Bill Wynne
Active member
Has anyone had success with a short barrel on a .22 bench rifle? I am thinking of between 19 and 22 inches. It seems like a short stiff barrel would work well but I have not seen one.
Concho Bill
Concho Bill
Short barrel bench rifle
- Thread starter Bill Wynne
- Start date
C
cadman1275
Guest
I had a short Lilja barrel on my Annie 2013. It would do good in "NO" wind conditions, but the minute someone decided to breath in my direction I had no idea where the bullet would go. That barrel was 21" in length. I now have a 26" barrel and it rocks in either condition.
Bill
Bill
D
Dennis Sorensen
Guest
With the target ammunition you are using is the velocity greater or less in a 26 inch barrel over a 21 inch barrel? Somehow I thought maximum velocity was reached in fairly short barrels in .22 LR and slowed down in longer barrels but I have never tested that theory...
John Kielly
Shari's fan club
When I shot, it was anecdotal around prone smallbore circles that shorter barrels achieve more velocity but longer barrels even out velocity variations. I never got around to testing that because, as well, in the warmer temperatures here, some of the more spirited target loadings (notably early manufacture Federal) would go supersonic in shorter tubes, which is why you don't see a lot of those bloop tube Annies hereabouts.
R
Rich In Kansas
Guest
higher velocity drifts more in the wind with the .22 just under the speed of sound. The opposite of centerfire that is much above the speed of sound.
The gun I currently shoot had a 21 inch barrel on it a few years ago. It was as accurate as anything out there when there was relative calm or light wind. In the wind, the longer barrels would win. I assumed, and I believe correctly, that the increase in velocity made the gun harder to shoot in the wind. I had it rebarreled with a 24 inch barrel and it made a huge difference. The gun shot better in the wind with the longer barrel. I still had another one with a 21 inch barrel and I tested them side by side. The 21 inch barreled gun was more accurate in the calm but the longer barrel would outdo it pretty bad in the wind. Ultimately, I settled on the longer barrel. I believe there is an advantage up to about 24 inches. After that, I think you start to fall off because with the slow ammo we use, I think you start to lose stability. I know that's not always the case, but it's been my experience.
Here is a rifle with an Anschutz "match" bbl from Numrich. Under 20", 1.25 blank dia that I left as. Smooth as a baby's butt on the inside when viewed with a borescope. The 3rd bull is a .165 and the 4th bull is a .212. I would like to see someone that really knows what they are doing fit one of these blanks to a good match gun.
N
nickloy
Guest
Barrel Lenght
Rich,
When did rimfire shooters rewrite the rules of physics?
A bullet of a given weight will always drift less at higher vel than at lower vel.The statement the a bullet drifts less at low vel is nothing more than an old wives tale,if you doubt this just look at the drift tables or research the formulas for drift and stick in your own vel and weight data and see what the results are.
Nick Loy
Rich,
When did rimfire shooters rewrite the rules of physics?
A bullet of a given weight will always drift less at higher vel than at lower vel.The statement the a bullet drifts less at low vel is nothing more than an old wives tale,if you doubt this just look at the drift tables or research the formulas for drift and stick in your own vel and weight data and see what the results are.
Nick Loy
R
Rich In Kansas
Guest
Nick
I would think all top quality match ammo would be of the high velocity type if higher velocity was better. But here is a write-up from the NRA Book of Facts that explains it as well as any and better than me, enjoy:
Those unfamiliar with smallbore rifle competition are often surprised to learn that target shooters almost universally use standard velocity ammunition in preference to the many varieties of high and hyper-velocity rounds available. The reason given is the low-velocity ammunitions resistance to wind deflection.
Despite what might seem at first to be the case, wind deflection is not proportional to the time of flight. Instead, it is proportional to the amount of delay in the flight caused by air resistance. The 1145 f.p.s. standard velocity .22 long rifle round takes .287 seconds to go 100 yds., but would take only .262 seconds to cover the same distance in a vacuum. The latter figure is easily found by dividing 300 ft. by the speed of the bullet (1145 f.p.s.), which would remain the same throughout its flight if it were in a vacuum. Thus the delay caused by air resistance is .025 second with the standard velocity ammunition.
The 1335 f.p.s. high velocity ammunition, which will take .259 second to cover 100 yds., would take only .225 second in a vacuum. Thus, the delay for this bullet is .035 second or 37% greater than that of the standard velocity round .22.
The high speed round, then, suffers about 37% more wind deflection than the standard velocity.
This remarkable result is due to the very rapid rate at which air resistance increases with increase in bullet speed in the region near the speed of sound. The .22 rimfires rimfires are the only important rifle cartridges that occupy this speed range, and they are the only ones that show more wind deflection as velocity is increased.
While air resistance always increases when the bullet is shot faster, the rate of this increase is less steep at supersonic velocities. Rifle bullets in general, contrary to the case of rimfires, are made less sensitive to the wind by raising their velocities.
NRA Firearms Fact Book
I would think all top quality match ammo would be of the high velocity type if higher velocity was better. But here is a write-up from the NRA Book of Facts that explains it as well as any and better than me, enjoy:
Those unfamiliar with smallbore rifle competition are often surprised to learn that target shooters almost universally use standard velocity ammunition in preference to the many varieties of high and hyper-velocity rounds available. The reason given is the low-velocity ammunitions resistance to wind deflection.
Despite what might seem at first to be the case, wind deflection is not proportional to the time of flight. Instead, it is proportional to the amount of delay in the flight caused by air resistance. The 1145 f.p.s. standard velocity .22 long rifle round takes .287 seconds to go 100 yds., but would take only .262 seconds to cover the same distance in a vacuum. The latter figure is easily found by dividing 300 ft. by the speed of the bullet (1145 f.p.s.), which would remain the same throughout its flight if it were in a vacuum. Thus the delay caused by air resistance is .025 second with the standard velocity ammunition.
The 1335 f.p.s. high velocity ammunition, which will take .259 second to cover 100 yds., would take only .225 second in a vacuum. Thus, the delay for this bullet is .035 second or 37% greater than that of the standard velocity round .22.
The high speed round, then, suffers about 37% more wind deflection than the standard velocity.
This remarkable result is due to the very rapid rate at which air resistance increases with increase in bullet speed in the region near the speed of sound. The .22 rimfires rimfires are the only important rifle cartridges that occupy this speed range, and they are the only ones that show more wind deflection as velocity is increased.
While air resistance always increases when the bullet is shot faster, the rate of this increase is less steep at supersonic velocities. Rifle bullets in general, contrary to the case of rimfires, are made less sensitive to the wind by raising their velocities.
NRA Firearms Fact Book
R
Rich In Kansas
Guest
I think the velocities are a bit high in the NRA fact book. So I went to JBM online and calculated for 1080 and 1150. The 1080 shows 1.3 inches of drift in a 10 mph cross wind and the 1150 shows 1.5 inches. But who ever saw the wind the same constant velocity from bench to target
M
Mad`
Guest
I've competed and done pretty well in rimfire and centerfire benchrest. I have found that a .22 lr @ 50 yards will drift a helluva lot more than a 6PPC @ 100 yards in the same velocity wind.
I don't know why this happens, but it is just my experience.
I don't know why this happens, but it is just my experience.
Last edited by a moderator:
V
Vibe
Guest
That's just a bit over simplistic. First, the bullet that loses the most velocity will drift more, and centerfire ammo generally have better low drag shapes.
2nd - it's not so much the actual velocity so much as it is staying out of the trans sonic turbulence. Even centerfire shooters try and stay above that range all the way to the target. Since rimfires cannot do that, we try and stay out of it by remaining slower.
Bill Wynne
Active member
Please try to stay on subject.
I believe that we are once again off on a tangent or to put it another way, chasing rabbits.
Forget about the wind effect on different types of bullets, I am asking if anyone has had success with a short barrel 22 bench gun.
Concho Bill
I believe that we are once again off on a tangent or to put it another way, chasing rabbits.
Forget about the wind effect on different types of bullets, I am asking if anyone has had success with a short barrel 22 bench gun.
Concho Bill
R
Rich In Kansas
Guest
I was trying to tell you why you don't want a short barrel as well as others. I don't think that is off topic. I have only seen a couple of short barrels that have done well in 14 years of shooting rimfire benchrest (br50 and ara). They were all on xp-100's converted to rimfire. And many of those times they did well were in low wind or night shoots. I've never seen one do well in 15 mph plus winds but I'm sure someone can recall a case.
Also a short stiff barrel will not respond well to a tuner.
And finally, as Vibe mentioned, another effect not related to wind drift, is if a rimfire bullet reached the speed of sound it hits turbulence as it drops through the speed of sound that causes a loss of accuracy. So you want to avoid getting to the speed of sound which a short barrel might achieve with some standard velocity ammo. I've had it happen with one lot of Eley 10x years ago but only on the first shot from a 25 inch barrel. That lot probably would have kept all its shots above the speed of sound in a short barrel.
And finally again, there is a reason short barrels are rarely seen at ARA matches where weight is not a factor.
Also a short stiff barrel will not respond well to a tuner.
And finally, as Vibe mentioned, another effect not related to wind drift, is if a rimfire bullet reached the speed of sound it hits turbulence as it drops through the speed of sound that causes a loss of accuracy. So you want to avoid getting to the speed of sound which a short barrel might achieve with some standard velocity ammo. I've had it happen with one lot of Eley 10x years ago but only on the first shot from a 25 inch barrel. That lot probably would have kept all its shots above the speed of sound in a short barrel.
And finally again, there is a reason short barrels are rarely seen at ARA matches where weight is not a factor.
Bill Wynne
Active member
I believe that this may be the best question. It would be interesting if someone would take a long take off barrel and with some ammo, known to be consistent, cut off an inch at a time and test at each cut.
It might take slower ammo to work well with a short barrel. When all of this is done, it may just be that a 26 or 28 inch length may just be the best length. It may just be that we are just a bunch of copy cats.
Concho Bill
S
Steve Keim
Guest
Bill,
Do you really want to be known here in San Angelo as "ol' short barrel?"
Steve
Do you really want to be known here in San Angelo as "ol' short barrel?"
Steve
Bill Wynne
Active member
Bill,
Do you really want to be known here in San Angelo as "ol' short barrel?"
Steve
Good grief!
Well, Steve, without friends like you, where would I be.
I think I will keep the barrel I have.
Concho Bill
S
steve b.
Guest
"I believe that this may be the best question. It would be interesting if someone would take a long take off barrel and with some ammo, known to be consistent, cut off an inch at a time and test at each cut."
You are changing alot more than just barrel length when you do something like this.
In simple terms, you are chaning the barrels natural harmonic tune, and more so, if there was a nice choke lapped into the barrel, you are removing it. Your barrel ID at the time of bullet departure is actually growing in dimension.
Further, you are taking a rifle apart and putting it back together, as well as recrowing it each time.
Many variables in that process to completely remove / manage. Not practical for most shooters / smiths.
s.
You are changing alot more than just barrel length when you do something like this.
In simple terms, you are chaning the barrels natural harmonic tune, and more so, if there was a nice choke lapped into the barrel, you are removing it. Your barrel ID at the time of bullet departure is actually growing in dimension.
Further, you are taking a rifle apart and putting it back together, as well as recrowing it each time.
Many variables in that process to completely remove / manage. Not practical for most shooters / smiths.
s.
Bill Wynne
Active member
Steve, I understand that a perfect test requires constants and we would be cutting the choke and changing the crown.
What I am proposing to test for velocity change only. I agree with you, there would be just too many variables to test for accuracy.
What would be wrong with this? A person with a throw away barrel could shoot a few rounds through a chronograph and record the results then cut an inch off of the barrel with even a hack saw or a band saw and crown the muzzle by hand. The process could be repeated until the barrel is too short for safety. This process could be completed in a couple of hours when the atmospheric conditions are fairly constant and you would be testing the same barrel.
Concho Bill