G'day guys,

I have a Winchester Super Grade in 300WM. It has a 26" tube and I really like nothing longer than 24" in a hunting rifle. So to chop or not??

Cheers,
Mark.

Sell the super grade, bank the cash and buy a new rifle with a 24" tube.

If you like Winchester model 70's, the featherweight in 300mag has a 24 inch barrel. Ruger's 300mags are 23". I wouldn't chop the supergrade, but it's your rifle.

I wouldn't chop it; I've re-barrelled .300s to get the longer pipe.

Exactly what will chopping 2" off the barrel accomplish?

Probably about 70-100 fps but that extra 2" can be unwiedly in our mountains chasing sambar deer and as stated I don't like the feel of a 26" barrelled rifle.

Cheers,
Mark.

I'm with you Mark! The beauty of the .300 Win Mag is that it's published ballistics are easily obtained with a 24" tube. Sure, you will pick up a little velocity going with a longer barrel, but if I were going to do that, I'd also go with one of the larger cased Weatherby's or RUM's. That Supergrade is a nice rifle, and as others have alluded to chopping it will hurt it's resale value, but if you plan on keeping it I'd say chop it ( make sure it is properly crowned ) and go hunting!

Although I'm on the "leave it alone" side; if you want the shorter barrel I wouldn't let resale value stop you.

I have .300 Weatherbys and a .300 RUM as well as my Win Mags. Give a Win Mag a good 26" pipe and it runs with in 150 fps of my RUM and does it with considerably less buck and roar. Knowing what I know now, I probably wouldn't have built it in the first place but it isn't going anywhere.

I wasn't talking about any loss of velocity. I was just curious about how lopping off two inches of barrel was gonna change it into a nimble piece of machinery that points itself? I hunted in the thick stuff with barrels out to 28" without a problem but to each his own.

I like a 26 inch barrel as they handle better for off hand shooting and running shots for me anyway..I also like the added velocity and cutting off two inches shows me nothing, my pocket knife is longer than that...If I go to a shorter barrel then I as soon have a 30-06..But you need to make your own choice, your the only one you need to please.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
I like a 26 inch barrel as they handle better for off hand shooting and running shots for me anyway..I also like the added velocity and cutting off two inches shows me nothing, my pocket knife is longer than that...If I go to a shorter barrel then I as soon have a 30-06..But you need to make your own choice, your the only one you need to please.

My sentiments, exactly. I'm a fan of long barrels.

Having said that, I stopped worrying about keeping my tools nice for the next guy. It's your gun so make it fit your needs. If you ever decide to ditch the gun just advertise it as a 'semi-custom'. Chuck it up and make some chips!

I've had eight .300 magnums from 21" to 26". My 26" was in .300 Winchester, Browning A-Bolt (LH). It shot whatever bullet at less than MOA and the 26" tube added an extra 75 to 100 fps to 180s and 200s (3200fps and 3000 fps). It out-shot my 24" .300 Wby.

I never noticed the extra 2-inches... I think that's a myth to suggest that a 2-inch longer barrel on a .300 magnum makes it uncomfortable or unwieldy. It's the overall weight and barrel contour that decides those issues. Plus, the extra 2" puts the muzzle blast farther from your face. I found that to be more important than a short or shorter barrel.

The full size M70 in .300 Win was too heavy to begin with, even with a 24" barrel in my experience... it was about right for a .375 H&H. The Featherweight should be better.

The Browning was the best overall of the six .300 Win Mags that I owned. A Ruger 77 SS with the "boat paddle" handle was next best. The full size M70 was way too chubby even with its 24" tube. Cutting 2" from its barrel would have made matters worse.

If you don't like your's, sell it to someone who really wants it. Then buy one with a 24" tube. But in my view, the .300 mags all perform best with a 26-inch barrel.

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

I don't like a 26 inch barrel and in fact prefer 23 inches when I have something barreled. They certainly fit better in a scabbard. I presume this is a current era model 70. If so, I don't think you are going to do much damage to its value. The recrowning may in fact improve accuracy. If resale value is prime concern, don't use it. Cut it and enjoy it!

quote:

Plus, the extra 2" puts the muzzle blast farther from your face. I found that to be more important than a short or shorter barrel.

True, as well as the absolute muzzle blast (and muzzle pressure) being less with a longer barrel. This is an often overlooked factor, especially with cartridges of large powder capacity and lots of muzzle blast. That's not to say that a 24" barrel is inadequate for a .300 Win, just that a 26-incher has advantages which may outweigh its slightly less convenient length.

Naaah, what you really want is down at Cabelas...

They have a Ruger in .300 WM, muzzle braked,with an 18" barrel. It has cool taktikel stuff hanging off the muzzle, too. And yes, it's a 77, with a standard bolt handle.

No kidding!

friar

min 24 26 is better.

I have other caliber better suited for shorter barrels.

I really prefer 26"on the 300 wm and similar cartridges

I find it comical that folks that will go walk the grouse thickets with a 26-28" double will complain about a 26" single tube. Don't think it makes any difference. The 2 inches is 100fps and a fraction of an inch at 300 yds.

quote:

Originally posted by Mark R:
G'day guys,

I have a Winchester Super Grade in 300WM. It has a 26" tube and I really like nothing longer than 24" in a hunting rifle. So to chop or not??

Cheers,
Mark.

Sell it to me and buy the featherweight version in 24" barrel.

Better yet, I will come to Australia and we can hunt with it to see if I like it.

Unless you want a longer range rifle with a 26" bbl. then sell it for one you prefer.

The old M70 300 H&H's came with a 26" bbl. and of course I had to have one. I used it near the car some.

To be frank I don't even like 300 magnums! They kick too much for what you get.

Shop for a 7mm magnum in a rifle with a 3 position safety that controls the firing pin and CRF.

My 24 inch 300 weatherbys struggle to keep up with my 26 inch win mags. Granted it's not a perfect apples to apples comparison, but when a caliber kicks that much more to go a bit slower the 2 inches of barrel starts looking like the bargain of the century. I seem to gain or lose 50 fps per inch.

quote:

Originally posted by JonP:
I find it comical that folks that will go walk the grouse thickets with a 26-28" double will complain about a 26" single tube. Don't think it makes any difference. The 2 inches is 100fps and a fraction of an inch at 300 yds.

The receiver on a break-open shotgun is about four inches shorter than a bolt rifle, making a shotgun with a 28" barrel as short or shorter than a rifle with a 24" barrel (or a pump/auto shotgun).

Despite that, I've never found a 26" rifle barrel particularly unhandy unless you are prowling the backroads to headlight deer from your car.

I've only ever owned 1 rifle in 300 that had a 24" tube, it didn't handle well at all, all my hunting rifles since have 26" barrels in magnum cartridges, excluding my 375 Weatherby that has a 24" tube, but it's a bull barrel and is heavy.
I much prefer the 26" tube and wouldn'cut a Super Grade, I also hunt sambar and have never had a problem with the 26" tube on either my Kimber or Model 70. I would hunt with it for a bit before deciding if you think it's necessary to cut the barrel back.

Cheers.

I had a 308 Norma that had a 22 inch barrel. With 180 gr bullets it would barely make 2900 fps. It was also very loud. Re-barreled that rifle and velocities were what you expect from a 300 mag. I would agree if you don't like a long barrel,trade it for one with the barrel length you do want.

I would opt for a 22 inch 30-06 if I felt the 26 inch 300 was to much to pack around, which I don't. I have packed my pre 64 mod 70 300 H&H to hell and back,I love that worn out old gun. It has never failed me.

If you cut a couple of inches off a 300 then your not improving the caliber to its full potential and the 30-06 with a good dose of 4831 or H414 will get very close to a short tube 300, and do it in a fwt wt. gun and a 22 inch barrel. Its amazing what a great gun the 30-06 is and how it performs with a short 22 inch barrel.

I would have a problem cutting 2" off the barrel of a fine rifle, but it's your gun.

My .375 RUM has a 26" barrel plus a muzzle brake lengthening the barrel to 27 1/2". I've used it on two hunts in South Africa and another in Zimbabwe without any issues with the barrel length.

First, Unless this is a collectable pre '64 I'd cut it with out remorse if that's what I wanted.

Second is performance. I'm in the camp that want's the extra couple inches to burn the powder more effeciently. A short tube .300 Mag anything is just a louder boom with more flash and .30-06 performance. I like the 22" FW idea for what you're describing.
There was an article done some time back in Shooting Times I believe, where the author trimmed a .308W an inch at a time, documenting velocity loss. I think his "perfect" balance was 20", giving the velocity loss increased more rapidly per inch as it got shorter from there. From starting length to 20" the loss was very little. I think every cartidge would follow a similar pattern of effeciency.

Changing to faster powders in the short barrels helps also.

My favorite short barreled bolt gun is a Model 600 in .308W, and I think it's 16.5". It's as handy as it gets, and the only thing I used that works that well up close was a lever gun.

Big Nate the big magnums don't respond to cutting off barrels like a 308 as they simply have way more powder to burn and get rid of and most of that powder lands in the snow with a magnum..The 308 and also the .270 most of all respond to 20" barrels incredibly well. The .270 has always amazed me in carbine length, hardly any loss at all on the two I played with.

As to saddle scabbard carry on a horse, I don't want anymore barrel than 22 inches and I don't want a magnum of any kind..A pre 64 mod. 70 fwt or small ring mouser with short tube works OK, but my saddle guns for elk and deer is are a Sav. mod. 99E in 250-3000 or my 99F in .308.

The browning BLR in 308, 358 or best of all is the .284 Win, that/s pretty jazzy saddle gun IMO>

When I build a rifle for someone this is always a discussion/decision point. I don't like barrels longer than 24" on hunting guns. The shorter the barrel, the more accurate the gun, in general, within reason. Some of my most accurate hunting guns only have a 19" barrel, even a 7mm Rem Mag. It is surprising how little velocity is lost, about 200fps. If you like the balance of the shorter barrel, do it......Tom

It sounds like you haven't tried it hunting yet. I'd do that this season. If it's unwieldy, then make the decision to sell or cut. But unless you've actually tried it, you may be solving the nonexistent problem.

LWD

quote:

you may be solving the nonexistent problem.

Solving non-existent problems...isn't that what the AR forums are all about? :-)

Leave it alone!

I have a Remington 721 in .300 H&H with a 26" barrel.....I just can't bring myself to "bob" it and as suggested I'll just sell it in favor of a lighter and more convenient barrel length.....IMO 22" is as much as any rifle needs.

I've owned that rifle for many years and used it in Africa where it worked just fine.....but it's always snagging branches when I hunt in the mountains.....I even restocked it with a scope friendly stock......I just can't bring myself to shorten the barrel!