Barrel length opinions for .223rem, bolt or auto

[Thirties]

What barrel lengths do you .223rem shooters prefer in bolt, or semi-auto?

And I especially what to hear why you have your barrel length preference.

I'm likely going to get a .223rem rifle. This would be my first bottle neck ammo rifle (have two pistol caliber Marlin levers, .22rf rifles, and handguns)

My current leaning is for a bolt rifle with a short barrel (light weight). This will be a pinker/varmint rifle. I load my own ammo. I'm not against a semi-auto, but it's not a burning desire either.

 

[Inspector3711]

I Have a Rem 700 LVSF (Light Varmint Stainless Fluted). They come with a 22" barrel. Mine will shoot 1/2" groups from a rest and I can manage 3/4" from sand bags. It weighs 6.75 lbs. I have a Bushnell 3-9X 40 Elite 3200 mounted on it. I L O V E this rifle! The only problem at this point is that it has the old trigger design. I've adjusted it to 3 lbs. but it still has some creep. I'll be upgrading the trigger soon.

 

[sholling]

My .223 varmint/target rifle has a 23" heavy barrel - a bit much for lugging around but great for little tiny groups at 200yd. For a more portable plinker/varmint I'd probably look in the area of 22" to get the most from the 223 cartridge, but that little 18.5" CZ527 Carbine with the super trick trigger is awfully sweet looking.

 

[Scorch]

I have an Interarms Mini-Mauser 223 with a 20" barrel. While it is light and handles easily, another 2" of barrel would not have hurt a bit. It barks plenty loud when I shoot it, and some folks have remarked about how loud it is. My brother's Rem 700 VSSF has a 24" barrel, and it is noticeably quieter.

 

[Inspector3711]

My LVSF isn't objectionally loud with 22" of barrel. Remington markets it as a quick handling predator rifle rather than a stereotypical varmint rifle. I think of it as a mountain varmint rifle that would be easy to carry.

 

[CPTMurdoc30]

Mine is a remington 700 VLS with a 26" barrel. It weighs in at 10.5# with scope, sling and bipod.

 

[LanceOregon]

Thirties:

For anything other than a heavy barrel heavy varmint rifle ( which generally have 26" barrels ), a 22 inch barrel is about ideal for the .223 You really will not give up any significant performance. And muzzle blast will not be bad.

What you really want to avoid at all costs is a .223 with a 16 inch barrel, which is common on many AR15 rifle. These guns have outrageous muzzle flash and blast. Anyone getting an AR15 is better off getting at least a 20 inch barrel, in my opinion.

But for a lighter, yet accurate bolt rifle, Inspector is right on the money about the Remington 700 LVSF It is very hard to beat, as it is outstanding in so many ways. Great trigger, comfortable stock and recoil pad, proven 700 action, and a barrel that is stiff enough to be accurate, let light enough to keep the gun's weight down.

I own one as well, and absolutely love it. Here is a photo of my rifle:

They cost $800 street price, though, which is about what a AR15 costs. For something much more affordable, you could instead consider something like a Savage Weather Warrior or Howa 1500.

.

 

[LateNightFlight]

I recently picked up the 700 SPS Varmint. The 26" bull barrel is hefty and gets about everything you can wring out of the .223. I thought I'd shoot it a bit to see how we got along before thinking about any tweaks. I have a Burris 6-24 X Black Diamond mounted and I'm getting 5/8ths inch groups with factory ammo, first time out and right out of the box.

It's great on the bench but I wonder how I'll feel about things when I lug it around for some coyote calling. There's no way I would think of this rig as a plinker, it's heavy and not something I’d choose to go plinking with. A Ruger 10-22: plinker. A 26” bull barrel: Not so much

This is my first .223 and until I read earlier posts in this thread, I had attributed its mildness to the round rather than the gun. Perhaps it is the gun. I shot it next to my 220 Swift and felt like this .223 had more in common with a 22 LR than anything else I've shot. It's surpisingly quiet and the recoil is next to nothing.

My choice of the long, heavy barrel was influenced by thoughts of bench shooting decent groups more than anything else. And I have loved every minute of what little time I’ve had with it. But I would think a trimmer 20” barrel would give you most of what you need for performance, and keeping the heft down would make your choice a little more practical, as well as versatile.

I paid 540 for the gun but the cost of shooting .223 sold me. And I want to mention the trigger because I understand it's new for this model. I've not shot custom after market triggers that I could compare it to, but compared to the factory triggers on my other guns... M77, Sako, etc., "Ah! Sweet!"

 

[Thirties]

Folks, thanks for all the advice . . . I'll digest it and research 22" rifles (they ain't cheap). The more I think about it, the less inclined I am to go the AR route. A friend has a Colt AR in 223rem. I'm going to have to shoot his to get a better idea of what they are.

Thanks, again for all your valuable replies!

 

[Art Eatman]

I use my .223 light sporter mostly for prairie dogs. The 22" barrel gives reasonable velocity. It's a tad less noisy than the shorties of 18" or less.

I dunno. I just like longer barrels. I'm a hunter/handloader, and I want max velocity for a given amount of powder.

Art

 

[44 AMP]

GI wannabees

There are two basic kinds of gun buyers, those who are most concerned with performance, and those more concerned with appearance. There is, of course quite a bit of overlap, but these are the general categories.

The M16 has a 20" barrel. This was done for two reasons, one, a handly length, and two, to get the required minimum ballistics from the 5.56mm round. The 5.56mm was chosen over the .222 Remington, because the .222 just couldn't quite deliver the velocity at long range that the military said they had to have. My, how things change. Today the 5.56mm is loaded with a heavier bullet at a lower velocity, AND the military has gone to a shorter (16" barrel) standard for the M4 carbine. They gave up the velocity that they said they had to have, to get a handier package.

A bolt gun in .223 is a varmint gun. Lots of fun, and good for pests and target shooting. A short barrel get you nothing except a handier package for houseclearing and mounting and dismounting in vehicles, and somehow, I don't see a lot of that being done with scoped bolt action rifles.

You want a GI lookalike gun, fine, get one. Get a short carbine or a 20" AR and enjoy it. If you want a bolt gun, 22" is more or less standard length, and varminters can be had with 24" and 26" barrels. Barrel countour has more to do with the weight than the length, and may have an effect on accuracy, but each rifle is an individual, and one cannot in truth say that config A will always be more accurate than config B.

Decide how the rifle is to be mostly used, carried a lot and shot a little, or carried a little and shot a lot. And then decide what is most important to you, sustained accuracy (firing a lot) or hunting accuracy (firing 1-3 shots), and balance that aginst the weight of the rifles, and your shooting style. Heavy barrels tend to stay more accurate as they heat up, compared to sporter weight barrels, so if you plan to fire long strings without cool down between rounds, a heavy barrel might be better. But, packing a heavy barrel varmint rifle up hill and over dale is a pain.

A sporter weight barrel can be as accurate as anything for a few shots, but generally (again, there are exceptions) as they heat up, groups tend to open up. But if packing a rifle around alot while hunting is important, you can do a lot worse than a good sporter wt, barrel.

Short(er) barrel rifles are handier in the thick brush, and at short range the loss of velocity is not an issue. But that kind of hunting is not generally done with a .223, so I would say a longer barrel (to get the most velocity) would be your best bet.

 

[drjjpdc]

Well my 2 cents is this. The next cartridge combo I was thinking about was a .223. Two options I am thinking about is the Remington 799. The street price of $650 and that gorgeous laminate are 2 factors. Or how about a used Thompson Contender/Encore rifle in .223? Also has the advantage of getting into more calibers with just a barrel investment, as well as the pistol family (action is the same for both rifle and pistol). H&R is also an inexpensive single shot alternative.

 

[NotSoFast]

I have a Mini-14, a semi-auto which has a 18 1/2" barrel as stock. It is good for what I intend it - varmints at fairly close range. I also think the potential for accuracy is there but that will take time as I work out bugs one at a time. Right now it is walking as it warms up and I plan on eliminating that first.