3 inches barrel difference

[c-fbmi]

If you're really concerned about the fps loss one can usually minimize or recover it by changing powders. This is even more applicable to a cartridge like the 416 Ruger with it's very high expansion ratio.

My understanding of "carbine" would be a 20" or less barrelled rifle. ie: the most famous carbine in the world............the Winchester model of 1894...........

 

[RememberTheSomme]

Most have given you a lot of practical differences for both barrel length's.

The shorter barrel may be a tad more accurate than the 23" due to rigidity, so any velocity loss may be made up for in getting the round more centered in the vitals at distance. The velocity drop per inch of lost will be dependent on the rifles own expansion ratio and the many bullet/powder type and charge weight combinations. There is no fixed number, except in a given rifle with a given load and the actual barrel chopped inch by inch, and then even this will vary from longest to shortest with that one load.

Some remind you of the extra muzzle blast and this can be an issue with large powder charges like in the 416 uncorking at high pressures. Ka-boom........ba!! Some rifle cartridges become down right nasty when they get too short.

Another consideration and this is a small one, but worth mentioning because it is important to me is the appearance.

Does the tube length balance with the fore-ends length?
Some rifles look better with rifle length barrels, while others are more beautiful with 20" carbine lengths or shorter.

Sometimes if the same overall length stock is used, some carbines look kinda funny with a long forearm. I usually go for the shorter barrel, however as I said some rifles are not as appealing with carbine barrels and nothing else made more compact to balance it all.
"
Take a Model 70 featherweight. The 22" tube and the standard length Schnabel fore end are a match made in Haven, New Haven to be exact. If you cut the barrel to 20" now something looks wrong. If you take the newer M70 compact with it's 20"bbl and downsized stock, then all is well.

I had the M70 lightweight sporter with the 22" tube in .30-06. This rifle looked unbalanced because of the shorter fore end compared to the Featherweight's fore end. It would have been more balanced with a 20" barrel, as such they were called light weight carbines.

An M-14 rifle is a beautiful balance with a 22" barrel. A 18.5" carbine looks to be bubba'ed to me, and again only for a balance to the looks, not to functionality or lethality itself.

Didn't want to bore you with appearance themes, but you know, we all like the look of our guns, so really look closely at both barrel lengths to see what you will really love to handle each hunt, the other mechanics are probably a lesser concern in the big scheme of things.

 

[conor_90]

I have personally decided 3 inches barrel difference is not worth the time, money and potential that the crown will not be nearly as good as the factories (in this case tikka) if I send it in for a chop job. I guess I will have to maneuver in thick brush.

Still love my short rifles though.

 

[BigUglyMan]

I have personally decided 3 inches barrel difference is not worth the time, money and potential that the crown will not be nearly as good as the factories (in this case tikka) if I send it in for a chop job. I guess I will have to maneuver in thick brush.

Still love my short rifles though.

You need to find a better gun plumber!

 

[sunray]

One of the hacks at one of the gun rags did a test long ago of velocity loss per inch of barrel. Started at 22" I think, cut an inch off, properly crowned and fired over a chronograph. Came up with 100 FPS per inch.
A 400 grain bullet starts at about 2400 FPS out of the Ruger. 400 grains at 2100 fps, assuming that gun rag hack was right, will kill anything you shoot at just as dead as it will at 2400.
Kind of odd there's no reloading data whatsoever for it.

 

[c-fbmi]

Most have given you a lot of practical differences for both barrel length's.

The shorter barrel may be a tad more accurate than the 23" due to rigidity, so any velocity loss may be made up for in getting the round more centered in the vitals at distance. The velocity drop per inch of lost will be dependent on the rifles own expansion ratio and the many bullet/powder type and charge weight combinations. There is no fixed number, except in a given rifle with a given load and the actual barrel chopped inch by inch, and then even this will vary from longest to shortest with that one load.


I beg to differ sir.
All cartridges have a very specific expansion ratio and it most certainly is a fixed number. I agree there are tolerance differences from one rifle to the next and it will affect the final expansion ratio of that cartridge fired in that rifle, however these tolerances are very minimal in relation to the expansion ratio of the cartridge. Different brands of brass also affect the expansion ratio but again very minimally.
Expansion ratio is a scientific formula (I'm not at home so I don't have my books to quote it to you) that compares the case capacity to the bore diameter and the ratio at which the expanding gases are allowed to expand as the bullet travel down the bore and the effective gas space increases.
Point being that expansion ratio for any given cartridge is most certainly a very specific number and tells one a lot about optimal powders for that cartridge and velocity loss per inch of barrel and regardless if you have a fat chamber or over/under size barrel these factors remain unchanged. It will not give you an indication of anticipated velocity but it most certainly will give you an expected velocity loss per inch of barrel...........which as I recall was the OPs original question. Larger bores from say 35 cal and up are minimally affected by shortening barrels and many times lost velocity can be regained somewhat by going to a slightly faster powder, smaller calibers that are moderately to massively over bore are much more affected by shortening barrels and do not react well to faster burning powders.

 

[c-fbmi]

As usual Sunray has taken a small slice of information and simplistically and incorrectly applied it to a much larger and more complex situation. The loss of velocity per inch of barrel length varies directly in relation to the expansion ratio and pressure curve of a given cartridge. What one man does with one rifle and one cartridge with one powder load has absolutely nothing to do with any other cartridge, bore size or powder charge and can only be applied to a cartridge with a similar expansion ratio loaded to the same pressure with a similar burn rate powder.


OP..........standard rule of thumb (just for future reference).........the faster the burn rate of the optimum powder for any cartridge, the less velocity loss per inch of barrel length with in normal length barrels.......18-26" Best case about 35 fps worst case 150+ fps...........in your case with the 416 Ruger I'd anticipate 50-60 fps loss per inch of barrel from 23-20 inches.

 

[RememberTheSomme]

Most have given you a lot of practical differences for both barrel length's.

The shorter barrel may be a tad more accurate than the 23" due to rigidity, so any velocity loss may be made up for in getting the round more centered in the vitals at distance. The velocity drop per inch of lost will be dependent on the rifles own expansion ratio and the many bullet/powder type and charge weight combinations. There is no fixed number, except in a given rifle with a given load and the actual barrel chopped inch by inch, and then even this will vary from longest to shortest with that one load.


I beg to differ sir. (A challenge, hmm,......... I'm being stared down?)
All cartridges have a very specific expansion ratio and it most certainly is a fixed number. I agree there are tolerance differences from one rifle to the next and it will affect the final expansion ratio of that cartridge fired in that rifle, however these tolerances are very minimal in relation to the expansion ratio of the cartridge. Different brands of brass also affect the expansion ratio but again very minimally.
Expansion ratio is a scientific formula (I'm not at home so I don't have my books to quote it to you) that compares the case capacity to the bore diameter and the ratio at which the expanding gases are allowed to expand as the bullet travel down the bore and the effective gas space increases.
Point being that expansion ratio for any given cartridge is most certainly a very specific number and tells one a lot about optimal powders for that cartridge and velocity loss per inch of barrel and regardless if you have a fat chamber or over/under size barrel these factors remain unchanged. It will not give you an indication of anticipated velocity but it most certainly will give you an expected velocity loss per inch of barrel...........which as I recall was the OPs original question. Larger bores from say 35 cal and up are minimally affected by shortening barrels and many times lost velocity can be regained somewhat by going to a slightly faster powder, smaller calibers that are moderately to massively over bore are much more affected by shortening barrels and do not react well to faster burning powders.

Last time I checked "very minimal" still means a difference. So will vary very minimally from the same cartridge fired in different rifles. So this minimal changes to the internal ballistics from one rifle to the next will produce a similar minimal difference in velocity drop when a barrel is chopped by 25.4mm, say,...one rifle may drop 26.37fps per inch and another 25.78 fps/inch. Still a difference and not an exact number. Thanks for taking the time to help back up my quote with further data and examples to show how ER's are minimally different with same barrel length in different rifles], I was too tired at that time in the evening for a lot of mumbo jumbo on internal ballistics.


So back to the OP chosing between 20 and 23 in this caliber I'd say go with what balances and looks right, forget about 75-90 fps loss, that is minimal..