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

[DeepMauka]

Thanks for the responses and info. I think I’ll confidently go with the 20”.

 

[benconfused]

Thanks for the responses and info. I think I’ll confidently go with the 20”.

Hey how are you liking the 20' length?

I'm searching RS on feedback/threads around 223 barrel lengths. At this point I'm probably playing head games between 16, 18 and 20' lengths.

My use case is 1) primarily plinking between 1-600/700 training and 2) Kids whitetail rifle (1-300 yrds effective killing)

 

[DeepMauka]

I ended up getting a good deal on one with a 22” barrel, so I went with that one

 

[sierracharlie338]

Hey how are you liking the 20' length?

I'm searching RS on feedback/threads around 223 barrel lengths. At this point I'm probably playing head games between 16, 18 and 20' lengths.

My use case is 1) primarily plinking between 1-600/700 training and 2) Kids whitetail rifle (1-300 yrds effective killing)

Stick with 20 if you primarily plan to shoot 6-700. Hits on target will be hard enough without losing velocity from the shorter barrel. If the 300 and in hunting rifle is the primary purpose then 18 would be my choice.

 

[Ringbill27]

Since you can’t use a suppressor I’d find the longest barrel you can and enjoy the increased velocity over the short barrels.

 

[North of 60]

Unless only hunting in extremely thick brush/woods/forest were 16" would be more handy, definitely a 20" to better optimize the .223.

 

[77TMK]

Curious why people have a belief that a 16” is louder or something than a 20”. Can you not be bothered to use hearing protection?

 

[deerhunter628]

Curious why people have a belief that a 16” is louder or something than a 20”. Can you not be bothered to use hearing protection?

People believe it is louder because it is louder.