Having trouble deciding with what profile I want to go with. Does anyone have pics of a rifle with a PacNor barrel in a #5 or #6 contour? Thanks.
Gunsmithing PacNor #5 or #6 pictures?
- Thread starter Josh-L
- Start date
Re: PacNor #5 or #6 pictures?
Anybody?
Anybody?
Re: PacNor #5 or #6 pictures?
Since I guess I'm not going to find any pics does anyone have any suggestions on how to decide what contour to go with?
Since I guess I'm not going to find any pics does anyone have any suggestions on how to decide what contour to go with?
Re: PacNor #5 or #6 pictures?
I can't speak for everyone, but most guys I know run medium palma or rem varmint contours. If you don't mind the extra weight, a MTU contour is common as well.
What the rifle used for?
I can't speak for everyone, but most guys I know run medium palma or rem varmint contours. If you don't mind the extra weight, a MTU contour is common as well.
What the rifle used for?
Re: PacNor #5 or #6 pictures?
Unless you intend to pay for fluting, consider the weight and your stock's barrel channel clearance.
The light varmint is a fine contour. The Palma and #7 and heavier contour barrels are primarily for balance and to dampen recoil, plus to give some heat absorption for rapid fire competitive stages. Firing from bags or bipod, the benefits of lesser movement under recoil a heavy barrel gives are also a plus.
Heavy barrels look cool, until you start hiking with them. An 18# rifle is practically a crew-served weapon, or ought to be. 14# is about the upper limit of comfort unless you are training for triathalon stuff.
Lighter is going to be more versatile. With Pac-Nor, you won't be giving up any accuracy by choosing a #5 or light palma over a heavy, unless you're intending to do longrange benchrest. If you're gonna carry your rifle to the firing line in a cart, go as heavy as you can. If you think you may ever carry the piece afield, make every ounce count and leave about 3-4lbs for your scope and mount system.
All the "good stuff" weighs like hell.
A balance is important...
Unless you intend to pay for fluting, consider the weight and your stock's barrel channel clearance.
The light varmint is a fine contour. The Palma and #7 and heavier contour barrels are primarily for balance and to dampen recoil, plus to give some heat absorption for rapid fire competitive stages. Firing from bags or bipod, the benefits of lesser movement under recoil a heavy barrel gives are also a plus.
Heavy barrels look cool, until you start hiking with them. An 18# rifle is practically a crew-served weapon, or ought to be. 14# is about the upper limit of comfort unless you are training for triathalon stuff.
Lighter is going to be more versatile. With Pac-Nor, you won't be giving up any accuracy by choosing a #5 or light palma over a heavy, unless you're intending to do longrange benchrest. If you're gonna carry your rifle to the firing line in a cart, go as heavy as you can. If you think you may ever carry the piece afield, make every ounce count and leave about 3-4lbs for your scope and mount system.
All the "good stuff" weighs like hell.
A balance is important...
Re: PacNor #5 or #6 pictures?
Rifle will be used for police long rifle school. The qual is only out to 600. This will be a .223 gun also. Barrel length will be 22 inches. I think I have it narrowed down between the #5 or #6 just don't want to get stuck with something too light or too heavy. Stock is a B&C light tactical.
Rifle will be used for police long rifle school. The qual is only out to 600. This will be a .223 gun also. Barrel length will be 22 inches. I think I have it narrowed down between the #5 or #6 just don't want to get stuck with something too light or too heavy. Stock is a B&C light tactical.
Re: PacNor #5 or #6 pictures?
What made you narrow down your decision to the 5 or 6?
What made you narrow down your decision to the 5 or 6?
Re: PacNor #5 or #6 pictures?
Just looking at the diagram and thinking the sizes looked about what I would want. That's why I'm asking for pics cause I'm not sure.
Just looking at the diagram and thinking the sizes looked about what I would want. That's why I'm asking for pics cause I'm not sure.
Re: PacNor #5 or #6 pictures?
In a 223 the bore size is small enough that it will have good stability in a lighter contour than a larger bore. I use rem varmint contours on my .224 bore rifles. It's a plenty stout contour and gets to 600 accurately (1 MOA or better). I try not to go heavier than that to keep the balance nice and not be too front heavy. I usually build my rifles that they can be carried and when needed, to be shot off hand. This makes weight a concern for me. My main target rifle sports a MTU contour since it only goes to the range.
In a 223 the bore size is small enough that it will have good stability in a lighter contour than a larger bore. I use rem varmint contours on my .224 bore rifles. It's a plenty stout contour and gets to 600 accurately (1 MOA or better). I try not to go heavier than that to keep the balance nice and not be too front heavy. I usually build my rifles that they can be carried and when needed, to be shot off hand. This makes weight a concern for me. My main target rifle sports a MTU contour since it only goes to the range.
Re: PacNor #5 or #6 pictures?
Pac-Nor makes a great barrel...no matter what contour. My very first custom sported a #8 contour .308 at 24 inches. Heavy is what I say. I have a 6.5 build happening right now that will have a med palma contour.
As for its applcation, being portable is a good thing. My duty rifle that I am using is sporting a 5.5 contour Broughton cut at 16.5 inches....believe me, it is GREAT for the purpose you state and will have no issue reaching past 600 yrds with 175 Fed Match...just food for thought.
B.
Pac-Nor makes a great barrel...no matter what contour. My very first custom sported a #8 contour .308 at 24 inches. Heavy is what I say. I have a 6.5 build happening right now that will have a med palma contour.
As for its applcation, being portable is a good thing. My duty rifle that I am using is sporting a 5.5 contour Broughton cut at 16.5 inches....believe me, it is GREAT for the purpose you state and will have no issue reaching past 600 yrds with 175 Fed Match...just food for thought.
B.
Re: PacNor #5 or #6 pictures?
For a .223 there is no way I'd go heavier than a #5. FWIW a #6 would be manageable as well if you pick that. I have a fluted #5 Lilja in the works right now for a .260 build. It's about right for something I'm going to carry a lot.
For a .223 there is no way I'd go heavier than a #5. FWIW a #6 would be manageable as well if you pick that. I have a fluted #5 Lilja in the works right now for a .260 build. It's about right for something I'm going to carry a lot.
