Lets poke the beehive. 22LR Heavy barrels purly cosmetic for rifles under $1000

Canadiankeeper

Canadiankeeper

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
60   0   0
Location
Alberta
Ok, so ignoring your personal opinion that a heavier rifle is easier to shoot on the bench. Due to more weight, less likely to jerk the rifle around or shift.
Also ignoring the argument of barrel heating because that is controlled by the shooter... IE volume shot, how fast you shoot, ect... You can just let the barrel cool.
We are not including custom 10/22 barrels or annies ect... High end 22lr rifles and custom builds basically.

STOCK rifles, under 1000 bucks HB makes no difference in accuracy/precision !

I would also say the rifles over 1000 have tighter tolerances, better chambers, feeding systems, bolt lock ups, triggers and a litany of other reasons why they shoot better. So we are focusing on sub 1000.
 
Last edited:
Ugly cars wouldn't be ugly if they weren't ugly. But they are. That being said, I've found that you have to be shooting pretty rapidly to generate much heat in a 22lr barrel.
So yeah, for slow shooters it pribably won't make much of a difference. The real argument is which is more detrimental to tight groups; light weight rifle or hot barrel
 
TDizzle said:
Agreed, except you just "ignored" the two points that make the heavy barrel more accurate for 22's under $1000.
Click to expand...

I disagree, I ignored the human input. That can make ANY rifle shoot like crap, or shoot well... If the person doesn't know how to shoot well, it doesn't matter how much the rifle costs. It will never reach its potential.

If you take a heavy barrel savage, CZ, Marlin, ruger, ect ect... Vrs a regular barrel. Strap them in to a rifle sled/vice. Take 5 shots, with 2 minutes between shots. None of those manufactured rifles will be guaranteed to group better then its heavy barreled counter part.
 
woofer2609 said:
Ugly cars wouldn't be ugly if they weren't ugly. But they are. That being said, I've found that you have to be shooting pretty rapidly to generate much heat in a 22lr barrel.
So yeah, for slow shooters it pribably won't make much of a difference. The real argument is which is more detrimental to tight groups; light weight rifle or hot barrel
Click to expand...

I would argue, what is more detrimental. A shooter who is unstable or with poor form vrs a hot barrel. The weight of the rifle only comes into play once you put the human factor into the equation. It MAY help some shooters stabilize.

If testing for true accuracy/precision, we do as much as we can to take the human error out of the equation. IE why led sleds come into play, rear monopods, bipods, ect. None of the mentioned tools with make a rifle group better, they simply help take the human input/error out of the equation for precision.
 
ya know, my dad and myself have twin guns we picked up back in the 90's.
mine is bone stock on a folding stock and his is the same with the exception of two thing.... he added a GM bull barrel to it and a Boyd stock.

i should have him bring it up and we should test them to see.
both are $200 10/22's just one has a $100 barrel and the other has the stock barrel.

he is coming up for a visit here in 3 weeks, ill shoot him a email and ask him to bring his up.
 
smokeater40 said:
Heavy barrels, less resonance (vibration)? More accurate and consistent groups. No? Shooter still the biggest factor though.
Click to expand...

I agree that the shooter makes a HUGE factor. I'm saying we take away the shooter. Drop the rifles in a vice. Compare results. I bet that there is NO difference in precision. Everything else is too poor of quality to really give the minimal advantage that a heavy barrel can provide for 22LR. Basically the rest of the rifle voids any chance the "heavy" barrel had of helping groups...

I think that with rim fire, there are so many other factors (within the rifle and ammo) that the benefits we see from heavy barrels in center fire rifles is lost on rim fires.
 
wayupnorth said:
ya know, my dad and myself have twin guns we picked up back in the 90's.
mine is bone stock on a folding stock and his is the same with the exception of two thing.... he added a GM bull barrel to it and a Boyd stock.

i should have him bring it up and we should test them to see.
both are $200 10/22's just one has a $100 barrel and the other has the stock barrel.

he is coming up for a visit here in 3 weeks, ill shoot him a email and ask him to bring his up.
Click to expand...

I encourage it, try to get rid of the human factor as much as you can. Use led sleds, or rifle vices for shooting so that there is as little to no human error.

wayupnorth said:
i have to believe there is a difference.
why else would we all do it?
Click to expand...

Simple, we are told it is better. Marketing at its finest! Not to mention we all like to you know, shoot our rifles. So it may help reduce the human error, but mechanically there is no benefit within the rifle itself.

I think that with rim fire, there are so many other factors (within the rifle and ammo) that the benefits we see from heavy barrels in center fire rifles is lost on rim fires. At least low end rim fires. Not custom match rifles or high end ones.
 
The question: "Are heavy barrels simply for looks on a rifle that costs no more than $1000?" The OP's contention is that a heavy barrel makes no difference in accuracy. He wants to ignore the part that a heavier barreled rifle gives greater stability when shooting from the bench.

Generally speaking that is true. There's no reason to believe that a thicker barrel will necessarily shoot more accurately than a slimmer one. The experience of CZ shooters posting on the CZ forum on RFC would support that idea. The simple fact that a barrel is a bull barrel does not in itself automatically mean it is more accurate.

But it is not always true. There's something to be said for a rifle that has sufficient mass that it gives greater inertia than one that is light and has less. In other words, it's easier to hold a rifle that has enough weight on target than it is to do so with one that is too light. This applies to off-hand shooting as well as from the bench.

There's no reason to believe that a heavy barrel gives any advantage when it comes to overheating because a .22LR will not overheat when shooting for accuracy. I'm not familiar with how warm a .22LR barrel becomes in semi-auto rifles that can shoot very large magazines very quickly, but no one should give a hoot about those in the context of this discussion.
 
grauhanen said:
The question: "Are heavy barrels simply for looks on a rifle that costs no more than $1000?" The OP's contention is that a heavy barrel makes no difference in accuracy. He wants to ignore the part that a heavier barreled rifle gives greater stability when shooting from the bench.

Generally speaking that is true. There's no reason to believe that a thicker barrel will necessarily shoot more accurately than a slimmer one. The experience of CZ shooters posting on the CZ forum on RFC would support that idea. My own CZ 452 American is a better shooter than the other CZ's I've had, including 453 Varmint and a 455 Varmint (although I must confess that I never found out how well my 453 Lux shot before I moved it in a reallocation of resources). The simple fact that a barrel is a bull barrel does not in itself automatically mean it is more accurate.

But it is not always true. There's something to be said for a rifle that has sufficient mass that it gives greater inertia than one that is light and has less. In other words, it's easier to hold a rifle that has enough weight on target than it is to do so with one that is too light.
Click to expand...

So, you agree with me. The fact a bull barrel does not in itself automatically mean it is more accurate. It can simply lend itself as a factor to help lessen the human error in shooting.

IE heavy barrels are simply cosmetic, or to be considered AT BEST similar to a bipod.
 
I would guess from a compleatly uneducated perspective that the biathalon rifle is indicitive in this question. They want as light a rifle as possible as they are required to carry the weight however it is still an 8lb .22 due to the need for the bulky stock to aid support positions and while the barrel isn't as heavy as some you see it isn't exactly a pencil barrel
 
If two barrels were of equal quality (not custom match quality as per your question) but factory production grade barrels, there should be no difference in accuracy potential based on contour alone (one is heavy, one is "sporter".) What is most likely observed is that the lighter barrel will be "pickier" and shoot fewer loads well compared to the heavy barrel which will shoot a wider variety of ammunition acceptably. Either barrel shooting it's pet load will be just as accurate. It is actually easier to "tune" a lighter contour barrel, and all of this boils down to barrel harmonics and vibration.

Now let's throw manufacturing inconsistency at this quality grade into the mix :) any one barrel of either contour may be more or less accurate than the next.
 
Sleeper said:
I would guess from a compleatly uneducated perspective that the biathalon rifle is indicitive in this question. They want as light a rifle as possible as they are required to carry the weight however it is still an 8lb .22 due to the need for the bulky stock to aid support positions and while the barrel isn't as heavy as some you see it isn't exactly a pencil barrel
Click to expand...

they are match quality rifles that sell for 2grand plus. I clearly am speaking towards under 1000 rifles.
 
Last edited:
RabidM4U5 said:
If two barrels were of equal quality (not custom match quality as per your question) but factory production grade barrels, there should be no difference in accuracy potential based on contour alone (one is heavy, one is "sporter".) What is most likely observed is that the lighter barrel will be "pickier" and shoot fewer loads well compared to the heavy barrel which will shoot a wider variety of ammunition acceptably. Either barrel shooting it's pet load will be just as accurate. It is actually easier to "tune" a lighter contour barrel, and all of this boils down to barrel harmonics and vibration.

Now let's throw manufacturing inconsistency at this quality grade into the mix :) any one barrel of either contour may be more or less accurate than the next.
Click to expand...


This guy gets what I'm getting at!

Also lets remind everyone I'm just :nest:

have just been hearing well a HB is a lot better, because they are better. Arguments lately. When in fact there are SO many more important factors into a 22 rifle and a heavy barrel doesn't automatically make a rifle more accurate. I had a guy at the range try to tell me his savage mk2 HB was better then any CZ while he was grouping over an inch at 50...
 
Recoil is the product of two factors;recoil velocity and mass of gun. An HB will have a heavier mass, therefore,less recoil. Less recoil will lead to less movement of the firearm TYPICALLY resulting in tighter groups all other variables the same ( shooter, ammo, weather) I have a regular barrel that can shoot as well as the HB , just not as consistently. YMMV
 
Man we overthink these things. You know what really matters? The quality of the bore. And by that I mean lack of tooling marks, proper consistent diameter, accurate chamber dimensions etc.. I have a mossberg from the 50's that has a thin sporter barrel AND a magazine tube hanging off of it, it's not glass bedded, and it out shoots every other rimfire I've ever owned besides maybe the BSA international ISU, but that's not really a fair comparison. It out shoots the heavy barrel savage mkII I had, all the Marlins, all the CZ's... And it's because back in the day they focused their attention on the quality of the bore and these old mossbergs are properly lapped at the factory before the chamber or crown were cut.

The dimensions of the barrel are irrelevant as to the barrels potential accuracy. UNTIL you factor in the shooter. If it's not comfortable to hold on target it isn't going to shoot as well. Which mostly comes into play for offhand shooting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom