Reply With QuoteId say quicker aquisition of the prey. Vetry useful for barn shooting as more pointable. Accuracy depends on if pcp or spring. And who makes the barrel has some impact also. My skan and fastfire 10 are just as good as more guns at 40 yards.
Registered User
I do not understand the fashion for short barrels these days. That I can see, many people with short barrels have to place an extender at the end of the barrel in order to cock the rifle. This, surely, removes the benefit of having a short barrel. In addition, short barrels tend not to have foresights, so the option of using open sights is also lost.
What advantage is there in a short barrel? Some people think it is better for quick shooting and is easier to point but surely this is only at the margin?
What am I missing in this?
Is there any difference in the accuracy between short barrels and the rather longer versions that are more traditional? This question, I think, is the most important and I do not know the answer but my inclination is to believe that the longer barrel is rather more accurate. Is there any research on this?
Views, opinions, guidance, advice, arguments and counter arguments will be eagerly read!
Registered User
Id say quicker aquisition of the prey. Vetry useful for barn shooting as more pointable. Accuracy depends on if pcp or spring. And who makes the barrel has some impact also. My skan and fastfire 10 are just as good as more guns at 40 yards.
Dodgy Diana User
Pro: less barrel time (=accuracy); fast-handling; coolness.
Con: lower shot count from PCP, harder cocking in b/b and HW77 style springers; harder to shoot with accuracy as lack of forward weight; need in a springer more ooooph to get up to power, meaning a bit more "recoil" and associated accuracy issues.
Experience and analysis suggests that a well set up rifle around 44" long is the best idea, but we gun nuts have for forty years liked the idea of a less efficient rat-twatter that is a bit handier. Presumably that is not simply a prejudice, but a meaningful view based on experience.
I mean, if I had a rat-infested barn, my Tracker would find a practical role as a handy rat-eliminator. Rather than being these days a toy.
Registered User
Are you saying, Geezer, that a short barrel on a pcp gives fewer shots per fill? I did not know this.
I am not at all convinced by the faster handling. First, many people add extenders, to aid with cocking and this extends the barrel to where it would usually be in a traditional rifle. So, they might as well have had a long barrel to start. Secondly, with a telescopic sight, no one would notice if the barrel were 6 inches or 26 inches - the scope carries out the aiming and it takes no notice of barrel length!
It seems that the leading reason behind this recent trend for short barrels is merely fashion and aesthetics. Perhaps this post should appear on the General Airgun section of the site, to see if any supporters can defend the short barrel.
So far, to my mind, the short barrel has been 'weighed in the balance and found to be wanting!' Can anyone change my view? The defence of the short barrel is weak, methinks.
Perhaps, Geezer, there is some truth in what you say about less barrel time but the pellet passes through the barrel so quickly that this must be inconsequential.
PS: Mr Moderator, thank you for transferring to the General Section from the Collectors' Section!
Last edited by andrewM; 16-05-2018 at 06:51 PM. Reason: PS
Registered User
short v long barrel argument is completely different for springer/pcp
for springer, underlever or sidelever definately benefit from a shorter barrel, and the only people who prefer longer barrels on break barrels are your wimpy weak armed types anyway
"But we have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked, but not comprised. We are interested and associated, but not absorbed."
Winston Churchill 1930
Registered User
It is actualy everything when it comes to consistencyOriginally Posted by andrewM
"But we have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked, but not comprised. We are interested and associated, but not absorbed."
Winston Churchill 1930
It don't mean a thing, if it ain't got a Spring
Main advantage to me is "handlebility" and lightness especially in a constricted environment such as hide shooting or internal areas.
Years ago when helping out a local pest controller, I found a Theoben Fenman, a BSA Lightning and a Webley Vulcan KS very useful in this scenario !
I once had a standard 21" barrel on a .22LR CZ452 rimfire reduced and rethreaded to 16" with a SAK moddy and didn't get on with it at all, much preferring the longer barrel. I eventually traded it in for a new 21" 452 and felt much happier, I still have it !
Other than that, I'd go for a standard length barrel everytime nowadays.
“An airgun or two”………
Guest
Some people shoot from a vehicle so a shorter barrel is easier to move about in a vehicle (bullpups too) .
Zebedee
If going too short, efficiency is reduced in all powerplants - springer, PCP, multi-pump pneumatic and CO2.short v long barrel argument is completely different for springer/pcp
for springer, underlever or sidelever definately benefit from a shorter barrel, and the only people who prefer longer barrels on break barrels are your wimpy weak armed types anyway
Specifically in a springer, restoring power (if required / desired) will generally need more spring / preload, leading to a harsher cycle (gun dependant of course).
Short barrels can be very accurate, as witnessed by the accuracy achieved by match pistols, HW44 etc.
I'd say the main advantage of a short barrel is the compactness for shooting in confined spaces / from vehicles as pointed out above.
Personally, on a break barrel springer I'd prefer 16" minimum and I certainly don't mind the longer barrels of rifles like the HW35E. In fact, especially if using open sights, the longer sight base has to be seen as a definite advantage.
THE BOINGER BASH AT QUIGLEY HOLLOW. MAKING GREAT MEMORIES SINCE 15th JUNE, 2013.
NEXT EVENT :- May 4/5, 2024.........BOING!!
Registered User
Ive got an 80 and a 77 both down to around 8.5 inches with no noticable drop in accuracy despite losing the choke and the required increase in preload. Cocking them requires a couple of Samoan gunbearers however.
"But we have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked, but not comprised. We are interested and associated, but not absorbed."
Winston Churchill 1930
Registered User
It does though only fractionally. I chopped my standard length AA40 down to a carbine, 4" loss of barrel and air cylinder, there was around a 20fps drop in velocity so there would be a very slight drop in shot count, I regulated it at the same time and eventually ended up with 114 shots at 11.3 fpe so I would say it's inconsequential if it's set up right regulated or not.
I carbined mine to use for HFT as I felt the longer barrel "wafted" around, shortening brings most of the weight between the hold and makes it steadier and more comfortable for me. No loss of accuracy at all
Fashion or aesthetics has got nothing to do with it, it all depends what the shooter is happiest with. You'll see top shooters (not me) using every type from over long to really short none gives an advantage in accuracy it's just what they prefer/feel comfortable with.
Registered User
Many thanks, all contributors; I have found this interesting reading.
"I'd say the main advantage of a short barrel is the compactness for shooting in confined spaces / from vehicles as pointed out above." This, from TonyL, seems to summarise the advantages along with a slightly lighter rifle and at no cost to accuracy. Bighit makes a similar point.
Personally, I prefer the longer, traditional barrels but I was curious to know whether there were any other considerations beyond those I identified in my initial post, not least relating to accuracy.
It being a still evening earlier, I put some 25 shots through my 1922 BSA Standard at various distances, which has a reassuringly long barrel but only open sights. Achieving a grouping of a little less than 1inch at 30m was most satisfying and makes me wonder what might be achieved were aperture sights or a telescope to be fitted, were it possible. And that, very neatly, takes me back again to the Collector's corner of the forum!
Posting Permissions
