by Texas Sheepdawg » Tue May 31, 2011 12:42 pm
The longer the barrel, the more time that the bullet is in the barrel, extending time on the lands which affects accuracy, (better), more powder burn time, which means the powder is consumed more completely, thus maximum energy from ignition. That is, Energy from the burning powder having more time to increase the speed and energy of the projectile.
This consumption is desirable since this is a gas powered rifle and gas is needed to also cycle the carrier/bolt. Achieving a complete powder burn also means less muzzle flash. Muzzle flash occures when unignited powder exits the barrel. If you burn most all of it before it leaves the barrel you won't get distracted or blinded by the extra powder that flashes as it leaves the barrel. But I would think any possible gain or reduction in recoil from a 20" barrel would be negligible and due mainly to the 8 extra ounces of weight and other anomalies of physics. And one more thought. My ears are almost 50 years old. According to the United States Army, I wore mine out long before I enlisted in 1994. I didn't pass their physical.
So I have been trying to take care of what's left of them. If I could have a 24" barrel, I would be tickled pink. I want that muzzle blast and the brake blast as far out there as possible.
So if someone thought that any of my previous statements about the 20" were made to sound like the extra four inches actually helped reduce recoil, I must have poorly worded those statements. In summary, no, the 20" does not likely have less recoil than a 16". (Unless you are using a ROSS BRAKE and a Gunnut A1 or A2 RECOIL-LESS STOCK like me! LOL!! JK!)
If any of my statements and opinions here are erroneous, I'm sure WC, HOOT, GUNNUT, Ross, Bushmeister and all my friends will be emailing and calling me on my cell phone.
But opinions are like armpits. Everyone has one or two and they sometimes smell.
-Texas Sheepdawg
http://youtube.com/c/TexasSheepdawg21
NRA Life Member