My understanding is that for very long hunting shots or bench shooting a bull barrel makes sense. What about hunting shots under 200 yds? Seems like it wouldn't be worth lugging the extra weight around.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Is a bull barrel necessary?
Collapse
X
-
I'll do my best to explain this as I understand it:
When a bullet travels down the barrel, the entire rifle flexes. This is the felt recoil. Now, the once that has happened, the barrel resonates like a tuning fork. This is what I've always been told is what is called "barrel whip". You can search on YouTube for high speed video of this happening. It is pretty dramatic on the big rifles.
A shorter barrel can help with this, since it is harder to flex a shorter rod (basic leverage) and a heavier barrel helps because it is also more resistant to flex. This is part of why some shooters are willing to sacrifice barrel length (bullet speed) for stability, and part of why so many tactical rifles are now with a short barrel (portability also being a key reason).
Some of this phenomenon can also be overcome with a really great stock, as well as a load developed to optimal charge weight (there are some really fascinating articles written about this)
Comment
-
Originally posted by TxAg View PostMy understanding is that for very long hunting shots or bench shooting a bull barrel makes sense. What about hunting shots under 200 yds? Seems like it wouldn't be worth lugging the extra weight around.
That is my opinion, I am sure others will see it differently.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TxAg View PostMy understanding is that for very long hunting shots or bench shooting a bull barrel makes sense. What about hunting shots under 200 yds? Seems like it wouldn't be worth lugging the extra weight around.
Not worth it for hunting. Maybe prairie dog hunting, when you are doing a lot of shooting. I bought a model 700 22/250 heavy barrel, and I wish I would have bought a model 7 instead.
Comment
-
Depends on many things. Length of barrel, caliber, contour of barrel etc…
Barrels that are lighter contour actually shoot better and more accurately at shorter lengths due to less barrel whip as Gummi mentioned above.
If it's a barrel that needs the longer length for complete powder burn then yes a heavier contour is the best.
In a nutshell, a short, stiff barrel will actually be the most accurate.
And there are few to no factory built rifles that have a bull barrel. Most may have a heavier contour but a true bull barrel is typically 1.250" all the way to the end.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mike D View PostDepends on many things. Length of barrel, caliber, contour of barrel etc…
Barrels that are lighter contour actually shoot better and more accurately at shorter lengths due to less barrel whip as Gummi mentioned above.
If it's a barrel that needs the longer length for complete powder burn then yes a heavier contour is the best.
In a nutshell, a short, stiff barrel will actually be the most accurate.
And there are few to no factory built rifles that have a bull barrel. Most may have a heavier contour but a true bull barrel is typically 1.250" all the way to the end.
I probably should have said "heavy barrel"...I think.
So what would you recommend in a .223 varmint style rifle? Heavy or standard barrel?
Comment
-
Originally posted by TxAg View PostI probably should have said "heavy barrel"...I think.
So what would you recommend in a .223 varmint style rifle? Heavy or standard barrel?
I have had several of both and I like the standard weight 18" bbl. That being said, I am not trying to shoot the eye out of a prairie dog at 200 yards. I just want to be able to walk long distances without thinking I have a concrete block hanging off my shoulder. I just need it to be accurate enough to hit/kill a coyote at 150 or so yards. A remington R15 with a standard bbl does everything I need it to do.
Comment
Comment