I was looking at the Pac Nor barrel website and wondered what benefits are there in 3 grooves over 6,8,9 etc or vice versa ? i did have a lee enfield No4 years ago with two groove ,but never thought much about it, apart from that it was faster to produce during wartime .
Thanks for any insights

I think that there is some sort of theory about one sort deforming the bullet less? In that less material is displaced to fill the grooves.

I suspect that wth broached rifling it makes little difference to how many grooves, but, for sure, with cut rifling TWO GROOVE was quicker!

Which is how come your WWII No4 has it! Two grooves vs four grooves = maybe three barrels done instead of just two in the same time.

And the cutter lasts twice as long!

I like an odd number of lands because you don't have two grooves directly across from each other which should mean less compression of the bullet. Also if you have an equal width of lands to grooves the lands will be wider the fewer that you have which implies that they should erode slower.

Have no idea which is the better idea, but I know my 257 Roberts with a Lilja 3 groove barrel shoots like a house afire.

So which would be better ? 3 or 5 ?

Krieger and Brux 4 grooves shoot damnded nice...point being is they all shoot well from a quality maker.

Competition shooters much prefer 4 or 6 groove. I think it all has to do with the quality of the barrel, not the amount of lands or grooves. We are not talking about stools.