What is the fascination with short barrels in the UK

[howa243]

I been speaking to a mate in the States, in fact going through what calibres are available over here and whats on sale as I ma thinking of getting rid of my .270 and .243 and we come to the conclusion that Uk has a fetish for short barrels and how much muzzle velocity is lost by shortening them

Thoughts.

At the distance that most shots are taken in the UK, I am not convinced that it makes any real world difference. So if the rifle is handier as a consequence of being shorter, then that's fine.

 

[stevenedwards]

As an engineer I work with facts and data. Not opinions. So, please check your "facts" again, then we can have a polite discussion about barrel length, which, as I said, is precisely measurable.

Now a handy little kipplauf, such as a Bergara B13 with a 16.5" barrel could be very sweet. No long bolt to throw either, keeps it as short as possible. Similarly a Blaser can be pretty short, if you want a magazine.

In defence to your request for data i have checked the measurement although there was no need. the 243 with the 26inch barrel is 11.813 inches shorter than the creedmoor with the 20 inch barrel, inclusive of the same specification moderator on both. Consistent with and slightly more precise than the "fact" I previously provided. I much prefer polite discourse but you chose to challenge the data provided with out feeling the need to be in possession of the underlying facts. I have not offered an opinion.

 

[Sharpie]

In defence to your request for data i have checked the measurement although there was no need. the 243 with the 26inch barrel is 11.813 inches shorter than the creedmoor with the 20 inch barrel, inclusive of the same specification moderator on both. Consistent with and slightly more precise than the "fact" I previously provided. I much prefer polite discourse but you chose to challenge the data provided with out feeling the need to be in possession of the underlying facts. I have not offered an opinion.

Please tell us the details, make and models, of the two that you have compared. 11.813" is rather a precise number, don't you think ? As I said, there is no way that a 26" .243 is a foot shorter than a 20" gun, unless it is something weird like a Pfeifer.

FWIW, my Lee Enfield #4 Mk 2 has I think a 22" barrel, it's now my longest gun. Seemed to be good enough, back in the day. Even beyond 1000 yards.

My Marlin, in 30-30 is about 20" I think.

My shortest would be my BSA Ultra air rifle at 12" or so, our minimum before it becomes a pistol and limited to 6 fpe, not 12, which has seen off plenty of rabbits, and seems to be my most accurate air rifle, and I've had quite a few. Very handy.

These are all well balanced guns (not bullpups). Which matters if you actually use them.

 

[Island]

Lovely looking toy. What's with the backwards trigger? Why did you let it go ? Now, what is the procedure to reload a single shot Pfeifer ? Somewhat slow I suspect, after you have fannied about with the butt plate, maybe tried to extract a tight case, and so on.

As I said before, a 26" barrel can never be shorter (nearly a foot shorter) than say a 20" one. Except in fantasy land by a dreamer. No names, no packdrill.

Yes you can build very short rifles, not using bolt actions and magazines, but to what real purpose ? Other than looking cute.

It's a trend at the moment with airguns, they all seem to be "bullpupped". Like the Pfeifer. Good stock fit and alignment with the sights, close to the boreline, not really a consideration.

At no point in the discussion was it ever claimed that a 26" barrel could be shorter than a 20" barrel. That would be ludicrous.

Hornet 6 stated that his longer barreled RIFLE was shorter in overall length than his shorter barreled RIFLE. You chose to come over all facetious, made yourself look foolish, and then when called out on it elected to attempt to belittle his "toy".

Your input would appear to be about as much use as Anne Frank's drum-kit in this instance....

 

[McKenzie]

At no point in the discussion was it ever claimed that a 26" barrel could be shorter than a 20" barrel. That would be ludicrous.

Hornet 6 stated that his longer barreled RIFLE was shorter in overall length than his shorter barreled RIFLE. You chose to come over all facetious, made yourself look foolish, and then when called out on it elected to attempt to belittle his "toy".

Your input would appear to be about as much use as Anne Frank's drum-kit in this instance....

Spectacularly distasteful analogy you used there.

 

[enfieldspares]

FWIW, my Lee Enfield #4 Mk 2 has I think a 22" barrel, it's now my longest gun. Seemed to be good enough, back in the day. Even beyond 1000 yards.

If it is as made at the factory and unchanged that barel will be 25" long.

 

[Klenchblaize]

Always amazes me

Rifle manufacturers spend a huge amount of money on research and field testing getting the perfect balance, ballistics and accuracy

Then some pay a great deal of money for a harmonised well built rifle then promptly pay out to have it cut up and then moan about ballistics and accuracy. And what a crap rifle it’s turned out to be

I sold a really good and very accurate rifle to a guy, ( Sako 75) I took him out pre purchase and he shot a ragged hole with it 2 x 5 shots

He had the barrel chopped and it now shoots like a scatter gun and the ballistics are terrible, it now sits in his cabinet unused, if I’d known he was going to butcherise it I wouldn’t have sold it, I’d rather keep it myself

22 WMR a guy had it shortened - never accurate again he sold it off in the end and bought another ???

Shortened .243 had it re crowned TWICE before it shot anywhere near reasonable

Beggars belief

There's certainly no shortage of equally insensitive Riflemen out there in the 21st Century!

K

 

[User00003]

At the distance that most shots are taken in the UK, I am not convinced that it makes any real world difference. So if the rifle is handier as a consequence of being shorter, then that's fine.

that might be quite true; however, point is also that it's needless to use certain chamberings with short barrels as ballistically that chamberings efficient spectrum is ruined by the short barrel, and in turn the shooter would have been better served on many levels by an alternative chambering.

you see, if a short barrel .308 or 7x57 or 8x57 is more efficient, has less recoil, better velocity, less barrel erosion, less noisey, less muzzle blast, less powder consumption, etc. etc. than say a short barrel 270, 6.5 or 7mm rem mag, or 300 win mag,,then why would anyone buy the latter? there's no argument really

manufacturers know full well that some of the rifles they sell in short barrels or particular twist rates are in no way shape or form appropriate for the chambering, but they quite simply think consumers are too stupid to understand this, and that people will assume the manufacturers know what they're doing..when in fact they're just making a mass scale production cheaper and not delivering a particularly suitable product

mass manufactured rifles usually suffer from:
a. barrel lenghts not cut to the appropriate calibre/chambering specs
b. twist rates are supplied mid-range and not to accommodate heavy for calibre bullets
c. bedding is ignored
d. triggers are set too heavy at lawyers requests, actually at the harm of deer who suffer from jerked trigger squeezes.
e. Throats not given consideration for usage of heavy or long for calibre bullets
f. sling swivels are likely to be attached to bipods and should be backplated internally
g. People have different lengths of pull!

 

[stevenedwards]

Please tell us the details, make and models, of the two that you have compared. 11.813" is rather a precise number, don't you think ? As I said, there is no way that a 26" .243 is a foot shorter than a 20" gun, unless it is something weird like a Pfeifer.

FWIW, my Lee Enfield #4 Mk 2 has I think a 22" barrel, it's now my longest gun. Seemed to be good enough, back in the day. Even beyond 1000 yards.

My Marlin, in 30-30 is about 20" I think.

My shortest would be my BSA Ultra air rifle at 12" or so, our minimum before it becomes a pistol and limited to 6 fpe, not 12, which has seen off plenty of rabbits, and seems to be my most accurate air rifle, and I've had quite a few. Very handy.

These are all well balanced guns (not bullpups). Which matters if you actually use them.

The 243 is Pfeifer and the "20 inch" is a Tikka T3.
I am sorry the measurement is to precise for you, you wanted data.
At no previous point did you qualify your statements with unless its this or that. You gave the impression of being unaware of such things.
You say that bullpups are not well balanced. Given your previous comments about requiring facts one can only assume you have based this assertion on empirical evidence or actual experience. which bullpups have you actually handled and used.

 

[jthyttin]

yeah but take a 7m RM for example, it's closer to 30fps lost per inch, and they should be min. 26" barrels..so take an 18" barrel, that's 240fps lost as well as all the bad sh*t that goes with it, recoil, throat erosion, powder cost, barrel life, noise, muzzle flash, etc. etc. so for a 160g'er, who would want to deal with a 7RM's bitchiness for around 2750fps?...you could load a gentle 7x57 to that!

Somebody who prefers 18" barrel? There's no way you can load smaller capacity cartridge to higher velocity, given similar max pressure. And velocity loss could be mitigated by powder choice (no experience with this particular example).

 

[jthyttin]

Now those that reload might be surprised if they ran their deer legal rounds through a chrono probably finding out that they are shooting far lower speeds than they expect . Proved this on a mates rifle where his .243 is shooting 100gr at 2700fps when SAMMI specs say he should be shooting 3100fps . My .243 shoots 3065fps but I am 2.2gr above SAMMI recomendations .

Since when has SAAMI recommended homeloads?

 

[jthyttin]

Even .223 works very well as short as 16"

223 (and similar cartridges) works very well significantly shorter, say 12".

 

[jthyttin]

To date I have not seen a sniper rifle cut down to as it was to long...lol

Lot of this has been done, since maneuverability often trumps velocity. And, most times, there's little velocity lost cutting overly long barrels.

 

[jthyttin]

Short can be very handy, but isn’t always best. Take the M4 rifles with short barrel no longer meeting the original requirements of range and penetration.

The "original requirements" were in breach of meaning if not the letter of international agreements, and "new" research has enabled other ways to dodge [the agreements] that are not so dependant on velocity.

 

[jthyttin]

you see, if a short barrel .308 or 7x57 or 8x57 is more efficient, has less recoil, better velocity, less barrel erosion, less noisey, less muzzle blast, less powder consumption, etc. etc. than say a short barrel 270, 6.5 or 7mm rem mag, or 300 win mag,,then why would anyone buy the latter? there's no argument really

Most times smaller case capacity and larger bullet diameter may give similar or better per-grain velocity in short barrels. But comparing apples to apples, greater case volume always gives higher velocity. Given same pressure etc.

 

[1894]

I've shot 'handy' rifles and find handy = unsteady. Short without moderator and I'll pass thanks. I shot my 19" 243 without moderator once and never have or will again.

Stutzens to me are madness, short barreled for added blast, enclosed in wood to protect from non existent rocks and unmoderatable. Even in the mountains they are anathema given the need for repeatable accuracy and velocity.

If they work and are enjoyable then great sometimes heart is better than head (you're unlikely to be head shooting with one either!)

 

[stevenedwards]

I've shot 'handy' rifles and find handy = unsteady. Short without moderator and I'll pass thanks. I shot my 19" 243 without moderator once and never have or will again.

Stutzens to me are madness, short barreled for added blast, enclosed in wood to protect from non existent rocks and unmoderatable. Even in the mountains they are anathema given the need for repeatable accuracy and velocity.

If they work and are enjoyable then great sometimes heart is better than head (you're unlikely to be head shooting with one either!)

I was interested in you experience of a "handy" rifle being unsteady. I have no experience of using a conventional rifle which has been significantly shortened to make it handy and can only imagine that this might create a stock heavy feel with an unsteady muzzle, but may be not ! I have briefly handled an 18 in 308 made by Mike Norris and that did not seem unbalanced as I remember, but made for the job. The Pfeifer is made for the job and the balance falls between you hands, may be due to the action being at one extreme and the mod at the other. It does take a little adjusting to but once you understand it, subject to my operator error, it will deliver touching groups.
Variety makes it interesting.

 

[Sharpie]

At no point in the discussion was it ever claimed that a 26" barrel could be shorter than a 20" barrel. That would be ludicrous.

Hornet 6 stated that his longer barreled RIFLE was shorter in overall length than his shorter barreled RIFLE. You chose to come over all facetious, made yourself look foolish, and then when called out on it elected to attempt to belittle his "toy".

Your input would appear to be about as much use as Anne Frank's drum-kit in this instance....

I was referring to stevenedwards nonsensical post, #58 I think, in which he claimed that a 26" barreled rifle was a foot shorter than a 20" one. He has subsequently revised that figure to 11.813" shorter (doh!), see post #82, though hasn't stated makes and models, despite my request.

For a really short handy rifle you need to lose the bolt and magazine.

A Pfeifer is one complicated, expensive and slow way to keep a long barrel, a kipplauf like a Bergara BA13, 16.5" barrel, takedown, is probably a much more usable and affordable device, with the barrel at eye level, not low down in the stock, bullpup style. I aspire to getting one in .308, with a PES moderator. A second shot should be possible in a few seconds, with practice.

Your reference to Anne Frank is deeply offensive. Shame on you.

 

[Tim.243]

Lot of this has been done, since maneuverability often trumps velocity. And, most times, there's little velocity lost cutting overly long barrels.

You missed out the other points of the post....!!

Tim.243

 

[User00035]

I was interested in you experience of a "handy" rifle being unsteady. I have no experience of using a conventional rifle which has been significantly shortened to make it handy and can only imagine that this might create a stock heavy feel with an unsteady muzzle, but may be not ! I have briefly handled an 18 in 308 made by Mike Norris and that did not seem unbalanced as I remember, but made for the job. The Pfeifer is made for the job and the balance falls between you hands, may be due to the action being at one extreme and the mod at the other. It does take a little adjusting to but once you understand it, subject to my operator error, it will deliver touching groups.
Variety makes it interesting.

I definitely find light, short barrelled rifles are less stable shooting off my tripod sticks than longer barrelled rifles that have some weight forward of the cradle. My old heavy barrelled CF2 (no mod) was an almost perfect stick rifle. The balance was perfect, I could practically take my hands of it and it would stay balanced on the tripod. There was no weaving or waving, little wind buffeting and 200 yard rabbits from a standing position were routine when out lamping. (Why did I sell that rifle )..

My Weihrauch rimfires with 14" barrels require a more concerted effort keep steady on the sticks. I've got a Sako 75 .243 now with a Jet Z and it's a pretty good stick rifle but its not as good as that old BSA.