Rifles should not have long barrels. 20-22 inches is about right.

>>34069755
Better velocity and a better sight radius (negated by optics usage i guess) makes a better long range gun over all.

The velocity, depending on the cartridge and powder used, can make a men cartridge into a ridiculously flat shooting laser, hence longer barrels improving accuracy.

You want to maximize the energy from your propellant

More powder to burn, or a slow burning mix, requires a longer barrel

But if your barrel is long enough that your propellant has ceased to add energy to your projectile, it's useless

>>34069828
Which is why it gets pointless around the 20" area.
I honestly think 18" is about the best balance for most cartridges.
But then I've also never made an in depth study of this shit so take that for what you will.

>>34069828

>not shooting fireballs to blind your opponent at night in CQC

>>34069755
For optimal velocity, you want a barrel as long as it takes to burn through the powder in the round you're shooting.

Longer barrel are heavier and help stabilize it, a thicker one would work too. A stiffer barrel may help with accuracy at long distances, another approach is to let it vibrate predictably.

>>34069755
Generally true for most applications. Some people are long distance hole punchers and can actually utilize a few hundred extra fps, however

>>34069779
>>34069828
>>34069873
Minor differences in velocity don't matter because very few riflemen are stable enough to shoot beyond about 200 yards anyway.

>>34069873
>Longer barrel are heavier and help stabilize it
Wrong. The most accurate barrels are short and thick.

>>34069915
That's only practical for benchrest shooting, not the field.

>>34069933
>200 yards
>two hundred yards
>six hundred feet
>maximum range he can shoot a rifle
Jesus, no guns. This isn't call of duty.

>>34069873
>For optimal velocity, you want a barrel as long as it takes to burn through the powder in the round you're shooting.

Yeah maybe, if there were only one type of ammo brand ammo and it were all identical.

This is why, when loading for accuracy, rifles and pistols have different load data for the same cartridge - you can guarantee a more efficient burn in a shorter barrel simply by using a faster burning powder and a heavier projectile.

>>34069933
>riflemen
>regular fucking riflemen
There's a reason we mostly issue carbines of 16"> dipshit.

If you're arguing barrel length for the average fucker with a gun, yeah, a carbine is best.
Hell, I assumed you meant in general in my first post.
Sorry I forgot that this was CoD; I'd have never argued your point if I'd known.

And the entire point of free floated handguards is to take advantage of the whole "predictable vibrations" concept.
It works great, hell, it works better usually than the rigidity BS you seem to be spouting.

>>34069933
Some people are benchrest shooters. There are also rifles in calibers larger than .308 which need a >22 inch barrel for actual military applications like sniping and destroying vehicles

>>34069997
Yeah, because the M107A2CQ totally isn't real and doesn't exist and can't destroy vehicles.

>>34069971
I'd like to see you shoot beyond 200 yards without a benchrest under field conditions.

>>34069989
>Hell, I assumed you meant in general in my first post.
I do mean for general purpose rifles.

>>34069989
>It works great, hell, it works better usually than the rigidity BS you seem to be spouting.
It's not bullshit. Short, stiff barrels really are more accurate.
>>34069997
>Some people are benchrest shooters
There's nothing wrong with benchrest shooting as long as you don't confuse it with practical shooting. Benchrest shooting is a test of equipment, not marksmanship.

>>34070034
Did you ever wonder why its only used in cramped places like boats and helicopters? You can also put .308 through a 10 inch barrel but its far from ballistically efficient.

>>34070062
>Benchrest shooting is a test of equipment, not marksmanship.
Are you that autist that was here a few days ago claiming you could shoot sub moa offhand and then never posted proof of any kind?

File: 1467156383761.jpg (576KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

576KB, 1920x1200px

>>34069755
>spend hours modding FO4
>spend hours building my settlements
>give NPC armor and best modded weapons
>the enemy spawns inside the settlement and kills 10 people

fuck this game

>>34070104
>Are you that autist that was here a few days ago claiming you could shoot sub moa offhand and then never posted proof of any kind?
I have never said anything like that. Why would I? That would contradict what I just said about benchrest shooting.

>>34070143
Im not convinced. Your manner of writing and this thread are awfully similar to the op of that thread. Its almost as if youre likely a shitposter making inflammatory threads for the (you)s. Really gets my noggin joggin.

>>34070164
Do you have no reading comprehension at all? First I say that benchrest shooting is not a valid reflection of marksmanship because the whole purpose of a benchrest is to take the human element out of the equation. Then you accuse me of saying that I can shoot as well from offhand as from a bench. Do you not see that those two statements are contradictory? Your accusation is a non sequitur.

>>34069755
Longer barrel imparts more spin to the round and ensures a more complete powder burn, which increases velocity, increased velocity equates to a flatter trajectory and longer range.

It depends what you're talking about. Shooting off-hand at distance is not preferred. If you can support the rifle with a strong shooting stance or other aide, the long barrel makes a lot of sense.

Retard.

>>34070214
>Longer barrel imparts more spin to the round
Says who?
>>34070214
>increases velocity
Not enough to make a difference. You reach a point of diminishing marginal returns when it comes to velocity.

>>34070132
>buying FO4 in the first place

>>34070209
I was simply accusing you of b8ing.

If you genuinely dont understand the reason for barrels over 22 inches then youre either an idiot or being intentionally dense.

>>34070305
The only reason is greater velocity, which doesn't make a difference inside any realistic shooting difference. No man or deer is going to be able to tell if you shot him with a 20 inch barrel or a 28 inch barrel. The result is the same either way.

>>34070243

You shut your whore mouth right this minute.

>I can't tell you how many times mods broke my games.
>ANY mission that involves going to the Corvega Factory can sod off!

>>34070325
Except thats wrong. Hunting and warfare are not the only "realistic shooting". Even if they were, common military loads rely on VELOCITY to work correctly. 5.56 often ice pics beyond a couple hundred yards with short barrels.

File: 338-lapua-barrel-length-and-muzzle-velocity-graph.png (72KB, 882x611px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 882x611px

>>34070227
>>Longer barrel imparts more spin to the round
Fucking physics you dunce. The bullet accelerates longer, therefore it has higher velocity, therefore it follows the rifling faster.
Also the velocity increase is pretty significant for long range shooting.

File: 1470893254613.jpg (57KB, 646x536px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 646x536px

>>34069755
>Actually, a short barrel is more accurate because it is stiffer.

A longer barrel is more cumbersome when it is unable to handle the recoil of the shot. However barrel length does not affect interior ballistics but only exterior ballistics in which rely on a lot more variables to ruin the shot, including wind speed, drop, bullet rotation, and velocity to maintain energy while under drag coefficients. The only material related problem is if the barrel thickness is unable to handle the recoil, no matter the length. That is why people buy HB and BB's while fluted is just a meme, even if they are advertized to "reduce temperature deformation". You can have .308 a barrel as long as 30" and it will be a tack driver, or a short 8" and it can leap out of your hands. They will have to both outrun and outlast the recoil, the main culprit of skill limitation that is know to move guns on it's own.

>>34070349
>Hunting and warfare are not the only "realistic shooting"
Of course they are. Target shooting is enjoyable and good practice, but it's just that, recreation and training.

>>34070349
>common military loads rely on VELOCITY to work correctly. 5.56 often ice pics beyond a couple hundred yards with short barrels.
I don't know what you mean my ice pick.

Actually, velocity is more important for soft points than FMJ because it helps soft points expand, but a soft point will still kill at impact velocities as low as 1800 fps.

>>34070352
>Fucking physics you dunce. The bullet accelerates longer, therefore it has higher velocity, therefore it follows the rifling faster.
It's a little more complicated than that. There are other factors like twist rate, ogive length, aspect ratio, etc.

>>34070352
>Also the velocity increase is pretty significant for long range shooting.
So get closer then. If you are so far away that you need a super fast bullet, then you're probably going to miss anyway.

>>34070418
>However barrel length does not affect interior ballistics
Of course it does. Barrels vibrate. Stiff barrels vibrate less.

>>34070427
Or you can get gud like Rex
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emJ0RToUYGE

>>34069755
>This is fuddlore that comes from the fact that old guns did shoot better with longer barrels because they had longer sight radius. Actually, a short barrel is more accurate because it is stiffer.

Not necessarily true. Accurazing a rifle depends on a whole lot of factors. Barrel harmonics can be shit on a short barrel if you don't do it right.

>>34070445
If that were true then nothing needs to be free floated.

>>34069755
ITT: Nobody who actually thoroughly understands barrel harmonics. Brutal.

>>34070460
Fake video.
>>34070480
Free floating allows barrels to vibrate the same way every time. It's all about consistency.

>>34070506
>Thinks Rex is fake
>LaughingGirls.jpeg

You must be new.

>>34070519
Also here's a video from him explaining rifle vibration and barrel harmonics, for those who wish to learn something proper.

>>34070427
>i dont know what you mean by ice pick
>i dont understand how m855 is designed to work
>i dont understand how fragmenting ammo works
We should administer tests before we allow people to start threads here

>>34070531
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h407yVskVeM
Whoops my b.

>>34070519
The fact that he claims to hit a beer can at 1200 yards on the first try is in itself evidence that it's fake. Anybody can put videos on the internet making incredible claims.

>>34069755
Wrong.

Rifles should have longer barrels, around 40 inch. First of all because you want the biggest velocity you can get, secondly because you want to outreach your enemies during bayonet charge.

Fucking noguns who never saw action in military, not knowing the reality of war.

>>34069933

>not wanting a longer barrel for shooting through body and vehicle armor when you inevitably get waco'd

Fuck off normie.

>>34070062

>he cant hit shit only 200 yards out

Kek, 200 yards is when I grab my rifle instead of my super blackhawk.

File: 1493255252040.jpg (111KB, 1553x1134px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 1553x1134px

>>34070243
>Buying FO4 when you can download it FOR FREE right now off steam and use the Codex crack to keep it forever

>>34070579
Ok, I admit that you have a point. In fact, you are the first person in this thread to give me a valid counterargument. My hat off to you.

>>34070571
>First of all because you want the biggest velocity you can get
No, you don't. You want just enough and no more. More than enough is overkill and comes at the price of fatigue.

>>34070588
>bragging on the internet.

>>34070561
Check out the rest of the channel before you call bullshit. I mean he has a 40 hour playlist precision shooting in great detail. he's pretty vetted here on /k/

>>34070609
He may have a lot of valuable information, but saying you hit a beer can at 1200 yards on the first shot is bragging. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

>>34070599

>being a shitshot

>>34070594
>You want just enough and no more.
You always aim for overkill you retard.
>More than enough is overkill and comes at the price of fatigue.
Tell me that after you fire 30 rounds into zulu warrior with your 2" barrelled gucci AR15 and he's still charging at you with a spear, he doesn't have a shield any-more because you shoot off his hand but he's still gonna kill you because your puny ass rifle couldn't do the job and you're so concerned about "fatigue" that you don't even carry bayonet you faggot.

>>34069755
All I can think about after seeing that rifle and jawline is Chad Thundershot

>>34070628
You are too. The only difference is that I'm honest about it. A man's got to know his limitations, as Clint Eastwood said.

>>34070631
>You always aim for overkill you retard.
Spoken like a true ballistician. We often fall victim to the "more is better" mentality.
>>34070631
I assure you that a 20 inch barreled 308 will kill any Zulu just as dead as a 28 inch Lazzeroni Warbird.

>>34070640
LOL.

>>34070652
>I assure you that a 20 inch barreled 308 will kill any Zulu just as dead as a 28 inch Lazzeroni Warbird.
It won't.

I know I've tried. Ever since I use my DIY 40 inch percussion .75 musket made out of huge, superthick steel pipe that can survive gigantic loads of smokeless powder. I also have 3 foot long bayonet to be sure that I can outreach them.

File: when_will_they_learn.jpg (230KB, 900x504px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 900x504px

>>34069755
>Rifles should not have long barrels.

File: 1888fencing-bayonet.jpg (68KB, 640x511px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 640x511px

>>34070571
At last someone that knows his shit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYQTFT9WU_I#t=250

>>34070661
>not using Gustav
It's almost like you want to raped by Zulus.

>>34070682
Thought about it.

Hard to put bayonet on it.

>>34070626
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFDR6lymjXA
He has lots of videos of him shooting consistently at 1200+ yds.
With the right tools, knowledge, and experience, it's really not that hard to shot long range. Although honestly equipment is by far the most important.

File: 18685296_777218615769406_753760547_n.png (211KB, 640x362px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 640x362px

>>34069858

>>34070690
Anyone can shoot at 1200 yards, but your group size at that range is going to be the size of a garbage can lid unless you bolt the damn gun down to a bench. We're talking about ranges so far that even your heartbeat can affect shot placement.

>>34070690
>honestly equipment is by far the most important
True, but short of using a robot, no amount of equipment can overcome the limiting factor, which is human error.

What about shotguns? What barrel length is the most efficient for velocity of shot and slugs?

>>34070766
Hard for me to say. With shotguns, rate of spread is important because it determines the ideal range. There are too many other factors like choke tubes and shot size. You best ask an experience birdhunter.

We wanted to give you bullpups so that you could have a 20-inch barrel in a carbine package but apparently the future isn't good enough for you...

>>34070777
Nice trips, but I meant more for buckshot and slugs for blowing up piggies.

>>34070712
Yes, and in the video he hit a can at 1200yds he was using a $4500 Surgeon rifle in .338 lm. Was there a bit of luck involved? Yes absolutely, but he is more than capable of hitting .5 moa at 1200yds with .338 lm

Just because you're a bad shot, doesn't mean everyone else is.

>>34070787
>>/out/

>>34070787
But then I can't use bolt actions.
>>34070789
For close range buckshot, 18 inches is plenty.
>>34070800
>Was there a bit of luck involved? Yes
There was a lot of luck involved, assuming it's not fake.
>>34070800
>hitting .5 moa at 1200yds
Even if your rifle, ammo, and shooter were perfect in every way, the wind alone would be enough to make your group size bigger than MOA at that distance.

>>34069755
If I want dead on accuracy you will not a barrel longer than 22 inches retard
> rifle will be too heavy and cumbersome
You'll be laying down on some hill 1 mile away from your target so who gives a shit if you have to walk a little to get to the spot

>>34070988
>If I want dead on accuracy you will not a barrel longer than 22 inches retard
Fuddlore. Short barrels are just as accurate as long ones.

>>34070062
Bro ham, 200 yard shots on man size targets are Ezpz. 18 inch wide at 200 yards is 9 MOA. How fucking trash are you?

>>34071021
I don't consider an 18 inch group to be acceptable. I expect better shot placement than that.

>>34071032
That's the minimum accuracy to hit the target, dingus. Reading comprehension is important. 4 MOA is about "average" shooter level of accuracy off hand. That's an 8 inch group at 200 yards, meaning you strike at most 4 inches away from point of aim. That's a center torso hit and is easily achievable in any """field""" condition. Go shoot 3 gun or AR Steel challenge.

>>34071054
>4 MOA is about "average" shooter level of accuracy off hand.
Says who? Do you have statistics on how close the average shooter can hold?

>>34070800
theres a whole shit load of difference of hitting a target at 1200 yards, and hitting with the first shot at 1200 yards

>>34070599
Eh I switch at half his distance for 357 magnum and I am average for distance pistol shooting and not using optics. He may be rounding his distance up a bit but its by no means impossible especially with some of the newer options

>>34069933
Are you retarded? US Army rifle qualification goes out to 300 using irons, and the Marines go further using optics for quals. I think like 500. Half the people I went to basic with had never held a gun before and the military gives horribly simple marksmanship training in basic training, yet they were making 300 yard shots within 8 weeks, and only a couple days worth of actual training. We had beat to shit M16A2's on top of that. Anyway, shooting past 200 isn't really a feat.

>>34072017
Summer time and universities are letting out at staggered increments we will get kids and manchildren who never shot irl.

>>34069755
Not every gun is .223 you dumb fuck, let the smart people sort out how long the barrel should be.

>>34069755
Why even use a barrel then? Since velocity doesn't matter, just throw your bullets at the enemy! It also provides the benefit having no barrel length, so room clearing is ideal for tossing bullets!

>34069933
The most accurate barrels are long and thick. You won't ever ever ever find anyone shooting 1000yd+ with any accuracy with a barrel 20 inches or less.
But alas this is a troll thread so no (you) for you.

>>34069755
>20-22 inches is about right
You mean like nearly every rifle made after WW2?

>>34069779
depends on the cartridge.

After 16in cartridges like .357/.44/.45-70 loose velocity.

>>34072211
.45-70 absolutely does not lose velocity after 16in.

>>34069755
does anyone have the PDF of "rifle accuracy facts"?

I'd drop it on mega, but I lost my copy when I microwaved my hard drive

>>34072049
I'm not in a university, fuck boy. I went to trade school. I didn't put myself into ridiculous amounts of debt just to slave away at shit I don't enjoy. And yeah, I definitely never shot a gun at all during my 8 year contract, and I definitely don't own guns because, ya know, I'm obviously a man child for pointing out someone is incredibly wrong by pointing out widely available facts. Woops.

>>34072575
Sure thing guy next you will tell me short barreled 5.56 is effective with anything but snowflake rounds. Now for laughs what did you ever get issued with a shorter than carbine length that was not an underslung shotgun or a pistol. You are trying but folks aint buying

>>34069755

>shooting deer dead is the only use for rifles