Whats the pros and cons of Mag-na-porting a barrel? I've never seen a rifle that has been ported or shot one. I know what it is, holes cut in the barrel. Want this increase the noise level? Why would you Mag-na-port a .270?

Why would you Magna port a 270?

I guess cause the guy that did it thought it looked cool???

I once did a remington m-722, in 270. There was a bulge under the front sight. I reamed the bore to slightly over groove diameter for a distance of about 3". I perforated the top of the barrel with about 15 1/8" holes along the sight base, both sides.

Was it loud?, you betcha! The muzzle jump was non existant. Recoil seemed less. You shot and watched the bullet hit through the scope. Nifty.....i guess. Later I cut it off and properly crowned it. Lesson, nothing magic about this or that muzzle brake. Vent the gas up and it pushes the barrel down.

Accuracy, I am not sure. The scope was a piece of trash. That was the accuracy problem. Didn't figure it out until after I cut it off. Heck, It might have shot OK with the bulge, for all I know. It was a fun experiment.

[ 04-12-2003, 00:40: Message edited by: scot ]

My 300Wby Mark5 is Magnaported. 1 in back and 1 in up is all the recoil it has now. It doesn't even fall off of the Harris bipod at the bench. I needed the break from recoil as I developed a very bad flinch while working up loads for a 300WinMag Ruger Mk1. Interesting to note that I don't flinch when using a handgun,even an overloaded SBH in 44Mag. Fred

Anything that reduces recoil generally increases accuracy. It's your rifle...who cares what anyone else thinks. You have to deal with increased noise but hearing protection remedies that. When you are hunting, it wont matter.

I have seen .270's and 30-06's ported. They shot well and were used by hunters who didn't want the recoil but still wanted the performance of the bigger bullet. I have a friend with a shoulder injury that braked his 30-06 because he liked that rifle and didn't want to move down in caliber.

Your money, your rifle, your choice...

swede

Mark - The pro is less recoil and muzzle jump the con is MUZZLE BLAST. I bought a .338 that was already magnaported and used it for eland, wildbeest, oryx etc. nice rifle, but I had to wear earplugs when hunting to preserve what hearing I have left. That kind of messed me up - having to stop and put in earplugs before I took a shot. I do not now own a rifle that is ported and probably will not own another one due to the blast problem. My advice is if you can't take recoil use a less powerful cartridge or hunt smaller game - a big soft recoil pad will and a heavier rifle will do wonders also. IMHO a .270 does not need to be ported. The exception being if someone had a shoulder injury problem or a risk of a detached retina.

[ 04-13-2003, 16:11: Message edited by: Eric Ansgar ]

I had a old Win. mod. 770 in .270 one time. It kicked like a mule. Have shot other mod 70 in .375 H&H that I would say was not much worse than the .270. And now own a 70 classic in 7mm mag that I promise does not kick as bad as that old .270.
I know that the two magnums weigh more and that is the likely reason for the difference since all three guns had that hard factory red recoil pad. Also wood vs.synthetic makes a big difference to some people. And stock shape makes a world of difference.
Before I put a brake on a .270 I would try some other things first like a good recoil pad and/or weight.
Now I hate a muzzle brake, but if you showed up at the range with a brake on your .270 I would understand. A .270 just plan kicks sometimes.

I understand some of the club ranges are restricting or outlawing guns with brakes. I know they are fierce on the folks on the next benches.

Thanks for the replys guys. The reason I asked was I'm thinking about buying a stainless steel rifle and found one I sort of like but the owner had it Mag-na-ported. Like I said I've never seen one ported. Its a 24" barrel I guess if I buy it and don't like the porting I could cut the barrel down and have it recrowned.