I'm having Mark Penrod build me a 338 Win Mag on a left-handed Model 70 action. I plan to use it as my "light" rifle for plains game. I'm trying to decide barrel length. I'm thinking of between 22" and 24". Velocity or ease of use in the bush? Compromise at 23"? Any thoughts, guys? Thanks. Jeff

24"

23" is my favorite length. I've had 3 at that length, one of which I cut down in increments from 26", and never noticed any perceptible change in velocity.

I also have two Jamison, approximately the same velocity range minus about 50fps, that are 21". That length is a bit "whippy" and a bit harder to hold.

Brad, a regular poster here, might chime in. He rags me frequently about my "long" barrels. He prefers 22". I'm building a 338WSM right now on a SA MRC action and that barrel is going to be 22", only because it is a short action and built to haul around in a saddle scabbard. The shorter barrels are much handier. If I were to build any 338 on a long action it WOULD be a 23" barrel again.

Jeff... I point better with longer barrels though alot has to do with balance ( a fact you can deal with lead shot and epxy later). This whole nonsense about 22" barrels are better for the brush than 24s really gripes me. Its like saying my friend Kile, is too big to hunt in the brush. Is it that brush is always 2"s farther from a 22 inch barrel? Never had a *greater* problem with longer barrels... I have been hung up when not carefull with every length of gun, including pistols.

I wonder if a fluted 24" barrel would be light enough?

If you are not going to go with at least a 24", you might as well get a 338-06 or 35 Whelen.

I've tried them all, and now have a 25" Walther.

I have a 24" Kreiger on my .338 Winchester, and that's the length I'll stay with for this cartridge.

AD

I've got a Dumoulin in 338 Win Mag with about a 21" barrel, since I have not been able to negate basic physics it does of course lose a little velocity. Mine has a full length Mannlicher style stock which seems to help and I don't really notice that it is more "whippy" than any of my 22-24" barrelled rifles. It is a very good rifle to carry and points very fast.

I have 3 short barrelled rifles, an 1891 Mauser in 7.65 x 53, the Dumoulin and a Ruger RSI in .308, all with full length stocks. I'm happy with all of them.

I prefer my 24" 338, it just seems to settle down/balance better than my 22" 338 and I like extra velocity - however slight. Consequently, I traded the 22".

What's wrong with the 26" barrel that usually comes with the 338 Win. Mag.?

I have pretty well decided to shorten the barrel on my .338 WM A-bolt from 26 inches to 22. Open to suggestions.

Anyway, I e-mailed my gunsmith and gave him my reasons. I remarked that I am getting good accuracy with 71 grains of H4831, and he wrote back that H4831 is a very slow-burning powder, and if I shorten the barrel I should watch for unburned powder grains sticking to the bore. He said if I see them, I may need to move up to a faster-burning powder.

Wouldn't you know it? During last week's deer season I killed our group's first deer at about 8:50 in the morning. Then, on my next watch I looked at the barrel and could see a few grains of unburned powder in the bore � and I have not even shortened the barrel yet.

My main reasons for wanting to shorten the barrel is to move better through the woods with the rifle slung over my shoulder, and faster target acquisition.

I don't want to lose velocity, but a .338 WM has velocity to spare. 100 fps or so doesn't matter as much to me as do fast target aquisition and accuracy.

kk

To me it is all about balance--I personally like the 23" tubes--and I like the tubes to have a bit of beef to them (.65"-.7") at the muzzle.

Just my thougths

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dogz

Regardless of long, or short, your barrel is, there will always be unburned powder. All the powder that's going to burn, ignites before the bullet goes very far into the barrel. I believe the number is 4% that the powder companies calculate is NOT burned in most any powder. Maybe it's 3%. What you are seeing may not even be unburned powder, but carbon residue.

With all due respect to your gunsmith, I've used propellants that burn considerably slower than IMR4831 for years, mostly N165, N160 and RL22. This is behine 225 and 250g bullets. It may be that for bullets lighter than that IMR4831 might be appropriate but it's certainly not too slow. The length of your tube has NOTHING to do with the burn rate of your propellant.

I bet a .338 is loud in a 20", my .270 is, so is my 8x57 with a 20". My .308 has a mild report with it's 18", must be that small case.

I have found when trying to pick a barrel length go long in your case 24". If you don't like it or think it would be better at 23" or 22" that can be done easily and with less expense than a new barrel. Sean

There's only one place one inch can make a difference and it isn't on rifle barrels. I have gone to having all 24" barrels on all my rifles and in a couple of older military rifles, I sure like the 30" barrels. Ballistics? No. Getting the muzzle blast away from me? Heck yes! If an inch makes a rifle more clumbersome, then I'll take up knitting.

The major reason for owning a rifle chambered for a magnum cartridge is getting the maximum velocity that cartridge has to offer. In my view anything less than a 26" barrel on any magnum chambered rifle makes little sense to me. I have never hunted in any terrain that would not allow me to shoulder my rifle with it's 26" barrel for a quick shot. If the terrain is that thick your short barreled hunting rifle will not work either. The recoil generated by those short barreled beasts magnify muzzle jump and group size even with a ported barrel. Now I see that velocity is not hindered by the shorter barrel, and that is just not so, reduce barrel length and velocity will suffer. You will soon see that trying to make a short barreled brush busting hunting rifle from one of those powder guzzeling magnum cartridges will administer intolerable abusive recoil to your shoulder.

You would be far better off using the 45-70 cartridge for a close range short barreled brush rifle. The 45-70 cartridge has few equals at close range with it's heavy slow moving bullet, they are devastating on any game animal. There is no such thing as a brush bucking rifle bullet. Any hunter who belives he can fire through thick brush to harvest his animal has been smelling to many gasoline fumes.

Jeff,

You've picked an excellent gunsmith. Mark has built seveal rifles for me and I have been extremely satisfied.

I know Mark prefers a heavier barrel profile on his rifles and that may make a difference in the handling and carrying.

My preference after trying both 24 and 26 inch barrels is 24" and I use a lighter barrel profile.

Owned both a 23" and 24" 338 - difference in velocity was minimal (20 fps). A shorter barrel is better when going thru the trees. When you get older having to bend even 1" less to clear a limb can be a blessing. Balance and handling qualities is what a fine rifle is all about.

Just because someone with a marketing degree put the term "Magnum" on a given brass cylinder doesn't mean anything.

The Bore-Volume / Case-Capacity Ratio of the 338 WM is nearly identical to the 30-06... obviusly the 06 works well with a 22" bbl. so why wouldn't the 338 WM? I've had the 338 with 26, 24 and 22" bbl's and like the handling qualities of the 22" bbl. (though like Bob and Mark 23" wouldn't bother me either).

I cut mine back to 22" about eight years ago based on the reasoning above. Afterward's I found ou that Finn Aagaard, John Barsness, Bob Bell and Dave Petzal all use 22" bbl's on their 338 WM's... guess I was in good company.

In my 22" bbl'd 338 225's go 2,850 fps and the 210 Partition goes 3,020.

I suspect what "feels" right to some people is really based more on their height and weight than anything else. I'm 5'10" and find an overall rifle length of 43" "right." I'll put the "feel" of a gun over minor ballistic advantage any day... especially one that goes up and down steep timbered and snowy slopes.

The .338 Win. Mag. is just about the only standard factory cartridge that's based on the .458 Win. Mag. case (or, if you prefer, shortened .375 H&H case) that CAN achieve full velocity with a 22" barrel, but that is hardly a set-in-stone, guaranteed pronouncement.

I say CAN because in my experience, velocity can vary great between barrels, even those of the same length firing the same exact ammunition. For example, I've owned several pre-64 Model 70s in .338 Win. Mag. with the original 25" factory barrel that would vary by as much as 100 fps. with the same ammo.

I owned a custom .338 Win. Mag. with a 24" Hart barrel that would do no better than 2600 fps. or so with handloaded 250 gr. Partitions, while my current .338 Win. Mag. with a 24" Kreiger barrel gives well over 2700 fps. with the same load - higher than the fastest of those old pre-64s with 25" barrels by a good 100 fps.

I owned a Dakota in .338 Win. Mag. (a real dog, and man, did I ever hate that rifle!) with a 23" Shilen barrel that would do no better than 2550 fps. with 250 gr. loads, while a friend's .338 Win. Mag. with a 23" Douglas barrel gives just under 2700 fps. with very reasonably loaded 250 gr. Partitions.

If it sounds like actual, attainable velocity is something of a grab-bag, regardless of barrel length, rest assured, it is. You'd need divine insight in order to know in advance what you'll get for velocity with a given length of barrel. If you order a 22" barrel, you might end up an ultra-fast tube that'll spit 'em out at full, original-spec velocity. Then again you might not!

I believe in playing the percentages, and that's why I now stick with 24" barrels in the .338 Win. Mag. Of the .338 Win. Mag. rifles I've owned over the last twenty-three years (over thirty of them), on average, the ones that produced the highest an most consistent velocities (across the board) have been those with 24" custom barrels.

I will also say that, while I detest 26" or longer barrels for general hunting, I've never found 24" barrels of a moderate contour to be a burden for any sort of hunting. They're worked well out of a saddle scabbard; they're worked well strapped to a packframe on sheep mountains; and they've been trouble-free on steep elk, bear, and goat hunts; plus they haven't been a nuisance out of a Landcruiser in Africa. I see no practical reason not to go with that barrel length.

AD

I went with a 23 inch barrel in mine.

I like 26" barrels on most of my guns but my 338 has a 24" Obermyer barrel...I wouldn't change it for anything...4 or 5 inches of extra barrel is not a problem on any rifle, hell, my pocket knife is that long folded...the benifits can be a plus in performance..

I have a Browning BAR in .338 Win Mag with a 24" barrel and this has worked fine in all hunting situations. I don't have a chrony but animals drop when hit with the .338.

I hope too many of you won't yelp at me but I have a custom Ruger 77, stainless 338 with a stainless 27", match grade, gain twist, bull barrel.

Recoil in not signifcant or any more than a 12 gauge shot gun. I have a William's FireSite (front and rear)set up and it's is a fantastic shooter.

I use it in the Sandhills of Nebraska where a shot can be at 5 yards or 1,000 yards.

I find it light and easy to carry....well my gun bearer finds it lite and easy to carry..LOL

I have a Model 70 with a 21 inch barrel and a Gentry Quiet Muzzle Break adds another 1 1/2 inches. It points quick and I have never noticed a loss in power from the short barrel. Everything from Asian Buff to Moose and Grizzly has fell like it was struck by the hammer of Thor!!! I wouldn't hesitate to use this gun on Cape Buff if it were legal.

Allan Day, inquiring minds want to know, why 30 different .338's over a 23 year period? Could you not find one you liked or did you like them all too much?

Beltloop,
The best iron sighted 404 Jefferys I ever had was a 27" barrel job..and I could shoot that muzzle heavy gun off hand like it was on a benchrest...I rolled Impala, Zebra and Hartebeest on the run and rolled and old dagga boy twice on the run at 200 yards with that old gun, another at a 100 yards, damn I wish I hadn't weakened when some guy wanted worse than I...that was a big mistake.

Long barrels and off hand shooting go like peaches and Blue Bell ice cream, doesn;t get any better than that.

Beeman, you can have too much of a good thing, yet never be quite satisfied. I'm a rifle eccentric and always have been, unfortunately for me! I've always liked the .338 Win. Mag., but finding rifles that I was really happy with in that chambering proved elusive. I went through about a dozen pre-64 Model 70s, a couple of Sakos, a half-dozen push-feed '70s, several Rugers, five or six Remington 700s, plus custom Mausers, Model 70s, and Remington 700s. I learned something from all of these rifles, and a couple of them I wish I never had sold - a Ruger 77R and a 1981 PF Model 70. Those two were great factory rifles, although I did re-bed them.

I don't consider any of the time or money spent with any of these past rifles to be a waste; rather time well-spent.

I currently have two custom Model 70s that are the best .338s I've ever had, and represent the end of the line as far as .338s go. I won't be replacing them.

AD

Jeff Alexander

I would not go for a shorter barrel than a 24 inch. 24 inch is not long and will do for the bush, personally I would would go for a 36 inch barrel, it seems like tall persons like long barrels and short persons likes short barrels

Ray Atkinson
Stop teasing, you old nitwit Blue Bell is fine soo is Braum's with peaches

/ JOHAN