 Gr Bullet

IMR7828 45.5gr 3123fps
Viht N560 44.5gr 3144fps
AA3100 44.0gr 3100fps
RL22 42.5gr 3019fps
IMR4350 41.5gr 3060


270 Win
24" Barrel
130 Gr Bullet

W760 54.0gr 3158fps
Viht N160 55.0gr 3102fps
H4831sc 59.0gr 3124fps
/rK22 58.0gr 3100fps

Whether these velocities are attainable or not I don't know but they are published loads.

[roper]

Don't know how accurate this article is
http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_barrel.htm

[beemanbeme]

Krochus, I don't understand what you are saying. I'm sure it's my fault but the chamber of the rifle is the combustion chamber. Regardless of what you put in there, it would have to be enough to generate an equal amount of pressure to be germaine.  If you put enough 4320 in there to acchieve 50,000psi, you should get the same velocity as you would if you put 4350 in there at the same pressure. 
I think the difference is the faster burning powder would reach the 50,000psi quicker. I think this is one of the reasons behind why some loads and cartridges "kick" harder than others.

[jmayton]

Doesn't it seem reasonable to assume that powder burn rates affect when in the barrel a bullet achieves it max velocity.  Take a 22" barrel.  Fire a round with an extremely fast burning powder and it may achieve it's max velocity (and pressure) with the bullet only 18 inches down the barrel.  That means that it is decelerating for the last 4 inches.  If you take the same bullet with an extremely slow burning powder it will achieve it's max velocity (and pressure) just as it exits the muzzle, but there is more potential there because there is powder that is not being burned.  By matching a load with a rifle a shooter can effectively have the bullet exit the barrel with the maximum velocity available with little or no unburned powder.  True, the velocity may be no different than an extremely slow burning powder, but efficiency is gained because of lower powder loss.  A longer barrel can help in this area by allowing more time for more powder to burn thereby increasing both pressure and velocity.  But there are so many factors involved that the velocity and resulting trajectory gain could be negligible (especially for hunting). 

[SHOOTALL]

my rem. 2506 has a 24 in. bbl as does my 300 win mag . my mod 70 in 3006 has a 22 in bbl . I find it easier to carry the 3006 in cover and either of the other 2 are long range affairs i use from a blind or over a field . now my Ruger 22-250 -22 inch bbl and my rem .223 varmint -26in bbl .
Shop around they do offer options .

[SHOOTALL]

Also all things the same but bbl. length . the longer the bbl. the more time the shooter has to affect the shot by flinch or other unwanted movement on his part .
How much more does bbl. length effect vel. over height above sea level ?

[R.W.Dale]

I'm sure it's my fault but the chamber of the rifle is the combustion chamber. Regardless of what you put in there, it would have to be enough to generate an equal amount of pressure to be germaine.  If you put enough 4320 in there to achieve 50,000psi, you should get the same velocity

 A the combustion chamber analogy is a good one. Just like an engine the more fuel you can completely combust the more horsepower <velocity> you can make. Just look in your reloading manuals loads at 80% or less load density very seldom out preform loads that are at 110%

 Your getting tripped up by not taking into account that peak chamber pressure only occurs for a very brief instant after ignition. Once the bullet is in the barrel for all intensive purposes pressure is dropping from then on due to the ever increasing volume of space the propelling gasses have to fill as the bullet progresses down the bbl. Thus a larger VOLUME of gas produce by burning MORE powder at the same peak pressure will produce more velocity because the bullet is being pushed harder at any point in the bore compared to a  load that is burning less propellant.

 Now obviously you can take this to an extreme where you're using a powder that's too slow for your bore case ratio. Usually what you end up with in this situation is an incomplete combustion, just like an engine running too rich.

[R.W.Dale]

Doesn't it seem reasonable to assume that powder burn rates affect when in the barrel a bullet achieves it max velocity.  Take a 22" barrel.  Fire a round with an extremely fast burning powder and it may achieve it's max velocity (and pressure) with the bullet only 18 inches down the barrel.

 But the problem with this reasoning is all of the powder is consumed in the first 3 or 4 inches of barrel from fast burn rates to as slow as can be completely combusted. If you have unburnt powder leaving the barrel your load isn't getting ignited completely.

[R.W.Dale]

Fashion!

   Shooters it seems cannot cope with long barrels hence the short action hype

we have a winner give the man a cookie!

 We've spent years convincing ourselves that our rifles are much superior to what that looser on the next bench has based sole on the fact our action is 3/8" shorter! And you expect shooters to waste that hard won 3/8" on a barrel that's 4" longer. That would be a major gun fashion faux paux