Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Firearms Forum > Guns
Barrel length >

Barrel length

Guns Like firearms themselves, there's a wide variety of opinions on what's the best gun.

Barrel length

Old 11-30-2009, 06:52 PM
  #1  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,143
Default Barrel length

What is the difference between a 22" & a 24" barrel,other than the ovivious 2". Reason I ask is I owned a Rem. 700 in 30 06 & I believe the barrel length was 22". I now own a Rem. 700 in 243 & the barrel length is 24". So I'm curious why the different lengths?
jerry d is offline  
Old 11-30-2009, 07:54 PM
  #2  
Nontypical Buck
 
Centaur 1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Titusville Florida
Posts: 1,727
Default

The longer barrel will give you more velocity and there's a good chance that it'll be more accurate, but it affects the feel and handling of the weapon. A few extra fps won't do you any good if the gun feels clumsy in your hands while walking around in the woods. Every gun is different and how it feels is different for everyone. If your walking around out west where you're out in the open the longer barrel will work best. If you're walking around in a thicket where the barrel is getting caught on every other branch I'd go with the shorter barrel.

Another thing to think about now that I reread your post. The 30-06 uses a long action and the .243 uses a short action. The barrel on the .243 is 2" longer but the overall length of the gun is probably only about 1" longer. That's why the balance of every gun is different.

Last edited by Centaur 1; 11-30-2009 at 08:01 PM. Reason: more info to share
Centaur 1 is offline  
Old 12-01-2009, 05:10 AM
  #3  
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 824
Default

They say about 100fps per inch. If you can tell the difference between 3000 fps and 3200 id worry
vabyrd is offline  
Old 12-01-2009, 05:45 AM
  #4  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: SE Wisc
Posts: 677
Default

i asked this question on another forum. The answers i got back were that it doesn't really make a difference. More of a marketing thing. I prefer 22" barrels and usually cheaper guns have 22" barrels. magnums usually have 24" barrels.
semi is offline  
Old 12-01-2009, 06:26 AM
  #5  
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 824
Default

I believe there is something about harmonics, but not too sure about it.
vabyrd is offline  
Old 12-01-2009, 07:13 AM
  #6  
Nontypical Buck
 
halfbakedi420's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: central and east texas
Posts: 4,894
Default

i heard it all now
halfbakedi420 is offline  
Old 12-01-2009, 08:47 AM
  #7  
Fork Horn
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 310
Default

For all practical purposes the 24" barrel is just a bit heavier. Very few people would ever notice a difference.


Mitch
mitchmtm1 is offline  
Old 12-01-2009, 01:02 PM
  #8  
Nontypical Buck
 
driftrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Coralville, IA. USA
Posts: 3,802
Default

The effect of barrel length, and the need for more, is really determined by the cartridge you're firing. The bigger the case for a given bore diameter, the greater the benefit of more barrel length. This is why magnums generally have more barrel length than standard length cartridges, and why short action cartridges often have even shorter barrels. The velocity difference is different between rifles, but generally, the bigger the case, the greater the velocity per inch of barrel. Magnums, and certain overbore non-mags (the 25-06 Rem, for example), really need 24" bbls minimum to take advantage of their ability to burn large amounts of slow powder, and 26" is better. Anything less than 26" on a modern super-mag (Rem Ultra Mags, 378 Wby based cases, 338 Lapua, among others), and you're just wasting powder. Most standard and short action cartridges are fine with 22" bbls, with some taking advantage of 24" (like the 243 Win). IMO, 20" is about the practical minimum for most CF rifle cartridges unless the advantage of a shorter bbl significantly outweighs the performance lost (the M4/CAR-15 for close quarters combat, for instance).

As for accuracy, more than likely a SHORTER barrel will be more accurate simply because it will be more rigid (if the contour is the same). What's easier to flex, a 12" piece of steel 1/2" rebar or a 12' piece? The longer piece will sag noticeably under it's own weight, where the short piece will not. The same is true for a barrel. When the barrel vibrates on firing, the longer barrel (all else equal) will vibrate with greater amplitude than the shorter barrel, making the possible shot dispersion from an "out-of-tune" load greater. Make the barrel shorter and it'll be stiffer and groups will TEND to be smaller overall. Long, thin barrels tend to be the least accurate. To stiffen a long barrel, the contour needs to be thicker, at the cost of added weight.

Mike
driftrider is offline  
Old 12-01-2009, 01:21 PM
  #9  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location:
Posts: 809
Default

Originally Posted by driftrider
The effect of barrel length, and the need for more, is really determined by the cartridge you're firing. The bigger the case for a given bore diameter, the greater the benefit of more barrel length. This is why magnums generally have more barrel length than standard length cartridges, and why short action cartridges often have even shorter barrels. The velocity difference is different between rifles, but generally, the bigger the case, the greater the velocity per inch of barrel. Magnums, and certain overbore non-mags (the 25-06 Rem, for example), really need 24" bbls minimum to take advantage of their ability to burn large amounts of slow powder, and 26" is better. Anything less than 26" on a modern super-mag (Rem Ultra Mags, 378 Wby based cases, 338 Lapua, among others), and you're just wasting powder. Most standard and short action cartridges are fine with 22" bbls, with some taking advantage of 24" (like the 243 Win). IMO, 20" is about the practical minimum for most CF rifle cartridges unless the advantage of a shorter bbl significantly outweighs the performance lost (the M4/CAR-15 for close quarters combat, for instance).

As for accuracy, more than likely a SHORTER barrel will be more accurate simply because it will be more rigid (if the contour is the same). What's easier to flex, a 12" piece of steel 1/2" rebar or a 12' piece? The longer piece will sag noticeably under it's own weight, where the short piece will not. The same is true for a barrel. When the barrel vibrates on firing, the longer barrel (all else equal) will vibrate with greater amplitude than the shorter barrel, making the possible shot dispersion from an "out-of-tune" load greater. Make the barrel shorter and it'll be stiffer and groups will TEND to be smaller overall. Long, thin barrels tend to be the least accurate. To stiffen a long barrel, the contour needs to be thicker, at the cost of added weight.

Mike
I will agree with all that is said above, if the barrel gets hot
If the barrel stays cool without rapid firing the longer barrel will not be effected in accuracy in my experience. Now this is standard cartridges, NOT wildcats and short magnums. These need to burn alot of powder and generate alot more heat and FPS. Again JMO and what I have experienced through my experiments.
RugerMike is offline  
Old 12-01-2009, 04:43 PM
  #10  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,143
Default

Thank-you for the education guys. I went in Remingtons website and it seems like all the 700's have a 24" barrel {except the carbines} no matter what caliber.
jerry d is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.