The "theory" is that a longer barrel length will help a bullet generate more velocity thus enabling it to better do what it was designed to do -- penetrate, expand, etc.; but is the difference really significate or is it only marginal? Or, to put it another way, if I have a .45 with a 5 inch barrel and another .45 with a 3.5 inch barrel and have them loaded with the same exact ammo, will the stopping power of the 5-incher be significantly more than the shorter one? The same question applies to other calibers (9mm's, .40's, etc.).
Do barrel lengths really matter?
- Thread starter FUD
- Start date
Chris Orndorff
New member
"Stopping power" is not something that can be measured or otherwise quantified. A meaningless term, imo. Velocity on the other hand can be measured, and depending on the bullet involved, the velocity lost through a shorter barrel may be significant.
The IWBA recently conducted some tests using .38 Special ammo through 3" and 2" barrels. Very interesting. With some loads, almost no difference. With others, a 50 to 80 fps difference which altered the expansion which in turn altered the penetration. Two examples:
Fed +p 129 gr JHP
3" bbl/883 fps/11.7"/.61"
2" bbl/793 fps/14.7"/.43
Win +p+ 110 gr JHP
3" bbl/1019 fps/9.5"/.64"
2" bbl/1016 fps/9.8"/.59"
So to answer your question...it depends! You would have to look at each individual loading and see what effects velocity changes have on that load.
The IWBA recently conducted some tests using .38 Special ammo through 3" and 2" barrels. Very interesting. With some loads, almost no difference. With others, a 50 to 80 fps difference which altered the expansion which in turn altered the penetration. Two examples:
Fed +p 129 gr JHP
3" bbl/883 fps/11.7"/.61"
2" bbl/793 fps/14.7"/.43
Win +p+ 110 gr JHP
3" bbl/1019 fps/9.5"/.64"
2" bbl/1016 fps/9.8"/.59"
So to answer your question...it depends! You would have to look at each individual loading and see what effects velocity changes have on that load.
It not only depends on load but on the caliber as well. Higher pressure(velocity) rounds depend less on barrel length than do lower pressure rounds. Thus, a .357 Sig will perform fairly well out of a shorter barrel, while a .45 ACP really performs best with the longer length.
Fud,
I realize that: (1) sight radius and barrel length are theoretically unrelated and (2) sight radius and accuracy are also theoretically unrelated. However, a longer barrel length tends to support a greater sight radius design, and increased sight radius tends to practically provide greater accuracy. We all agree, I suspect, that accurate shot placement is the most important variable in effectiveness.
Regards.
I realize that: (1) sight radius and barrel length are theoretically unrelated and (2) sight radius and accuracy are also theoretically unrelated. However, a longer barrel length tends to support a greater sight radius design, and increased sight radius tends to practically provide greater accuracy. We all agree, I suspect, that accurate shot placement is the most important variable in effectiveness.
Regards.
JimWolford
New member
FUD;
The same thought occured to me and I reciently had the chance to test *one* cartrige.
I have a S&W 357 mag with the 8" barrell, I also have a S&W 357 Mag with 3" barrell.
At a local gun show, I picked up a partial box of Remington factory ammo with the 158 grain JSP bullets at a real bargain price.
Off to the club I went with my "Pact" chronograph and fired ten rounds thru each gun.
Difference? 250 fps less for the 3" barrell.
Is this significant? Yup.
I think some of the people who are considering those 2" barrel 357 revolvers should avail themselves of a chronograph before spending bunches of money on something that "sounds good" on paper
FWIW
Jim
------------------
Lay up some blackpowder and flints
The rest we can build, if need be
The same thought occured to me and I reciently had the chance to test *one* cartrige.
I have a S&W 357 mag with the 8" barrell, I also have a S&W 357 Mag with 3" barrell.
At a local gun show, I picked up a partial box of Remington factory ammo with the 158 grain JSP bullets at a real bargain price.
Off to the club I went with my "Pact" chronograph and fired ten rounds thru each gun.
Difference? 250 fps less for the 3" barrell.
Is this significant? Yup.
I think some of the people who are considering those 2" barrel 357 revolvers should avail themselves of a chronograph before spending bunches of money on something that "sounds good" on paper
FWIW
Jim
------------------
Lay up some blackpowder and flints
The rest we can build, if need be
suckersrus
New member
I heard somewhere, I can't remember where,
"Its not the size that counts, its how you use it."
"Its not the size that counts, its how you use it."
Greetings FUD My Friend;
The longer sight radius sure seems to help an
old timer like me; whose blind in one eye and
can't see out of the other!!!
Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, Life Member N.R.A.
PS: Yes, I think most shooter's can shoot the
longer barreled weapons more accurately.
The longer sight radius sure seems to help an
old timer like me; whose blind in one eye and
can't see out of the other!!!
Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, Life Member N.R.A.
PS: Yes, I think most shooter's can shoot the
longer barreled weapons more accurately.
Hollowpoints are designed to expand in a specific velocity range.
If you care about your hollowpoints expanding, then it matters a LOT. If not, then not.
FirearmsTactical also tested many loads out of the short barreled .45 and found them to perform very poorly. No expansion through cloth. 185gr +P might expand through cloth but the heavier ones won't.
The same tests were done to the .40 and found that the .40 expands very well from short barrels. This is because the .40 is designed from a 4 inch barrel so a 3.5 inch barrel still does okay. And, it is a high pressure round that goes well from a short barrel. .45 works best out of a 5 inch barrel. If you want expansion, you need to stick to that barrel length.
And, I don't care what anyone says, .45 hardball sucks in hitting power just as bad as any other hollowpoint that does not expand, so hollowpoint expansion always matters to me. I would much rather have a .40 that expands most of the time over a .45 that never will. That is why, in short barreled guns, I go with the .40.
Your short barreled .45 will still make a hole, but it won't expand. If you want "hitting power", you want the hollowpoint to expand. so, yes, your 5 inch .45 is going to have much better hitting power than a 3.5 inch barreled one. They will still make a hole though, one will just dump energy better and hit harder.
That't my two cents, and I have no interest in arguing about opinions on it. To each his own.
If you care about your hollowpoints expanding, then it matters a LOT. If not, then not.
FirearmsTactical also tested many loads out of the short barreled .45 and found them to perform very poorly. No expansion through cloth. 185gr +P might expand through cloth but the heavier ones won't.
The same tests were done to the .40 and found that the .40 expands very well from short barrels. This is because the .40 is designed from a 4 inch barrel so a 3.5 inch barrel still does okay. And, it is a high pressure round that goes well from a short barrel. .45 works best out of a 5 inch barrel. If you want expansion, you need to stick to that barrel length.
And, I don't care what anyone says, .45 hardball sucks in hitting power just as bad as any other hollowpoint that does not expand, so hollowpoint expansion always matters to me. I would much rather have a .40 that expands most of the time over a .45 that never will. That is why, in short barreled guns, I go with the .40.
Your short barreled .45 will still make a hole, but it won't expand. If you want "hitting power", you want the hollowpoint to expand. so, yes, your 5 inch .45 is going to have much better hitting power than a 3.5 inch barreled one. They will still make a hole though, one will just dump energy better and hit harder.
That't my two cents, and I have no interest in arguing about opinions on it. To each his own.
Yeah but . . .
Insofar as velocity is a function of complete combustion in the barrel, and combustion rate is dependent upon the "speed" of the powder, ammo designed for a shorter barrel is charged with faster burning powder.
Yes. You lose velocity with a shorter barrel simply because the pressure behind the bullet is sustained for a greater duration in the longer barrel. A longer sustained pressure behind the bullet translates into increased acceleration and velocity.
BUT . . . A "hot" or fast burning powder will lose less velocity in a short barrel than ammo charged with a slower buring powder.
The next thing you need to consider is that a "short spike" in a fast powder generally means a lower working pressure. The slower burning powders generally create higher working pressures in longer barrels and result in higher velocities.
That's the basic theory. There are lots of exceptions. I like a .357 snub loaded with 158 gr. JHP. --Velocity to burn.
Insofar as velocity is a function of complete combustion in the barrel, and combustion rate is dependent upon the "speed" of the powder, ammo designed for a shorter barrel is charged with faster burning powder.
Yes. You lose velocity with a shorter barrel simply because the pressure behind the bullet is sustained for a greater duration in the longer barrel. A longer sustained pressure behind the bullet translates into increased acceleration and velocity.
BUT . . . A "hot" or fast burning powder will lose less velocity in a short barrel than ammo charged with a slower buring powder.
The next thing you need to consider is that a "short spike" in a fast powder generally means a lower working pressure. The slower burning powders generally create higher working pressures in longer barrels and result in higher velocities.
That's the basic theory. There are lots of exceptions. I like a .357 snub loaded with 158 gr. JHP. --Velocity to burn.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ala Dan: ... whose blind in one eye and can't see out of the other!!! ...[/quote]Considering you already posted the highest score in round three, I can only imagine how much better you would do if your eyes were functional 
Regards, FUD
...[/quote]Considering you already posted the highest score in round three, I can only imagine how much better you would do if your eyes were functional Regards, FUD
I tend to like 4" to 5" barrels for balance but sometimes buy longer barrels for lessened muzzle flash and blast. For accuracy, I am not sure that anything over 4-5" makes much difference. As far as velocity is concerned, depends entirely on what powder is used. I do wonder if .380 in a 6" barrel would beat a 9x19 in a 2"...