Optimum Barrel Length on a 284 Win

[jsflagstad]

I am looking at having a custom barrel done for my Encore rifle in 284 Win. Looks like I will have choices of barrel lengths from 16 inches on up. For carrying and fast handling, of course I would favor the shorter barrels. My question is, is there an optimum length that this cartridge works well with? I want to use it as a hunting rifle, but I don't want to give up any performance or accuracy with a short barrel. I have heard that 20" is a good length, but the suggestors of that length had no data to tell me why. Just fishing to see if anyone has had any experience here.

Thanks,

JSF

[cntryboy1289]

The .284 winchester will do fine with a 20" barrel. Some of the folks that are using it in long range shooting are going with the longer barrel, but you won't notice enough loss in velocity to matter one bit with a hunting rifle. I can look up the numbers for you if you have to have them, but you most likely will lose less than 200fps using the short barrel versus the longer target length barrel.

[jsflagstad]

Thanks for the reply. So would you say 20" would be the minimum length? Or would a 18" or possibly a 16" perform well? I am looking to have a gun capable of 500 yard accuracy with some practice.

Thanks,

jsf

[cntryboy1289]

It will be better to keep it around 20-22", but that is not to say that it won't perform at 16-18. If you go that low, you will just have to work with it to learn how it shoots. I'll run some numbers for you and let you know what I come up with on the velocity at the length you are proposing. I think it would be just fine to go with a 20" barrel as far as handling goes, anything less than that and you can have a gun that feels unbalanced, just have to work with the stock to get it to feel right for you.

I have done some guns that you would call a mountain gun that had the 18" barrel and added some weight to the forend to help it aim well. Most had the very thin profiled barrel and felt kind of whippy under firing the gun. You might consider that when you take it down to the length that you are talking about. You might consider using a heavy profiled barrel like on a Handi Rifle to help add some weight and make it feel better when shooting it.

[Harry Bonar]

Dear Sir:
First of all even though Encores are good rifles I patently hate them!
But, in regard to bbl length, with that single shot action, I'd use a 24" or 26".
Harry B.

[jsflagstad]

Bonar,

Thanks for your thoughts. So why do you so openly hate Encore Rifles? Something I should know?

JSF

[Harry Bonar]

Dear Sir:
It's the shape of the things! I keep having the feeling of a handgun action converted into a "rifle."
I do not even like the shape of the T,C. handgun! Also, I do not like the shape of the muzzle-loader bbl. set-up.
There is nothing wrong with these rifles, they are strong, accurate rifles.
I'm a "traditionalist" in regard to muzzle-loaders - I believe they should be of the Berks, or Lanchaster style. I also decidely hate the abortions they call muzzle-loaders they call "in-line" - they are bubble-packed abortions shooting not a patched lead balls but sabots!
As you can see, I'm old, set in my ways and traditionalistic!
Yet, I agree reluctionaly that if the old makers had the technology to make these guns, they would have built them also. Nothing wrong with your gun - just me, an old cantankerous dinosaur who is a tradionalist who thinks a rifle out to look like a Winchester Mod. 70!
Harry B.

[jsflagstad]

Bonar,

Thanks for the reply and I respect your position. The only thing I don't like about the old stuff, is that I can't hit anything with them.

I did however, have an older gentleman out shoot me last summer at a black powder shoot. He was shooting a 58 caliber flintlock and I was shooting my inline. It is the only gun he owns and has killed just about every species of game in North America with it. You gotta respect that. He didn't beat me too bad, but nonetheless, he beat me.

JSF

[Ruger4570]

I guess to sort of answer your original question,, the optimum length would probably be a 26" barrel. I have a few 284's. one has a 22" and one a custom build with a 23". They both shoot fantastic. I would think that a 20" would create a lot of muzzle flash and certainly not get all the power out of the round.

[Harry Bonar]

Dear Sir:
I've got a 54 cal flintlock Hawken full stock almost ready to shape.
Horace Warner at 40 rods (220 yds) for practice shooting would sign the W of his last name on the target! Yes, with a muzzle-loader with a primitive scope from a bench-rest!
Glad that you like "charcoal burners" some of the greatest groups ever fired are from muzzle-loaders.
Yes, I like about a 24" 0r 26" bbl. on a 284 - good cartridge - used for wildcats.
Harry B.

[Scorch]

Since it is a single shot, your barrel length will not be such a handicap as with a bolt action. Why not 26" to wring the last fps out of it? And don't mind Harry. He's like a lot of us older folks who think a rifle should be pretty to look at too.

[jsflagstad]

Scorch,

Thanks for the input. I am leaning toward the 20" barrel for faster handling but your point does make sense. I am still waiting for cntryboy to give me some calculations before I make my final decision though. I don't mind Mr. Bonar's comments, actually I rather enjoy his comments and others such as yours. This is a great place to learn. I think with pretty guns, bueaty is in the eye of the beholder and I think that tastes definately change over time. At one time I thought that Winchester Modell 99's were as ugly as they come, now I wouldn't mind having one. My Hi Point Carbine is so ugly it's cute....and so on...

JSF

[HSMITH]

My 284 is 17", my dad has one that is 20". With the exact same loads of 4350 and 160 Sierra GameKings my gun runs about 60 FPS slower than his. This is just a sample of two rifles, and two more could even show the difference the other way. During legal shooting light I have not noticed a difference in flash, and there isn't really a difference in blast.

What bullet weights are you wanting to use? With a 160 you run out of room for powder pretty quickly in a magazine rifle, but in a single shot you will be able to chamber it for LOOOONG loads bringing quite a few more powders in to the mix. I would look for something in the 22-26" length for a single shot, and throat it so that a 160 doesn't need to be seated below the neck. That throating work alone will give you a distinct advantage over a magazine rifle, and the longer barrel on a single shot will make your 26" SS the same length basically as a 20" magazine rifle.

[jsflagstad]

Smith,

I haven't loaded for the 284 yet, but I really like how the Barnes X bullets (120 and 140 grainers have worked in my other 7mm rifles.

JSF

[cntryboy1289]

From what I have been seeing in my calculations, you will lose around 100 fps if you cut off around 4" of barrel. Like what has been said, a 26" barrel would be best on the rifle, but, this is your rifle and should be set up like you want it to be. If it was me and I wanted a shorter handier rifle to carry, I would stick with a 22" barrel. This will keep you around 100fsi lower than a standard 26" barrel and will still give you plenty of velocity for the round. You can subtract another 50fps to it if you come down to 20" from a 26" barrel. The choice is yours.

[dfaugh]

From what I've seen (and seen tested) for intermediate sized cartridges (Remenbering that the .284 has the same capacity as a 30-06), you lose 40-50 fps. per inch of barrel length. Which may or may not be signifacant for you. Personally, I wouldn't go below a 20" barrel, and would probably go 24" no matter how inconvenient that may be. If you handload you may be able to develop a good load for the shorter barrels.

[jiminthecorner]

Hi, I built a 284 on a 1909 Arg action,with a Douglas bbl @ 20". I also had it "long chambered" to an OAL of 3.1" I can load the longer cartridge to 7mm rem velocities with 160 gr bullets. It is my Moose rifle but I have Bang/flopped a number of our big whitetails up here and a coyote or two on the farm. I also agree with Bonar on the Encore. I sold the one I had. It just wasn't for me but that's my opinion. The 284 win is a most maligned cartridge and Layne Simpson is responsible for some of the predjudice! JITC

[jsflagstad]

Thanks for all of the info guys. I ordered the barrel this week. I got a 20" stainless bull barrel with scope mounts.

JSF

[jsflagstad]

I got the barrel this past week, also had TC put a muzzle brake on it. I put a cheap scope that I had just laying around on it to give it a quick try this afternoon. I loaded up some moderate 140 grain HP's and took 5 shots with it. The most amazing thing I noticed, was that this rifle exhibited little to no felt recoil . I would say even less than my 22-250. Given that characteristic, I really like it so far. When I started looking at the 284 win cartridge, many were warning me about the recoil of it as being rather high. Anyone have any thoughts on this? When I get the new scope I'll take it out and see how it groups.

Thanks again to everyone for the help..

JSF

[williamd]

Congrats on a fine calibre. Played with a number and rate it tops. Mostly M88's but others, too, in other 284 bore versions. Shortest bbl I used was 21 (don't ask) and found, as in other rifles, that powder selection, i.e., burn rate, has a lot to do it all. I could get almost the same velocity across my chrony from the 21 as from a 24. Remington built the M600 and 660 in various flavors all with short bbls and they performed just fine. Ever see a custom bench rest gun on a 40X action (or other) with a long bbl ... no.

[HSMITH]

Both mine and my dads 284's kick REALLY hard. Mine is a M88 Carbine and his is a M99 Featherweight. They really are brisk, mine feels like a M70 Featherweight in -06 with 220 grain bullets shooting my 160 load. I haven't met a 284 yet that wasn't quite brisk in recoil.

[jsflagstad]

That TC muzzle brake on mine must do wonders then. Like I said there is very little recoil, it amazes me a bit, but I'll take it.