Can anyone tell me the best length barrel for a 222 Remington ,that being ,the most efficient,, for max velocity ,burning of powder etc, thanks

Longer the bullet stays in the barrel, more speed it gets - to a certain point. Depends on bore diameter & amount of powder. Magnums would be well over 30", 222 probably 27'-28'. Just makes an impractical scenario; nose heavy, terrible balance, etc. Don't think velocity gains over 24" in 222 would be worth getting excited about. reloadersnest.com - 30 gr @ 4144, 40 gr @ 3613. Safe loads in their gun. 23' barrel. You can hot-rod the hell out of it, but barrel life will suffer.

My old 722 had a 26" barrel in 222. It was a tack driver with max charge or RL-7

The .222 in the CZ 527 22" barrel does everything I exspected it to do.On a calm day, with a steady rest and the blood pressure down three to fourhunderd yard fairly accurate shooting is doable.The performance will not change much if the barrel were 3" longer. roger

quote:

Originally posted by airgun1:
My old 722 had a 26" barrel in 222. It was a tack driver with max charge or RL-7

Currently have two of those old Rem 722's in 222 Rem.
Never did any Chronographing of the loads, but each one is flat accurate, one with IMR-4198 and the other RL-7; both shooting about every bullet made in the 50-52 grain weight class very well. They may not look good, but they don't take second place in the accuracy department. One shot a 1/4" group and the other a .187 group at 100 yards. These are 3 shot groups using 20X scopes. In fact, they are boringly accurate.. And that's avery good thing...

Don

I've got an old 40x 222 Br model with 27" barrel and a custom with 24" barrel use the same load in both rifle.

My Mannlicher Luxus had a 24" barrel. I had it chopped back to 21". I cannot see any practical difference. With a 100m zero, drop at 200m is the same.

I have never shot it through a chronograph.

As a educated guess (make that a W.A.G.), I think once you go beyond 24", you're wasting time and barrel. "IF" you made any gain at all, it would be mostly smoke and mirrors.

"Optimum" is the right concept, but in order to define it you have to specify the usage. A rifle for carry (walking varminter)? A "truck" gun for quick action? A heavy varmint/target gun for bench use?

The length of barrel should be somewhat proportional to the speed of powders that the cartridge uses. The .222 uses relatively quick powders compared to most centerfires, so it doesn't need as long a barrel (as say a .220 Swift) to provide acceptable velocities and muzzle blast.

A 20" barrel is plenty for a carry rifle; a 24" barrel provides adequate velocity and sufficiently diminished muzzle blast for a bench gun. But remember, people who compete in the "light varmint" bench class with this cartridge will frequently use only a 20" barrel in order to put more thickness/stiffness into the barrel and still remain within the weight limit -- and they win a lot of competitions.

I suspect that even with the relatively small, fast powder charges of the .222 that you would continue to gain velocity in a barrel of 32 to 36 inches or more before velocities started downward due to barrel friction (and muzzle blast would be markedly lowered). But is a three foot long barrel "optimal". For most uses, of course not.

Bottom line: One has to assume that you are not seeking maximum possible velocities, otherwise you would simply use a larger cartridge. If that is true, then typically as you shorten the barrel to less than 20" you get significantly more muzzle blast and begin to loose enough velocity to matter. Conversely, if a barrel is much longer than 24" you get less velocity gain with each additional each and quickly reach the point of meaningless returns for the additional length.

So, take your choice of any reasonable length; it won't matter much to the performance of the cartridge.

Nice posting, Stonecreek. roger

Stonecreek said it all, for any practical purpose. Only I can add that benchresters (at one time) found 21-3/4" to produce the largest percentages of Tony Boyer's "hummers". That is old info and maybe either caliber-specific or superceded since Reagan was president. Anyone know?