++Oct 20/22 UPDATE++ 9 inch Carbon Fiber Takedown Barrels Anyone ?

old303 said:
I'd have thought the whole purpose of a takedown was to be able to store the firearm broken-down, and that there was little point to shortening either half past the shortest you could get them both? With the 26" rule, yes, I could see wanting to get close to 13" either half, but going to a 9" barrel seems more than you can practically use.
Click to expand...

You’d be surprised. ��. I’ve had one of their 9” barrels on a regular 10-22 for years. Brother-in-law laughed at it when he first saw it. He quit laughing when I started dropping gophers at 80 yards with no problem. The only reason the BC crowd wants 12.5 is because their hunting regs preclude use of any gun with a 12” or under barrel. They get shafted with the Mare’s Leg as well.
 
KePet said:
You’d be surprised. ��. I’ve had one of their 9” barrels on a regular 10-22 for years. Brother-in-law laughed at it when he first saw it. He quit laughing when I started dropping gophers at 80 yards with no problem. The only reason the BC crowd wants 12.5 is because their hunting regs preclude use of any gun with a 12” or under barrel. They get shafted with the Mare’s Leg as well.
Click to expand...

Yes, I understand the motivation for a short barrel if you're building a just-over-26" gun with a decent length of pull back at the stock end, and that leaves you needing not a lot of inches out front. That's a fun gun, and quite handy too!

But what I'm questioning is that in a takedown. All the above applies when it's assembled, but for minimum storage length you're breaking it down and the back half from the stock to receiver is probably the part that has to be a certain length to cover your LOP, so a front half the same length makes sense and doesn't make the package any longer and gives you some sight radius. I guess I'm more interested in how compact a package a takedown makes broken down than in what it works out to assembled. And a really short barrel might even force the back half to be longer to keep the assembled thing up past 26" and that seriously unbalances the whole takedown concept.
 
old303 said:
Yes, I understand the motivation for a short barrel if you're building a just-over-26" gun with a decent length of pull back at the stock end, and that leaves you needing not a lot of inches out front. That's a fun gun, and quite handy too!

But what I'm questioning is that in a takedown. All the above applies when it's assembled, but for minimum storage length you're breaking it down and the back half from the stock to receiver is probably the part that has to be a certain length to cover your LOP, so a front half the same length makes sense and doesn't make the package any longer and gives you some sight radius. I guess I'm more interested in how compact a package a takedown makes broken down than in what it works out to assembled. And a really short barrel might even force the back half to be longer to keep the assembled thing up past 26" and that seriously unbalances the whole takedown concept.
Click to expand...

Packed up its much narrower at the top of the action, but maybe that's splitting hairs.

I've been running a 9" on a backpacker stock for a couple years now, it's my go to "toss it in the backpack" gun for gophers and plinking. I like it so much so that I've also done a complete swap out for VQ internals to rival my other 10/22's.

It's amazingly balanced and quick to shoulder. The post I had earlier was because we are building my dad a very similar gun. So much fun!
 
Sun_and_Steel_77 said:
Looks good, but please consider making a 12.5 inch version as well for us British Columbians who wish to legally hunt small game.
Click to expand...

I can’t even fathom how this is a law here..
Guess the projectile coming out of that 8” barrel would not kill an animal.. have to have that extra 3.5”...

Talk about an arbitrary stupid law.. doesn’t surprise me in BC though since there’s a lot of brain dead hippies out here.
 
RyoTHC said:
I can’t even fathom how this is a law here..
Guess the projectile coming out of that 8” barrel would not kill an animal.. have to have that extra 3.5”...

Talk about an arbitrary stupid law.. doesn’t surprise me in BC though since there’s a lot of brain dead hippies out here.
Click to expand...

I don't recall the barrel length being a law but a hunting regulation. Yes I agree the reg doesn't make sense to me either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom