16” vs 20” performance in 223 (non suppressed)

[DeepMauka]

I’ve tried searching, but cannot find enough information with a non suppressed rifle. All of the information data I found is with suppressed rifles. I am looking to buy a new Tikka t3x lite in 223. I cannot use a suppressor because of my state laws. My ears and freedom are jealous of you guys who can (no pun intended).

I was wondering how much performance I’d be losing with a 16” barrel vs a 20”. I will be backpack hunting with this rifle in some not so friendly terrain, so a smaller rifle will be easier to carry around and pack out.

Is the performance between the two barrels so much that I should go with the 20”, or will I be ok with the 16”?

Thanks

 

[bojangles808]

what distance shots are you likely taking? if inside 350-400 a 16 in Tikka is likely still good out to 400 yds with ammo like eldms or tmks. also depends on elevations. I have the 20 in Tikka unsupressed and I like it, i feel like 18-20in is an ideal length unsupressed for handling. I get 2693 with 73 g ELDM and 2787 with black hills tmks. take 100 fps off those numbers and plug them into a solver and see which you like better for a better 16 vs 20 performance eval

 

[omicron1792]

I’m all about the shortest barrel. However if unsuppressed I would do 18-20”

 

[Styer22]

At 1000ft above sea level a 16” will get simple brass factory 77TMK loads like AAC out to ~1800fps at 450ish yards.
A 20” barrel would get the same load to 1800fps at ~500yards.

Delta at the muzzle is about 150fps. This is technically comparing a 20” tikka bolt to a 16” AR on the same day with the same lot of ammo.

 

[199p]

16" unsuppressed will be nasty to shoot

 

[UnckleBob]

I’ve tried searching, but cannot find enough information with a non suppressed rifle. All of the information data I found is with suppressed rifles. I am looking to buy a new Tikka t3x lite in 223. I cannot use a suppressor because of my state laws. My ears and freedom are jealous of you guys who can (no pun intended).

I was wondering how much performance I’d be losing with a 16” barrel vs a 20”. I will be backpack hunting with this rifle in some not so friendly terrain, so a smaller rifle will be easier to carry around and pack out.

Is the performance between the two barrels so much that I should go with the 20”, or will I be ok with the 16”?

Thanks

With you goals, I would buy a 223 T3X with a 20" barrel and see if it fits your needs. Without a can, that rifle (especially if you buy a Compact model) is pretty compact. If you don't like it, have the barrel cut.

 

[Lee_R]

Paul Harrell on YouTube has videos on this.

 

[Kaleb]

A 16” wouldn’t balance to suit me. My 16” barrels are fine adding a light suppressor back but very butt heavy without. Obviously balance is also dependent on the rest of the package but for a tikka I’d say 20” would be about as short as I’d go for balance and muzzle blast.

 

[Kimber7man]

I’m loving my 16” roughtech ranch, suppressed though.

 

[DeepMauka]

what distance shots are you likely taking? if inside 350-400 a 16 in Tikka is likely still good out to 400 yds with ammo like eldms or tmks. also depends on elevations. I have the 20 in Tikka unsupressed and I like it, i feel like 18-20in is an ideal length unsupressed for handling. I get 2693 with 73 g ELDM and 2787 with black hills tmks. take 100 fps off those numbers and plug them into a solver and see which you like better for a better 16 vs 20 performance eval

Thanks. I was thinking 500 and in

At 1000ft above sea level a 16” will get simple brass factory 77TMK loads like AAC out to ~1800fps at 450ish yards.
A 20” barrel would get the same load to 1800fps at ~500yards.

Delta at the muzzle is about 150fps. This is technically comparing a 20” tikka bolt to a 16” AR on the same day with the same lot of ammo.

 

[northernalpine]

Generally speaking, plan to lose 25-30fps per inch of barrel reduction. The performance difference would be 100fps to 120fps (roughly) loss between a 16” and 20” barrel. Hand-loading can potentially recoup some of the lost velocity, but there’s a limit.

Velocity and bullet selection dictate how far you can/should engage animals. If you are unsuppressed and targeting 500yds, 18”-20” is a safe bet for a wide variety of bullets and still easy to carry. You could probably get away with 16” but the margins are tight and bullet selection narrows considerably.

 

[NWBLKTAIL]

I would run 20” if you want 500 and In.

 

[Samson7x]

Here’s some recent data from ammo I tried in one of the new 16” threaded versions fyi.

Hornady black 75gr: 2577fps
Hornady 73gr eld: 2588fps
Hornady frontier 68gr: 2766fps
Hornady varmint express 55gr: 2845fps

 

[SloppyJ]

I wouldn't recommend a 16" unsuppressed. Go 18 or 20 and call it.

 

[Kaleb]

I wouldn't recommend a 16" unsuppressed. Go 18 or 20 and call it.

Agreed. More to it than chronograph numbers. Muzzle blast will be about like having a brake and it will balance like a fat kid on a seesaw.

 

[wind gypsy]

Another vote for 20" if unsuppressed. That is still plenty handy, will balance better, wont be as loud, and you get an extra 100 FPS. No brainer.

 

[Steve300xcw]

18" in a bolt gun is a nice place to be.

 

[Kaleb]

So curiosity got the best of me. My regular tikka sporter 223 is in a ctr stock so I could use ctr magazines for longer coal and I like the ctr. I thought I had the barrel cut at 16” but that must have been something else or he just left it touch longer? Either way I’m either 17 3/4” give or take. The balance point is doable but a little farther back than I like personally but we all have opinions. I’m sure we can have different opinions on muzzle blast too. So set up the way mine is 18” would work if you’re okay with where the balance is.

I don’t know why my pictures aren’t showing

 

[bdg848]

16" unsuppressed will be nasty to shoot

I'm not criticizing, genuinely asking, why do you feel it'd be nasty? I wouldn't shoot a 20inch without hearing protection or a suppressor either, that would still cause hearing damage, but I do shoot 16'inch ARs all the time (with earplugs). I don't find the muzzle blast to be bothersome at all. I have not, however shot a 16inch bolt gun without a flash hider like an AR has. Does the basic mil style flashhider make that big of a difference in the experience assuming you are using ear pro with both?

 

[199p]

I'm not criticizing, genuinely asking, why do you feel it'd be nasty? I wouldn't shoot a 20inch without hearing protection or a suppressor either, that would still cause hearing damage, but I do shoot 16'inch ARs all the time (with earplugs). I don't find the muzzle blast to be bothersome at all. I have not, however shot a 16inch bolt gun without a flash hider like an AR has. Does the basic mil style flashhider make that big of a difference in the experience assuming you are using ear pro with both?

I think because I shoot so many suppressed guns ive gone soft, its just so much nicer.
Just the thought makes me cringe and i can almost hear my ears ringing haha, its more if you dont get a chance to plug up or your with a mate and are trying to talk at the sametime.

I wear hearing protection even with a suppressor if I have time, ill plug up and if shooting braked rifle ill use ear plugs and muff overtop. i dont have anything that runs naked anymore.

least you will get a cool fireball with nothing on the end, not sure about a flash hider never ran one sorry.