20" Is Too Long

[CMP70306]

All of the above. It sticks up above my head and catches brush when slung and when field carried it just seems like it takes more maneuvering. In the stand it just feels heavy and awkward.

I used to hunt with a 24" barrel + brake and I never gave it a second thought. But after being spoiled with 16" the last few years, 20" plus a 12 ounce can seems unwieldy.

You haven’t lived until you’ve had to switch windows on a running buck with a 9” can on a 24” barrel in a stand that’s only 52” wide. I made it work but the buttstock went out a third window to make it happen quickly.

Now my rifles are 18” to 20” and I’m still using that 9” can as the suppression is too good to pass up.

 

[zrodwyo]

Suppressors do a lot to help short barrels...it is just getting over the cost and taking the plunge in a state that allows them.

True, but 20” suppressed is a a hell of a lot quieter than 16”.

 

[Ajsomp]

20” is about my upper limit for suppressed rifles. 16” gives up too much velocity for 6.5 creed or 6mm with factory loads for western hunting. 18” seems to be the sweet spot for 223 and 6 creed for me. With the right suppressor you’re still under what most factory 24” and muzzle devices are.

For east coast hunting - 16” all day.

 

[justin davis]

Suppressors do a lot to help short barrels...it is just getting over the cost and taking the plunge in a state that allows them.

Yea even with suppressors. Short barrels are still louder suppressed than longer suppressed barrels

 

[omicron1792]

One thing I like about the Blaser r8. It is 4” shorter than a standard bolt action rifle. So a 20” barrel is the overall length of a 16” barreled tikka.

 

[North of 60]

Yea even with suppressors. Short barrels are still louder suppressed than longer suppressed barrels

No doubt...my point was suppressors make shorter barrels on rifles more tolerable sound-wise, not that they are quieter than long barrels suppressed.