How does Barrel contour relates to precision

[Good Times]

Built a 6.5-06 AI on a 26" #1 Shilen barrel. .498 at the muzzle.
Built on a Remington 700 action with a Brown Precision stock and a kick eez
recoil pad.
Rifle weighs 6.6 pounds without optics or bases.

Built for hunting, not constant shooting. It's the first shot that counts.

Very pleased with how it turned out.
Have a similar rifle in 300 ackley with a #1 shilen 26" barrel that shoots a 200 grain accubond at 3150 fps and will shoot a 3 shot 1" group at 100 yards.

Rifle with Brown Precision stock and Leupold 3.5-10x40 Vari X III scope , Kick Eez pad and muzzle brake With Talley rings/bases weighs 7 lbs 8oz.

Outstanding lightweight backpack hunting rifle.

 

[Bart B]

I don't think any one barrel contour is any more accurate than another. As long as they're properly stress relieved after rifling then fit to a squared up receiver face, long, skinny ones will shoot just as accurate as short, stiff ones. For several dozen shots fired once every 10 to 20 seconds. They all walked shots to some amount in original factory condition as the barrel heated up.

I've had five Win 70 receivers's face squared up with the barrel tenon axis then fitted with a match barrel or shimmed .005" or so then the original factory barrel replaced. They all never walked shot impact as the barrel heated up. Others have noticed the same thing with other makes.

 

[engineer40]

I don't think any one barrel contour is any more accurate than another. As long as they're properly stress relieved after rifling then fit to a squared up receiver face, long, skinny ones will shoot just as accurate as short, stiff ones. For several dozen shots fired once every 10 to 20 seconds. They all walked shots to some amount in original factory condition as the barrel heated up.

I've had five Win 70 receivers's face squared up with the barrel tenon axis then fitted with a match barrel or shimmed .005" or so then the original factory barrel replaced. They all never walked shot impact as the barrel heated up. Others have noticed the same thing with other makes.

I agree with everything you stated above.

But do you agree if I were to state that a thicker stiffer barrel will shoot more different kinds of ammo accurately? Because the barrel harmonics are not playing as large of a role in the scenario with the thick barrel?

 

[Bart B]

. . .But do you agree if I were to state that a thicker stiffer barrel will shoot more different kinds of ammo accurately?

No.

Because the barrel harmonics are not playing as large of a role in the scenario with the thick barrel?

What role in what scenario?

At one range or all ranges?

 

[engineer40]

No.
What role in what scenario?

At one range or all ranges?

Sorry if I didn't communicate my thoughts clear enough last time. I agree with you that thin barrels can shoot very accurately... especially if you reload.

I'll give an example to illustrate what I was trying to say previously. Let's say we have 2 barrels that are both 26 inches. Barrel 1 is a bull barrel. Barrel 2 is a thin barrel. Both are created by the same barrel maker using the same rifling and stress relieving methods.

We pick 10 boxes of ammo from a range of manufacturers, different bullet weights, etc and then we shoot an equal amount through each barrel.

If we add up and then take an average of the group sizes; most of the time, do you think the thick barrel would have a better average? I lean towards the thinking of Yes.

The couple of thick barrels that I own, it just seems like they shoot a plethora of ammo better. Not just 1 kind that I found to work or just some reloads that I've worked up specifically for that rifle system.

I'm not anti-thin barrel. I have some that shoot terrific. It does seem to me though that accuracy is easier with a thick barrel. Maybe others have had different experiences though? Thanks.

 

[Bart B]

If we add up and then take an average of the group sizes; most of the time, do you think the thick barrel would have a better average? I lean towards the thinking of Yes.

No, I would not think the thick one would have a better average.

 

[engineer40]

No, I would not think the thick one would have a better average.

Hmmm, interesting...

My experience concurs with the example I gave. But I suppose differing opinions is part of the reason why accurate shooting is so intriguing and interesting.

Thanks for the dialog Bart.