Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles What caliber does best with short barrel?

So I am thinking about getting another rifle to be my truck gun at least all winter and spring while I am calving out heifers. Going to want cut barrel down to 16.5-18”, and will be using it on coyotes and hogs from up close to probably 400yds. Thinking of 223, 243, or 6.5 creedmoor and wondering which one is going to be affected the least with that barrel length? Thanks

Of those 3

223..

Get a AR-15, 1-8twist 18" with 77grain SMK, suppressed, Bushnell LRHS 3-12x44

Whichever make sure the muzzle is well out of the truck. Talk about loud. A suppressor would be nice if your not in an entirely rural area. All would work well but the smaller one is going to be quieter if all are at the same presser level, The 223 will be fine for deer and head shots on Hogs as well as the others. If deer are the primary target the 243 or Creed would be my choices. Heavy bullets in the 223 or others may not loose much velocity at all depending on load. I would start at 20 inches and see if that is good and then shorten in increments if needed as even the 223 will have a fair amount of muzzle flash and blast at 16" and the others more so. I can develop a flinch easily shooting the black guns the flash and the spring action in my ear is conducive to it for me.

Probably a 7-08 would be better than all those listed except a fast twist .223 with heavy bullets.

Maybe a 6.5 Grendel. It'd carry more than the .223 for the long shots.

Can't see the value in going less than 18" though. I'd get a shorter stock before I'd get a shorter barrel. Anything close to 13" LOP is plenty for me.

First off -- I don't have a prejudice toward/against any of the cartridges you mention.

Secondly - hogs out to 400 yds, I'd think you'd need punch and bigger holes.

Thirdly - Denton or Mathman etc. could explain this better than I. The larger the bore (caliber) the less velocity (speed) is lost by shorter barrel length.
Example of the principle - I had a 20" bll 308 W, yet I was able to get the same velocity w/ 150 gr bullets AS with 22"ers.

Bore Capacity can only be increased so much by added bll length >> to a point. In converse, a larger bore is less susceptible to velocity loss in
shorter lengths. HELP Denton <grin>

So, if you follow me, the 6.5 or even 7-08 will fair well in shorter barrel lengths.

Good Luck

Jerry

Are you killing hogs to eat or trying to eradicate them? If you don't care if they run off get the .223, if you're trying for DRT buy a .308. Both cartridges work very well in short barrels.

Me I'd just buy a Ruger American Ranch or M4-orgery in .223/5.56 and Load up some TTSX or CEB Raptors and call it a day.

6.5 Grendel Would Be my first choice; Think Howa or CZ527. Surprised no one has mentioned the 7.62x39 & 300 Black out. CZ 527 American would be my 1st choice in any of the calibers encouraged here.

If you are able to put a suppressor on the rifle then the 300 BLK may be your preferred choice for the job at hand. If you are not suppressing the firearm then a longer barrel should get serious consideration IMHO.

If 400 yards is likely to come into play much then I would go back to the 6.5 Grendel. http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthread.php?15423-Howa-hb-threaded-grendel

Ruger GSR.

6.5 CM RAR Predator, lopped to 19"

The 223 of those listed, I'd have to go 308 Winchester in a good bolt gun and work up an accurate load with 165/168 gr bullets to match a BDC reticle and keep a good range finder in the cab.

Not on your list (of course), but the first thing that came to my mind was the 7-08. The Grendel might do, but the notion of my pretty little 527 bouncing around in a gritty old truck makes me weep. Maybe the Howa? Not going to find Grendel ammo at the Western Auto either, if that's a consideration.

Not sure about the .223 at 400 as I'm still waiting for my first shot at a deer with mine, but ARs now officially leave me cold, having tried and failed to like them. You may be different. A suppressor would be nice, but apparently it's a looong wait for approval. This may be the only area in which I'm envious of the Brits for whom they're pretty much standard kit.

Those ain't hog cartridges.

I would prefer the 243 Win (awesome field cartridge), but would rather have 20" length barrel. All cartridges will perform on 18", 16.5" will work but may not feel as balanced as 18" or 20". 6.5 CM will suffer most velocity loss due to longer projectiles and greater bearing surface, which yields greater friction (there's a reason Hornady introduced the cartridge with a 26-inch barrel in their marketing), but all 6.5mm have this problem regardless of barrel length. It is one of a few reasons the 264 Win with a 24" barrel barely yields 270 Win velocities. This is not anything worth losing sleep over however. While the cartridges you mentioned will suffer a lower expansion ratio than typical due to shorter barrel length their powder capacities are not substantial enough to be of any real concern. Regarding expansion ratio (ratio of volume of powder in chambers [case volume plus bore volume in grains of water] to the volume of case powder in grains of water). As most already know its the reason most 3.4" cartridges (6mm-06, 240 Wby, 25-06 and magnums are on 24" barrels minimum, but several should be using 26" barrels and greater if looking for maximum expansion ratios and velocity/performance.

I already have a gun that does what you’re wanting, but it’s a 6.8SPC AR w/16” barrel, built light and simple and running accubonds. The short barrel doesn’t kill the SPC like it often does most 6.5s and smaller bores. It still holds onto enough velocity to work at 400, easily. Collapsible stock and 2-point, and I can ride or drive with it on me or on the dash.

No doubt without looking, overbore cartridges like the .243 have the most to lose.

But here's some tests anyway. The Creed fared much better than I would've thought. The heavier/longer 142 SMK only lost 101fps going from 27 to 18 inches. Case design?

https://rifleshooter.com/2016/04/243-winchester-effect-of-barrel-length-on-velocity/

https://rifleshooter.com/2016/02/6-...ngth-on-velocity-cutting-up-a-creedmoor/
The velocity figures on the Creed look low across the board though. Maybe tainted by powder selection?

You want either a 6.5 Grendel in a Howa Mini HBAR version, or

the Ruger American Predator 308 in 18" threaded.

......................................I will agree here and would go with at least a 6.5 mm with better bullet BCs and for reduced wind drifts at longer ranges. No personal experience with any shorty tubed 6.5s, but have considerable experience with my short barreled 300 WSM Ruger Frontier. Using many identical hand loads with varying powders, bullet weights and brands, it lost on average 4.5% in velocity during side by side chrony test comparisons with two 24" barreled 300 WSMs. Based on several articles I have read, 16.5" barreled 7/08 and 308s should give the same results. A 4.5% loss in velocity from a barrel that is 7.5" or 31% shorter than a 24" tube is excellent...

If the same above results can be gotten from a 6.5 mm, where the loss is minimal at say 5% on average or less (assuming you use a 16.5" barrel length) then imo, a short 'n handy 6.5 mm would make an outstanding choice followed up by the 7/08.

In theory the bigger bore size burning similar powder charges will lose less speed so the 6.5 should lose a LITTLE less speed in a shorter barrel. But it ain't enough to worry about. I've compared 308 and 3006 with barrels ranging from 18"-24". Chopping 4" from a 3006 will cost you around 100 fps. Chop the same 4" from a 308 and you lose about 75-80 fps. Yea, the 308 is more efficient, but the 3006 starts 100-150 fps faster. It is still faster with the 4" shorter barrel.

I'd shoot hogs, deer or Coyote with a 223 out to 200ish, Coyote much farther. If you're shooting hogs or deer at 400+ I'd go bigger, and I really like the 6.5 best of those 3. The 243 just isn't enough jump over 223. I'd not let barrel length effect my decision.

.338 federal

.350 Rem Mag