Armory Sponsor
Posted: 6/11/2008 3:03:10 PM EDT
| Can anyone give any info on what I will be losing ballistics wise by getting a 16 inch barrel FAL instead of a 20-21 inch barrel? About how far will the 16 inch barrel reach out there? 20 inch? Thanks for any input. |
|
My load, 45gr IMR 4895 behind a 165gr SST, in my 21 inch barrel FAL gives 2750FPS. Out of my 16 inch PARA I get a little over 2550. Both barrels are IMBEL manufacture so it should be a good comparison. As far as how the shorter barrel shoots at distance. I have shot both at 300 yards. Accuracy appears to be about the same. Both rifles hold around 3MOA. About as good a I can do. |
If I remember right, I was told that a 50 to 75 FPS loss should be expected for every inch shorter that the barrel is. I was asking the same question a while back over on the files. It was pretty funny when I asked a stupid question in response to a post on the subject, "I was ridiculously tired from working two jobs", but anyway, that dude freaked! You would have thought I insulted his Mom!  Most posts that I searched though seemed to agree that there would not be a significant loss in ballistics. I was going from 18" to 16" barrel. I wanted a carbine length FAL. So it will depend on what you want the rifle to accomplish for you, and if all else fails...Get Both!  One site I saved on the subject was this... www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_barrel.htm |
16" with the integral brake is not pleasant at all. Buddy of mine sent two back to DSA for 19" bbls without brakes after about 20rds through the braked 16's. Keith P.S. He had the same results with a 16" .308 bolt gun with a brake except he just sold the complete rifle. |
Armory Sponsor