App/website for barrel lengths, powders, bullets

[shedhunt]

I'm wondering if there is something out there, where you can put in your caliber, barrel length(s), powder and bullet weights, to see what the difference would be in velocity of different barrel lengths of same caliber?

I'm trying to figure out what length barrel I want to go with.

Thank for your time and help!

 

[FURMAN]

Cut down tests have been done countless times over the years in almost every case capacity out there. Despite what some believe the data says there is no ”more efficient“ case when it comes to velocity loss due to shorter barrel. Smaller cases will always burn less powder per fps gained. There are more accurate cartridges based on case capacity vs bullet weight. You are going to AVERAGE 25fps per inch.

Quick load is a good predictor when given good inputs but to be accurate it needs some calibration data.

 

[Joel@LRO]

I agree with above. Having done a couple barrel chops myself its an AVERAGE. On a 300 win mag the first inch saw a loss of 75 fps, the next 15fps, and then 30fps.

Here is a good site. http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/

good rough data for a lot of calibers. As with everything it can be modified by powder, case, primer, bullet selection.

 

[Broz]

I have lots of data logged over the years on dozens upon dozens of builds. If you figure 20 to 25 fps / inch of barrel in normal rifle barrel lengths, you will be very close.

 

[shedhunt]

Cut down tests have been done countless times over the years in almost every case capacity out there. Despite what some believe the data says there is no ”more efficient“ case when it comes to velocity loss due to shorter barrel. Smaller cases will always burn less powder per fps gained. There are more accurate cartridges based on case capacity vs bullet weight. You are going to AVERAGE 25fps per inch.

Quick load is a good predictor when given good inputs but to be accurate it needs some calibration data.

FURMAN, I thought I read some where in a thread that you did a write up on this. Could you point me in the right direction of where to find it as per my search I've not located it.

 

[shedhunt]

I have lots of data logged over the years on dozens upon dozens of builds. If you figure 20 to 25 fps / inch of barrel in normal rifle barrel lengths, you will be very close.

With a can on the end, will that help with burn rate, etc?

 

[shedhunt]

With a can on the end, will that help with burn rate, etc?

Or does it have no effect?

 

[FURMAN]

I have not done a write up specifically to this because I feel like it serves no purpose other than for someone to create content. Like I said the studies have been done enough to give anecdotal evidence to support my statement. Most cartridges will still be burning powder well over 34 inches. There are so many factors that not every combo will yield 25 fps per every inch lost. The trends would most likely not be a flat linear line. This is due to the statistical insignificance of testing one barrel with (usually) one combo. In oder to do an actually study the way I think you are asking would take hundreds of thousands of shots through hundreds of barrels. The easiest way to do this would be to take a rifle and plug known data into quick load then reduce barrel length in the program and see the results. This also has been done countless times.


I think the end answer to your question is this: For every 50 fps gained(assuming all else equal) your hit probability on a 10" plate will go up approximately 1% with a 3mph wind certainty at 1k. This is a very rough number again with several factors affecting that calculation including the bullets bc. Most will discount 1% as insignificant but I disagree. I will take every extra chance at success I can get. I would argue that chopping your barrel off to make it "more maneuverable" is insignificant. I have never been hunting and thought, man when I get home I am getting a shorter barrel. The only reason rifle builders are pushing short barrels today is because they want to sell you a suppressor. Ear plugs are cheap. Good ear pro is also relatively inexpensive.

Pro Fit Series

Get ear protection custom fit to your ears. Both Pro Fit Series models deliver 29 NRR, 120 working hours, under a quarter ounce, and a custom molded fit.

proears.com

If I were building a rifle I would choose 28" before I chose 24". I find 26" to be the best compromise mainly because it is easier to get into a gun case with a brake on it.

 

[Phil Rizzo]

Interesting take on barrel lengths, one that I share.
Of the 8 rifles I currently shoot the shortest barrel is 24” and has the brake in addition.
3x28”
1x27.5”
2x26”
1x25” braked

I’ve always been of the mindset that extra length gives free performance, and that is priority one. If it’s going to be “long” it might as well contain rifling. Personal preference, though, not the only way.

 

[shedhunt]

I have not done a write up specifically to this because I feel like it serves no purpose other than for someone to create content. Like I said the studies have been done enough to give anecdotal evidence to support my statement. Most cartridges will still be burning powder well over 34 inches. There are so many factors that not every combo will yield 25 fps per every inch lost. The trends would most likely not be a flat linear line. This is due to the statistical insignificance of testing one barrel with (usually) one combo. In oder to do an actually study the way I think you are asking would take hundreds of thousands of shots through hundreds of barrels. The easiest way to do this would be to take a rifle and plug known data into quick load then reduce barrel length in the program and see the results. This also has been done countless times.


I think the end answer to your question is this: For every 50 fps gained(assuming all else equal) your hit probability on a 10" plate will go up approximately 1% with a 3mph wind certainty at 1k. This is a very rough number again with several factors affecting that calculation including the bullets bc. Most will discount 1% as insignificant but I disagree. I will take every extra chance at success I can get. I would argue that chopping your barrel off to make it "more maneuverable" is insignificant. I have never been hunting and thought, man when I get home I am getting a shorter barrel. The only reason rifle builders are pushing short barrels today is because they want to sell you a suppressor. Ear plugs are cheap. Good ear pro is also relatively inexpensive.

Pro Fit Series

Get ear protection custom fit to your ears. Both Pro Fit Series models deliver 29 NRR, 120 working hours, under a quarter ounce, and a custom molded fit.

proears.com

If I were building a rifle I would choose 28" before I chose 24". I find 26" to be the best compromise mainly because it is easier to get into a gun case with a brake on it.

Thank you for the reply and your insight, this is exactly why I've come here to ask questions before doing anything. Much appreciated!

 

[shedhunt]

Interesting take on barrel lengths, one that I share.
Of the 7 rifles I currently shoot the shortest barrel is 24” and has the brake in addition.
3x28”
1x27.5”
2x26”
1x25” braked

I’ve always been of the mindset that extra length gives free performance, and that is priority one. If it’s going to be “long” it might as well contain rifling. Personal preference, though, not the only way.

Thank you Phil! All of my other rifles are 24-26" barrels and I've had great success with them. I'm not 100% sold on the shorter barrel, it's something that is interesting and wanting learn more about.

 

[idcwby]

I'm wondering if there is something out there, where you can put in your caliber, barrel length(s), powder and bullet weights, to see what the difference would be in velocity of different barrel lengths of same caliber?

I'm trying to figure out what length barrel I want to go with.

Thank for your time and help!

Let us know what cartridge. Not everyone here is using the same length barrel for a cartridge and you could get some velocity ideas from that.

 

[shedhunt]

Let us know what cartridge. Not everyone here is using the same length barrel for a cartridge and you could get some velocity ideas from that.

My apologies, I thought I had listed that at some point, but just went back through my responses and don't see it.

It's a Tikka T3X 6.5 PRC, all factory.

I've looked at shooting 140-147 grain bullets, but am not opposed to going a little lighter as well. This setup will be used for medium sized game, if we go chase Elk, we will utilize my other rifle.

My son is special needs and I'm trying to get him something that he doesn't have to do a lot of thinking about and can comfortably shoot out to a few hundred yards. He currently shoots my custom 7 Rem Mag very well, but unfortunately my bolt is on the wrong side of the action, so makes it a little more difficult for him to cycle rounds.

 

[FURMAN]

As stated above cartridge does not matter the physics doesn’t change.

 

[Bamban]

Interesting take on barrel lengths, one that I share.
Of the 7 rifles I currently shoot the shortest barrel is 24” and has the brake in addition.
3x28”
1x27.5”
2x26”
1x25” braked

I’ve always been of the mindset that extra length gives free performance, and that is priority one. If it’s going to be “long” it might as well contain rifling. Personal preference, though, not the only way.

This ^^^ can't beat free velocity

My 28 inch SRS braked Serengeti chambered 30-06 launches 215s at 2800 in the TX summer heat and humidity.

 

[nksmfamjp]

GRT helps.


www.ballisticsbytheinch.com

 

[Mike D Texas]

Ive trended toward shorter barrels over the last couple of years. My most recent is my 338 NMI. I elk hunted with it last year with a 28” barrel plus brake. It was manageable until I had to go in the timber.

This year I had a 22” barrel spun up for it. It still launches a 275 grain CEB Lazer at 2950’ish.

That’s plenty good for shots a long way out there. And I will be shooting it suppressed instead of braked. To
me it’s just way more pleasant than dealing with ear pro.

 

[shedhunt]

Ive trended toward shorter barrels over the last couple of years. My most recent is my 338 NMI. I elk hunted with it last year with a 28” barrel plus brake. It was manageable until I had to go in the timber.

This year I had a 22” barrel spun up for it. It still launches a 275 grain CEB Lazer at 2950’ish.

That’s plenty good for shots a long way out there. And I will be shooting it suppressed instead of braked. To
me it’s just way more pleasant than dealing with ear pro.

That's what I've been thinking is to cut it down to 21-22" and put my suppressor on it. I understand that I'll loose some velocity but it will put me at 25-26" overall vs 28-29"

 

[J2shooter]

Ive trended toward shorter barrels over the last couple of years. My most recent is my 338 NMI. I elk hunted with it last year with a 28” barrel plus brake. It was manageable until I had to go in the timber.

This year I had a 22” barrel spun up for it. It still launches a 275 grain CEB Lazer at 2950’ish.

That’s plenty good for shots a long way out there. And I will be shooting it suppressed instead of braked. To
me it’s just way more pleasant than dealing with ear pro.

I like the idea of a shorter barrel 338 NMI a lot!

 

[-CRASH]

I have not done a write up specifically to this because I feel like it serves no purpose other than for someone to create content. Like I said the studies have been done enough to give anecdotal evidence to support my statement. Most cartridges will still be burning powder well over 34 inches. There are so many factors that not every combo will yield 25 fps per every inch lost. The trends would most likely not be a flat linear line. This is due to the statistical insignificance of testing one barrel with (usually) one combo. In oder to do an actually study the way I think you are asking would take hundreds of thousands of shots through hundreds of barrels. The easiest way to do this would be to take a rifle and plug known data into quick load then reduce barrel length in the program and see the results. This also has been done countless times.


I think the end answer to your question is this: For every 50 fps gained(assuming all else equal) your hit probability on a 10" plate will go up approximately 1% with a 3mph wind certainty at 1k. This is a very rough number again with several factors affecting that calculation including the bullets bc. Most will discount 1% as insignificant but I disagree. I will take every extra chance at success I can get. I would argue that chopping your barrel off to make it "more maneuverable" is insignificant. I have never been hunting and thought, man when I get home I am getting a shorter barrel. The only reason rifle builders are pushing short barrels today is because they want to sell you a suppressor. Ear plugs are cheap. Good ear pro is also relatively inexpensive.

Pro Fit Series

Get ear protection custom fit to your ears. Both Pro Fit Series models deliver 29 NRR, 120 working hours, under a quarter ounce, and a custom molded fit.

proears.com

If I were building a rifle I would choose 28" before I chose 24". I find 26" to be the best compromise mainly because it is easier to get into a gun case with a brake on it.

I agree with you Ryan on having every bit of performance you can get. Even if it's only "1%".
Where our personal preferences differ, is on shooting suppressed. Once I started shooting suppressed, I never want to go back. It's so nice to shoot this way without having to deal with hearing projection (I'm referring to hunting -not range work).
As an example. A couple years ago I was hunting with a good friend. I was suppressed, he was not. We were overlooking another mountain face where we had spotted deer previously. We were glassing with our rifles at the ready. All of the sudden all heck breaks loose on the side of the mountain. A smaller buck had come over the top and into the face we were watching. He went into the a very thick area. Does came pouring out of that thick area with a very nice buck. My buddy spotted it before I did and instantly got behind his rifle. I was trying to get my glass on it while trying to get directions from him on its location. All while trying to get my hearing pro in my ears. (It was around my neck). I was able to get my pro in, and just had barely got my glass on the buck the moment he shot. But, my buddy waited a few seconds while I got my ears in.

The point with this is, that if he was suppressed, I could have focused on located the buck (to have a second set of eyes on) AND also be able to communicate with normal voices during this high-tension time. I think it would have went a little smoother and shot went off quicker. He still was able to get the shot off and a fantastic buck BTW. But could it have gone the opposite way if I held him up any longer?

I have had my rifle (24" w/ TBAC Dominus) through very very thick stuff. At no point while going through any type of thick areas did I think that having 5" less barrel length would make my trek any easier through thick stuff. I would still have a barrel sticking out trying to snag stuff. To me it's all relative. The benefits of a suppression is far more to me than worrying about a little less on the end of the barrel.
My suppressor can also be taken off by hand at a moments notice. So, IF I thought it would be easier to trek through a thick area with it on, I could take it off.

I think most people are thinking too far into stuff like barrel length and weight of the rifle. If those two things will make or break your hunt, then they need to be focusing on other parts of their overall system. Including themselves. Recoil management and shot placement are far more important, when it comes to punching that tag you have waited for.

 

[FURMAN]

I agree with you Ryan on having every bit of performance you can get. Even if it's only "1%".
Where our personal preferences differ, is on shooting suppressed. Once I started shooting suppressed, I never want to go back. It's so nice to shoot this way without having to deal with hearing projection (I'm referring to hunting -not range work).
As an example. A couple years ago I was hunting with a good friend. I was suppressed, he was not. We were overlooking another mountain face where we had spotted deer previously. We were glassing with our rifles at the ready. All of the sudden all heck breaks loose on the side of the mountain. A smaller buck had come over the top and into the face we were watching. He went into the a very thick area. Does came pouring out of that thick area with a very nice buck. My buddy spotted it before I did and instantly got behind his rifle. I was trying to get my glass on it while trying to get directions from him on its location. All while trying to get my hearing pro in my ears. (It was around my neck). I was able to get my pro in, and just had barely got my glass on the buck the moment he shot. But, my buddy waited a few seconds while I got my ears in.

The point with this is, that if he was suppressed, I could have focused on located the buck (to have a second set of eyes on) AND also be able to communicate with normal voices during this high-tension time. I think it would have went a little smoother and shot went off quicker. He still was able to get the shot off and a fantastic buck BTW. But could it have gone the opposite way if I held him up any longer?

I have had my rifle (24" w/ TBAC Dominus) through very very thick stuff. At no point while going through any type of thick areas did I think that having 5" less barrel length would make my trek any easier through thick stuff. I would still have a barrel sticking out trying to snag stuff. To me it's all relative. The benefits of a suppression is far more to me than worrying about a little less on the end of the barrel.
My suppressor can also be taken off by hand at a moments notice. So, IF I thought it would be easier to trek through a thick area with it on, I could take it off.

I think most people are thinking too far into stuff like barrel length and weight of the rifle. If those two things will make or break your hunt, then they need to be focusing on other parts of their overall system. Including themselves. Recoil management and shot placement are far more important, when it comes to punching that tag you have waited for.

I need to first say I get the argument. I have heard it. I have shot suppressed. I try to avoid saying always or never anymore because not many things are that black and white but I will never hunt 100% suppressed.

Pro Fit Series

Get ear protection custom fit to your ears. Both Pro Fit Series models deliver 29 NRR, 120 working hours, under a quarter ounce, and a custom molded fit.

proears.com

These are relatively inexpensive, they actually increase ability to whisper in the necessary situations, they last for days, take batteries that are very small and easy to carry extras, don't effect my rifle, and work for all of my rifles, lol.

As far as the statement of focusing on shot placement I mean no offense when it say this but I am so sick of hearing this. NO ONE misses on purpose. In real hunting situations no one is going to hold 1 moa 100% of the time. I would say most will be hard pressed to hold 1 moa even 50% of the time when the wind goes above 10mph and terrain is involved.

If you run WEZ you will see the effect from barrel length(muzzle velocity). It is small but the way I see it it is free. There are nearly infinite ways to increase hit percentage. Everyone has to make the decision on where they cut off the chase for higher. Faster cartridges, bigger/higher bc bullets, longer barrels, etc.

I don't have the energy to talk people out of suppressors. It is not my money, my rifle, and I don't have to carry them. I just don't get it. I have yet to be in a situation where I really wanted one.