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.