Author Topic: To shorten or not. (Read 707 times)

NoBull60 · « **on:** June 09, 2008, 05:59:30 PM »

Hi Handi Guys,

This should be simple for someone out there. I was looking at two NEF's the other day. First was a 204 bull barrel and the other was a 223 bull barrel. They are both 22" and I was thinking either would make a nice carry rifle for coyotes if they could be shortened to 18.5" to make them a bit lighter and quicker to handle. Now the questions: Has anyone shortened they're bull barrel with satisfactory performance?? In otherwords, are you still happy with accuracy?? Will 3.5" of steel make much difference with the weight? Has anyone shortened the varmint fluted barrel?

Thanks,

NoBull60

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #1 on:** June 10, 2008, 12:15:34 AM »

You can do what ever you want. I like short barrels in the right cartridge and do not think it will make any difference in accuracy as long as the shortening job is done right. A square cut and a good crown. However, shortening a 204 will get you much more muzzle blast and reduce the velocity. Velocity is what the 204 is about. Overall weight maybe 8 oz. The 223 would be a better candidate for shortening. Less relative velocity loss. Muzzle blast will be increased over the 22" barrel of course. I do not think the loss in velocity and gain in muzzle blast is worth the 1/2 pound lost in weight in either the 204 or 223, but that is my personal opinion. Good Luck and Good Shooting.

Datil · « **Reply #2 on:** June 10, 2008, 02:28:32 AM »

MHO, Get a light weigh 223 in stead bull barrel cuts down weight alot!
Then you don't have cost of shorting bull barrel.
I know of 2 light weights that shoot good right out of the box,
as long as you don't shoot a bunch of times without letting barrel cool.
Thats my thoughts for a carry gun. Marv.

coyotejoe · « **Reply #3 on:** June 10, 2008, 03:13:27 AM »

Well, it's all a matter of personal preference but a singleshot with 22" barrel is already shorter than a bolt gun with 18" barrel and that is short enough for me. For a "stalking rifle" I like light weight but find that a longer barrel greatly improves the balance for off hand shots which are often encountered in that use. I'd second the vote for a .223, either standard or super lite. My personal rifle for such use is an old Savage M-219 in 30/30 and I've never found the 26" barrel to be a problem.

PHATINJUN · « **Reply #4 on:** June 10, 2008, 06:16:51 AM »

I wouldn't do a bull or the fluted either I would look for a sweet shootin super lite first. Also as stated before leave the 204 as is.Kurt

NoBull60 · « **Reply #5 on:** June 10, 2008, 07:16:00 AM »

Thanks for your thoughts guys,

I had an idea in my head that needed varification. My thoughts were leaning towards the light weight 223 since I haven't seen much negative about it and the definate decrease in weight.

NoBull60

Couger · « **Reply #6 on:** June 11, 2008, 01:02:03 AM »

Quote from: coyotejoe on June 10, 2008, 03:13:27 AM

Well, it's all a matter of personal preference but a singleshot with 22" barrel is already shorter than a bolt gun with 18" barrel and that is short enough for me. For a "stalking rifle" I like light weight but find that a longer barrel greatly improves the balance for off hand shots which are often encountered in that use. I'd second the vote for a .223, either standard or super lite. My personal rifle for such use is an old Savage M-219 in 30/30 and I've never found the 26" barrel to be a problem.

CoyoteJoe makes some good points!

I don't understand what to me seems "fad-dish" when it comes to shortening barrels.

As already stated, some cartridges work well on various length barrels, but others absolutely must have enough inches to bring them into their real or FULL potential, IOW - to function the way they were originally designed to!

I think the .204 Ruger is one of those! And other rounds might include the .264 Win Mag, 7mm Rem Mag, .300 Winchester and the .25/06.

Besides the .204R I'd also never shorten a .22-250 or .220 Swift!

However, a smaller capacity case like the .221 Fireball necked to .204 or .192 calibers in a 18 to 20in barrel would probably work much better.

There's a thing called "expansion ratio" when looking at how well and efficient a cartridge shoots.

It should be fairly easy to see that compared to the .204 caliber and the large case capacity for that size of bore, a .204 Ruger burns a lot of powder, and needs a long barrel to burn it all.

If one looks at the Bullberry website (for custom Contender and Encore barrels), Fred there conducted some tests to calculate the optimum necessary barrel lengths to maximize the ability of the .204 Ruger (and also the .17 HMR).

Take a look at that site and it will probably include what a .204R will do with a 18in tube. Twas me, i wouldn't do it.

If I needed a really short walking or "packing" Handi-Rifle, I'd stick with a .223 on a barrel no shorter than 20inches (in a Handi-Rifle). Overall length of such a rifle would be less than 36inches! Just how "short" is needed?

Heck the NEF "Survivor" with a 22inch .223 or .308 heavy-barrel is 35 1/2 inches out of the box. With a standard L-O-P stock, that rifle would still be shorter than 37in before the barrel was cut.

trotterlg · « **Reply #7 on:** June 11, 2008, 03:39:44 AM »

If you need to loose some weight, you can turn a straight taper on the barrel from just in front of the recoil lug to the muzzel, for the .204 I would say you could go to .500 which would loose probably as much weight as cutting 3 inches off the end. Larry

NoBull60 · « **Reply #8 on:** June 11, 2008, 12:50:10 PM »

Thanks for your help guys,

I'm just trying to make my mind up more than anything. My friend thinks his 204 is the way to go and I like the accuracy of it. Its just toooo dang heavy for my gimped shoulder. His is a Remington varmint weight. I just can't steady it with my left arm anymore. I was just thinking shorter to lessen the weight. I think I've got another option that will work. I'll just use my 223 for this year and next year, I'll convert it to 17Rem and make him eat crow for a change. Thanks guys, for all your words of wisdom.

NoBull60

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #9 on:** June 11, 2008, 02:34:43 PM »

NoBull60 - If you can go to store that has a 204 Handi. Heft it, it may surprise you. It may be heavy, but not as heavy as that Remington and it is shorter to start with so it moves it's center of gravity back. Just one more thought, Varmint guns are not really made to shoot off hand, they are made to shoot off a rest, be it a bipod, steady rest or bags, so getting it to where you want to shoot is the only worry. If you want a walk around gun (and I have a few) then you want a slim barreled gun. Slim barrels are lighter than a cut back heavy barel and they will not cut back your velocity and muzzel blast will not be increased. Just make sure you do not shoot 50 in a row through it, let it cool off a little between shots. A walk around gun is not for setting up and blasting away. You stalk your prey and get one shot at a time and not that many in a day. Good Luck and Good Shooting.

Badnews Bob · « **Reply #10 on:** June 12, 2008, 05:39:59 AM »

Think about a Hornet, light short and plenty good for Yotes.