With iron sights the sight radius is slightly longer but I don't see any real improvement of accuracy.No difference as far as I can tell. Doing some research on custom barrels, alot of so called experts claim that a .22LR is at max velocity with a 16" barrel. The longer barrel may provide better accuracy in extreme cases like long distances hunting or competitions. How much accuracy I couldn't tell you however it's slight.
I agree. Other than a longer sight radius, you should notice no difference between the two.With iron sights the sight radius is slightly longer but I don't see any real improvement of accuracy.
This -- shooter comfort -- is really the only practical difference. I'm fine w/ the 18.5" barrel, so that's what I bought.I prefer the balance of a 20 inch barrel over 181/2 inch.
Earlier this year I got a brand new 10/22 with a 20" barrel, no barrel band and a wood stock (guessing Birch?) from the Bass Pro in Garland, TX. It was the last one they had left, and it was the same price as the regular 18.5" wood-stocked, barrel-banded 10/22.Would the 20 inch barrel make a dramatic difference in accuracy over the 18.5? the only down side i see is I would have to get the black synthetic stock
Earlier this year I got a brand new 10/22 with a 20" barrel, no barrel band and a wood stock (guessing Birch?) from the Bass Pro in Garland, TX. It was the last one they had left, and it was the same price as the regular 18.5" wood-stocked, barrel-banded 10/22.
I don't know how true this is, but the guy at the counter said the one I got (the 20" one) is supposed to be an exact replica of the original "old school" 10/22s when they first came out a few decades ago. Regardless of the accuracy of that claim, if you're looking for a factory wood stocked 20" 10/22, you might want to check with Bass Pro to see if they have any more of those.
Yep, now that you mention it, he was a younger guy, or at least younger than my late-40's self.The guy at the counter must have been a young guy. When I bought one in 1964 ($50), it was the 18.5 with the barrel band. There was only one model. It loked like the carbine model of today only it had metal parts where there is plastic today and they all had walnut stocks instead of birch. I gave it to my sister and bought a stainless when they first came out.
I took it to mean he was talking about 22 rifles in general and not just the 10/22. In that case the 22 rifles of a hundred years ago were mostly 20 inches or longer.The guy at the counter must have been a young guy. When I bought one in 1964 ($50), it was the 18.5 with the barrel band. There was only one model. It loked like the carbine model of today only it had metal parts where there is plastic today and they all had walnut stocks instead of birch. I gave it to my sister and bought a stainless when they first came out.
I missed that part.Wouldn't call a 10/22 as a "exact replica" of the old time even with the 20" barrel.