18.5 inch or 20 inch barrel?
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Joined
·
74 Posts
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.
Joined
·
32,417 Posts
With iron sights the sight radius is slightly longer but I don't see any real improvement of accuracy.
Joined
·
2,163 Posts
I agree. Other than a longer sight radius, you should notice no difference between the two.
Joined
·
69 Posts
a 10" or 14" T/C barrel will shoot as good as any barrel.
lower vel. and shorter sight radius tho. I used to buy 22lr but the case to get same lot # than weigh each one and sort by weight. the same weight was my match ammo, sort out the clunkers,their will be light ones. I used my balance beam scale.once u get scale set it u sort fast depending how fusy u want to get. IHMSA 40 course * # of entrys each week end. it sucks to sort than JERK trigger during a match. easier to blame ammo.
lower vel. and shorter sight radius tho. I used to buy 22lr but the case to get same lot # than weigh each one and sort by weight. the same weight was my match ammo, sort out the clunkers,their will be light ones. I used my balance beam scale.once u get scale set it u sort fast depending how fusy u want to get. IHMSA 40 course * # of entrys each week end. it sucks to sort than JERK trigger during a match. easier to blame ammo.
Joined
·
5,018 Posts
I agree with the others - no significant difference. Get the one you want, regardless of the barrel length.
Joined
·
350 Posts
This -- shooter comfort -- is really the only practical difference. I'm fine w/ the 18.5" barrel, so that's what I bought.
Joined
·
59 Posts
Long barrel difference
I have an old Stevens with 24 inch barrel and I dont notice any difference between that and my 10/22.
I have an old Stevens with 24 inch barrel and I dont notice any difference between that and my 10/22.
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.
Joined
·
263 Posts
The difference will be negligable. Like the others said, get what you want. I got a 20" and love it.
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.
Yep, now that you mention it, he was a younger guy, or at least younger than my late-40's self.
Joined
·
32,417 Posts
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.
Joined
·
32,417 Posts
I missed that part.
No, he was specifically referring to the original 10/22s when they first came out when he sold me the 20" barrel with no barrel band. I was looking at both the 18.5" with the barrel band and the 20" one. I'm new to 10/22s, and knew even less about them then than now. I knew of the 18.5" carbine, the Sporter and the Target model, so when I saw the 20" with no barrel band I specifically asked him about it and why it was different. He said it was supposed to be a replica of the first 10/22s, claiming that's exactly how they came when they first came out. Judging from the responses on here, I'm assuming it was either an honest mistake on his part, or maybe I completely misunderstood what he meant. One other difference I noticed is that the butt-end of the stock on mine looked slightly different than the regular 18.5" barrel-banded butt-end stock. Maybe that's what he meant?
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
