Any suggestions on what the shortest, but still effeciant, barrel length should be for a 280 Remington (or 7x64 Brenneke)?

I'm thinking of somewhere between 20 and 22 inches. Would 20 inches be too short to achieve reasonable velocities?

Erik

In 6,5's 7X64 or 270 etc. 24 - 25 inches is fine. Why do you want a short barrel?

Cheers
/JOHAN

I have a couple .280s with 22" barrels and they work fine as hunting rifles. I have two 7x57s with 20" barrels and they kill just as dead!

I wouildn't go shorter due to muzzle blast.

quote:

Originally posted by ErikD:
Any suggestions on what the shortest, but still effeciant, barrel length should be for a 280 Remington (or 7x64 Brenneke)?

I'm thinking of somewhere between 20 and 22 inches. Would 20 inches be too short to achieve reasonable velocities?

In order to get the potential from a .280 or 7x64 I think you'd be happiest with 22". If you're inclined toward 20" the 7mm-08 is as good as it gets.

I use 25 fps per inch for the situation you describe. I have a 7X57 with a 20.5" bbl and it's not all that much handier than a rifle with a 22" tube with it's long action and all. Some use a weight change of one ounce per inch of barrel length.

It's not so much the loss or gain from the barrel length as a 7X64 will still be more powerful than a 7X57 no matter what the barrel length.

All that said everything adds up and a 20.5" barrel is not bad. I don't like them shorter than that however as the muzzle blast cranks up then.

With the round considered, I would opt for a 22" barrel. The difference between a 20 and a 22" tube doesn't make a whole lot of difference in the handling of the rifle. My two 7mm's are a old mauser with with a 20" tube and a WInchester Model 70 featherwieght in a 22" barrel. In the field these rifles carry very siimilar, not a lot of difference. The 280 I am building is a 23", but its still in stockwork stage and I haven't shot it yet.

There are two train off thoughts on this, if you do it too long and are unhappy it isn't a big deal to cut a inch or two off and recrown the barrel, but once its short is always short.

Second though is why go through the above if you know what you want, it just costs money.

If your really looking for a short rifle, think a 21" tube, you don't loose in handling from the 20" and not much velocity loss from the 22", in this case compromise will get you the best of both worlds.

I have settled into liking 23" barrels for that exact reason not too long when carrying them, not any significant velocity loss, for me its a sweet spot.

I'm on the other end of the spectrum. The vast majority of my hunting is in open country so length isn't a problem. On all my rebarrels I opt for either 26" or 24" . I like FREE velocity.

If You are at all worried about velocity I would go longer.

FN in MT

quote:

Originally posted by Lowrider 49:
I have a couple .280s with 22" barrels and they work fine as hunting rifles. I have two 7x57s with 20" barrels and they kill just as dead!

I wouildn't go shorter due to muzzle blast.

My sentiments exactly.......

make it to suit the owner.....not the terrain.....I like short.....what do you like?

If you are going to have a 20"bbl. .280, then you might as well have a 7-08. The .280/7x64 is slightly overbore w/ lighter bullets & is at it's best w/ a bbl. 22"-24". I split the diff. & went 23" on my M70, much like schromf, it's a good compromise.
Frank can get by w/ a longer tube because he's well past 6-1" tall.

Check this out...

http://www.accuratereloading.com/764brenneke.html

I like 23-24" barrel on a 280...

quote:

Originally posted by JOHAN:
Erik

In 6,5's 7X64 or 270 etc. 24 - 25 inches is fine. Why do you want a short barrel?

Cheers
/JOHAN

Maybe I'm a midget???

Seriously though, I generally like rifles to be compact. This gun will be for battling my way thru the dense forests here in Norway with the rifle slung on my back most of the time.

I have been thinking of going with a 22 inch barrel, but wanted to hear if anyone here on AR had expericance in this calibre with an even shorter barrel.

Thanks for your input guys.

quote:

I have been thinking of going with a 22 inch barrel, but wanted to hear if anyone here on AR had expericance in this calibre with an even shorter barrel.

I've owned .270 rifles with 20" barrels and a .30-06 with 18.5" barrel.....they kill stuff very dead.....what wlse can you say?

FN,

I typically hunt thick country often right up on the Idaho/Montana border. I have also hunted Montana a fair bit, its very varied country, outside of Prichard where I used to hunt the country is all the same down into Thompson Falls, move over 100 miles east of Missoula the country opens ip and over where I antelope hunt in the eastern part of the state a tree is a scarce sight.

But I hunt the thick stuff which means "Alder" nasty stuff to pack a rifle through ( actually its nasty to walk through much less carry a rifle) A shorter tube is a big help and doesn't hang up near as much. Over 24" I definately notice, I have a 22 inch 30 mag even. Yes out in the open country I prefer a longer tube, but I want all around guns, and I hunt the thick stuff more than I do the open country.

One of the reasons I have hankered for a single shot rifle, 25 inch barrel on a rifle shorter than a 22" bolt...sweet

Schromf,

Yeah....... Your stuck with going SHORT. I'm blessed with open country so 26" at 6'-2" is an easy carry. Then again I DO carry my wifes 20" 7mm-08 carbine when I'm really not seriously hunting and it IS a sweet carry.

You might like a Ruger #1 with a 20 or 22 inch tube. STILL short but decent ballistics.

FN

This is one of the nice things about the Blaser R 93.
I have a 22 inch 308, a 24 inch 375H&H, and a Tracker bbl in 19 3/4 inches in BOTH 308 and 375 H&H. I can switch between calibres and bbl lenghts in less than 5 minutes.
Throw in a 300 Mag bbl, 223 bbl and a 28ga shotgun bbl and you just about have it all covered.

I use 600 mm (23.6") barrel length on my .280. I have not felt the need to go with a shorter barrel.

jim