18 vs 24" barrel UPDATE: Got it!

I ordered mags from site sponsor irunguns this morning. Supposedly in stock in Canada, already have my shipping notice and tracking number. There is a thread on their forum about it.
 
In the hands of most shooters you wont see a real big difference between the 18" and 24" until you start pushing out past 600. When I started shooting .308's it was with a 24" barrel. I then switched to a 20" barrel and didn't notice a difference. Won more matches with a 20" barrel then any others with some distances out to 1000. I have since gone all the way down to 16". Velocity is still about 2550 with a Lapua 170gr Lockbase. The rifle is extremely handy, but there is a significant rise in muzzle blast to contend with. 18" would be a good compromise.
 
Had a 19" 308. Used it for hunter class at Burns Lake 1000 yard shoot. It was capable of three shot groups of 7" to 9" at 1000 yards. Rules at the time required using factory ammo. I used Hornady 155 gr match ammo. Have no idea what velocity was but scope setting was 48" high at 100 yds to reach 1000. It was a great little carbine.
 
Here is what you should be considering...

24" barrel should be getting about 2650fps with 175gr SMK's, drop at 500 would be 11.7 MOA , 4.1 MOA of wind with 10mph full value

18" barrel should be getting about 2500fps with 175 SMK's, drop at 500 would be 13.4 MOA , 4.4 MOA of wind with 10mph full value

Is the extra 9" of drop and 2" of wind worth the added mobility of the shorter barrel? Only you can decide this.
 
Last edited:
guntech said:
It isn't accuracy you lose (unless you are using iron sights) ... it's velocity you lose when you shorten 6 inches... and it varies on cartridge.
Click to expand...

I've been looking at a cartridge that is commonly found in Center Contender pistols and in trying to extrapolate the vel to a longer barrel I've come to the conclusion that it can vary wildly. The often quoted rule of 25 fps per inch is just ballpark so to speak. As guntec so clearly stated all you really loose is fps, and as stated several times, how important that is to you is the issue. If I'm not mistaken you said the rifle is available in two barrel lengths so the problems encountered cutting it down are moot...nice to know though if you were considering it. The loss of velocity can be mitigated somewhat if you handload through bullet and powder combinations.

It sounds like you really want the short barrel and I think it's safe to say it will meet your needs...you'll be able to shoot it long if you choose, it'll just be more work and you won't likely win any F Class matches with it.

Almost forgot the noise! Ganderite brought up something that doesn't get mentioned often and it could reduce the enjoyment of the rifle if you plan on shooting it a lot. My AR has a 16" barrel and I was stunned to see how loud it is. Any more blast and shooting it would be more like work than fun.

If it was me? 24" hands down, the extra length and weight is no major chore to deal with. The barrel harmonics in the short barrel may be easier to load for but .308 isn't know as being anything but forgiving. The extra vel only helps.
 
Last edited:
Are there brakes/flash hiders that can direct the noise away from the shooter at all? The rifle is heavy and doesn't need much in the way of recoil reduction.
 
Roddy said:
Are there brakes/flash hiders that can direct the noise away from the shooter at all? The rifle is heavy and doesn't need much in the way of recoil reduction.
Click to expand...
The only thing you can add to your rifle to reduce noise is a suppressor. Brakes increase noise by a substantial amount. Thanks to our government being the firearm experts that they are, suppressors are illegal.
 
Roddy said:
Are there brakes/flash hiders that can direct the noise away from the shooter at all? The rifle is heavy and doesn't need much in the way of recoil reduction.
Click to expand...

Yes there are. They are often a 2 piece system. The internal portion being the brake and the external being a noise deflection shroud that redirects the blast from the shooter and sides, back towards the front. Noise level will have the same dB rating but you the shooter wont get as much blast.
 
Well thank you everyone for the replies. It is very much appreciated. Once again this site is going to cost me a ton of money. :p
 
Last edited:
In my experience, shorter barrel, stiffer barrel. They tend to be more accurate. I find 20'' tends to be the perfect balance between velocity, durability. If I was not hunting with it, and the rifle was purely a range toy id go for a 24'' - 26'' to get the full potential from the cartridge.

If the rifle length is an issue (i.e.. hunting situations) id look into a folding stock before Id go below 20''. Just my two cents.
 
Well maybe I can get a 24" as they are much easier to find and then have it cut later and rethreaded if I want it shorter. I would like to be able to handle these guns a bit more first.
 
So I ordered the 18" then thought about it ad decided that going against the consensus of CGN was a bad idea and had it changed to a 24" (thanks P&D, you guys were very helpful and patient).

I put a Vortex PST 4-16x50 FFP MRAD scope on it with Burris Zee rings to give it some incline. I am not sure about the scope and am kind of wishing I got the 6-24x with EBR2 reticle. I worry about not having enough magnification power and I like the idea of the Christmas tree type reticle.

LRJvAG.jpg


Anyways I am new to precision shooting and not the best shot. I started out with Norinco ammo at 40 yards to zero and got about 2" groups. I switched to Federal 150gr FMJ and the groups went down to about an inch. Finally at 40 yards I tried Hornady Steel Match 155gr. I got three shots in one ragged hole.

qzLKIF.jpg


Today I got out to 100 meters and tried again. The wind was about 10mph at 90 degrees to me so I figured I would have to hold an inch left. I have a Caldwell support bag with crushed walnut shell in it that I was using as a rear bag that did not work very well. It has no height adjustment. I am looking to make something with bean bag chair filling or something.

Anyways from prone I managed this with two consecutive shots at 100 meters in the wind.

sPNjbZ.jpg


Not too bad but mosty luck I think.

Anyways I'm pretty happy with the rifle. I am not too sure about my scope and my Harris bipod won't sit straight as the bottom of the forend is flat and is made for a
convex forend.

Any thoughts on 4-16x versus 6-24x scopes or bipod problems?
 
At the ranges you are talking about hunting at you will not use any thing higher then 16 power on the 6-24. I have the 6-24 on my rig and usually have it at 6 power while hunting because it is to easy to loose your target at a higher mag. Only time I use 24 power is for paper targets. This all being said you can always turn a 24 power scope down to 16.
 
Well I have heard that on the 6-24x PST tje "eye box" is finicky at 6x. To me this means you have more scope shadow and it would be slower to get off a quick shot. I find the 4-16 more finicky at 16x in terms of shadow and poorer image quaility so I was hoping a higher powered scope would allow me to use 16x without pushing the limits of the optic to get a better image at that magnification. I am not sure if it works like that but that was my thinking. I also really like the idea of the EBR-2 reticle for holds.
 
Roddy said:
Well I have heard that on the 6-24x PST tje "eye box" is finicky at 6x. To me this means you have more scope shadow and it would be slower to get off a quick shot. I find the 4-16 more finicky at 16x in terms of shadow and poorer image quaility so I was hoping a higher powered scope would allow me to use 16x without pushing the limits of the optic to get a better image at that magnification. I am not sure if it works like that but that was my thinking. I also really like the idea of the EBR-2 reticle for holds.
Click to expand...
I would have to disagree about it being slow to get on with 6 power. This also comes down to proper stock setup so you can have consistant eye relief and this could take some practice for proper cheek weld. The EBR-2 is nice and I plan to switch to it as well.
 
Thanks for the advice everyone. I will try making a sand filled bag. I hope be able to beat the 0.75" @ 100 yards challenge.

Got the bipod sorted out with some Loc Tite and tape. I am still debating about trading in the scope. I am not sure about the jump to 6-24x but I am not entirely comfortable with my 4-16x.
 
6VS5A2.jpg


I am thinking of getting one of these stocks for it but they are almost $2000. Sig doesn't make the ten round mags or the aluminum chassis anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom