Centerfire Barrell Shortening

Robotack

I have a Remmi 700 SPS in .243 with a 24" barrell. Even with a reflex mod on I have a lot a barrell between where my stock ands and where my mod begins.

I've been noticing more and more on the likes of fieldsports britain for example, that Roy Lupton and others mods almost meet their stocks.

Here's a link to just one pic I could find with an example.

http://www.gunmart.net/accessories_review/ase_utra_ns-3s_north_star_moderator/

Are they shortening their barrells? If so, is it simply to make the rifle more maneuverable? I assume it must have negative effects on ballistics?

On a side not I reckon the slightly shorter ones look a little better plus it would mean less gun sticking up above your shoulder to snag branches etc.

garv123

I asked the question before for a friend and everyone recommended 20" for a .243. It also depends what mod you go for. T8's are very prone to rush but only add about 2" to the over all length of the barrel.
How far do you normally shoot with the .243?

It wasn't me!

It is worth noting that shorter .243s can struggle to make the energy requirements for deer shooting. I recall an article in one of the UK magazines which made that point about a 20" .243, and even with handloads, the chrono showed it was hit or miss. Now, you're never going to have any authorities put your rifle over a chrono, and it's certainly not going to make a difference on the animals, but if you want to stay strictly legal, a .243 is not a round I'd have from a short barrel.

sfakiaman

Interesting article here on the effects of shortening .223 and .308 barrels. It seems to conclude that for hunting purposes there is not a drastic drop in muzzle velocities or POI and the increased muzzle blast is taken care of by the moderator. The tests however were done with handloads.

http://www.shootingtimes.co.uk/features/136776/How_important_is_the_barrel_length_of_a_rifle.html

tac foley

Don't overlook the fact that a lot of rifles here in UK that look short with a moderator on them have over-barrel reflex mods designed specifically to keep the OAL down to a reasonable level for shooting out of vehicles.

tac

rowa

It wasn't me! wrote: »

It is worth noting that shorter .243s can struggle to make the energy requirements for deer shooting. I recall an article in one of the UK magazines which made that point about a 20" .243, and even with handloads, the chrono showed it was hit or miss. Now, you're never going to have any authorities put your rifle over a chrono, and it's certainly not going to make a difference on the animals, but if you want to stay strictly legal, a .243 is not a round I'd have from a short barrel.

Maybe the hornady light magnum loads might gain some power back ? Does anyone stock it in ireland ?

http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/product/87510

Robotack

tac foley wrote: »

Don't overlook the fact that a lot of rifles here in UK that look short with a moderator on them have over-barrel reflex mods designed specifically to keep the OAL down to a reasonable level for shooting out of vehicles.

tac

OAL??

There seems to be contrasting opinions on this topic. I put an A-tec CMM4 Alu on my rifle just yesterday. SO LIGHT. It's like a new rifle but as it's not reflex it adds another 2" to my overall length which is a bit of a pain. Still though, I'd rather the longer barrel than a significant drop in FPS or POI.

tac foley

Robotack wrote: »

OAL??

There seems to be contrasting opinions on this topic. I put an A-tec CMM4 Alu on my rifle just yesterday. SO LIGHT. It's like a new rifle but as it's not reflex it adds another 2" to my overall length which is a bit of a pain. Still though, I'd rather the longer barrel than a significant drop in FPS or POI.

OAL = OVERALL LENGTH

An internationally recognised abbreviation.

Again, here in UK the minimum LEGAL length for any rifled barrel is 300mm.

tac

Lullymore24

Robotack wrote: »

I have a Remmi 700 SPS in .243 with a 24" barrell. Even with a reflex mod on I have a lot a barrell between where my stock ands and where my mod begins.

I've been noticing more and more on the likes of fieldsports britain for example, that Roy Lupton and others mods almost meet their stocks.

Here's a link to just one pic I could find with an example.

http://www.gunmart.net/accessories_review/ase_utra_ns-3s_north_star_moderator/

Are they shortening their barrells? If so, is it simply to make the rifle more maneuverable? I assume it must have negative effects on ballistics?

On a side not I reckon the slightly shorter ones look a little better plus it would mean less gun sticking up above your shoulder to snag branches etc.

The guys on FSB shoot deer & Foxes 350 yards or less. 20" is perfect for that.
Most of them guys are using non standard rifles and spend a lot of money on their kit tuning it, except the guy who has a deal with a U Company and has to shoot Ruger as they are his sponsor.

f you want to get your rifle shortened go for it, 20" with up to 4" of a mod on top is still plenty short and well balanced.

Cass

I would normally tell someone thinking of this that if they are unsure, and the cons outweigh the pros then wait until a better time to do such alterations.

However no gun will be "destroyed" by shortening. It may cause it to prefer a different bullet, need a re-zero, etc. but not destroy it. A day on a range after getting the work done would solve any issues so your choices are two fold.

• Do it, and spend the day getting the rifle re-zeroed, and checked out.
• Leave it till after the season, and do it all when the "pressure" is off.

Robotack

Your opinions are all much appreciated. Have any of you actually shortened your barrels? Just wondering what effects, of any, you found first hand.

Robotack

So, I got it done. Fergal White trimmed it down to 20" and re- crowned / re-threaded it. A lovely job by a highly skilled and nice chap.

Straight down to the range with a little help from a friend and she was as accurate if not better than before right out to 300 yards. So I'm delighted.

Tac Foley, I know the principal of reflex mods, we have them here too.
And thanks for the international abbreviation lesson... but whilst I appreciate your input, both of your posts feature "here in the UK", and while I for one welcome international posters into this forum and admittedly refered to Fieldsports Britain, I'm not in the UK so their relevance in somewhat limited.

juice1304

Thats good that your happy with it. Do you find much difference in it weight /maneuverability?

Robotack

Huge difference Juice... I can sling it muzzel up US style without wacking the mod on everything. It balances way better and the mod is closer to you body so it feels lighter. And it looks better too.

4200fps

It wasn't me! wrote: »

It is worth noting that shorter .243s can struggle to make the energy requirements for deer shooting. I recall an article in one of the UK magazines which made that point about a 20" .243, and even with handloads, the chrono showed it was hit or miss. Now, you're never going to have any authorities put your rifle over a chrono, and it's certainly not going to make a difference on the animals, but if you want to stay strictly legal, a .243 is not a round I'd have from a short barrel.

I don't how you make out .243's struggle to make energy requirements for deer shooting. With a 80grain load from the muzzle of a .243 produces 2080 foot lbs of energy. That's 380foot lbs more than the legal requirement for deer shooting. 20 inch is the way to go. Energy is the same also no difference in velocities are noticed under 300 yards. Who'd be shooting deer at that range in this country. Tikka and Sako make most of their rifles in 20 inch barrels as they know whats required by hunters. Ideally you need 1000 or more foot lbs of energy to deliver a humane kill on a deer that's why the law recommends 1700ftlbs or more of muzzle energy to make the caliber legal for deer hunting. The .243 even delivers 1000ftlbs at 300 yards

dicky82

Robotack wrote: »

So, I got it done. Fergal White trimmed it down to 20" and re- crowned / re-threaded it. A lovely job by a highly skilled and nice chap.

Straight down to the range with a little help from a friend and she was as accurate if not better than before right out to 300 yards. So I'm delighted.

do you have to be a member on these ranges? i saw a good clip on fieldsportsbritain where the lads were able to shoot at life size targets to simulate foxes and deer and long ranges. would be great if the novice hunter could go out on these ranges to build up confidence by getting trigger time at long range shots. i'm sure allot of lads would like a facility like this rather then going out for the real thing straight away

juice1304

Yes you need to be a member of a range over here, unless someone brings you as a guest.

Vegeta

4200fps wrote: »

I don't how you make out .243's struggle to make energy requirements for deer shooting. With a 80grain load from the muzzle of a .243 produces 2080 foot lbs of energy. That's 380foot lbs more than the legal requirement for deer shooting. 20 inch is the way to go. Energy is the same also no difference in velocities are noticed under 300 yards. Who'd be shooting deer at that range in this country. Tikka and Sako make most of their rifles in 20 inch barrels as they know whats required by hunters. Ideally you need 1000 or more foot lbs of energy to deliver a humane kill on a deer that's why the law recommends 1700ftlbs or more of muzzle energy to make the caliber legal for deer hunting. The .243 even delivers 1000ftlbs at 300 yards

Personally if I was buying a gun for deer it would not be one with the minimum energy at only 300 yards.

I'm all for short barrels and rifles with great handling but like more power than I need rather than the other way round. To each their own I suppose.

Robotack

Vegeta wrote: »

4200fps wrote: »

I don't how you make out .243's struggle to make energy requirements for deer shooting. With a 80grain load from the muzzle of a .243 produces 2080 foot lbs of energy. That's 380foot lbs more than the legal requirement for deer shooting. 20 inch is the way to go. Energy is the same also no difference in velocities are noticed under 300 yards. Who'd be shooting deer at that range in this country. Tikka and Sako make most of their rifles in 20 inch barrels as they know whats required by hunters. Ideally you need 1000 or more foot lbs of energy to deliver a humane kill on a deer that's why the law recommends 1700ftlbs or more of muzzle energy to make the caliber legal for deer hunting. The .243 even delivers 1000ftlbs at 300 yards

Personally if I was buying a gun for deer it would not be one with the minimum energy at only 300 yards.

I'm all for short barrels and rifles with great handling but like more power than I need rather than the other way round. To each their own I suppose.

Sfakiaman's link:
http://www.shootingtimes.co.uk/features/136776/How_important_is_the_barrel_length_of_a_rifle.html

Is quite good and suggests only a very minimal drop in fps. The vast majority of my shooting is 1-200yards so the advantages for me outweigh the disadvantages.

Vegeta

Robotack wrote: »

Sfakiaman's link:
http://www.shootingtimes.co.uk/features/136776/How_important_is_the_barrel_length_of_a_rifle.html

Is quite good and suggests only a very minimal drop in fps. The vast majority of my shooting is 1-200yards so the advantages for me outweigh the disadvantages.

As I said, to each their own. Looking at ballistic calculators and factory loads for .243, losing 140-160 fps does bring some of the rounds into 1800-1900 ft/lb range.

4200fps

The short 20 inch barrel is hard bet for deer/fox hunting. Looks great,feels great as its way more mobile and lighter also its accuracy is perfect. The .243 hasn't let me down and i'm confident it will knock any deer in reasonable range and with good shot placement which is expected by every shooter with any deer caliber. I had a rifle with a 24 inch barrel with a mod and it was a disaster. Banging of and catching of everything and was too heavy. 20 inch barrel and rifles for .243 is promoted by most rifle manufactures.