About to put in an order for a PN#1, 3 groove, 1-8". Will finish at 21ish"

Going to drop that in a McM Winchester Compact swirly. (Win M70, push feed, SA, .223 AI)

Finally getting around to finishing a project that was supposed to happen years ago.

Thinking that will be a pretty handy rig, not looking for super light, just comfortable (7-8lbs) and short enough to be easy to carry. Hopefully be a nice all arounder.

Most of you here have a lot more experience than me when it comes to building.

Thanks

Any particular reason for three grooves?

No reason other than the praise I've read for them here and a couple other sites I frequent.

I've seen 3 grooves praised my many, but cussed pretty strongly by a few. I don't have one myself.

Thanks for the insight, I'll do a little more research on that.

A gunsmith near me has had very good luck with three groove Liljas in .308".

I do not cuss any of my Pacnor 3 grooves.

Including the 223AI

I had the identical barrel you described and loved it.

A gentle suggestion - go with the 5-groove barrel. But at the same time, do yourself a favor and double-check that item with P-N.. IIRC, there are some calibers that are a bit fussy with the 3-groove barrels...

My mountain rifle contour Pacnor 8 twist, 3 groove, in 223ai is shooting 75 amax into tiny little clusters. Love mine but maybe got lucky.

I do not think the 223, 6.5 or 458 calibers are fussy with the three grooves. All of mine are consistent accurate shooters. I have 5 groove Pacnors in 358 and 7mm and they shoot great too.

We've used 3 different PN 3 groove barrels for 1-8" 223AI's. No problems here either.

Why not 7 twist nowadays?

I had thought about that, but came to the conclusion that 1-8" will do everything I'll ever need.

I think a good barrel is a good barrel, that being said some BR guys prefer 4, 5R and I know one that likes 3 grooves. Maybe it's the way they tune there load that fits that particular groove, I think the majority of us could never really be able to tell the difference if they were all good barrels to begin with.

I've read Dan Lilja's comments about three groove barrels. If I remember right he had talked with varmint hunters looking for more barrel life, and the thinking was if the number of grooves was reduced to three while keeping the same land to groove ratio the barrel life could be extended because the same amount of steel would have fewer exposed edges to be eroded during firing. Cleaning could be easier with fewer corners to clean out.

From other conversations, the main knock on three groove barrels I recall was they were tougher on long target bullets in tight twist, high velocity situations. After the barrel wore just a bit the bullets would get torn up an come apart in flight, more so than with six groove barrels for example.

I don't know how the land to groove ratio varies between different groove numbers for Pac-Nor.

I would be really tempted to try a poly barrel as I have heard good things about them as in easy on bullets, easy to clean, last longer and even that the BC is higher as there are no deep grooves on the bullet. I don't know about the last claim but the others seem legitimate.

Good to go on the barrel, now I just have to decide whether to go Edge or gel coat.

Thanks to all who weighed in.

For an 8lb rifle I would go gel coat over Edge and save a few bucks........

Had a few 3-G and 5 via P-N. All shooters.

I would ask Chris for his recommendation in that caliber.

Will a #2 not meet your weight goal? A 2 at 22" might be my pick for balance but it's all subjective.

Well mostly.

They recommended their 3 groove.

I had though initially about a #2, but PNs #1 should be meaty enough for this one. .6ish at the muzzle should be plenty for me in .22 cal.

Not really hung up on specific weight here, just don't want a lot of extra heft and not looking for a flyweight either.

My go-to rifles are all between 7 and 8lbs (ready to go) and that's about right for me. As long as I don't get too far above or below that I'll be fine.

All the 3 gu barrels I have installed were real shooters...

OP - I endorse your target weight, had a 221 FB by SG&Y, it had heft but portable, got it 2nd hand but it was around .65 muzzle, and yes in a smallish 22 bore, there is more meat than a larger bore. Flyweights are not my fave.

Here is a build I found years back on another site:

About 18 months ago, I decided I wanted a 222 for varmint hunting. I usually shoot a factory Ruger 204, but I wanted to step things up a notch in accuracy for my walking varminter.

I chose a 222 because of its old-school reputation for accuracy and its relatively mild charge. I didn't want a cartridge with screaming velocity, but I wanted something with enough punch to drop a coyote at about 250 yards.

I decided on a Borden Alpine action. It arrived about a year ago and was beautifully put together. It is as smooth as any action I've ever touched. I then decided to have Krieger put a barrel on, so I had them put on a 23" with a 1-14 twist. The contour is between a #2 and #3.

I then sent it into McMillan to be stocked with an Edge stock. It just arrived yesterday and I put on a Leopold 3.5-10 with Talley rings. The weight is 7 lbs 12 oz.

I can't wait to shoot it and today I loaded up some 40 gr and 50 gr V-Max bullets with IMR4198. I'll post the results, but I sure hope it shoots.

His muzzle is .664 - from another post he made. So his made your weight with a "2.5" so to speak, Krieger.

Thanks for the insight.

I ordered a #1 and an Edge. I think I'll be happy with it.

Congrats, and looking forward to pics and reports.

Thanks!

I'm looking forward to it too, waiting always sucks.

And what is the point of your post? I have a 6" stack of targets like that and smaller groups. They have been shot with 4, 5 6, and 8 groove barrels.

Sherm, I agree that a good barrel is a good good barrel. We talked about this at a BR match this past weekend. 4 and 6 grooves are used in BR competition. Maybe some other comps use other configuration. Never actually seen any difference in wear because of the amount of lands and grooves.