"Secret" barrel length

cohunt

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2016
Messages
5,211
Location
Colorado Springs, CO
So has anyone had an exceptionally accurate rifle and then chopped the barrel down to 21 3/4" to see what happened to the accuracy?

The Houston warehouse secrets say you "must" use 21 3/4" barrel for optimal accuracy.......is this really the "secret length"?

I've seen some pretty darn accurate rifles that weren't 21.75"--- could they print better groups?

I bought a26" 300wsm to cut down and thread for suppressed hunting--- I was originally gonna go for 22" but why not 1/4" less just to try----- but it's pretty accurate at 26" and I hate to ruin a good thing ( never should have shot it before I chopped it cause now I'm doubting if I should go for it)

Thoughts on the "secret barrel length" from those who have tried it .....?
 
Last edited:
You and I read the article, so there's nothing secret about it.
Profile also has a say in that, and the bullet design, seat position plus powder load have the greatest effects.
I have a load of 125 PSPs for my daughter's 26" Savage 308 with a varmint profile, and it's close to a one hole shooter, with the OD of five shots fitting under a dime.
 
They produced some pretty astonishing results in that warehouse (5 shot groups of .025" @ 100y) --- but they were using small caliber (22) cartridges too

Virgil said the most important thing he learned there was that specific length was the key to it all
 
Has anyone here on lrh ever owned a rifle with a 21.75" barrel?

Could you add a brake? That might screw up the "secret" harmonics length, right? ...if a brake added 1.5" would you need a 20.25" barrel? Or does the unrifled length of a brake change the harmonics?
 
Those guys were short range benchrest guys and almost none of that carries over to long range. One of the most notable differences is in long range you have to balance ultimate accuracy with ballistics.
So you are saying that .025" 5 shot group at 100 yards goes to shiznet at 800+ yards? Didn't litz prove that a small group size at 100 equates to a small group size at distance ? Or al least no one ever disproved him any way
 
Top