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

Are we going back to shorter barrels in magnums?

Old 04-25-2011, 08:34 AM
  #1  
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northeast Texas
Posts: 442
Default Are we going back to shorter barrels in magnums?

I recently had Hill Country Rifles start working on a custom built 7mm. Rem. Mag. for me, and I was a little suprised to find that the majority of their custom rifles are built with a 24" barrel....standard AND magnum.

I guess from a SHOOTERS perspective, something like a 26" barrel would be better simply for getting max velocity when running through a chrono.

I can also see from a HUNTERS perspective, that a 24" barrel gives "adequate" velocity and offers better rifle balance and easier handling in cramped spaces.

I currently have them splitting the difference with a 25" barrel.....but I'm REALLY thinking about going to a 24".

Any opinions would be GREATLY appreciated.
schoolcraft is offline  
Old 04-25-2011, 09:45 AM
  #2  
Fork Horn
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 332
Default

I have 2 26" barreled guns. Drives me crazy in my safe. They have to sit in the back by the shotguns or leaning in the front.

Second, I know its just a pain when i hunt newfoundland or places where there is a lot of brush.

Lastly, yea, it the "in thing" to have a short barreled gun. Tactical guys are all going to it. Surprisingly.
BCRules is offline  
Old 04-25-2011, 12:22 PM
  #3  
Giant Nontypical
 
jeepkid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ****ifornia
Posts: 5,052
Default

I personally can't tell the difference hunting with a 24" 25" or 26" rifle...
jeepkid is offline  
Old 04-25-2011, 01:01 PM
  #4  
Giant Nontypical
 
salukipv1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: IL
Posts: 6,575
Default

I'm not sure we're going back to 24" just more hunters like the idea of 24" over 26", I think both will remain available to hunters in the future. The guy who wants every last fps will want the 26" the guy who wants a handier lighter rifle and willing to give up 100fps or less will take a 24"

I'm sure we all wish we could shoot a 300 RUM in a 6 lbs rifle and have 1/2moa accuracy, and have it kick like a .243, for $400, but nothing is free with rifles, have to give up something to get something.

I think by the time you figure out everything about rifles you die an old man, and your wisdom will probably be lost on youth.
salukipv1 is offline  
Old 04-25-2011, 02:39 PM
  #5  
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northeast Texas
Posts: 442
Default

Well, I made the call......24" fluted barrel it is.

I noticed that Remington has gone to a 24" barrel on their new 700 XCR II, and I guess Ruger has used 24" on their magnums pretty much forever.
schoolcraft is offline  
Old 04-25-2011, 04:17 PM
  #6  
Giant Nontypical
 
jeepkid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ****ifornia
Posts: 5,052
Default

You won't tell any difference with just 1"...shoulda stuck with the longer tube...
jeepkid is offline  
Old 04-25-2011, 06:04 PM
  #7  
Nontypical Buck
 
fritz1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,081
Default

Originally Posted by schoolcraft
Well, I made the call......24" fluted barrel it is.

I noticed that Remington has gone to a 24" barrel on their new 700 XCR II, and I guess Ruger has used 24" on their magnums pretty much forever.
My Remington 700 BDL 338 win mag has a 24" barrel but my 300 ultra mags have a 26" barrel.
fritz1 is offline  
Old 04-26-2011, 05:56 AM
  #8  
Fork Horn
 
warbirdlover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: central Wisconsin
Posts: 479
Default

My Remington 700 BDL 338 win mag has a 24" barrel but my 300 ultra mags have a 26" barrel.
Is that because the 300 RUM has such a large case and so much powder to burn?
warbirdlover is offline  
Old 04-26-2011, 06:57 AM
  #9  
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northeast Texas
Posts: 442
Default

If I was having a RUM bult, that barrel would be AT LEAST 26".....maybe 27' or 28".....but if I built a .300 Ultra, it wouldn't be for lugging around thick woods.

I know I'm going to like my rifle when it gets finished, but if I had it to do all over again, I probably would have built a .280 Rem. with a 24" barrel and an EDGE McMillan stock to shave off another 8oz. off the weight.

It looks like the total weight of the 7mm. Rem. Mag. Hill Country Rifles is building me will hover around 7 1/4 pounds un-scoped...maybe a tad under. I'm also not going to be shooting excessively long ranges. A recent trip to a 300 yard rifle range shooting at 6" steel plates from "hunting positions" was a VERY humbling experience....practice, practice, practice...lol.

I figure my 7 mag will be much handier carrying through the woods and manuvering in a box stand....and a 160gr. Nosler Accubond should still cause real issues for whatever it's aimed at even if it only came out of a 24" barrel.
schoolcraft is offline  
Old 04-26-2011, 08:35 AM
  #10  
Fork Horn
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 332
Default

Originally Posted by warbirdlover
Is that because the 300 RUM has such a large case and so much powder to burn?
There is no "unburnt" powder after 15" or less. Just if you buy a RUM, you didn't buy it to shoot heavy projectiles, but shoot flat. You didn't buy it to to crawl thru briar patches and make 50 yard shots.

A 30-06 benefits as much as a 300RUM from extra barrel length
BCRules is offline  

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - 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.