How does barrel length help or hinder .308

S

Smiley

New member
A carbine length barrel for a FAL is better for CQB and more urban type situations in my opinion than a normal length barrel. But how does this shorter barrel really affect the longer range abilities of the .308. Would a DSArms carbine be able to hit targets out to 400 yards accuratly? How about velocity? How badly does the shorter barrel affect the velocity and thus penetration and accuracy fo the bullet.

Basically my question is comparing a 16" barrel with a 21" barrel. I know that a 16" barrel will not perform with the same accuracy or velocity as the 21". But what will the 16" do?
 
Shot in the dark here, but I seem to recall you lose about 50ft. per second per inch of barrel reduction. If that is correct, it would not be a big deal .

And technically speaking, I do not see any reason why a 16" barrel would be any less acurate than a longer barrel.

Or, I could be completely wrong.:)
 
Smiley,

I don't think the velocity issue is that big a deal until you get to pretty long range. I do believe that the hindrance to long range accuracy comes with the shortened sight radius that some carbine style rifles have. Of course, a FAL would not be affected in this way since the sight radius is not changed.

One thing that WOULD affect me personally is the increased muzzle blast of a shorter barrel. In a "real life" shooting scenario, without hearing protection, the blast of a short barrel would most likely have me flinching beyond hope in short order.

I have two AR-15's, one 20", one 16", both with bare muzzles. The increase in noise with the 16" is quite noticeable, and I find, quite objectionable if I don't have my muffs on. I can only imagine what the blast from a short barreled .308 with a muzzle brake would do to my ability to concentrate on a sight picture and squeeze....

Just my .02,
Swampy
 
Nosler #4 gives 308 data for 24" rifle and 14" pistol barrels. Most loads vary 300-400 fps between the two lengths. No bullet weights above 165grs are listed for the short barrel. In the pistol section the * (most accurate load) is by lower load for every powder (another 300fps or so lower)

I dunno how they compare accuracy. Their "less accurate" loads have delivered sub inch out of my 18" barrel. Good enough for me.

Tom
 
Should have mentioned that the prototype Rem 700 LTR had an 18" bbl. They showed it to us at the factory and told us how one of their shooters got sub moa at 600 yards. It was designed for only 300.

The other thing I forgot to mention is that with the shorter barrel, you'll get a lot more muzzle blast. Wear eye and ear protection and get a Pachmayr pad on it.
 
i've got a Charter 2000 field king on the way back from the factory right now--i didn't shoot it before i sent it back--anyway should have it back in a few days--it is a 308 w/18 inch barrel with a comp on the barrel--i suspect it should either do real good or real bad---i'll post some results after i try it..........Dick
 
Barrel length has nothing to do with accuracy. Obviously a shorter tube will have a reduction in velocity. 400 yards is not long range for a 308. The slightly flatter trajectory of the longer barrel won't amount to much at that range. At 1000 yards it would be a different matter. If you want a 16" barrel, go for it. Watch-Six
 
Here's a different take on the muzzle blast issue. Factory loads that were developed for the .308 were most certainly optimized for a specific range of common barrel lengths. Military loads were likely optimized for an even narrower range. My guess is that 18" lengths were not in either target population ... but all that means is that the stuff you can get off of the shelf wasn't made specifically for you ... it doesn't mean that you can't go after some of the faster burning powders that look sub-standard in the existing reloading manuals when they are shot out of a 24" barrel ... those loads might actually lose a lot less velocity than the slower burning powders that appear to be superior in the longer barrels. Now ... if you want combat type quantities of customized ammo, then you are gonna have to sit down and spend some quality time with your reloading bench ... but my guess is that you could find a load that had reasonable performance and didn't suffer from the dreaded muzzle blast from hell.

I'd say it was possible ... and it might be worth it to you ...

I'd say that you might even find that you can duplicate the performance of mil-surp with less muzzle flash ... that way you can still plink with the cheap stuff (ear protection fully installed) and hunt with the custom stuff and not change the zero!

Good Luck,
Saands
 
saands, off and on through the years, somebody would write in to a reloading section of one of the gun rags, asking about faster-burning powders in short rifle barrels.

Invariably, checking with the powder companies yielded the answer that there is no benefit in trying that.

I don't recall their reasons, but they're the ones who develop and test loads--so I've just taken their word for it. TANSTAAFL.

:), Art
 
I had a hunting buddy of mine that had one of those Remington short barreled bolt carbines. IIRC it was a 660 and may have been called a "Mohawk". He used it as a "brush rifle". Had an Aimpoint sight on it. Geezzzz he put some meat in the freezer with it...........out to 250 yards and it was as the Cajun says "garonteed" fried backstrap. The only problem with it was as so many of the knowledgeble posters here have stated..........muzzle blast! Damn thing hurt my already half deafened ears if he shot within 150 yards of me :D. One thing was certain when he shot everyone knew who was shooting............the shot was usually followed by one of us saying "Johnny got antoher one". He did not miss often. Oh by the way he retired a Ruger .44 carbine when he got his hands on that .308 Remingotn 660.
 
FWIW, I reload for a .308 M7, 18.5" bbl - 165s & IMR 4350 = right at 2400fps.

Muzzle blast is more pronounced than with a longer barrel, but hearing protection at the range & when shooting game, I don't ever recall even the recoil. ;) It's there no doubt - seems to get lost in the shuffle.

Some gee whiz junk ... interesting effect at different velocities is bullet weight relative to velocity. I ran 150, 165 & 180s through a ballistics calculator & at the stated velocity, the 165s had a better long-range trajectory & energy than did either other bullet weight. Vary the velocities a tad & the others had the advantage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top