22 or 24
06-04-2006, 08:17 AM
#11
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location:
Posts: 40
RE: 22 or 24
More than anything, I was just considering optimal handling and balance on this rifle. I'm not looking for a light-weight rifle, nor is a 24 inch barrel too hard to move around. I was just wondering if there would be much of a performance difference in the two lengths; I thought I read somewhere that it would truely be negligable with the ought-six. I'm not a reloader, so I thought maybe I'd ask for some opinions on here.
Thank you.
Thank you.
06-04-2006, 08:31 AM
#12
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: S.W. Pa.-- Heart in North Central Pa. mountains-
Posts: 2,600
RE: 22 or 24
As for what else you may wish to consider for your new rifle, I would seriously recommend you get the factory trigger worked over, or install a quality aftermarket one. Triggers are a critical part to performance. JMHO.
06-04-2006, 02:56 PM
#14
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,290
RE: 22 or 24
There is more to barrel length than velocity. Balance and muzzle blast are an element. The 06 has loads in a wide variety of weights. If one was dedicated to shooting heavier loads, you could go to a 20" barrel and not lose much statistically. But it would handle very differently. For some, any velocity gain is a big deal. In fact, with the very wide variety of .30 cartridges on the market, I think it is a very big deal in the US. Anyway, heft a few things to get an idea what suits you. I handled a Winchester 1885 High Wall in 325 WSM this weekend. Alot to like there. 28" barrel. Balanced real good to my feel. (Lets see. Do I need a 325 wsm?)
06-04-2006, 10:17 PM
#15
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Western Nebraska
Posts: 3,393
RE: 22 or 24
ORIGINAL: biscuit jake
If you find someone with an 22 inch barrel 06, shoot it at night. You will see just how much burn your have outside the barrel.
If you find someone with an 22 inch barrel 06, shoot it at night. You will see just how much burn your have outside the barrel.
Frankly the effects at night are intertesting but totally irrelevant in the bigger game of killing things like elk. Further I'd forecast that if you can't do it with 180 grains at 2,800'/sec then you really ought to be looking at something like a 338 mag. or maybe a 375 H&H.
If one likes longer barrels then get them. However I can assure you that your 30-06 is not in the least handicapped with a 22" barrel.
06-05-2006, 05:17 AM
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
RE: 22 or 24
ORIGINAL: biscuit jake
If you find someone with an 22 inch barrel 06, shoot it at night. You will see just how much burn your have outside the barrel.
If you find someone with an 22 inch barrel 06, shoot it at night. You will see just how much burn your have outside the barrel.
I still don't know for sure. But supposely, its be debunked several times.
06-05-2006, 08:22 AM
#17
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 6,471
RE: 22 or 24
Anything else I should be thinking about instead?
Oh yes you would be much better off with a Kimber 8400 LA Montana in 06. You would save a lot of money in the long run and have a much better action.YOu have to wait for a custom to be built and that can take as little as a few months to a substantial length of time. The Kimbers should be delivering shortly. It will have a 24" barrel as well. http://www.kimberamerica.com/rifles/
I'm not looking for a light-weight rifle, nor is a 24 inch barrel too hard to move around.
06-05-2006, 09:28 AM
#18
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: WC FL
Posts: 26,323
RE: 22 or 24
Generally, if you take two identical cartridges and fire them out of two different handguns, one with a short barrel, one with a longer barrel, the longer-barreled handgun will fire the bullet faster, farther and with a flatter trajectory.
Longer barrels give powder more time to burn behind the bullet, generating greater muzzle velocity and therefore downrange velocity. Also, being longer gives a barrel more time to impart spin to the bullet, helping ensure its accuracy.
Longer barrels give powder more time to burn behind the bullet, generating greater muzzle velocity and therefore downrange velocity. Also, being longer gives a barrel more time to impart spin to the bullet, helping ensure its accuracy.
06-06-2006, 06:53 AM
#19
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: A flat lander lost in the mountains of Northern,AZ
Posts: 3,171
RE: 22 or 24
ORIGINAL: bigcountry
I used to think this too, but all reports by all powder mfgs said its complete hogwash and the powder is burned up within 6" of the barrel.
I still don't know for sure. But supposely, its be debunked several times.
ORIGINAL: biscuit jake
If you find someone with an 22 inch barrel 06, shoot it at night. You will see just how much burn your have outside the barrel.
If you find someone with an 22 inch barrel 06, shoot it at night. You will see just how much burn your have outside the barrel.
I still don't know for sure. But supposely, its be debunked several times.
06-06-2006, 07:29 AM
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
RE: 22 or 24
ORIGINAL: HighDesertWolf
ive read that is only true for shotguns, now with rifles its totally different from caliber to caliber. I'll have to find the article that explain this, but I do remember part of the article on a specific caliber of interest of mine that I payed close attention to which is the 308 win. the article explained that a 308 win. needs a 28 inch barrel to efficiently ignite all of its powder, but the gases would still be expanding to an even longer length and that a 308 would have to be shot through a 20 foot barrel before it would experience bullet drag in the muzzle. anyway the article explained alot about powder volume in comparison to length and diameter of the bore to determine how efficiently it would burn the powder. bottom line is barrel length does make a considerable difference in velocity.
ive read that is only true for shotguns, now with rifles its totally different from caliber to caliber. I'll have to find the article that explain this, but I do remember part of the article on a specific caliber of interest of mine that I payed close attention to which is the 308 win. the article explained that a 308 win. needs a 28 inch barrel to efficiently ignite all of its powder, but the gases would still be expanding to an even longer length and that a 308 would have to be shot through a 20 foot barrel before it would experience bullet drag in the muzzle. anyway the article explained alot about powder volume in comparison to length and diameter of the bore to determine how efficiently it would burn the powder. bottom line is barrel length does make a considerable difference in velocity.