Reduce barrel from 25" to 20" in .243 - Bad idea ???

[Mr_Logic 5]

I think you might have missed the point here. You obviously need good shooting skills in both target and field applications. The key point is that in the field you:

 

1. Often have to carry a rifle for some considerable time

2. Sometimes make long standing shots

3. Generally do not fire many rounds in quick succession.

 

For range-based target work you:

 

1. Generally fire prone

2. Never make standing shots (obviously excepting gallery etc - I'm talking precision rifle)

3. Quite often fire many rounds in a relatively short space of time.

 

All of this means that, for range work, you want a heavy barrel, and generally you want a flagpole too, because you get better velocity. For field work, you still need accuracy, but you also need a comfortable weight, good handling and balance. These things do matter for range-based target work, but much much less.

 

That's why light barrels exist on field tools, and it's why you'd have a longer barrel cut - so it's comfy in the field with minimal trade off. On a range, that trade off changes ballistics and makes you less competitive, so it's a bad idea. But so long as you hit them in the vitals with the right bullet, animals don't care if you're hitting their X ring or their 10 ring - they still die just fine.

[cyclonebri1 8]

I think you might have missed the point here. You obviously need good shooting skills in both target and field applications. The key point is that in the field you:

 

1. Often have to carry a rifle for some considerable time

2. Sometimes make long standing shots

3. Generally do not fire many rounds in quick succession.

 

For range-based target work you:

 

1. Generally fire prone

2. Never make standing shots (obviously excepting gallery etc - I'm talking precision rifle)

3. Quite often fire many rounds in a relatively short space of time.

 

All of this means that, for range work, you want a heavy barrel, and generally you want a flagpole too, because you get better velocity. For field work, you still need accuracy, but you also need a comfortable weight, good handling and balance. These things do matter for range-based target work, but much much less.

 

That's why light barrels exist on field tools, and it's why you'd have a longer barrel cut - so it's comfy in the field with minimal trade off. On a range, that trade off changes ballistics and makes you less competitive, so it's a bad idea. But so long as you hit them in the vitals with the right bullet, animals don't care if you're hitting their X ring or their 10 ring - they still die just fine.

 

 

Don't worry mate I understand perfectly what you and D are saying, not missed the point at all, but my style of shooting is almost invariably done prone, resting on dry stone walls or sat, (which is why I bought the tallest bipod I could find). More a sniping style than free range shooting, due to me being a little less mobile than some.

 

It's each to his own as I said, we'd all shoot the same gun if it wasn't. As it happens my 2 rimmys are a 20" target s/s Ruger in 22, and a 24/25" s/s Savage heavy barrelled jobby in hmr.

 

Good Hunting

[Mr_Logic 5]

Almost all my shots are off a bipod too, it's the carrying of said rifle that makes me have a short barrel or light barrel variant for field use...

[Deker 3,478]

I think you might have missed the point here. You obviously need good shooting skills in both target and field applications. The key point is that in the field you:

 

1. Often have to carry a rifle for some considerable time

2. Sometimes make long standing shots

3. Generally do not fire many rounds in quick succession.

 

For range-based target work you:

 

1. Generally fire prone

2. Never make standing shots (obviously excepting gallery etc - I'm talking precision rifle)

3. Quite often fire many rounds in a relatively short space of time.

 

All of this means that, for range work, you want a heavy barrel, and generally you want a flagpole too, because you get better velocity. For field work, you still need accuracy, but you also need a comfortable weight, good handling and balance. These things do matter for range-based target work, but much much less.

 

That's why light barrels exist on field tools, and it's why you'd have a longer barrel cut - so it's comfy in the field with minimal trade off. On a range, that trade off changes ballistics and makes you less competitive, so it's a bad idea. But so long as you hit them in the vitals with the right bullet, animals don't care if you're hitting their X ring or their 10 ring - they still die just fine.

 

 

Don't worry mate I understand perfectly what you and D are saying, not missed the point at all, but my style of shooting is almost invariably done prone, resting on dry stone walls or sat, (which is why I bought the tallest bipod I could find). More a sniping style than free range shooting, due to me being a little less mobile than some.

 

It's each to his own as I said, we'd all shoot the same gun if it wasn't. As it happens my 2 rimmys are a 20" target s/s Ruger in 22, and a 24/25" s/s Savage heavy barrelled jobby in hmr.

 

Good Hunting

 

 

In the field I use the bipod as often as possible, but my type of hunting often has me out walking for hours, sometimes through the woodlands where flagpoles with a moderator on the end keep getting caught in the trees and old boys like me get worn out carrying them.

 

I cannot deal with heavy or long barrels in these circumstances and there is no need for them either, when rarely more than a handful of shots are fired, and not often over 200 yards!

 

If a persons hunting involves them waiting in ambush then perhaps heavier and/or longer barrels may be justified or even preferred.

 

But I still struggle with this devaluing a rifle by cutting the barrel, the opposite has been the case in my experience!