I have been putting together the pieces to build a woods rifle in .358 Winchester. So far, I am building it on a Savage action and have found a Leupold M8 4X33 for a scope. The next step is figuring out a barrel length and twist rate (I plan to load bullets in the 180 and 225gr range).

I was originally going to go with a 22 inch barrel with a 1:14 twist. However, after doing a few internet searches, I have found many people suggest a 1:12 twist, and 20 inches, or even a 19 inch barrel as being perfect for then .358. I like the idea of a 19 inch barrel for the compactness but will it take too much away from the velocity?

Also, I plan to purchase the barrel either from PAC-NOR or ER Shaw. I know of PAC-NOR's reputation but not of Shaw's. Since this is going on a short range hunting rifle, will the Shaw barrel be a good choice? Considering the application and it is 1/3 the cost of the PAC.

Thx

Barrel length should fit your preference, it won't make a lot of difference in performance. I like my 22" barrel on a .358, YMMV. Twist relates to your vision. Any of the twist rates you mention will work on bullets in the weight class you mention, my .358 has a 16" twist and handles them all with aplomb, including 250 gr Hornady SP-ILs. A fair number of folks find the 250 grain bullets will not stabilize in 16" twist...dunno if they speak to spitzer or round nose designs in that regard. If you are certain you will never use a 250 grain bullet it won't matter, pick what you want. If perchance you think that a day may come when you do use them....well, you might want to hedge your bets. I'd go with the 14" twist regardless and not worry. I don't think it would hurt you to use a 12" twist either but I doubt it necessary. You're not going to be plinkin' prairie dogs at 500 yards with this gun.....

I have had the best luck with a 14" twist. The 16" on my 350 Rem Mag and a Norma will stabalize even 300 grain bullets but the 14" on an old 358 I had and a current Norma gave fantastic accuracy with all bullets. If you want to play with lighter bullets the 12 twist is more than you need.

DigitalDan;
You bring up a question I have had for quite a while, and I haven't gotten it answered by lurking or looking: Why wouldn't one just go with the 12-inch twist if it alone for sure stabilizes all the bullet weights you MAY ever use in the 358?
I had mine barreled with a PAC-NOR with a 12-inch twist so I could have the flexibility to shoot 180's to 250's. So far all I have shot is 200gr factory loads, and 225gr NP's. Both group under an inch at 100 yards, and I think the 250 should do the same...am I missing something in my logic? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/help.gif" alt="" />

BB, the question is not so much what one should/would do, but what is necessary. Fella said he wanted to shoot 180-225 grain bullets. 1:16 will do that. He was lookin' at 1:12 and 1:14 barrels...my logic being that a 12" twist won't hurt him, a 14" will do the job(meaning that other factors such as cost may hold sway) whereas a 16" might not IF he ever wanted to go for the longer/heavier bullets. As I mentioned above, my 16" twist works on 250 Hornadys, others don't. I know mine will not stabilize the old 300 gr. Barnes Original. There are several ways to look at the matter, I'm certain that none are totally right or wrong. For general application it behooves us to give the rifle as much flexibility as practical, ergo, a barrel of suitable accuracy with the broadest array of bullets practical. For target and long range work if makes sense to customize the twist for the bullet because a) undertwisting will shoot poorly, and b) overtwisting induces unnecessary stress and deformation of the bullet and thus derogates accuracy...a little. The .358 is not a cartridge needing a lot of consideration on option B. There's nothing wrong with your 12" twist, or my 16" either...they both work about the same on paper.

Barrel makers don't always know what their barrels will be used for unless they get a specific build order spec'ing twist etc. Put yourself in their boots the day you do a run of .358" barrels. They could be used for anything from the .35 Remington to the .358 STA...big range of preformance, no? Economics is one issue they must consider..their barrels gotta sell or they'd be lookin' for a new job. So, what you goin' to do? Make fast twist barrels for bullets not likely to be used, or slow twists that limit customer options? Probably you'll cut down the middle and call it good enough, right? Coho spec'd his bullets in the first post, reasons don't matter...but if he were building a .358...Norma or STA I might wonder if a 12" twist wouldn't cause the 180 grain bullets to fly apart at the muzzle due to centrifugal forces, that being a common ailment of high velocity quick twist varmint rifles using light weight thin skinned bullets.

That would be my .02 worth on the subject of twists and compromise...more or less. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Thanks for the replies. I'll take the fence and go with the 1:14.

Thx

I did a lot of research and soul searching for the right twist when I built my 35-284. I settled on the 14" feeling it was sort of the middle ground and also that I would be shooting mostly 225 gr bullets. It worked well for me and the gun will put Sierra and Noslers into 3/4" groups at 100 yards all day long. I haven't tried too many 250 gr bullets, but the ones I did use seemd to shoot about the same. Very accurate gun in my opinion.

When I had MRC build my 358 I had them give me a 22" barrel using a 1/14 twist. I settled on this after doing a lot of research and their recommendations. I have not been disappointed.

Sound's like you have a twist down...I'd like to address barrel length.
My .358 is a Sako carbine with the 20 inch tube and I find it just a hair muzzle light. That make's it lightning fast to point, but a little hard to hold still on target.
I'd suggest going no shorter that 22" or even 23 / 24". Tell your smith that you want to try the rifle while still in the white. Play with it and ask yourself about balance. I like a rifle to be just barely muzzle heavy. I shoot best that way.
Balance and egronomics are the key to a perfectly fit rifle. Your smith can easily cut and crown if you'd like it shorter. But he can't add it back on. I think that going less than 20 would be a mistake. It won't balance as well and will be noisier, slower. FWIW.

DD;
Interesting info, and easy to understand. Thanks a bunch.
BB

I hadn't thought about that! I'll get a 24 and work my way back (if needed). I plan to use this setup for Coastal Elk.

Thx

DD,

Not to be disagreable, but I have a .357 Mag Handi rifle with an 18 3/4" twist that I shoot 250 gr bullets with. The velocity is a little over 1200 fps and yet it shoots 1" groups at 100 yards.



My point is, what is supposed to be verboten, may not always be so.

Here's what the 250's look like when loaded in .357 Mag brass and .360 DW brass.

Coho

My Browning BLR in .358 win has a one in 12" rate and shoots 200 and 225gr bullets to MOA or better. I would say use the 1 in 12" even though the 1 in 14" would do just fine. This way if you want to load a 225gr TSX you wont have to worry about its long length.

DD is right though, for a woods rifle either would work very well and it is really splitting hairs, but i would choose the 1 in 12"

Paul, that's not disagreeable but it does illustrate my point(s). The issue with stability is not one of weight but rather length. Your bullets(I can tell you're a misplaced buffalo hunter <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />) are of a form that packs a lot of weight into shortest length. All RN or FN lead bullets do that. High quality of bullet comes into play here as well, being unbalanced requiring a higher gyroscopic stability factor(faster twist) as it were. Bore smoothness is a factor as fouling contributes to a loss of balance as well. I've had a few folks question me regarding my use of the 250 gr Hornady IL-SP as their guns will not shoot them....dunno the specifics in their cases but do know this is common. Twist rate in 98% of the deal with bullet stability, the other factors taking up the rest...if you're shooting a good barrel you can walk the line where others cannot. Without speculating a whole lot I'd guess that even with that bullet design you would not be able to go too much further with weight(length) before you ran into stability issues.

Nice shooting by the way...what do you use that for?

Concerning rifle balance, I too like a slight muzzle heavy rifle. Length is not the only way to get this. I like 20" barrels in 358 so I just go to a heavier contour. Byron

I have a MRC 1999 in .358 Win, with a 21-inch, #4 contour barrel with a 1 in 12" twist. It shoots everything I have tried in it into sub-inch groups. I am curious to see how the 225 gr TSX works, as I'd like to use this rifle for plains game in Africa next May.

+1

Dan,

That's my deer/hog load or else the 180 gr XTP that's on the left hand side of the picture.

Rotational speed influences the stability of any bullet and yet these slow moving bullets (the 180 is only 1650 fps) are stabilized as well as needed for the effective range I'll encounter.

I have shot pointed bullets as heavy as 220 gr and still didn't have any stability problems. They just weren't as accuracte as what I'm shooting now.

I also have a .35 Whelen, that was built in the '60s, that doesn't have a problem with 250 gr bullets. I never took the time to check the twist in the barrel, so I can't comment on the actual rate. The Whelen cartridges do look a little funny when I load 358429s in them!

You might also ask about the barrel wall thickness in another thread or this one if the thought gets aired. I am trying to remember but it may have been Mule Deer who layed down some rules on minimum barrel wall thickness in terms of accuracy. Maybe 0.150" was his number? Look it up.

I have three .358 Wins all with factory barrels .560" at the muzzle, 1-12" and 22" long. None group all that well but the M70 may be a 1.25 moa rifle.

A .560" muzzle calculates a .358" bore to a .101" wall thickness!

I don't like heavy barrels on woods rifles at all however. Also I did accuracy work on a R77-1 cut to 19" and the blast was noticable along with the 75 fps velocity loss.

Now these are all conflicting dimensions in terms of accuracy, weight, blast and velocity.

For myself I am staying with the factory barrels. They bag game just fine.

Here's a substandard 1 3/8" group with my Whelen using a Hornady 180 gr single shot pistol bullet.



The Lichner barrel is .625" at the muzzle, which is only .133" wall thickness. Normal groups are 1" or less at 100 yards and covering a 3 shot group with a nickel used to be common, when I was much younger.

It took three fouling shots to bring the group in and I believe the "flyer" in the group is where it still wasn't settled down (I've slept since then <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />).

Mine has a muzzle diameter of .650 - which is what MRC considered to be the minimum they would go.

I have five rifles chambered to the .358 Winchester. Three have 1 in 16" twists rates and two have 1 in 12" barrels. The 1 in 16" guns are all bolt action and the 1 in 12" guns are lever actions. Guess what? The two witht he 1 in 12" barrels are noticable more accurate than the bolt action rifles.
Regarding whether a 1 in 12" twist will affect how well a 180 gr. bullet holds together, I have some 150 gr. Remington bullets that were made for the .350 Rem. mag. and so far I haven't had any come unglued at high velocity, even in the 1 in 12" guns.
I also have three rifles in .35 Whelen, two having a 1 in 16" twist and another, a custom Mauser I picked up at an estate sale has a 1 in 14" twist. All will shoot bullets up to 250 gr. reasonably well. The Mauser is the tightest grouping rifle, but all are acceptable. The next Whelen will have a proper 1 in 12" twist.
Paul B.

It could be that the pointy/longer(?) bullets were on the edge of stability. Certainly other factors could be at play so I won't flog that horse too much. Rotational velocity results in angular momentum and that is where stability comes from. In general terms spitzer forms have more displacement between CG and CP so require more spin. Solid base wadcutters, or better yet, round balls have the two co-located, or nearly so. Idle curiosity on my part, have you shot those little hindenbergs out to the range where they start going sub-sonic, and if so how did they do there? If, and that is an "if" you are on the edge of stability it might show up at that range. Marginal stability does not infer inaccurate necessarily, but it does make the bullets susceptable to the wobbles along the way. Transonic speeds are the realm of maximum pitching moments on bullets.

On a small tangent, sometimes folks confuse velocity with stability, thinking they can overcome marginal circumstance with fps. To a very small degree that is true. The math is rather simple actually. A bullet with a 12" twist at 3000 fps MV is spinning at....drum roll....3000 rps or 180000 rpm. Tighten the twist up to 10" and it's doing 3600 rps or 216000 rpm. Rather than tighten the twist we'll assume that some nimrod wants to achieve the same stability with velocity....he'll need 3600 fps, and that goal is likely not possible due to case capacity or pressure limitations.

Nice hog cannon BTW. Probably a lot of thru and thrus? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Dan,

The "hog cannon" is still unchecked, but as the hogs get closer to being a problem here, that will probably change!

1200 fps is barely supersonic and many would consider that to be transonic, or at least dropping below supersonic speeds pretty quickly after leaving the muzzle. Whatever, it doesn't seem to hurt the accuracy, but I haven't shot them out further than 100 yards.

You asked about "pointy" bullets, here's a picture of Speer 220 gr and Hornady 200 gr in .357 Mag brass compared to a 125 gr.



Since they were seated to the cannelure, they aren't very long compared to the 250 gr. In fact, they look almost normal. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> I shot these much faster than the 1200 fps cast bullet.

"I plan to use this setup for Coastal Elk."

Coho:
Sorry Dude, coastal elk don't like .358's ! Make's em fall down dead ! Good luck with your project and your hunt. BT53

Transonic = Mach .7-1.3 for purposes of this discussion...Mach 1 point of highest drag and pitching moments. Forget the question about longer ranges.

How long are the jacketed bullets in inches vs. the 250 gr lead? You obviously have a great deal more bearing surface with the lead and that helps with concentricity.

Dan, the 250 gr is 1.026" and the 220 gr jacketed is 1.012" long. In this case, the bearing surface is longer, but that's not always the case. A 158 gr 358156 has more bearing area than the longer and heavier 170 gr 358429. That's one of the reasons the 358429 will be faster, with the same load, than a 358156.

A normal 158 gr LSWC non gas check bullet, like Oregon Trails, will produce 1643 fps MV out of the Handi rifle using .38 Special brass and 13.5 gr of Alliant 2400. The same load with a 170 gr 358429 will produce 1742 fps out of the same Handi rifle. Out of a 4" M66-2 the OT produces 1301 fps MV and the 358429 produces 1355 fps. (NOTE: these loads should never be used in anything chambered for .38 Special and probably not even if it's an "N" frame, like a .38/44)

Good to see ya over here Paul.

A faintly educated guess on this leans toward the probability that your 250 gr bullets work better with that twist due to lesser displacement between CG and CP as compared to the Spitzer form due to form despite slightly greater length.

Well Scott, is the CG still treating you well? I know the weather is certainly different up there! Gatorland did have some things going for it. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Dan, the Speer 220 gr isn't really a spitzer. I would describe it more as a flat point, but irregardless, I thought the low velocity would make it perform more like a cast bullet, due to the heavy jacket material. So, I just switched to a more accurate, for me, heavier cast bullet.