On a previous post I asked opinions on the Browning X-bolt in Stainless Stalker 300 WSM. I really liked the dimensions of this rifle, especially the light weight and 23" barrel.
This is important as the rifle will wear a suppressor which adds weight and length but practically eliminates recoil.
But, there are none in the country to buy...
Next option is the Tikka T3.
Question: what is the practical and cost implication of cutting the barrel to 23"?
Yes, 1.25" is not a lot extra to live with, but it certainly would help.
I aim to shoot 165gr and 180gr bullets, so velocity is still fast enough.
Your comments on this and the T3 Stainless in general will be appreciated.

quote:

Originally posted by Karoo:
On a previous post I asked opinions on the Browning X-bolt in Stainless Stalker 300 WSM. I really liked the dimensions of this rifle, especially the light weight and 23" barrel.
This is important as the rifle will wear a suppressor which adds weight and length but practically eliminates recoil.
But, there are none in the country to buy...
Next option is the Tikka T3.
Question: what is the practical and cost implication of cutting the barrel to 23"?
Yes, 1.25" is not a lot extra to live with, but it certainly would help.
I aim to shoot 165gr and 180gr bullets, so velocity is still fast enough.
Your comments on this and the T3 Stainless in general will be appreciated.

There will be a slight velocity loss, accuracy should not be affected if the crown is right.
The weight saving will be minute, as skinny barrels don't weigh much anyway.
As to your choice in rifles, I must say neither take my fancy, but, that's a personal thing, we like what we like, right?
I use a couple of 300 magnums, I never use any bullet lighter than 180gr in them, there is no advantage to using the lighter pill, it ruins more meat, doesn't shoot as flat as the 180gr does and runs out of puff sooner.

Cheers.

I have a Tikka T3 which I've been very pleased with.

In regards to shortening the barrel by 1.25 inches you would lose velocity but with a suppressor you gain velocity. I would predict no significant velocity loss with a suppressor on the shortened barrel compared to an unshortened barrel with no suppressor.

You will see more velocity variation between individual rifles with the same load than what you will loose cutting off that little barrel length.

Thanks for the comments.
Shortening the barrel has as much to do with making it easier to handle than the weight issue. The suppressor makes any rifle rather long.
As for the cartridge, it is the one I have set my mind on after lots of research and will fit nicely between my other rifles and suit the intended game very well. (I trust!)

quote:

Originally posted by Grumulkin:


In regards to shortening the barrel by 1.25 inches you would lose velocity but with a suppressor you gain velocity. .

How does a suppressor "gain velocity"?

quote:

Originally posted by marshmandan:
You will see more velocity variation between individual rifles with the same load than what you will loose cutting off that little barrel length.

The old rule of thumb was 25 fps per inch between 2500 and 3000 fps, 30 fps per inch between 3000 and 3500 fps. Both are negligible when the barrel is only being shortened by 1.25"

Seems to me it was P.O.Ackley that did a series of tests several years back testing different barrel lengths. To eliminate the differences in individual barrels, he took one long barrel and chronographed the loads, then cut an inch off and repeated firing over the chronograph. He repeated the process in one inch increments starting with a barrel that was about 28 inches long down to about 18 inches. I think the article may be in one of the issues of his Handbook, but I may have it's location wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Ray B:
Seems to me it was P.O.Ackley that did a series of tests several years back testing different barrel lengths. To eliminate the differences in individual barrels, he took one long barrel and chronographed the loads, then cut an inch off and repeated firing over the chronograph. He repeated the process in one inch increments starting with a barrel that was about 28 inches long down to about 18 inches. I think the article may be in one of the issues of his Handbook, but I may have it's location wrong.

Would be great to see these results.

quote:

Originally posted by Snellstrom:

quote:

Originally posted by Grumulkin:


In regards to shortening the barrel by 1.25 inches you would lose velocity but with a suppressor you gain velocity. .

How does a suppressor "gain velocity"?

A suppressor essentially adds a little barrel length.

quote:

A suppressor essentially adds a little barrel length.

I can't believe you said that. Is the suppressor rifled?

I'm sure the Tikka stainless will be a fine rifle I have little first hand experience with it but both I've been round were 30/06 and very accurate. 300 WSM is very capable, my brother has a couple and they are both extremely accurate and kill elk sized animals as you would expect.
The shortening of the barrel will have minimal effect on velocity, isn't the rule of thumb about 25 fps per inch?

My very limited experience with suppressors is with a .223 in an AR, changed the POI by about 4" low, I assumed it was due to decreased velocity by the "muffler" on it.
I'll have to get the Chronograph out after the hunting seasons and check my assumptions.
I am very much doubting I'll get an "increase" in velocity by adding the 12" suppressor to my 16" barreled AR.
I will confirm later.
Good luck with your Tikka rifle OP.

quote:

Originally posted by Snellstrom:



My very limited experience with suppressors is with a .223 in an AR, changed the POI by about 4" low, I assumed it was due to decreased velocity by the "muffler" on it.

I will confirm later.
Good luck with your Tikka rifle OP.

Thanks. My rifles all shoot much lower with the suppressor too, but I have always assumed it to be due to the heavy muzzle and major reduction in flip.

Here is a chop test done on a 308.

http://bulletin.accurateshoote...changes-with-length/

In my wild and misspent youth, I remember reading an article where the barrel was cut off with a common old hacksaw and recrowned with a carriage bolt chucked into a drill and smeared with jeweler's rouge.

quote:

Originally posted by Mark Clark:
Here is a chop test done on a 308.

http://bulletin.accurateshoote...changes-with-length/

Thanks Mark always great to see real data

Here is another one, mostly pistol data but very well documented.

http://ballisticsbytheinch.com

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by DocEd:

quote:

A suppressor essentially adds a little barrel length.

I can't believe you said that. Is the suppressor rifled?

Why would the fact that a suppressor isn't rifled have anything to do with it? Is a shotgun barrel rifled (yes, I know some are)? A suppressor is an enclosed cavity and while the bullet is in it, there will be accelarating gas behind it.

Suppressors also reduce recoil quite a bit more than a brake. I think that has more to do with groups printing lower than increased velocity does.

Is the bore OD the suppressor so small as to prevent the "accelerating gases" from blowing by the projectile? If so, and you claim velocity gain, who needs rifling?
I believe that the wad, in a shotgun barrel, seals the blow by so that argument is invalid.

It is my belief that as soon as the projectile exits the barrel it is not longer accelerating and is at that point no longer being propelled so no increase in velocity from the exit of the barrel is possible.
Try to visualize the moment the bullet exits the barrel the gases escape to the side of the bullet in the silencer, they are no longer pushing the bullet.

Well gentlemen, I perceive you probably haven't used a suppressor. It's well known that in AR-15s used with suppressors are more "gassed." It's true that gas in a suppressor passes to some extent around the bullet but there is still more pressure behind the bullet than in front of it until the bullet exits the suppressor. I don't think an 8 inch suppressor adds 8 inches of effective barrel length but it does add a little.

Has anyone actually fired a round over a chrony with and then without the silencer? What were the results.
Understand that with normally loaded ammo you can get considerable variance between rounds.

quote:

Has anyone actually fired a round over a chrony with and then without the silencer? What were the results.
Understand that with normally loaded ammo you can get considerable variance between rounds.

Yes it has been done, some crude home experiments and other true statistically validated experiments under lab conditions treated to statistically valid methodology.

If one wades through the noise an clamour in the popular gun press and weed out what can be seen as valid data sets we see that in a correctly designed suppressor that velocity does go up.

However the increase is not large enough to be statistically significant.

Not only that it is not enough to offset the loss brought about by shortening the barrel.

To do a valid test a lot of shots need to be fired due to the randomness of the event . We are typically looking a strings of up to 40 shots using multiple guns

I have three 308's that I shoot quite a bit, A 26" and 20" Rem 700, and a 20" Model 7.

The 20" 700 takes .4 more grains of Varget to reach the same "sweet spot" with a 168grn Nosler of +/-2650fps with the exact same components.

The effect of a supressor on velocity seems to be related to the burn rate of the powder used, in my limited playing with it I saw a greater difference between supressed and unsupressed with slower powders. Powder will continue to burn in a supressor just like a barrel apparently.

For what its worth I get 2773fps with a 150gr Nosler Balistic tip and 2659fps with a 168gr Nosler Custom Competition in the 20" 700 both with supressor attached.

Bob Bell documented in an early Handloader’s Digest which I have, an experiment he did with a 7mm-08. He started with a 27" barrel and checked a bunch of reloads using different powders and bullet weights for velocity and accuracy as the barrel was trimmed back to an eventual length of 18.5". It was not trimmed an inch at a time but I think went down in 5 stages from 27". Surprisingly even with 2-3" of difference in barrel length the 7mm-08 only showed a variation with some loads that you could normally get in shooting a string of the same loads in the same length barrel. The velocity difference from 27" to 18.5" was also not dramatic.
I'm always a little sceptical myself when we start talking of trimming barrels, as those that take this route for convenience and carryability of a rifle more often than not promote the view that dropping velocity is not going to mean much, but when we get into a discussion on reloading again more often most look for the highest velocity with acceptable pressure and accuracy. They may not be the same people in both discussions but we seem to have two different takes when considering the above subjects.
How often do we listen to those trying to wring out a few more feet per second from their 416 Rigby, 404 Jeffery and especially the 458 Winchester, which are usually 24’ in barrel length and then hear the promotion of 20 or 22” barrels as being handier to carry. Let alone the discussions we have on the magnums and comparing them to the calibre equivalent ‘06 cartridge performances all the while ramping up or cutting barrel lengths

quote:

Originally posted by marshmandan:
For what its worth I get 2773fps with a 150gr Nosler Balistic tip and 2659fps with a 168gr Nosler Custom Competition in the 20" 700 both with supressor attached.

One of my 308 Winchesters, the one I use with a suppresor, also has a 20 inch barrel.



Shot with a suppressor.

And, for what it's worth, Hodgdon's 2011 Annual Reloading Manual list a 308 Winchester load of 44.5 grains of IMR 8208XBR with 150 grain Nosler BT bullets giving a velocity of 2,870 fps out of a 24 inch barrel (that would be without a suppressor).

Maybe some day I'll chronograph some loads with and without the suppressor but I'm not that bored right now.

I generally call cutting from 26 to 20 inches about a 30 to 35 FPS loss per inch..in a 308, 30-06 and such calibers..

In a belted magnum case you can multiply that number by at least two it seems.

Based on my chronograph and some tests Ive done over the years..

NOt scientific by any means but a good ball park figure I suspect..You cut a magnum caliber to 20 inches your shooting a 30-06, a 270, 280, 284 or whatever in equal bores..For what its worth I have lost less velocity with 20 inch barrels from the 270 and 308, why is that I have no idea, but the chronograph told me so!

I wouldn't swear to the accuracy of this post, its nothing more than some off the wall tests Ive done over the years, and Lord knows you can make one tiny change in such tests and change the whole picture.

I believe Browning chambered the X-bolt in 23 no?

In the 300 WSM I would go the same length as 338 Wm, 22.5

Yes, the X-Bolt is 23".
This week I picked up a Tikka T3 Lite (different version to what I am wanting to get, though) and must say that I found it very flimsy feeling.
It gets great reviews, though.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
I generally call cutting from 26 to 20 inches about a 30 to 35 FPS loss per inch..in a 308, 30-06 and such calibers..

In a belted magnum case you can multiply that number by at least two it seems.

Based on my chronograph and some tests Ive done over the years..

NOt scientific by any means but a good ball park figure I suspect..You cut a magnum caliber to 20 inches your shooting a 30-06, a 270, 280, 284 or whatever in equal bores..For what its worth I have lost less velocity with 20 inch barrels from the 270 and 308, why is that I have no idea, but the chronograph told me so!

I wouldn't swear to the accuracy of this post, its nothing more than some off the wall tests Ive done over the years, and Lord knows you can make one tiny change in such tests and change the whole picture.

Ray as I've posted before, I have gotten just over 3000 fps with 150g Partitions out our 270 Win with a 22" barrel for over 40 years. May be a tad hot, but shows no pressure signs and still shoots nickel sized groups.

Me too Chuck, Ive also noticed the 270 is effected less by barrel length than any other caliber Ive had a chance to test..

Alf,
I have shot my new .338 Ruger African with and without the muzzle brake and their is no significant difference in velocity..They also give you a screw on weight so the zero remains the same and I have not need to use it as the zero remains the same with or without the weight, that's a reasonable expectation for no change in zero...This has been the case with two .338 Rugers Africans, two 9.3x62 Ruger Africans.

Bottom line is I think the Ruger African models set a new standard in factory rifles today..I like the African/Englsh styling and the approach to that design of rifle and the fact that they all seem to shoot exceptionally well, I see some criticism to the recent addition of the muzzle brakes, and I disapproved of them myself until I broke down and purchased one, and I love it, it comes off and has a false muzzle that screws on..Its great for extended firing at the range, working up loads and sighting in, when hunting I intended to take it off, but after two deer hunts this year and two elk hunts, the same for last year, I have yet to remove it...Im so pleased with it I put my high dollar custom .338 Mauser on the Internet market.

Now that I've cleaned up the bedding (removing the barrel support pad and drilling out the bottom and barrel-side back of the recoil lug recess as a precaution) my new Ruger 338 WinMag shoots sub-MOA. It is a wood stock, 2014 model (non "African"), and a delight to shoot deer with. 24" barrel, factory/standard throat. The 185-TTSX does 3150 with 74.5gn Rel-17 and WLRM primers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhE7QMXRE1g

The old circumsizing of rifle barrels is a phase factor that all gun nuts go thru, it comes and goes throughout ones life...After 82 years Ive decided it just makes damn little difference under any circumstances..Do what blows your skirt up, it will make you feel good..

quote:

The old circumsizing of rifle barrels is a phase factor that all gun nuts go thru, it comes and goes throughout ones life...After 82 years Ive decided it just makes damn little difference under any circumstances..Do what blows your skirt up, it will make you feel good..

That makes as much sense as anything. I have never really seen the reason for shortening a rifle barrel.

My motivation in this case is entirely due to the added suppressor. That extra inch makes it easier to fit the rifle into the pick-up, into the gunslip and the gun rack.
I have rifles in varying lengths and that 1" does make a difference!

I can only imagine one circumstance wherein an inch could make a difference, has nothing to do with hunting..