cr-this is a good question, I've kind of made a bit of a science of this and this is what I've come up with that works for me.



On my 700/magnum I've shot out 7 tubes on it and am on my 8th. Obviously I shoot it a lot, very littles is from the bench and most of it at long range or in unsupported positions. Basically I love to shoot and I really enjoy trying to stay in tune with the rifle.



I've found a good trigger is really nice, I use the Jewell and wouldn't trade it for anything.



Lastly, I've used barrels of lengths on this action of 23" to 26". I've found by far for me that the 23-25" range is what I shoot the best from all positions.



I like a bit of beef to the tubes and I generally have used Schneiders tubes and they have been 4.5 weight tubes. This will put them in and around .7 at the muzzle. I really like the tube weight more than the length and have found this to be very important to me.



One of the guns I shot the best was when I had a 21" tube on my G33 in a 06 that would of miked about .67 at the muzzle. That rifle now has a tube of about the same weight and it is cut at 23" and is in a 270 and I shoot it a bit better I believe.



I am about 6' 1" if that means anything.



Just some thoughts.



Personally I'd be for going 23"-25" and about .67 to .7 at the muzzle. Generally the shorter the tube the fatter I like it.



Thoughts...?



Questions...?



Have a super day!



"GET TO THE HILL"



Dogz

DJ,

I agree about off-hand being a last resort. But even from field positions, or resting on a tree, etc, I like a gun to be a LITTLE bit muzzle heavy. If it's too far out of balance, it becomes a chore to carry. But I like the balance point about 1-2" ahead of the center of the front bridge of the action. I find it also swings better for running shots that way.

Steve

You are correct that longer will be more stable. However, shorter barrels tend to be more accurate. That said, I like my hunting barrels longer just for the added stability. Good luck on your project.

I find there to be two parts of this discussion: the balance point of the rifle itself and then the effective balance point induced by how the shooter holds the rifle. Taller shooter tend to hold the forend further out, etc. Also depends on whether or not you're a diehard sling shooter. Barrel contour can also make a difference for any given length...

Personally, I find anything over 22.5" inches to be pointless, but then again, I don't shoot magnums anymore either.

Good luck.

Like you and Mark, I like my rifles somewhat barrel-heavy for stability in shooting from unsupported positions. I like short, fat barrels on guns that aren't too ballistically handicapped by a short barrel. But your .300 Weatherby will make good use of the extra length. I'm surprised that I haven't found my 26" barrel as cumbersome as I thought it would be. I haven't hunted with it in really thick stuff, but did work through some thorn bushes in RSA with it without a problem. I still prefer 24" for manueverability. Never tried a 28" barrel on a bolt action.

I'm 6'4" with (relatively speaking) short arms, for what it's worth.

Steve

If I had a choice between holding my Model 600 or Model 700 off-hand (big difference in barrel length) I would pick the 600. I could hold it all day. Maybe the 700 would be more stable, but I would still have the 600 on target long after I got the shakes with the 700.

To me if I couldn't have a 26" barrel I would take the 24" in your scenario. The 27" seems too long to me.