Thread: Why shorten?

Originally Posted by Stocky

I dont understand how do you type if your blind?

Guess I’m into older stuff like this 1916 CG presented as a shooting prize in Sweden in 1947. No way would I shorten this, nor any of my other old ones.

Hi JOHN
Part of the design of long barrels on rifles was they were open sights thus a long barrel gives a better sighting radius .
add a scope or red dot , just have it as short as you wish . a shorter barrel dosent flex as much as a long skinny one
Cheers

Originally Posted by Ingrid 51

Guess I’m into older stuff like this 1916 CG presented as a shooting prize in Sweden in 1947. No way would I shorten this, nor any of my other old ones.Attachment 288891

I would never shorten a work of art like that, My Tikka is a lovely bit of engineering, but it's still just a tool. I cut 3" off just to help compensate for the length/weight of the 4" can

All my centre fire rifles are 22".

The shorter the barrel the louder and velocity suffers. Doc them then add length with a suppressors. Seems counter productive to me.

I wouldn't shorten them below 20" due to velocity reduction and increased noise. And you still have the recoil.

How many shots do you fire at deer/game a year? Twenty perhaps? Although not great, it's not going to cause a huge amount of hearing loss.
If your concerned, wear a pair of these. Not a high level of noise reduction but convenient and user friendly.

Life is full of compromises.

As I have learned more and my tastes have developed, I've ended up going with longer barrels and smaller cartridges, as I find it satisfying getting a lot out of a minimal amount of powder and I end up with something that's easy to suppress. Since most of my daytime hunting is in open country, length just isn't a problem until the rifle gets so front heavy that it doesn't want to stay pointing upright when slung. My last deer were shot with a 26" suppressed 284 which I find just fine to carry.

I have more recently started putting together some shorter rifles for nighttime work in and out of vehicles. But they are chambered in highly efficient little cartridges - mostly shooting subsonics. With the exception being a 16" 223AI.

A short barreled centerfire is all well and good, if all you need is a tool to do a job... But for you guys that shoot them without hearing protection, are you sure it's hearing safe??? Heck, my long barreled rifles probably still aren't. I'm in the tinnitus club and am trying not to upgrade to platinum membership - so earplugs for anything supersonic for me. You do NOT want to join too. I suspect a lot guys rocking 16" 308's and 17" 284's will be in later life... Along with their dogs.

Originally Posted by Jhon

A redundant question obviously. Or a comment posed as a question. Take your pick. Not aimed at anyone either.

The thing that has been bugging me forever it seems is what amounts to, in my unhumble opinion, a fetish, a fad, an obsession with "chopping" the barrel on a perfectly good firearm. Someone offers a classic BSA, a BRNO, or Winchester, a beautiful Sako, a Vixen, a Tikka 3xLite, a Savage 99, a CZ 537 Ebony Edition...and as I pounce in anticipation I read "barrel chopped to...". Sod me sideways. A rifle destroyed. And they're still asking top dollar for it. Like somehow chopping 2, 6, even 8 bloody inches off the poor thing somehow makes it worth more. Those are inches some of us would be pleased have, but I digress.

I understand folk wanting less weight. I understand fast pointing in bush. That's what a carbine is designed for, right? If you're in the bush any carbine length centre fire rifle on the market will do the biz, right? 30-30, 7.62x39, lever actions in 44-40, 45-70 45 colt, hell, even 357mag will do the job. And if you must chop something down for 50 metre fast shots in heavy cover why not a filthy old 303B battle axe? As to less weight, that's what gymns and barbells are for, correct? When men were...well...all that good stuff.

But no. We take a 22 to 24in barrel, open field, medium to long range rifle and destroy everything decent and good about it then try and pass the bloody thing on as somehow "improved". Why?

(Ducking 'n Diving)

good on ya for bringing it up mate but sadly you will not win

I recently bought this puppy, 1944 Parker Hale .303, I expect the bang is gonna be loud but I won't be shortening it or putting a can on.

Originally Posted by Ingrid 51

Guess I’m into older stuff like this 1916 CG presented as a shooting prize in Sweden in 1947. No way would I shorten this, nor any of my other old ones.Attachment 288891

Funny thing is ,Sweden shortened tens of thousands of those .

How many people are dialing scopes anyway? My problem with short barrels is performance and its got nothing to do with clicks on a scope. It's about the bullet does when it gets there. I want full velocity.
If you want to know what lowering your performance by chopping barrels does in the real world try shooting something out of a .30-30 that been chopped to 14 inches. Your better off hitting it with the gun.

Why you would want to muzzle (get it?) the abilities of a high performance round like the 270 baffles me. I have met people who have cut the barrels down to 20 inches on 7mm Rem Mags!

Ive always regarded it as a passing technology fad to do with suppressors. People who have short barrels and suppressors are often those who just like new gizmos. If I lived in the UK and only had access to a small property with whinging neighbours, I might have a suppressor (In fact, I do have a rifle suppressed that is used for exactly that) or are shooting over a dog, but otherwise I see no point to them. Even the reduced recoil doesnt hold much water for me.

And yeah, Jhons right, this fad has destroyed the value of so many good sporting rifles.

Originally Posted by AR7

Hi JOHN
Part of the design of long barrels on rifles was they were open sights thus a long barrel gives a better sighting radius .
add a scope or red dot , just have it as short as you wish . a shorter barrel dosent flex as much as a long skinny one
Cheers

Good point

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

good on ya for bringing it up mate but sadly you will not win

Hah, not about winning, all about conversation. Doing ok so far....

People doing what they want with their own private property... wild.

Originally Posted by Jhon

Hah, not about winning, all about conversation. Doing ok so far....

short has been done for awhile the old 742 woodsmaster came out in a 18 1/2 version and Remington made other carbines for what they call brush hunting - not many I would not shorten a mint Vixen or Forester would escape

I dont see any real benefits of cutting it down, other than keeping it the same length with a suppressor added, unless it serves its purpose (i.e pig hunting, or other close range shooting situations) you will always loose accuracy and/or range when cutting it down, if that tradeoff doesnt bother you for your situation then go ahead, just hate seeing it done to a valuable or rare rifle.
Even better is to shop around and look for a rifle designed with a short barrel from factory.
Take a look at a marlin model 70 for instance, they have quite a short barrel on those for a .22lr, the first one I saw I thought was cut down at first until I looked up the factory specs and discovered they are all able to be produced short due to their microgroove rifling. Those things are dead accurate too.

Originally Posted by John Duxbury

How many people are dialing scopes anyway? My problem with short barrels is performance and its got nothing to do with clicks on a scope. It's about the bullet does when it gets there. I want full velocity.
If you want to know what lowering your performance by chopping barrels does in the real world try shooting something out of a .30-30 that been chopped to 14 inches. Your better off hitting it with the gun.

Why you would want to muzzle (get it?) the abilities of a high performance round like the 270 baffles me. I have met people who have cut the barrels down to 20 inches on 7mm Rem Mags!

Ive always regarded it as a passing technology fad to do with suppressors. People who have short barrels and suppressors are often those who just like new gizmos. If I lived in the UK and only had access to a small property with whinging neighbours, I might have a suppressor (In fact, I do have a rifle suppressed that is used for exactly that) or are shooting over a dog, but otherwise I see no point to them. Even the reduced recoil doesnt hold much water for me.

And yeah, Jhons right, this fad has destroyed the value of so many good sporting rifles.

I don't see anything wrong with a rem mag shooting a 162 at 2950-3000fps which is what you get from a 20" one.

Sent from my CPH2531 using Tapatalk