Thread: Barrel length considerations

N Foster, did give the swede a bit of a bad wrap, its and excellent calibour, more capable than a lot of the new 6.5 offerings. Reloading it in a modern rifle, to higher pressures with good pills is the answer.
Having said that, I have always had a 308 and it always gets the job done, a lot to like about the 308.

Originally Posted by flock

N Foster, did give the swede a bit of a bad wrap, its and excellent calibour, more capable than a lot of the new 6.5 offerings. Reloading it in a modern rifle, to higher pressures with good pills is the answer.
Having said that, I have always had a 308 and it always gets the job done, a lot to like about the 308.

you say what???????

feed the swede the partitions as per knowledgebase...and it is great I believe is what was said....


the whole which cartridge debate has been going on since stones n spears were getting chucked at saber tooth tigers..... and the where you hit em is more important that what with since then too.

the notion that a .243 kills better than a .308 or vice verse is crap..pure and simple..... to be clear,if shot up the arse the .308 with heavy projectile would be better choice and SHOULD kill better /cleaner (will be messy) as the bigger/heavier projectile should travel far enough to get to vitals.....and the .243 poked into crease/meat saver shot should deliver more whollop than a slower heavier pill from .308....but both will kill animal......and and AND if you fed your .308 a 100grn projectile the point is moot...same case,same projectile weight.
BOTH will work fine.
the .243 shoots a bit flatter and a bit lighter on recoil
the .308 shoots heavier projectiles and can penertrate a bit better from poor angles......

as for one being more forgiving than the other....taken in context it hold merit.....a .224 fragile projectile going fast if hits point of jawbone or into neck missing bone MAY deliver enough stunning shock to immobilize animal long enough to finish it off whereas a big slow heavy projectile in same spot may zip through cutting narow path as no resistance to work against and animal will walk away wounded.....
flip that over and the fragile .224 going fast (or any really fragile projectile for that matter) into solid meaty bit MAY blow up giving shallow wound with animal still very mobile VS big heavy or more stout projectile will bore on through hopefully breaking bone and reaching vital bits....
its all swings n roundabouts....
Ive blown up a few fragile projectiles on bigger animals when caught out with wrong load in chamber and shot instinctively in a hurry,Ive also poked narrow deep holes into the wrong place on animals....... making good of a bad situation means you still get animal and hopefully fix your cock up quickly.
flock is correct,there IS a lot to like about the .308
there is also a lot to like about the .243....go back 25 years and for smaller statured shooter,ladies or youth and it was THE recommended cartridge...what has changed the most is the advent of suppressors to drop noise and recoil.... now a lot of bigger cartridges have been dropped down into same niche.

Originally Posted by iambatman

Kia Ora Te forum.

After you all convinced me to ditch my 6.5x55 musings and knuckle down to a .308, I have spent the last couple of months weighing up which rifle I should get

I have largely settled on a Tikka T3X Lite. I know it's a little cliché, a little light and a touch more expensive than some, but its reputation for accuracy and the great action have won me over.

As I'm still waiting on the FAL to walk into the letterbox, I took a little research trip to some outdoor stores. One I saw had a T3X carbine. I've combed through Tikka's website for a month or more and haven't seen that term used. The salesman told me it was exactly the same except it had a 16 inch barrel instead of 20.

So, based on my little bit of knowledge - always a dangerous thing - this would make the rifle shorter (duh!) and lighter. But I'm worried about what I don't know. Namely, how will the shorter barrel affect accuracy, bullet speed, loudness and felt recoil? I will be fitting a DPT suppressor which makes it near enough to a 20 inch barrel again. Though, I suppose, if I just got a standard 20 inch barrel, the suppressor would extend it to 24ish inches.

Also, is the "carbine" designation legit? Has this outfit just gunsmithed a rifle, voiding the warranty?

For context, this will be a mostly bush and clearings rifle with the occasional shot over open farmland courtesy of some friends of friends. I will not get into long range shooting: 250 to 300 meters will be the maximum on game.

Thanks in advance.

Greetings @iambatman,
I understand your reasons for considering a change from the 6.5 x 55 and think you are on the right path with the .308. I would like to make a suggestion that you don't abandon your interest in the 6.5 x 55. As you have discovered decent ammo is hard to get due to the US chronically underloading the cartridge. This is easily solved by handloading but even here it is not easy. Good load data is sparse and often contradictory, even in the same data set. US reloading dies do not match the chamber well and of course projectiles in 6.5 are hard to come by at the moment. So why do you ask am I putting in a good word for the 6.5? It is because I have found that loading for the 6.5 x 55 is very rewarding. The cartridge is easily the equal of the .308 when loaded to its potential, and I am not talking about Roman Candle loads either, but it is not for the novice. I started handloading over 50 years ago and lusted after a 6.5 x 55 for years until I got my first one about 1990. I have to say that the 6.5 has taught me more about handloading in those 30 plus years than all of my other rifles put together.
In short get your .308 or whatever you decide on but don't give up on owning a 6.5 x 55 some time in the future.
Regards Grandpamac.

Greetings, grandpamac.
I should have been clearer, I've given up on the 6.5 Swede as my first rifle. I agree with you that I am still a fan of the cartridge, particularly if I was to hand load.

I still harbour ambitions of owning, reloading and shooting a Swede. But it certainly won't be my first rifle. That will be a .308, although many are making a strong argument for the .243.

I will throw in my 5 cents worth ....
243 is a most capable cartridge.
Will do the job no question. Penetration isn't an issue. Was drilling perfect holes in 12mm steel plate with an old Parker Hale 243 using ppu soft points at 100 mtrs. Less recoil but need the longer barrel.
I currently use a lightweight 16 in tikka 308 as my bush gun with dpt suppressor.
Kicks more than 243 and on smaller goat/fallow sized animals at close bush ranges can be devastating and do lots of damage but can destroy alot of meat in the process. My 45/70 did far less meat damage funnily enough.
That's also the reason I bought my black semi 223 years ago to avoid so much close range carnage.
If you go the same route with 308 and run a dpt you will need at least one extra baffle to help tame the noise and recoil and will end up with a barrel around 20 plus inches long but if want it suppressed and solely as a bush rifle working through tough scubby shit I find the shorter barrel a godsend if suppressed. But I also have other rifles for more open hunting.
So in my opinion if you want a bush basher go shorty suppressed 308 but be prepared for a possible extra loss of meat over a 243 , depending entirely on shot placement of course but body shots will incur much more damage from my experience.
If you want a pleasant to shoot, accurate, popular (for a reason)all rounder caliber for more open shooting as well and don't mind the extra barrel length can't go wrong with 243 . In most hands probably more accurate also .

Barrel length. It’s easier to chop more off as apposed to adding it back on…
And another big .243 fan here.

I reload and shoot them both. Lots to like about both. Only differentiator for me is on big bodied animals where I sometimes don’t get exits with the .243. Difficult to say the .308 would always be better on the same shot because you can’t directly compare, but I prefer the heavier pill in these situations.

There both good, learning is part of the journey. Different folks arrive at different destinations….


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don't overthink it. A T3 308 win at 16" (with suppressor) and factory ammo will do exactly what you ask of it. As will many other rifle/cartridge combinations.
Get it and get out hunting.

Originally Posted by Shearer

Don't overthink it. A T3 308 win at 16" (with suppressor) and factory ammo will do exactly what you ask of it. As will many other rifle/cartridge combinations.
Get it and get out hunting.

Agreed. Only addition I would make is a 16" 308 is basially a 30-30. How often are there threads on here about getting velocity out of short barrels?. News flash, the easy way is don't cut below 20".

A 20" barrel is carbine lenght and actually not very long.

LOL, a question about barrel lengths has become a full blown 243 vs 308 debate! I own both and for me the 243 is ideal for meat hunting; it’s plenty of gun for hinds/spikers/yearlings (the 308 is a bit overkill on smaller animals IMO), and because it shoots pretty flat you can quickly place an accurate neck shot and minimise meat wastage. The 308 is what I use in the roar or in big country when a bit of extra down range energy might come in handy; it will also accompany me on a sambar hunt this winter. Both perform well on game. I have more experience with the 308 and I have found it to be very effective; it’s a rare for an animal to run, they normally get poleaxed. In terms of 308 barrel lengths I would go 16in if it’s a dedicated bush rifle, and 18-20in for an all rounder. Recoil is stout in light rifles but a suppressor and limbsaver sorts that out

If you can't decide between a 243win and a 308 win, get a 260 or 7mm08. All the same parent case, some more popular than others.
If you shorten any of them you will loose more MV/inch of barrel cut with the smaller bore diameter. ie 243will loose the most, 308 the least per inch shortened.