PDA

View Full Version : Remington 700 w/20" barrel in 270 Win?


hoser
March 1, 2011, 11:15 AM
When did Remington make the 700 with a 20" barrel in 270 Winchester? Found one for sale I was interested in when is was manufactured and if barrel is too short for most effective ballistics in that caliber? I'm not a rifle guy. Thoughts? :confused:

warbirdlover
March 1, 2011, 11:50 AM
http://www.loadammo.com/Topics/October05.htm

It looks like your muzzle velocity would drop about 100 fps (similar to 30-06). Most ballistic information is derived from 24" barrels. Since most non-magnum rifle barrel lengths are 22" (or at least they were) the standard lengths would drop 50 fps from the published data. Not a big deal really. If someone wants to correct me feel free.

Never heard of Remington making a 20" .270 model 700. Someone might have had a gunsmith shorten it.

Eagle0711
March 1, 2011, 02:38 PM
There is a couple of positives. If you handload go with the faster powders such as IMR 4350, H414, or many other suitable powders.

The second point with a 20" barrel your accuracy may be a little better because it is stiffer and a-will not whip or viberate as much when shot.

It's also handier and lighter to carry.

If it shoots to your satisfaction, I'd forget about it. What ever it is getting shot will never know the difference.

roklok
March 1, 2011, 02:45 PM
Remington manufactured some 20" 700s back in the 60s and 70s, see them for sale now and then on Gunbroker.

Art Eatman
March 1, 2011, 03:00 PM
About all that faster powders would do is reduce muzzle flash.

While the ballistics wouldn't make it a good gun for open country, the short barrel would make it handy for woods-country hunting. Easy handling in tighter brush and undergrowth, etc. And out to 200 yards or thereabouts, the ballistics would be plenty good to ruin any deer's day. The trajectory starts "drooping" on out toward 300...

Hog Hunter
March 1, 2011, 03:04 PM
If im not mistaken the tactical model 700 is either a 20 or 22

hoser
March 1, 2011, 05:13 PM
This one looks like a standard 700 with open sights.

603Country
March 1, 2011, 05:13 PM
Like Eagle says, if you like it that's all that matters. You might notice a bit more noise and flash from that shorter barrel and you'll probably have a somewhat lower muzzle velocity (which you won't notice), but that's no big deal.

JerryM
March 1, 2011, 11:38 PM
Lower muzzle velocity would be unacceptable to me. My 270s are to do long range shooting at deer and similar size game. My 22 inch barrel will get 3150 out of a 100 gr bullet.

Why get a long range rifle and handicap it with a short barrel? It will also blow the ears off a brass monkey as Jack O'Connor used to say. I would not own one.

Regards,
Jerry

Fat White Boy
March 1, 2011, 11:41 PM
If 50 or 100fps is lost with a shorter barrel, it will still be over 3000fps. Not an issue IMHO....

hoser
March 2, 2011, 01:41 AM
Would it be that much louder with 2" less barrel length? Would it be like having a muzzle brake?

lefteyedom
March 2, 2011, 02:13 AM
Buy the rifle and chrony it. There is no way to know what the MV going to be. CHRONYS have a way of making lyers of reloading manuals and manufacturers of B.B.

Once you kown what the M.V. adjust the scope accordly.

A 270 is a hunting rifle, its ablity to put the first two shots to same point of aim is the important virtue. Wether the 130 gr bullet is going 2800fps or 3100 gps it will cleanly kill deer if the bullet it put in the right spot

I have used 20" barrel 06 and 308 for years and have been happy with them.

jmr40
March 2, 2011, 08:44 AM
Remington did make some 20" barreled 700 carbines in several calibers. I'm guessing late 60's and early 70's, but could be wrong.

The muzzle blast will be a bit louder, but you will never notice the slight loss of velocity in a normal hunting situation.

JerryM
March 2, 2011, 09:56 AM
But if we say that 100 fps does not count, why not another 100 fps? I buy a .270 to get .270 ballistics. That is at least 3100 fps with a 130 gr bullet.

Regards,
Jerry

jmr40
March 2, 2011, 02:52 PM
It won't be 100fps. Likely 50-60 fps. You will see a greater difference between individual barrels of the same length than you will between 2" of barrel length. I've got rifles with the same barrel length that will shoot 100fps different from each other. I've got 20" barrels that will shoot faster than 22" barrels with the same ammo.

thesheepdog
March 2, 2011, 02:53 PM
I've got 20" barrels that will shoot faster than 22" barrels with the same ammo.

Probably a combination of fast burning powders and rifling difference (slower twist rates produce slightly faster velocties).

warbirdlover
March 2, 2011, 04:16 PM
But if we say that 100 fps does not count, why not another 100 fps? I buy a .270 to get .270 ballistics. That is at least 3100 fps with a 130 gr bullet.

Regards,
Jerry

Yes but most .270 barrels are 22" long standard. (There are some companies now making them 24"). The ballistic data is from testing in 24" barrels. So a "normal" length 22" barrel will lose about 50 fps from the published data of 3060 fps with a 130 gr bullet. Of course there's the Hornady "superperformance" ammo.

http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ballistics/270_winchester.html

jmr40
March 2, 2011, 04:22 PM
Both are FN Winchester barrels with the same twist.

Some barrels just shoot faster than expected, some slower than expected. It seems to be the quality of the barrel. Quality barrels with closer tolerences tend to shoot faster and be more accurate.

Buying a gun with a 2" longer barrel is no guarantee it will be faster than another gun with a slightly longer barrel. As a general rule, yes. Just not to the extreme that some folks keep repeating on the internet.

There is no perfect math formula to predict what will happen, but the closest I've found is to expect about .5%-1% velocity change for each inch your barrel length changes.

Where you make the cut is huge as well. Almost any round does pretty well between 20"-24". Cut a 26" barrel down to 24" and the drop in velocity will be very small. Cut a 18" barrel down to 16" and you will see a much larger difference.

JerryM
March 2, 2011, 07:46 PM
Quote Yes but most .270 barrels are 22" long standard. (There are some companies now making them 24"). The ballistic data is from testing in 24" barrels. So a "normal" length 22" barrel will lose about 50 fps from the published data of 3060 fps with a 130 gr bullet. Of course there's the Hornady "superperformance" ammo. End Quote

The two .270 rifles I have are 22" and both get 3100 fps or slightly over with 130 gr bullets.
Yes, different rifles vary. Let each do as he will, but my minimum barrel length on a hunting rifle for long ranges is 22".

Jack O'Connor claimed 3200 fps from his 22" barrel .270 with 130 grain bullets, but 3150 has been my top vel with reasonable pressures.

Regards,
Jerry

lefteyedom
March 3, 2011, 05:28 AM
Bullet speed is greatly overrated...
If you know the targets range and the cartridge true performance you can hit the target. A 180 grain 308 may not sound like a long range deer rifle but with the right dope it is.
Most hunters will do better with a rifle that fits them than simply
a rifle that shoots a bullet faster.