Author Topic: Barrel Length question? (Read 696 times)

ourabmen · « **on:** February 09, 2004, 03:10:19 PM »

OK guys help me settle debate. What is the appreciable difference between a 270 WIN rifle with a 24" and a 22" rifle? A guy at one shop swares up and down that it is a crucial factor. Is he wright, wrong, crazy and in need of therapy? Thanks for the info.

As always,

OUrabmen

Dave in WV · « **Reply #1 on:** February 09, 2004, 03:17:45 PM »

The standard factory barrel length for most gun makers is 22" for the .270 Win. and has been for years. The difference at most would be around 100 fps velocity so I would say it is a personal thing.

taxmiser · « **Reply #2 on:** February 09, 2004, 04:37:32 PM »

I've been reloading and playing with .270's for longer than I would care to discuss but as a general rule after many many years of chrongraphing various loads in differing barrel lengths an average of 35 tp 45 FPS is lost with each inch of barrel reduction. This has been determined by measuring the velocity before and after removing some barrel. Of course there are 22'' barrels that will deliver higher velocity than the same load in a different rifle with a 24'' tube.
Each rifle is a law unto it's own..............
Dale

Dragon31 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 15, 2004, 06:22:18 PM »

I hunt with three difference .270's and have a great deal of respect for the caliber as a white tail deer cartridge. Each of my rifles has a differenct barrel length but all are Remington 700's. They are:

1. regular 700 BDL blue barrel, 22 inches long.
2. regular 700 BDL, stainless, 24 inch barrel,
3. Sendero heavy barrel, 26 inchs.

With these three rifles, and the same loads, I've found the .270 to have the widest velocity spread of any caliber I reload for. Using 130 gr bullet and H1000 with the same powder charge there is and average 180 feet per second difference between the shortest and longest barrel.
Using 150 gr bullets and H1000 it is in the neigborhood of 140 ft per second. Using 130 gr bullets and H4831 the difference is about the same but the shorter barrel seems to hold its speed better. I use max loads of slow powder and I think the extra 4 inches in barrel length really helps out in letting all the powder burn. However, three guns don't make a universal rule for everbody.

Iowegan · « **Reply #4 on:** February 16, 2004, 12:18:34 PM »

My findings agree with Taxmiser. There are some things you can do to "equalize" the situation. Using a powder with a little faster burn rate for the same book velocity will cut the velocity difference down even more. If you're loosing more than 80 fps between 22 and 24" barrel, then you are using the wrong powder (too slow).

Also, due to variations in chambers and bores, it's not unusual to see 100 fps spread between two rifles in the same make, same caliber, same ammo, same barrel length. That makes it real hard to do a good comparison unless you measure, cut, and measure.

huntsman · « **Reply #5 on:** February 16, 2004, 02:07:10 PM »

I am assuming you are strictly a hunter and not a target shooter. Unless you are planning on stretching the limits of the 270 by going after something like big bears (I'm not recommending this) or shooting at incredible ranges (300+ yards), the only real difference you or your game will ever notice between the 22 or 24 inch barrel is the convenience of how they handle. The difference theoretically will be between 40 to 100 fps depending on variables, but study any ballistics chart and you will see that we are talking about 1" to 2" of bullet drop at 300 yards and still more than ample killing energy delivered to game inside that range as well.

Look at it this way: the 6.5 Swede at 150-200 yards and 7mm-08 at 100-150 yards produce about as much energy as a 270 at the muzzle. Both calibers regularly take up to moose-sized game with authority. You and your game will not notice the 2".

Dragon31 · « **Reply #6 on:** February 16, 2004, 02:54:32 PM »

There was an article on the .270 and barrel length in one of the gun rags several years ago. It seems Jack O'conner alway claimed a higher velocity out of his .270 than what the author was getting from his 22 inch barrel, O'conner used the 24 inch barrel. I like the .270 and was using it in Michigan, Kentucky and South Carolina to hunt whitetails. The way that I hunted those three states is totally different so I wanted a load that would shoot reasonably well in all three guns but favored the long distances that I would shoot in SC. I bought a Chrony and started looking at different loads, thats when I started noticing how much velocity the .270 lost per inch of barrel lengh. Using slow powder for max velocity it will make more of a difference. Funny thing, last year every buck I killed was less than 100 yards and the closest at 30 ft with a pistol. Not much of a challenge for the old .270.