You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ideal .30-06 barrel length?
- Thread starter reynolds357
- Start date
IMO, its not a bad idea to use multiple criteria to make a decision.
Back in WW1 they used long bayonets. I assume by the same logic,a long barrel was a longer handle for a bayonet.
Part of why the M-4 is the standard rather than the M-16 is getting in and out of a Hum Vee.
Some brush and vine or stand situations,or thin air at 9000 ft,might favor shorter,handier barrels,as might hunting on horseback
The "hang" or inertia of a longer barrel might be better for steady holding ,whether offhand or prone...
If I preferred a shorter barrel and was concerned about flash and blast,I might help a little by loding 4895 or Varget.
Or if I had a 24 in bbl and I wanted velocity 4350 works pretty well.
A fat 20 in bbl will be rigid,and MIGHT be more accurate than a 26 in # 3 contour...or maybe not.
Thing is,often its wide open spaces where a longer barrel might be handy for longer shots...slight velocity and "hold" advantage.
The same conditions that favor o shorter ,handier rifle usually present shorter shots.
I might start with the 26 in + blank,then saw off an inch or so at a time till the rifle jus feels "right" for what I want. I typically end up around 21 to 23 in. . And IMO,nothing says a rifle bbl length has to be evenly divided by 2.
A 23 or 21 or 25 !/2 bbl is just as good as a 20,22,or 24 in bbl. I have no need for a tape measure regarding barrel length,except for BATF minimums
Back in WW1 they used long bayonets. I assume by the same logic,a long barrel was a longer handle for a bayonet.
Part of why the M-4 is the standard rather than the M-16 is getting in and out of a Hum Vee.
Some brush and vine or stand situations,or thin air at 9000 ft,might favor shorter,handier barrels,as might hunting on horseback
The "hang" or inertia of a longer barrel might be better for steady holding ,whether offhand or prone...
If I preferred a shorter barrel and was concerned about flash and blast,I might help a little by loding 4895 or Varget.
Or if I had a 24 in bbl and I wanted velocity 4350 works pretty well.
A fat 20 in bbl will be rigid,and MIGHT be more accurate than a 26 in # 3 contour...or maybe not.
Thing is,often its wide open spaces where a longer barrel might be handy for longer shots...slight velocity and "hold" advantage.
The same conditions that favor o shorter ,handier rifle usually present shorter shots.
I might start with the 26 in + blank,then saw off an inch or so at a time till the rifle jus feels "right" for what I want. I typically end up around 21 to 23 in. . And IMO,nothing says a rifle bbl length has to be evenly divided by 2.
A 23 or 21 or 25 !/2 bbl is just as good as a 20,22,or 24 in bbl. I have no need for a tape measure regarding barrel length,except for BATF minimums
I recall a time when a 24" barrel was standard for sporting rifles. IIRC, I was Jack O'Connor who did a lot of stumping for lighter weight barrels and 22" in length. I never saw where 2" more barrel increased weight all that much and never saw a 24" barrel to be all that big a problem even in thick brush.
Paul B.
Paul B.
IIRC, Ballistics by the Inch showed that in bbl lengths shorter than 19" [remember, that's with the chamber, so really only 16.5" of bullet travel] the rate of velocity sacrificed to the God of Noise grew progressively worse for .30-'06. So that would be my lower bound for a .30-'06 "carbine." To put it in perspective, the M1 Garand is considered to have a 22" bbl, so that would lop 3" off the end of one, and I've never considered the M1 to be conspicuously "unhandy." Mmmm, a Tanker M1 w/o all the sturm und drang: Tasty!
Rifle barrel lengths are always measured from bolt face to muzzle regardless of their cartridge.
I don't think sound pressure levels across all typical barrel lengths for a given load are much different. It varies with pressure upon bullet exit. Faster burning powders have less pressure at the muzzle than slower ones for a given peak chamber pressure. I'll try to find some test data.
I don't think sound pressure levels across all typical barrel lengths for a given load are much different. It varies with pressure upon bullet exit. Faster burning powders have less pressure at the muzzle than slower ones for a given peak chamber pressure. I'll try to find some test data.
Last edited:
Jim Watson
New member
To put it in perspective, the M1 Garand is considered to have a 22" bbl,
Not by the US Army.
Perhaps you were thinking of the M14. Which is not .30-06.
a 165 gr .308 at 2800 fps at the muzzle gets to 500 yrds at over 1800 fps and with over 1200 fpe and with a 200 yrds zero drops 46", a 7mm 162 gr bullet at 2800 fps gets to 500 yrds with over 1900 fps with over 1400 fpe and with a 200 yrs zero drops 43". with the .270 and a 150 gr at 2800 fps the 500 yrds fps is over 1800 and fpe 1200 and the drop 45". info from Hornady vol 2 handbook of cartridge reloading. so the old 3006 does pretty good with other calibers when compared at 500 yards.
RaySendero
New member
Red Devil wrote:
For a .30-06 class hunting rifle - would need a good reason not to get it w/ a 24" Bbl.
...and there are a few, but that is your call.
Yes, I'm in agreement here!
24" should be the standard for an "all around" 30-06.
But I would purposely build it for the primary planned hunting conditions:
If its stalking deer 150 yards or less might go shorter, however I've not found a 24" to be any hindrance.
If its longer ranges for Elk, I would go 26".