Thread: .308 win, barrel length vs bullet weight

I have the latest copy of NZ Guns & Hunting in front of me, apparently the last printed issue ever!

It has an article entitled "Accuracy is all About Consistency" by Evan Honore. In this article, Honore, who sounds pretty experienced and with the .308 Win in particular, states "you need a 22-inch or longer barrel to shoot 165gr" [bullets in a .308]. Later he says "A 22-inch .308 barrel can shoot 165gr projectiles maximum, whereas a 24-inch barrel can shoot 180g" and goes on to say that the common 20-inch barrels are limited to 150g projectile max.

He doesn't really explain what he means by "shoot" nor does he give what his expectations are. I'd have to say the pictures of groups in the article are very impressive, mostly pics of groups with holes touching. So perhaps the above is based on expectations of that type of accuracy? But I've never of anyone else arguing such a critical relationship between barrel length and bullet weight.

I've owned a few .308s and have mostly used 165gr bullets (hornday SPs and SSTs mostly). A sako with a 20" barrel would put them into 25mm groups at 100m and a Howa with a 19" barrel that groups 165gr bullets into an average of around 18mm at 100m with the SP bullets - in my book that is good enough accuracy and clearly at odds with what Honore has written.

Mind you, I've never tried 180gr bullets and its been over a decade since I shoot either a deer or a target more than 100m away... so perhaps I'm not testing things hard enough to know my bullet/barrel length combo doesn't work..??

I'm sure the author is basing his statements on experience but I feel he is not giving enough info in the article to enable me to judge how he has come to his conclusions.

Now, many of you will run shorter barrels than I do, and wondering about how you get on with various weight bullets in your .308?

I run 180gr SPs out of a 20inch BLR for my bush load, sure they are not going super fast. Do I care.............. No.

I have used a 308 20" Remington LTR for many years and shoot it out to 700 yards on paper, best was 9 x bull and one just outside x bull 59 out of a possible 60 points that was a good day!

I use 155 gr Amax and find they also drop game just fine, dropped two Fallow one straight after the other standing next to each other stone dead at 500 yards across a gully, also a good day!

Tried other match projectiles which were amazingly accurate but would fail to stop a wallaby in its tracks if it made it to cover before falling over I thought I missed it, a strange day that was!

20" LTR is 2700 fps my Sako TRG22 26" was 2900 fps same load.

Scot Trail must be running 50grn projectiles in his one then...10" barrel if memory serves me correctly...and shooting animals out to 400ish....much dialup needed of course.

I think the twist rate has far more to do with it than barrel length...barrel length will help with velocity definately....guys with short barrels often drop down in weight to keep velocity up so trajectory isnt so much of a rainbow.
mine is 21" and handles everything Ive tried so far 125-200grn.

I would have thought twist rate was more important than barrel length in relation to bullet weight.
I have a 24 inch 1:12 twist and a 16.5 inch 1:8 twist. The 24 likes the 178gr eld-x, I haven't done any supersonic load development for the 16.5 yet but have shot 150 and 180gr factory ammo - not definitive but the 150 does seem to shoot better so far.
Interestingly the difference in muzzle velocity between the two rifles with the 150 factory ammo is only 135fps

Magazine writers

My 18in bbl 308 shoots 150 gn to 168gn pills into tiny little bug hole groups, REM factory bbl chopped to 18in

All replies are exactly what I expected.

Rather odd article really, again I'm not doubting that his opinions are based on his experience, but he needs more detail on how he reached his conclusions and probably needs to take note of what the rest of us are up to.

Originally Posted by Dama dama

All replies are exactly what I expected.

Rather odd article really, again I'm not doubting that his opinions are based on his experience, but he needs more detail on how he reached his conclusions and probably needs to take note of what the rest of us are up to.

It needs some context, Is he talking about benchrest shooting where they live and die by a couple of thou in group sizes or is he talking about hunting rifles?
If its the latter then no surprise it is the last edition.

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

It needs some context, Is he talking about benchrest shooting where they live and die by a couple of thou in group sizes or is he talking about hunting rifles?
If its the latter then no surprise it is the last edition.

He is definitely discussing hunting rifles.

Opinion masquerading as fact !

Yes, but wrapped up in a reputable publication with glossy pictures, and many, less experienced, people will take it as fact.

I recall reading a piece by, Nathan Foster. Even he (who loves long barrels) stated there was no need for a .308win to be any longer than 20", and 18 & 19" are fine too, and he prefers bullets in the 165-178gr weight range.

130's at 2950 from a 16.5" 1:8T.

Validates why i haven't brough gun and hunting magazines for 10 years !

Often flick through them in huts and it reminds me why i stopped buying them.

Same things written from the opposite direction.
Worst of all mostly hunting articles written by elite hunters with no humility and consideration of the new inexperienced want to be hunters reading them.