- Thread starter KeithR41
- Start date
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
26" Will get the job done, But so will 18.5".
It all depends on what you will be using it for.
26" Will get the job done, But so will 18.5".
It all depends on what you will be using it for.
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
What are you going to use it for?
Make your tool to fit the job.
What are you going to use it for?
Make your tool to fit the job.
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
I wouldnt want anything shorter than 24." but thats me!! Lee
I wouldnt want anything shorter than 24." but thats me!! Lee
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
I had a 24" 260 and it was excellent. As did a very good friend and not many could out shoot him.
I had a 24" 260 and it was excellent. As did a very good friend and not many could out shoot him.
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
I'm on the standby list for the 2010 Oregon Sniper Challenge and I hope to use the rifle there. Just got the action today, stock should be here anytime. Going to order the barrel next week.
I'm on the standby list for the 2010 Oregon Sniper Challenge and I hope to use the rifle there. Just got the action today, stock should be here anytime. Going to order the barrel next week.
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
Here's some good info:
http://snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=123540&Number=1349339
Here's some good info:
http://snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=123540&Number=1349339
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
26" barrel would be a good starting place.
26" barrel would be a good starting place.
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
I've shot 1KM (1123yd) with a 24" 1:8" using 139Scenars and what turned out to be an insanely hot load in that rifle (blew a <span style="font-style: italic">lot</span> of primers the next day when the temp went over 90*).
I've shot 1KM (1123yd) with a 24" 1:8" using 139Scenars and what turned out to be an insanely hot load in that rifle (blew a <span style="font-style: italic">lot</span> of primers the next day when the temp went over 90*).
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
26" will leave more room for error as shorter rifles are not as forgiving of mistake, from my limited experience with them. It will also give you more velocity as stated above.
With a shorter barrel you will need to be better at your fundamentals and at your range estimation. LL has already proven the a short barreled 260 will do the job but it's much easier to go down the longer barrel road as there is a lot more info out there to aid you in your load work up.
26" will leave more room for error as shorter rifles are not as forgiving of mistake, from my limited experience with them. It will also give you more velocity as stated above.
With a shorter barrel you will need to be better at your fundamentals and at your range estimation. LL has already proven the a short barreled 260 will do the job but it's much easier to go down the longer barrel road as there is a lot more info out there to aid you in your load work up.
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
I'm also interested in this aspect of barrel length. I'm looking to run a .260 with a suppressor and I'd love a manageable rifle.
Anyone running a 20" suppressed? Thoughts?
Thanks,
John-
I'm also interested in this aspect of barrel length. I'm looking to run a .260 with a suppressor and I'd love a manageable rifle.
Anyone running a 20" suppressed? Thoughts?
Thanks,
John-
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Onemoretime</div><div class="ubbcode-body">26" will leave more room for error as shorter rifles are not as forgiving of mistake, from my limited experience with them. It will also give you more velocity as stated above.
With a shorter barrel you will need to be better at your fundamentals and at your range estimation. LL has already proven the a short barreled 260 will do the job but it's much easier to go down the longer barrel road as there is a lot more info out there to aid you in your load work up. </div></div>
onemoretime,
Say what???? Please elaborate how a longer barrel helps to be:
More forgiving?
How does a "longer barrel" translate into not needing better shooting and ranging fundamentals?
And how does a longer barrel give you "more info" and "aid" in your load process?
In my experience a longer barrel gives you only two things.
More velocity and a longer sight radius.
If you are using a scope, then we can discard number two. As to number one, of the biggest myths still circulating is that barrels "lose" around 30 to 50 FPS when cut.
The real figure in most standard calibers is around 10 to 20 FPS per inch. So cutting that 26" 260 barrel to 22" may lose you 40 to 80 FPS, or about 1.7% to 2.7 % of your velocity, for a 15% shorter barrel.
I once cut a 26" 30 caliber barrel back to 22". It was chambered for the wildcat 30-338 win mag. Using the same load before and after and chronographing, I lost a whopping 56 FPS, by cutting the barrel 4". My load was 70 grains H-4831 and a 200 grain bullet.
Until you actually cut a barrel, and test it, any general rule of thumb about losing X velocity, with each inch of barrel cut is mostly hooey.
Now if you shooting a marginal cartridge like a .223 Rem (marginal meaning tough to make it to 1000 yds supersonically), then every inch of barrel does help. But if a 260 will reach 1000 yds supersonically with a 18.5" barrel. It will certainly do so with a 22", 24" or 26" barrel. Does it really matter at lot in the end result if you have dial 8 mils instead of 7.8 mils on your scope?
Certainly if benchrest competition is your goal, and 17 lbs is your max weight, then having a rifle that weighs 16lb 15 oz is the berries. And certainly if your rifle never see's anything but a rifle range, then make your barrel as long and heavy as you like.
But if your rifle is to be more than marginally useful some where other than on a rifle range, then great length and great weight are dubious virtues to be seeking.
Bob
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Onemoretime</div><div class="ubbcode-body">26" will leave more room for error as shorter rifles are not as forgiving of mistake, from my limited experience with them. It will also give you more velocity as stated above.
With a shorter barrel you will need to be better at your fundamentals and at your range estimation. LL has already proven the a short barreled 260 will do the job but it's much easier to go down the longer barrel road as there is a lot more info out there to aid you in your load work up. </div></div>
onemoretime,
Say what???? Please elaborate how a longer barrel helps to be:
More forgiving?
How does a "longer barrel" translate into not needing better shooting and ranging fundamentals?
And how does a longer barrel give you "more info" and "aid" in your load process?
In my experience a longer barrel gives you only two things.
More velocity and a longer sight radius.
If you are using a scope, then we can discard number two. As to number one, of the biggest myths still circulating is that barrels "lose" around 30 to 50 FPS when cut.
The real figure in most standard calibers is around 10 to 20 FPS per inch. So cutting that 26" 260 barrel to 22" may lose you 40 to 80 FPS, or about 1.7% to 2.7 % of your velocity, for a 15% shorter barrel.
I once cut a 26" 30 caliber barrel back to 22". It was chambered for the wildcat 30-338 win mag. Using the same load before and after and chronographing, I lost a whopping 56 FPS, by cutting the barrel 4". My load was 70 grains H-4831 and a 200 grain bullet.
Until you actually cut a barrel, and test it, any general rule of thumb about losing X velocity, with each inch of barrel cut is mostly hooey.
Now if you shooting a marginal cartridge like a .223 Rem (marginal meaning tough to make it to 1000 yds supersonically), then every inch of barrel does help. But if a 260 will reach 1000 yds supersonically with a 18.5" barrel. It will certainly do so with a 22", 24" or 26" barrel. Does it really matter at lot in the end result if you have dial 8 mils instead of 7.8 mils on your scope?
Certainly if benchrest competition is your goal, and 17 lbs is your max weight, then having a rifle that weighs 16lb 15 oz is the berries. And certainly if your rifle never see's anything but a rifle range, then make your barrel as long and heavy as you like.
But if your rifle is to be more than marginally useful some where other than on a rifle range, then great length and great weight are dubious virtues to be seeking.
Bob
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
Most of the 260 Rem shooters I know shoot a 28" barrel for tactical matches. We run the 140's from 2800-2840 fps. The long 28" barrel is bulky and does get in the way sometime, especially with another few inches of muzzle brake. But, I like the gained velocity over the shorter barrels. Is it a lot of extra gain- no, but it is a slight gain. I think a 24, or maybe a 26" would be handier. If I were to do it over again, I would probably go 24", with enough straight taper at the chamber to rechamber once to about 22".
Most of the 260 Rem shooters I know shoot a 28" barrel for tactical matches. We run the 140's from 2800-2840 fps. The long 28" barrel is bulky and does get in the way sometime, especially with another few inches of muzzle brake. But, I like the gained velocity over the shorter barrels. Is it a lot of extra gain- no, but it is a slight gain. I think a 24, or maybe a 26" would be handier. If I were to do it over again, I would probably go 24", with enough straight taper at the chamber to rechamber once to about 22".
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
As stated on the other thread I linked to, I'm running 130 Berger VLD's that have virtually the same BC as the 139 Scenar at 2935 out of a 24" barrel. For me, switching to a VLD and using hBn is a significantly bigger gain than running an extra 4" of barrel.
As stated on the other thread I linked to, I'm running 130 Berger VLD's that have virtually the same BC as the 139 Scenar at 2935 out of a 24" barrel. For me, switching to a VLD and using hBn is a significantly bigger gain than running an extra 4" of barrel.
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Red_SC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As stated on the other thread I linked to, I'm running 130 Berger VLD's that have virtually the same BC as the 139 Scenar at 2935 out of a 24" barrel. For me, switching to a VLD and using hBn is a significantly bigger gain than running an extra 4" of barrel. </div></div>
Just FYI- During testing, I've run the 130 VLD's to 3010 fps with 2 different powders (H4350 and R17) out of the 28". They shoot very well. It's a 75 fps difference and about 18 fps per inch gain.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Red_SC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As stated on the other thread I linked to, I'm running 130 Berger VLD's that have virtually the same BC as the 139 Scenar at 2935 out of a 24" barrel. For me, switching to a VLD and using hBn is a significantly bigger gain than running an extra 4" of barrel. </div></div>
Just FYI- During testing, I've run the 130 VLD's to 3010 fps with 2 different powders (H4350 and R17) out of the 28". They shoot very well. It's a 75 fps difference and about 18 fps per inch gain.
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
I'd have to look back at my book, but I was somewhere just under 3000 when I got pressure signs with H4350. The load I'm using was the best combination of accuracy and SD.
I know y'all will get better velocity with the longer barrels and identical loads, just pointing out that there is another way to get the same downrange performance without needing the extra long barrel.
I'd have to look back at my book, but I was somewhere just under 3000 when I got pressure signs with H4350. The load I'm using was the best combination of accuracy and SD.
I know y'all will get better velocity with the longer barrels and identical loads, just pointing out that there is another way to get the same downrange performance without needing the extra long barrel.
Re: .260 barrel length suggestions?
BobinNC,
Sorry I just got in.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
How does a "longer barrel" translate into not needing better shooting and ranging fundamentals?
And how does a longer barrel give you "more info" and "aid" in your load process?
</div></div>
My experience is from 2 .308's I had set up exactly the same a PSS with a 24" barrel, worked over by Randy Cain and bedded into an A5 stock and an LTR with a 20" barrel worked over by Randy Cain and bedded into an A5 stock.
I found that the longer PSS was much easier to "drive", likely due to the extra weight up front. Easier to stay on target and manage recoil. This was mostly due to my lack of knowledge in HOW to drive the rifle correctly. The PSS with the longer barrel was more forgiving.
You are correct about the ranging, I meant to comment about the flatter trajectory that the extra velocity gets you but you are right 50 fps is marginal.
My comment about the "more info is simply because most people shooting .260's are using longer barrels at this time so there is more info out there for what is attainable with that set up.
My comment about it being much easier with a longer barrel is also because you can cut the barrel down if you don't like the length but you can't add an length back on once you take it off.
Again, I said in my original post. I have "limited experience" so take what I say with a grain of salt and don't get so worked up about it.
BobinNC,
Sorry I just got in.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
How does a "longer barrel" translate into not needing better shooting and ranging fundamentals?
And how does a longer barrel give you "more info" and "aid" in your load process?
</div></div>
My experience is from 2 .308's I had set up exactly the same a PSS with a 24" barrel, worked over by Randy Cain and bedded into an A5 stock and an LTR with a 20" barrel worked over by Randy Cain and bedded into an A5 stock.
I found that the longer PSS was much easier to "drive", likely due to the extra weight up front. Easier to stay on target and manage recoil. This was mostly due to my lack of knowledge in HOW to drive the rifle correctly. The PSS with the longer barrel was more forgiving.
You are correct about the ranging, I meant to comment about the flatter trajectory that the extra velocity gets you but you are right 50 fps is marginal.
My comment about the "more info is simply because most people shooting .260's are using longer barrels at this time so there is more info out there for what is attainable with that set up.
My comment about it being much easier with a longer barrel is also because you can cut the barrel down if you don't like the length but you can't add an length back on once you take it off.
Again, I said in my original post. I have "limited experience" so take what I say with a grain of salt and don't get so worked up about it.
