• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

.22 long rifle accuracy

I'm a fan of longer barrels also. Hard to say if 16" barrels are the optimum length though. Otherwise you can bet the high end guns would all have short barrels.
I just like the longer barrels for the balance. 24" feels ideal (for me) with a sporter for offhand and bull or heavy tapered on the bench. Whatever I'm losing in accuracy, I feel is made up for in stability.
 
Long barrels were necessary for the open sights used . The longer the barrel the better . Scoped barrels are another story
 
There was a post in the Rimfire group just the other day , were some research showed 19 to 20 was optimal , but you didn't loose much at 16... Might want to jump over there.... I like 16 for all around use especially hunting....
 
Look at the burn rate of the 22LR and it's easy to why the short barrel is an optimum choice. I have a CZ455 ultra lux and it has the 28" barrel and while it's awesome with the iron sights for hunting if I take it target shooting about 30-40 rounds in the barrel if fouled and hitting way off mark. A phone call to CZ got me a recommendation for a 20" barrel kit and was also told that the 16" was best for target but 20" was best "general purpose" length.
 
Everything I have read states that the powder has burned after 16 inches, but if you are using a scope I do not believe accuracy will be an issue, as mentioned above if you are using iron sights a long barrel is optimal. I use red field sights on my 52C at 200 yards and it is very accurate.
 
Long barrels were necessary for the open sights used . The longer the barrel the better . Scoped barrels are another story

No, not really.

Look at the burn rate of the 22LR and it's easy to why the short barrel is an optimum choice. I have a CZ455 ultra lux and it has the 28" barrel and while it's awesome with the iron sights for hunting if I take it target shooting about 30-40 rounds in the barrel if fouled and hitting way off mark. A phone call to CZ got me a recommendation for a 20" barrel kit and was also told that the 16" was best for target but 20" was best "general purpose" length.

I reckon CZ knows something about their own barrels, but the 16" recommendation is poor for "target" work with everybody else's stuff. I'd pose the question: If you had a 28" Lilja on it, and the action were trued up, do you think it would be "off mark" in 50 rounds?

And does the 40-50 round problem have ANYthing to do with barrel length? (No.)



the barrel is the major component in .22 rimfire precision but not the length of the barrel.

Actually, the length IS a major component in a .22LR's accuracy.




The gentleman asked whether a short barrel was more accurate in ALL CONDITIONS. To that question, the only correct answer in this thread is:

To be frank, there is some application of centerfire logic here in a thread discussing .22LR. The two do not really cross as completely as some would have you believe.

Via burn rates and etc., it's true that at 16-17", one full revolution has been completed, and the bullet is about as fast as it's ever going to be.

The issue with short barrels (16-18") is that they don't slow bullets down enough. Target .22LR ammunition is exclusively subsonic, and with very good reason. KEEPING that ammunition subsonic in colder temperatures (without going to a dedicated biathlon ammo) is of the utmost importance, and the only way you can reliably do that is to have the barrel length out there. This is true in spades if you suppress the rifle.

Same as it is with fullbore rifles, a STANDARD length barrel (in that case, a 20-24" tube) provides the best blend of usability and technical/mechanical accuracy. Sure, an 18" .308 may be one accurate SOB and handy in the woods, but it's versatility is impacted by the short tube.

On the same note, a 16" .22LR may be AWESOME in the summer, and just fine with supersonic ammo, but as for accuracy in "all conditions"...well, notsomuch.

One final question: if 16" were best and most reliably accurate in varied conditions, don't you think Smallbore (the sport) rifle shooters would use them?

They don't though.


My vote is, and will be, 20-22" minimum for accuracy and versatility of that accuracy.
 
I've had 26" and currently have one with a 24", 18", 19", and a handgun with 11". Using identical ammo, my highest velocities come from the Thompson break action 19" barrel rifle. The 24" and 18" are bolt action rifles and they are the most accurate, but the Thompson isn't far behind. I would say the accuracy in the bolt rifles is better because I get far better ignition on the rounds and the triggers are much lighter. It is an extremely rare occasion that the bolt actions give me a misfire, even with cheap ammo. The case rims have nice deep strikes from 'round' shape firing pins in the bolt rifles. They are not square like the Ruger 10/22 that are prone to giving many misfires.

All that being said, I would say barrel length has nothing to do with accuracy in my 22lr's. I dont even consider it as a factor in the accuracy equation. I firmly believe the action ignition design, 'quality' of the barrel, trigger, and ammo all play a much bigger role in helping me place tiny groups on target.
 
Almost all of our BR barrels are between 23-25 in. long. The majority are +/- .900 diameter. Some exceptions such as our sporter barrels are shorter to safe some weight. Some guys have tried longer barrels on their heavy guns with a little success.
Keith
 
The issue with short barrels (16-18") is that they don't slow bullets down enough. Target .22LR ammunition is exclusively subsonic, and with very good reason.

Same with airguns, best accuracy a bit below the barrier. I've also read in a Brian Litz book where he graphed out the various 22LR ammunition and it was very obvious that the most accuracy comes from subsonic. So from my perspective, I'd probably narrow down the ammunition that I planned on using and go from there with barrel length. If I was using a round that was right on the brink of the barrier then the extra barrel length could help a lot.
 
And if a 16” was better you can be assured thats all youd see.
What he said. In my opinion, some of the answers were confusing velocity and accuracy. Like another post said, highest velocity doesn’t always equal accuracy, especially if you start pushing a flat nosed bullet designed for subsonic conditions faster than that.
 
I agree that the 16" barrel is not really the answer that's why I got the 20" barrel since it's the best "all arounder" for hunting and target work. If I'm going to hunt with iron sights it's going to be the 28" barrel for sure. Also most Olympic 22 rifles use a 550mm barrel which is about 21.6 inches long.
 
There is (or was) a man who lived in Borden, Indiana who has considerable experience in rimfire rifles. He wrote several articles for Precision Shooting magazine. His name is David Coffee/Caffee ?
His experience and his method of getting the maximum available accuracy from a .22 was to slug the barrel to find the tight spot.
Then cut off the rest of the barrel on the muzzle end AFTER the tight spot. Doesn't matter how long the barrel ends up being.


A friend of mine has a very nice air rifle that is only rifled for the last 1 or 2 inches of the barrel. He will tell you on a target with flies printed on it, which part of the wing he will hit.
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
164,970
Messages
2,187,420
Members
78,620
Latest member
Halfdeadhunter
Back
Top