Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Custom Rifles & Wildcats Hey Charlie, what are your guidelines for barrel contours, lenth, and for what cartriages ?

Hi Charlie. I understand after many years of building custom rifles for satisfied customers, you have settled on certain standards/guidelines as to barrel lenth and contour. Would you share these with us, and the reasons why you make rifles to these specifications ? I'm interested in your experiences. E

Eremicus
<br> Sorry for the late response. Next time, rattle my chain a little.
<br>The guidelines that I use came about by way of trail and error and from some experiences of others who were doing this long before me. Guidelines are as follows:
<br>#1 or #2 contour, 21 inches max
<br>#3 contour, 22 inches max
<br>#4 contour , 24 inches max
<br>#5 contour, 26 inches max
<br>#6 and larger 28 inches to 30 inches.
<br>I know this will be cussed and discussed, so I will add a few of my own thoughts.
<br>Longer barrel lengths than what I have listed will shoot. It is usually easier to make the shorter barrel shoot. A person can look at that in one of two ways:#1...Charlie Sisk is too lazy or cheap to spend the time needed to develope loads using the longer barrel. #2 If it is easier for me to make the rifle shoot well with the shorter barrel, it will probably be easier for the customer also. Probably will shoot factory ammo a lot better.
<br>Folks on occasion will ask for a longer barrel and I give in. John Barsness and Rick Bin come to mind. The agreement was that if the rifle didnt shoot well, the barrel was cut to the proper length. The problem is I cant do this for everyone. If I tell a customer the longer barrel may not shoot well, then the first thing I hear is "well old so-and-so down at Joe's shop says he can make that length shoot. You dont know what you are doing or you could make it shoot too." Well I just cant go there. I need to make every rifle that comes from my shop shoot with little fuss. Folks can soon get over a inch or so less barrel but they never forget when they cant get any good groups. One thing is for sure and certain: no amount of careful maching can add stiffness to a barrel. All other things being equal, a stiffer barrel will shoot more accurately than one that is less stiff. Deflection is a better term when talking about barrels. Barrels aren't stiff like most folks think: they flex like wings on an airplane. The important thing is to get the deflection the same every time.
<br>Couple more thoughts:
<br>I wont use a barrel\caliber combination with less than .150 wall thickness at the muzzle. Yes folks do it all the time and yes sometimes barrels do split. There isnt enough money in this business for me to worry about someone getting hurt or some kind of law suit.
<br>I wont use a muzzle brake with less than .100 wall thickness. I have tried making them smaller and I blew several right off the end of the barrel.I tried to make them from aluminum too....save some weight....what a stupid idea....one of many for me....blew enough off that I could predict fairly close where they would land.....
<br>Dan Lilja is a very experinced barrel maker, maybe one of the best. There is some good information on his site about barrel stiffness and deflection.
<br>Look at Kreiger's site. Those guys are no dummies. They are probably just as sharp as Dan Lilja. Look at their barrel contours, rather look at the ones they wont make. Yes they make the Weatherby fluted barrels but Weatherby accepts the liability for them. Stainless and cold weather dont go well together.
<br>Opinions about this will vary, I am just relaying my experineces. You mileage may vary.
<br>Charlie

I for one really appreciate you taking the time to lay it out in such a candid way for us to understand, you and Ken have really added to the campfire, thanks to you, Ken and obviously others here such as Mule Deer, we all get a better idea of what to do and what not to do.
<br>thanks to all for your time.
<br>Bill

Charlie,
<br> I like your way of thinking. I was taught to always try to keep the weight in the barrel when spec'ing a rifle, then shave weight elsewhere if desired. Was also taught a stiff stock is a great asset to a stiff barrel. Thanks for sharing, MtnHtr

Thanks Charlie. I've known for sometime of the relationship between barrel lenth, contour, and stiffness. What I didn't know is how fussy/touchy the lighter barrels are, or to what degree.
<br> I've got a Light Mtn contour Pac nor on my .25-284. It shoots OK, but nothing to write home about, with the Barnes X. It only shoots one load under .5 MOA. And that one doesn't push the bullet any faster than a .257 Roberts would. However I get .8-.9 MOA with the 100 gr. XLC's and the 75 gr. X @ 3340 fps. and 3550 fps. respectively. That's all I need. I took a serious gamble with that rifle. But, it worked. As you've indicated, I'm willing to do the work to find such a load - others aren't.
<br> So now I have some more food for thought and design considerations. Another good point is the idea of not saving weight in the barrel, but elsewhere first. The more I shoot the "muzzle heavy" rifles, the better I like them. E

this be true, especially in the field. i like a rifle with hang-time. need all the help i can get away from the bench and sandbags.

I concour with a beefy barrel. The pencil thin barrels may be just as accurate but I can't hold them as steady.
<br>
<br>Thanks to Charlie for sharing his information. I thought it an interesting coincedence that all my rifles save one conform to your legnth / contour recommendations. The one exception is a 24 inch 220 Swift # 3 contour but it's a hummer. I arrived there because that is the way I like the rifle to ballance. I had no knowledge that barrel harmonics could be better within those guidelines.

One thing I know for sure. There is no way I'm sending my rifle to a guy who has made more rifles in a month than I'll ever own, and then discard the recommendations he's gotten over long trial and experimentation (Charlie runs a LOT of experiments, as we all know). If he mitches and bones much at all about what I'm asking for, I have a pretty good idea that I'm acting the dude.
<br>
<br>I cannot agree more with his statement that you'll forgive and forget an inch of barrel or a bigger contour than you envisioned much faster than you will a rifle that won't shoot!!! Especially when you heft the balance on one of Charlie's rigs ... just ask Eremicus. He did a double-take on my 23" #3 Shilen (which is already an inch longer than Charlie likes) on the first day of our desert hunt, and was talking about building a rifle with similar specs by the last day. It's a standard weight .30-06 AI (just what I wanted), but I used a very light McMillan Kevlar Special Mountain Hunter stock (1 lb 7 oz.) and happily shifted the weight to the barrel. Overall weight is the same, but the balance point was shifted forward, truly just in front of the recoil lug, and all the weight is in the front hand. It's a beaut!
<br>
<br>That rifle shot like a bug from day one. The Weatherby has been even better, if that's possible, and it's been shooting mostly XLC's. I can't wait to see what it will do with match-grade bullets, Sierras, maybe even Ballistic Tips (for kicks). I'd like to see Swift make a .257 Scirocco!!
<br>
<br>I, for one, am through arguing. Charlie knows his stuff, and no mistaking it (as if I had to be the one to make that pronouncement! .
<br>
<br>Rick

Charlie, sorry to be so late on this thread, I'm a pretty occasional user of this forum. Still, your recommendations about barrel contours was *exactly* what I have been looking for. So with a bit of luck, maybe you might spot my question:

Only problem that I have with your recommendations (e.g. Contours #1 & #2 max 21"), is that all barrel makers seem to specify their own contours. So a Shilen #2 is not the same as a Krieger #2 is not the same as a Pac-Nor #2 (you get the drift <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />). So the contours you were citing, which contours were they?

OK, I'll just be specific - no reason to beat about the bush: would you use a Krieger #2 for a 22" barrel in .270 Win?? (Krieger Contours)

Thanks a bunch for your time in advance. - mike

mho,

If you read the whole post that Mr. Sisk composed you will see that he states that he requires at a minimum 0.150" wall thickness at the muzzle. He doesn't recomend any thinner and he states he will not build them any thinner. So I reckon to answer your question, look at the different barrel maker's diameters at the muzzle, if the bullet diameter plus 0.300" is less than the muzzle diameter it is a safe bet.

Good Day

Mike
If you went to 21 inches, A Kreiger would be about .575 which is about the min. Kreiger will only make chrome moly in this small of a contour. I think this would shoot ok, but if it didnt a contact point in the foreend would probably do the trick. I guess for a straight answer, yes I would build a rifle like this. Ought to make a dandy deer/sheep rifle.
Charlie

I have rifle which started out as a Sisk barreled action and semi finished stock. Not paying too much attention to barrel and contour when I got into the project it was very pleasant surprise to see how well this rifle held and shot off hand when it was finished. The balance point of the rifle, scoped, (it has a 24" #4 contour barrelin .30/06) is just a head of the trigger guard. There is no tendency for the muzzle to wander.

After this project, I may have to have another as the balance is worth the extra weight inherant in the barrel length/contour.

I have no argument at all with the recommendations. It's just that I like a rifle with light ends for hunting. For target rifles of course it's the opposite.

The wall thickness on a M 70 Featherweight in 30/06 is .130". Millions of these rifles have been made and they shoot very well.

The wall thickness on a Featherweight .358 Win is about .110" in both the M 70 and M 99 Savage. These barrels are kind of thin for accuracy.

Hi all,

Like most here I tend to favor a slightly muzzle-heavy balance to my rifles. I have a custom 7 mag built off a SUCKS 700 action with a High Tech (ie. light) stock. It has a fluted 26" Lilja #5 contour and the balance is PERFECT for me. 8 pounds with the scope on it.

The 300WSM I'm having built now is going to have 22" tube. To keep the balance the same, I went with a #6 fluted barrel. As near as I can tell, the weight of the barrel and the balance should be close to identical.

The above guys are right. Save the weight in the stock and the action, not the tube. Just MHO. YMMV

Avagadro, yes I did notice that measurement - and did the math. I was just not sure what Charlie originally meant with his .150 minimum wall thickness - was this a safety or an accuracy issue?

Charlie, thanks for taking the time to respond. As I read the Krieger contour chart (click for Krieger Contours), the #2 contour would be .600 at 24", which probably means .600+ at 22". I suppose some of the confusion comes from Krieger offering a contour #0 as well - pretty much matching the #1 contour of other barrel makers. In any event, this only points in the same direction as your reply, so I guess I should not be complaining <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> Again, thanks a bunch for sharing your experience.

- mike

Amazing what you learn by listening to an expereinced gunsmith. My gunsmith recommended a #5 contour douglas for my .280 when i specified a 25" barrel. While it may not be a featherweight, the balance is excellent!

If someone thinks a 25" barreled 280 has excellent balance then they are satisfied. This pattern is from pre WW11 when the beloved Col. Whelan touted the super accurate 24" barreled Springfield (03) pattern.

Such rifles are fine for informal target shooting but they are wearing to carry or even bring to arms after a long day.

When the M -70 Featherweight came out in 1955 that was the end of that theory.