Shortening barrels - cut from the chamber or from the crown?

tomcat220t

Mod Note: Split from this thread on how much to shorten barrels by because this got more interesting as a side issue.

andyone wrote: »

i will be collecting my new 10/22 target shortly.... and was considering shortening the barrel.... as is it 20".. i would like to shorten it as much as possible with out loosing any accuracy..... anyone i've talked to say's take it back to 16.5"... and i know that this would increase velocity.... but i'm wondering about accuracy....????

as ye know the factory .920" barrel has a 1:16" twist and i'll only ever be shooting subs thru it....

if it was shortened more would the subsonic rounds leave the barrel supersonic... as the remainder of the barrel which would normally slow the bullet down, would be gone...????

has any one shortened theirs to 12.5".... how did this effect performance????

The correct way of shorting a .22lr barrel is from the chamber .
That will give you the best chance of not loosing accuracy .

Cass

tomcat220t wrote: »

The correct way of shorting a .22lr barrel is from the chamber .
That will give you the best chance of not loosing accuracy .

Can i ask how this is done? Never seen (or heard) of it being done this way.

As i understand it, if you want to shorten the barrel by 3-4 inches then it only needs to be cut, and re-crowned (at muzzle)

If you cut the same 3-4 inches at the chamber end of the barrel you are cutting away the entire chamber. So now you need to re-chamber, and re-thread the barrel . This is fine is you have a bull barrel that has a consistent diameter/profile from the action to the muzzle. If you have a tapered profile though and cut away 3-4 inches then the point (on the barrel) you now have to re-thread to screw back into the action will be of a smaller/lesser diameter than the action, and not work.

Apart from all that a cut, and re-crown would be cheaper than cut, re-thread, and re-chambering.

tomcat220t

Ezridax wrote: »

Can i ask how this is done? Never seen (or heard) of it being done this way.

As i understand it, if you want to shorten the barrel by 3-4 inches then it only needs to be cut, and re-crowned (at muzzle)

If you cut the same 3-4 inches at the chamber end of the barrel you are cutting away the entire chamber. So now you need to re-chamber, and re-thread the barrel . This is fine is you have a bull barrel that has a consistent diameter/profile from the action to the muzzle. If you have a tapered profile though and cut away 3-4 inches then the point (on the barrel) you now have to re-thread to screw back into the action will be of a smaller/lesser diameter than the action, and not work.

Apart from all that a cut, and re-crown would be cheaper than cut, re-thread, and re-chambering.

At the risk of sounding smart .......can i ask you who said cut+recrown at the muzzle is the correct way to shorten a .22lr barrel and maintain its accuracy ?

clivej

tomcat220t wrote: »

At the risk of sounding smart .......can i ask you who said cut+recrown at the muzzle is the correct way to shorten a .22lr barrel and maintain its accuracy ?

Of the 3 gunsmiths that I have talked to they will always say to take it off the muzzel end.

Nerver, never heard of shortening a barrel from the chamber. I would seem to me you will be upsetting/introducing to many variables by cutting off the chamber.

tomcat220t

clivej wrote: »

Of the 3 gunsmiths that I have talked to they will always say to take it off the muzzel end.

Nerver, never heard of shortening a barrel from the chamber. I would seem to me you will be upsetting/introducing to many variables by cutting off the chamber.

No offence to whom you were speaking to Clive , but its not the correct way to shorten a .22lr barrel ..
Are you sure they ment exactly what your claiming ?
Were any of theses Irish gunsmiths ?

clivej

tomcat220t wrote: »

No offence to whom you were speaking to Clive , but its not the correct way to shorten a .22lr barrel ..
Are you sure they ment exactly what your claiming ?
Were any of theses Irish gunsmiths ?

3 Irish gunsmiths and who are you quoting as telling you your info??

Can't find any reference to what your talking about.

hacksaw the barrel off
http://www.castbullet.com/misc/hack.htm

rowa

tomcat220t wrote: »

No offence to whom you were speaking to Clive , but its not the correct way to shorten a .22lr barrel ..
Are you sure they ment exactly what your claiming ?
Were any of theses Irish gunsmiths ?

How could you shorten from the chamber end ? The diameter is normally much less along the barrel so how could you rethread the barrel ? It would be far too small unless it was a bull barrel.
I have heard of the barrel being shortened slightly and rethreaded at the chamber end to allow a tighter match chamber to be recut , especially on a semi which have sloppy chambers from the factory to ensure good feeding.

Cass

tomcat220t wrote: »

At the risk of sounding smart .......can i ask you who said cut+recrown at the muzzle is the correct way to shorten a .22lr barrel and maintain its accuracy ?

I never said it was the right way. I said it was the way i've always seen, and heard of it being done.

tomcat220t wrote: »

No offence to whom you were speaking to Clive , but its not the correct way to shorten a .22lr barrel ..
Are you sure they ment exactly what your claiming ?
Were any of theses Irish gunsmiths ?

I notice you still have not answered either my question or Clive's. So without deflecting by answering a question with a question could you please explain it to me how or why it's done at the chamber and how it is more accurate to do it this way than the "normal" way?

I'm genuinely curious.

Sandy22

Ezridax wrote: »

explain it to me how or why it's done at the chamber and how it is more accurate to do it this way than the "normal" way?

It's because a lot of the barrels intended for really high-level accuracy in .22LR are deliberately built with a small amount of choke at the muzzle. With due respect to Clive we're not talking about Rugers here, so he wouldn't be expected to know that. Obviously if you lop a couple of inches off the muzzle, the choke is lost. Coincidentally, many of these barrels are untapered, so moving the profile "backwards" isn't a problem.

It's well established that a little choke is beneficial for accuracy in shooting unjacketed / soft-lead bullets. I believe it's also applied to high-accuracy air rifles.

tomcat220t

Sandy22 wrote: »

It's because a lot of the barrels intended for really high-level accuracy in .22LR are deliberately built with a small amount of choke at the muzzle. With due respect to Clive we're not talking about Rugers here, so he wouldn't be expected to know that. Obviously if you lop a couple of inches off the muzzle, the choke is lost. Coincidentally, many of these barrels are untapered, so moving the profile "backwards" isn't a problem.

It's well established that a little choke is beneficial for accuracy in shooting unjacketed / soft-lead bullets. I believe it's also applied to high-accuracy air rifles.

100 %
This simply fact has been known for well over 30 years and the few gunsmiths ive dealt with here in Ireland , dismiss this basic fact and lob off from the crown :o:o.
Even budget rifles makers are using this technique for years .
Gunsmiths.......:rolleyes::rolleyes:.

Sparks

Sandy, are you sure that's still being done today, deliberately? I always thought the variation in Anschutz barrels was an artifact of the button rifling rather than a sought-after thing; and Shilen make a really big deal about how they don't do this for their top-of-the-line barrels or their second-tier barrels for that matter, and they're up there as one of the best .22lr barrel manufacturers out there. FLOYDSTER could correct me here, but I thought Lilja's drop-in anschutz replacement barrels were the same; no choke, just really precise manufacturing and rifling.

Cass

Sandy22 wrote: »

It's because a lot of the barrels intended for really high-level accuracy in .22LR are deliberately built with a small amount of choke at the muzzle.... .

Finally an explanation. Thanks. I understand the line of thinking, but in relation to this:

With due respect to Clive we're not talking about Rugers here,

That's exactly what the OP is discussing.

andyone wrote: »

i will be collecting my new 10/22 target shortly.... and was considering shortening the barrel....

So would it work on a Ruger? If it is so much better why do gunsmiths shorten from the muzzle? Is it to reduce the cost to the customer? As with my post above i understand how each way can be done, but the only benefit i could see was cost. Accuracy levels must not drop that much if gunsmiths still do it from the muzzle end.

So is it still done. how many gunsmiths still use this process. If 3 out of 4 gunsmiths use the muzzle end then are those three wrong, and the sole one doing it from the chamber right. Also how does that single smith explain the increase in cost. A fairly substantial one i would imagine at that. Having to re-thread the barrel, re-chamber the barrel. More expensive than cutting the amount of the end of the barrel then simply re-crowning.

Excuse all the questions, but having never heard of any gunsmith do it this way i'm curious why if it is the correct method why more gunsmiths, from anywhere, are not using it.

tomcat220t wrote:

100 %

That's all i was asking you for earlier on.

tomcat220t

Ezridax wrote: »

I never said it was the right way. I said it was the way i've always seen, and heard of it being done.

I notice you still have not answered either my question or Clive's. So without deflecting by answering a question with a question could you please explain it to me how or why it's done at the chamber and how it is more accurate to do it this way than the "normal" way?

I'm genuinely curious.

Chopping from the crown end of a .22lr is a no/on without first slugging the barrel to find out the tightest spot .
That spot is where the crown will best benefit for accuracy .
Any other shortening should come from the chamber side after that .
Most .22lr match blanks come with a slight choke and any gunsmith worth his/her salt will still slug the bore to find the exact spot to crown the barrel from .
This is been known for many years around the world of gunsmithing .

tomcat220t

clivej wrote: »

And the OP ask how short is too short 10/22 not about benchrest target barrels. I always thought it was more to do with the head of a .22lr pushing into the rifling at the chamber that made the difference.

Like on my 10/22 Lothar Walther match barrel where a proprietary chamber reamer is used to ensure the cartridge and bullet feed smoothly while allowing the bullet to consistently engrave the rifling .020". This with the 11 degree crown makes it consistently accurate, but not to that of a custom benchrest rifle.

C/Z choke their barrels and are nearly half the price of the Op Target 10/22 rifle .Im willing to bet that the ruger target barrel has some kind of tighten around the muzzle ...either way it can be slugged to find out .

Cass

If this "tightening" does not exist. Should they still cut from the chamber?

tomcat220t

Ezridax wrote: »

If this "tightening" does not exist. Should they still cut from the chamber?

If it has no choke at all at the muzzle it wont be much of a shooter!!!! ......A "Gunsmith " would lap the barrel most of the way down and leave the last bit at the muzzle alone ..thus creating a choke .
Most good Gunsmiths lap their blank match .22lr barrels to suit their specs, regardless of make !
Reason this service is not offered by some guys here is its an art to correctly lap a .22lr barrel .
All the more reason guys should be at least aware of the fact the most .22lrs are choked and to shorten from the chamber end would be best bet to retain accuracy !

Cass

So if a barrel has no choke it is "useless"? I would be curious as to which manufacturers, both of rifles, and just barrels, use this process.

This brings me back to me previous question. Cost.

If a lad wanted to shorten a barrel, and was quoted say €150 for a cut, and re-crown. Then he went to another smith, and he said it would cost (guessing here) €600 because he has to cut the chamber, re-chamber the barrel, re-thread the barrel, hand lap the bore and then re-fit. Which would a lad choose?

Also is there really that much of a difference? has there been any testing to show that a barrel cut, re-chambered, re-thread, lapped is in anyway more effective than a cut at the muzzle and re-crowned. IOW i know of work done to some rifles that improves accuracy, but on such a slight scale that it is almost unnoticeable. Also the actual act of lapping, etc. Do gunsmiths here have the equipment to accurately measure the variance in the bore when lapping?

Finally the issue of a choked bore. Would it not lead to be build up of lead or copper at the muzzle that when in the first half of the barrel would not be an issue, but if this build up occurs at the muzzle where the bore is choked and hence not enough room for such a build up would this not lead to a loss in accuracy quicker than a barrel that has a continuously consistent bore diameter from chamber to muzzle. Or is it a case of only being effective o rimfires (lead bullets) rather than fullbores (jacketed bullets).

Sparks

tomcat220t wrote: »

If it has no choke at all at the muzzle it wont be much of a shooter!

Shilen disagree, even for Ruger barrels.
I'm not saying that Anschutz don't do it; I'm just saying it doesn't appear to be the kind of thing that is universally accepted.
I think this is up there with cleaning smallbore rifles and using WD-40; some people say one thing, others say the opposite, and there doesn't seem to be any accepted proven answer with supporting data.

All the more reason guys should be at least aware of the fact the most .22lrs are choked and to shorten from the chamber end would be best bet to retain accuracy !

I really don't think that's going to be true in all circumstances, especially not when you're talking about barrels that aren't bull barrels in profile, and don't get easily pinned into the receiver like an Anschutz 20xx series does.
I mean, if you have a tapered profile like this:



How do you cut that at the chamber end by more than (D - threaded length)?

tomcat220t

Ezridax wrote: »

So if a barrel has no choke it is "useless"? I would be curious as to which manufacturers, both of rifles, and just barrels, use this process.

Lux and Standard models are 22”. American, Varmint, Style, Silhouette are 20”. These models are also available in 16”. We do not recommend the cutting down of any CZ barrel due to the fact that they are hammer forged and are actually choked at the muzzle to maximise accuracy which is one of the reasons CZ rifles are renowned for their accuracy. There is also no guarantee that the bore is actually dead centre to the outside diameter in the middle of the barrel. Shortening the barrel will also invalidate the warranty. CZ rifle barrels are hammer forged from solid billets for that particular barrel length; even the 16” barrel has a special billet for the shorter barrel. If you want a shorter barrel part ex your old rifle and get a new rifle with a new three year guarantee!

The above is from an international CZ wholesaler

Perhaps you are more qualified to explain to CZ where they are going wrong with their rifling process:P

Ezridax wrote: »

This brings me back to me previous question. Cost.

If a lad wanted to shorten a barrel, and was quoted say €150 for a cut, and re-crown. Then he went to another smith, and he said it would cost (guessing here) €600 because he has to cut the chamber, re-chamber the barrel, re-thread the barrel, hand lap the bore and then re-fit. Which would a lad choose?

€600 :rolleyes:.....

Around half that for a re-chamber.

Ezridax wrote: »

Also is there really that much of a difference? has there been any testing to show that a barrel cut, re-chambered, re-thread, lapped is in anyway more effective than a cut at the muzzle and re-crowned. IOW i know of work done to some rifles that improves accuracy, but on such a slight scale that it is almost unnoticeable. Also the actual act of lapping, etc. Do gunsmiths here have the equipment to accurately measure the variance in the bore when lapping?

If some of the guys overs here had the correct knowledge and technique required, measuring the variance in the bore is quite cheap and simple.

Ezridax wrote: »

Finally the issue of a choked bore. Would it not lead to be build up of lead or copper at the muzzle that when in the first half of the barrel would not be an issue, but if this build up occurs at the muzzle where the bore is choked and hence not enough room for such a build up would this not lead to a loss in accuracy quicker than a barrel that has a continuously consistent bore diameter from chamber to muzzle. Or is it a case of only being effective o rimfires (lead bullets) rather than fullbores (jacketed bullets).

Again one of the most popular and successful brands of .22lr CZ choke their barrels.

Have you seen any of your concerns about copper or lead build up at the muzzle of a CZ choked barrels?

Sparks

tomcat220t wrote: »

Perhaps you are more qualified to explain to CZ where they are going wrong with their rifling process:P

I don't think CZ are well-known for making the best barrels in the world. They specialise in cheap rifles, from what I know. Lilja and Shilen are known as barrel manufacturers though, and Shilen make a big deal about not choking.

Honestly, I think this is not "basic" information in any sense of the word, and I think you'd find it has historical origins that no longer apply for our current manufacturing standards for match-grade barrels and ammunition.

If some of the guys overs here had the correct knowledge and technique required, measuring the variance in the bore is quite cheap and simple.

I think you might find that their achieved standards do not quite bear out the degree of implied contempt you're bringing to your posts so far...

Again one of the most popular and successful brands of .22lr CZ choke their barrels.

But CZ are cheap rifles. They're not designed to be the most accurate rifle out there, but to be "good enough". You're taking an argument about a really esoteric part of the market and applying it to a mass manufacturer.

Cass

tomcat220t wrote: »

Perhaps you are more qualified to explain to CZ where they are going wrong with their rifling process:P

Like yourself i'm no gunsmith so i'll leave manufacturers that use this process to their wears.

€600 :rolleyes:.....

Around half that for a re-chamber.

Fair enough. No idea what a re-chambering costs as i've never had it done. However thats to re-chamber what about cutting the barrel, re-threading or smithing it to re-attach to the action? Is that free?

If some of the guys overs here had the correct knowledge and technique required, measuring the variance in the bore is quite cheap and simple.

'm sure they do, but choose to provide the most popular style of barrel shortening to keep the customer, and their pockets/wallets happy.

Again one of the most popular and successful brands of .22lr CZ choke their barrels.

Have you seen any of your concerns about copper or lead build up at the muzzle of a CZ choked barrels?

Never really paid it any mind to be honest, but then again my CZ was never used for the type of shooting that requires the accuracy to which to say will be lost. In fact i've yet to see a CZ take the "title" when faced against Anschutz, Feinwerkbau, Walthar, Bleiker, etc. As in the match grade barrels you referenced above.

You have mentioned one brand out of dozens. Would be interesting to see how many manufacturers actually use the rifling method necessary to produce this choke at the muzzle or even lap their barrels to produce this choke at the muzzle. Also to know which gunsmiths in Ireland apply this method of barrel shortening, chambering, re-threading, and lapping.

tomcat220t

https://www.volquartsen.com/products/541-stainless-muzzleweighted-barrel


This company is at the forefront of the worlds most accurate 10/22 rifles !
They see the importance of choked .22lr barrels!

rowa

"What is important is that the bore and groove dimensions are uniform down the length of the barrel, that the twist rate is uniform and that the groove circle is concentric with the bore. Many think a slight choke at the muzzle end of a ten thousandth or so will improve accuracy. But bench rest shooters have shown that parallel barrels seem to win more matches than choked ones. The exception is barrels which shoot lead bullets, like .22 Rimfire barrels and air rifle barrels. These barrels definitely shoot better if there is a slight choking in the barrel. The barrel should also be completely free of stress so that as it warms up during a course of fire the barrel does not bend so leading to group shifting".

Taken from this article

http://firearmsid.com/feature%20articles/rifledbarrelmanuf/barrelmanufacture.htm

tomcat220t

Sparks wrote: »

I think you might find you'd change your opinion on that if you ran into trouble!

That's going to be deeply relevant when you see 10/22 rifles winning benchrest matches and the Olympics. Until then though, I'd look more to Lilja and Shilen.

Shilen & Lilja ect... are some of the best rimfire barrels on the market but are useless without a world-class gunsmith to create a world class rifle ,Agree???
Who would you regard as a worldclass .22lr riflesmith ?
One name comes to my mind ,Bill Calfree !

Sparks

tomcat220t wrote: »

Shilen & Lilja ect... are some of the best rimfire barrels on the market but are useless without a world-class gunsmith to create a world class rifle ,Agree???

I disagree with what you mean, though what you say doesn't have much wrong with it
Basicly, compared to making the barrel, which is hard, and making the action, which is hard, joining the two could be done by almost anyone, especially with actions like the Anschutz 2011, which is designed for this.
You don't need a guy with a lathe to fit a shilen barrel to a 2013 rifle.

Who would you regard as a worldclass .22lr riflesmith ?
One name comes to my mind ,Bill Calfree !

Calfee, but no, I'd go to Bleiker.

tomcat220t

Sparks wrote: »

I disagree with what you mean, though what you say doesn't have much wrong with it
Basicly, compared to making the barrel, which is hard, and making the action, which is hard, joining the two could be done by almost anyone, especially with actions like the Anschutz 2011, which is designed for this.
You don't need a guy with a lathe to fit a shilen barrel to a 2013 rifle.


Calfee, but no, I'd go to Bleiker.

Bleiker ,anschutz ect... are not the F1 of the .22lrs :rolleyes:
50 br nationals in the usa .....wont see many if any factory rifles in the top runnings !
Since your talking top end of .22lr accuracy they are mostly custom jobs at that level .
You do need top components , lathe and most of all a guy top of his game to be in the running at that level of gunsmithing .
Simply bolting an out of the box match barrel to a 2013 or a Bleiker wont cut the mustard !

Sparks

tomcat220t wrote: »

Bleiker ,anschutz ect... are not the F1 of the .22lrs :rolleyes:

Okay. So we're talking about 10/22 accuracy; then you're talking about hand-made barrels on 50lb rigs in the US benchrest matches (and here, we're not talking about rifles anymore, we're talking about what are essentially
mounted guns in .22lr) and saying that these are much better than Bleiker and therefore you're right about how you cut a Ruger 10/22 barrel...


tomcat, there's a fair bit of confusion here.
Especially since most of the benchrest rigs you're talking about don't do the choked-at-the-muzzle thing because they've found through testing that it's not the best approach.

tomcat220t

Sparks wrote: »

Calfee, but no, I'd go to Bleiker.

Bleiker .22lrs use Lilja barrels .
Lilja have a taper in their bore, ie choke !

Sparks

tomcat220t wrote: »

Lilja have a taper in their bore, ie choke !

Taper isn't the same thing as choke. Taper refers to the contour of the barrel (ie. the outside contour). Eg (and these are for lilja):

Standard contour barrel


Straight taper contour barrel

tomcat220t

Sparks wrote: »

Taper isn't the same thing as choke. Taper refers to the contour of the barrel (ie. the outside contour). Eg (and these are for lilja):

Standard contour barrel


Straight taper contour barrel

Totally incorrect ,Sparks
Im surprised you came up with such a reply !
PM me if you want ?

Vegeta

I for one have learned something new so appreciate all the info.

What kind of accuracy is lost if the choke is cut out of a .22lr barrel? I've seen many guys on English forums get CZ rifles cut well below what's legal here and they usually report that accuracy is unaffected.

Is this something only benchrest shooters would care about or notice? Small fractions of an MOA or what? I honestly wouldn't know how bad this could make a rifle.

I'm not knocking CZ .22lr rifles either in case I am accused of it. I have a CZ .22lr rifle

tomcat220t

Vegeta wrote: »

I for one have learned something new so appreciate all the info.

What kind of accuracy is lost if the choke is cut out of a .22lr barrel? I've seen many guys on English forums get CZ rifles cut well below what's legal here and they usually report that accuracy is unaffected.

Is this something only benchrest shooters would care about or notice? Small fractions of an MOA or what? I honestly wouldn't know how bad this could make a rifle.

I'm not knocking CZ .22lr rifles either in case I am accused of it. I have a CZ .22lr rifle

Lead is an almost dead metal unlike copper !
So when the lead slug starts it journey down the barrel ideally a constant contact with slug and bore would be great for accuracy but thats not what happens very often in real life of barrels .
Any of the smallest variation between bore and lead slug along the barrel is rectified with a small amount of choke just before the lead slug leaves the barrel.
This technique of .22lr rifling is used world wide by all the top .22 lr rifle manufactures .
This list of manufactures includes Anschutz ...one of the worlds most successful target rifle manufactures .
Anschutz rifles have won more olympic medals and world accuracy records than any other rimfire rifles combined .
C/Z barrel are also choked to aid their .22lr accuracy .
Some people buy c/z .22lr and never find out it true potential ..thats fine ,imo.
But if some one wants to retain warranty and accuracy with their c/z ,my advice is dont go chopping off the choke .

If anyone wants to add or correct on what im saying in this topic ..Great!
For years ive understood this to be the case in .22lr rifles and not copy and pasted from somebody elses views !

Vegeta

Thanks for the info tomcat, any info on what level of improvement the choking provides?

Sparks

tomcat220t wrote: »

Anschutz rifles have won more olympic medals and world accuracy records than any other rimfire rifles combined .

Correct. But you're correct because Anschutz have been building olympic rifles for longer than anyone else. Not because they're making the best barrels in the world today. They're a damn sight better than CZ or Ruger at making barrels, yes, but whether they're better than Lilja or Shilen isn't an open question -- the current Olympic medals are being won by Bleiker rifles (using Lilja barrels) and Anschutz rifles with Lilja barrels and Anschutz rifles with Shilen barrels. With the possible exception of a few individual shooters like the Russians, who (a) can't afford new kit and (b) have old kit that was the best in the world when the USSR bought it for them and still is today; most people winning the medals aren't using original Anschutz barrels and noone who's winning medals is doing it with an original unselected Anschutz barrel.

And as for "you need a choke because you have bad ammunition", that was true a hundred years ago (moderately; making a tapered bore then was pretty difficult); today it just is not because our manufacturing standards have advanced in the past century. We don't hand-make ammunition anymore. We don't need barrels that compress the projectile to fix manufacturing defects in the projectile. That's what the sales pitches from Lilja and Shilen and others are based on.

For low-end rifles with low-end ammunition, yes, I can see that there's an argument that it would be useful (an argument without conclusive supporting data as far as I can see); but for the high end, they just make better barrels and better ammunition instead, and they seem to be winning a lot more medals than those who still choke barrels.

tomcat220t

Vegeta wrote: »

Thanks for the info tomcat, any info on what level of improvement the choking provides?

There are several references to guys shorting their Anschutz rifles with disappointing results on the net,if that helps .
I know of guys that got rifles shortened with mixed results ....was this down to the recrown ,barrel condition , shooter or chopping off from the crown ...cant say for definite !
One thing i do know is most .22lr rifle manufactures go to great lenghts to ensure the barrels are choked for improved accuracy .
You can be sure that a budget rifle like C/Z dont choke their barrels just to improve by a tenth of an inch at 50 meters ,imo.

tomcat220t

Sparks wrote: »

the current Olympic medals are being won by Bleiker rifles (using Lilja barrels) and Anschutz rifles with Lilja barrels.

Lilja .22lr barrels are not a parallel bore .

tomcat220t

Sparks wrote: »

the current Olympic medals are being won by Bleiker rifles (using Lilja barrels)

http://www.bleiker.ch/MedaillenspiegelSummaryoftitles_71.html

http://jga.anschuetz-sport.com/index.php5?menu=9&sprache=1&aktion=detail&newsletterID=%E0%9D%014%BC%91%92d

Smallbore results from 2008 Olympics

The ANSCHÜTZ group by far was the most successful company with the most medals in the air rifle and air pistol competitions. 7 medals of possible 12 medals were won with the products of ANSCHÜTZ resp. STEYR which means a success rate of fantastic 58 %.

Small bore disciplines:
ANSCHÜTZ could triumph also in the small bore disciplines!

In the women’s 50 m rifle 3 position 3x20 competition all medals were won with ANSCHÜTZ small bore rifles. A new Olympic record was set. There were 6 ANSCHÜTZ rifles in the final and 65 % of the shooters used a small bore rifle of the “MeisterMacher”.

In the men’s 50 m rifle 3 position 3x40 competition the Gold and Silver medals were won with ANSCHÜTZ rifles. The final was thrilling until the last shot. Matt Emmons from the USA was on the first place until the 9th shot. The 10th shot was a 4,4 only and unfortunately he lost a medal and had to be content with place 4. Memories of Athens came up again …

The ANSCHÜTZ shooters won 8 medals in the shooting disciplines, far more than any other German company. With the medals of STEYR the total quantity was even fantastic 13 medals in the end. The slogan “MeisterMacher” again has proved!

Where are you getting your facts from
Bleiker (lilja) brought one bronze medal home from the last olympics .
How many did Anschutz win ??

Sparks wrote: »

and Anschutz rifles with Lilja barrels and Anschutz rifles with Shilen barrels.

What make barrel are you shooting ?
Even though its an air rifle ,is your barrel choked ?

Sparks

tomcat220t wrote: »

Bleiker (lilja) brought one bronze medal home from the last olympics .
How many did Anschutz win ??

Not so many - most of the anschutz rifles have had their barrels replaced (both the Emmons have used lilja since Athens, as has Potent).

But I got sick of going round and round, so I emailed all the barrel manufacturers I could find who do precision barrels:

• Dan Lilja says they use a slightly tapered bore on their rimfire barrels.
• Shilen ratchet-rifled barrels use a tapered bore, their octoganal and six-groove barrels do not.
• Brux barrels favour a slight tapered bore on their rimfire barrels.
• Border barrels also use a tapered bore.
• Walther make both straight and tapered bores, they don't have any preference, they just build whatever the customer wants.
• Spencer barrels don't have a tapered bore
• Broughton use a 2-thou tapered bore
• Hart will add a tapered bore if the customer explicitly asks for it, but they don't do it otherwise.
• Kreiger also put in a 2-thou tapered bore.
• Bartlein barrels don't use a tapered bore and gave a very comprehensive answer on that, which I've asked for permission to republish here, but basicly said that the available data doesn't show one way or the other whether tapers do any good or not, and that other factors are far more important (and he also pointed out that Anschutz barrels, when tested against barrels from manufacturers like these, come in way down the field unless you carefully select the barrel (which is why shooters will have 30-year-old rifle barrels on the firing line even if they've replaced all the other parts)

That's fairly evenly split - eight cases where a tapered bore is used (counting the times it's explicitly asked for by the customer), six where it is not (again, counting the times it's explicitly asked for).

Some points:

• Nobody used chokes.
• All bar one of those who said they put in a tapered bore, said it went in from chamber to crown. So it wouldn't matter if you cut from front or back, you'd still affect things to one degree or another.
• also, I've run into a lot of anecdotal tales while digging all this up that stated that chopping off the front of an anschutz barrel is basicly flipping a coin - some get better, some get worse and there seems to be no way to tell in advance which it'll be.

Basicly, I think that this is like batch-testing your rifle ammo for smallbore, only more so (ie. there are maybe five or ten shooters in Ireland where you could even measure the difference it makes and you can spot those guys from their medals and disciplines -- it's what my coach calls allen-key shooting). If the differences are as small as reported when dealing with rifles that are far more accurate than the 10/22 (ie. bolt action match rifles with match barrels), then it can't be that important -- and when ten of the most highly regarded manufacturers of precision barrels in the world (people whose reputation and livelihoods depend on it) don't agree on it, and don't seem terribly worked up over it either, I don't think it can really be that important.


I'll post up Bartlein's email later if he okay's it, it's actually really interesting.



ps. I know it reads like an argument in places but this thread's been quite neat. New stuff learnt, new data gathered from the source - more threads like that please!

tomcat220t

Sparks wrote: »

Not so many - most of the anschutz rifles have had their barrels replaced (both the Emmons have used lilja since Athens, as has Potent).

But I got sick of going round and round, so I emailed all the barrel manufacturers I could find who do precision barrels:

• Dan Lilja says they use a slightly tapered bore on their rimfire barrels.
• Shilen ratchet-rifled barrels use a tapered bore, their octoganal and six-groove barrels do not.
• Brux barrels favour a slight tapered bore on their rimfire barrels.
• Border barrels also use a tapered bore.
• Walther make both straight and tapered bores, they don't have any preference, they just build whatever the customer wants.
• Spencer barrels don't have a tapered bore
• Broughton use a 2-thou tapered bore
• Hart will add a tapered bore if the customer explicitly asks for it, but they don't do it otherwise.
• Kreiger also put in a 2-thou tapered bore.
• Bartlein barrels don't use a tapered bore and gave a very comprehensive answer on that, which I've asked for permission to republish here, but basicly said that the available data doesn't show one way or the other whether tapers do any good or not, and that other factors are far more important (and he also pointed out that Anschutz barrels, when tested against barrels from manufacturers like these, come in way down the field unless you carefully select the barrel (which is why shooters will have 30-year-old rifle barrels on the firing line even if they've replaced all the other parts)

That's fairly evenly split - eight cases where a tapered bore is used (counting the times it's explicitly asked for by the customer), six where it is not (again, counting the times it's explicitly asked for).

Some points:

• Nobody used chokes.
• All bar one of those who said they put in a tapered bore, said it went in from chamber to crown. So it wouldn't matter if you cut from front or back, you'd still affect things to one degree or another.
• also, I've run into a lot of anecdotal tales while digging all this up that stated that chopping off the front of an anschutz barrel is basicly flipping a coin - some get better, some get worse and there seems to be no way to tell in advance which it'll be.

Basicly, I think that this is like batch-testing your rifle ammo for smallbore, only more so (ie. there are maybe five or ten shooters in Ireland where you could even measure the difference it makes and you can spot those guys from their medals and disciplines -- it's what my coach calls allen-key shooting). If the differences are as small as reported when dealing with rifles that are far more accurate than the 10/22 (ie. bolt action match rifles with match barrels), then it can't be that important -- and when ten of the most highly regarded manufacturers of precision barrels in the world (people whose reputation and livelihoods depend on it) don't agree on it, and don't seem terribly worked up over it either, I don't think it can really be that important.


I'll post up Bartlein's email later if he okay's it, it's actually really interesting.



ps. I know it reads like an argument in places but this thread's been quite neat. New stuff learnt, new data gathered from the source - more threads like that please!

Have i missed something here ?
Taper bore /choke ???
Post 54??? What did i say ?
Post 57???Your reply ?
All you have done is backed up every thing ive been saying
If you ask any of theses companys do the have a choke in their .22lr barrels they say YES and do so through lapping the full bore into a tapped bore ..ie tighter at the muzzle than the breech .(taper bore)
The method in which anschutz achieve their choke is different to match barrels but the exact principle applys .

Sparks

tomcat220t wrote: »

Have i missed something here ?

Yes.

Taper bore /choke ???

Tapered bores, chokes, and tapered barrels are still three seperate things.

• A tapered bore is a bore that varies continously over a long part of the barrel, the entire length from chamber to crown with most of those I asked.
• A choke is where the bore changes quickly over a short distance (around an inch or less) from one size to the other; none of the manufacturers I asked do that. All produce better barrels than Anschutz.
• A tapered barrel is where the outside of the barrel changes diameter over the length of the barrel, not the bore; it's how you get from a largeish action to a thinner barrel.

If you ask any of theses companys do the have a choke in their .22lr barrels they say YES

Tomcat, I just did ask them and that's not what they all say. I didn't go look up their websites on google; I emailed each of them directly and asked directly and was answered directly.
If you think you know what they're doing better than they do, I think you're wrong.
And if you think that your rifle can't shoot well without a tapered bore or a choke, well, half the top manufacturers just plain don't agree with you and the other half just don't seem to care that much - and they do this for a living.

tomcat220t

Sparks wrote: »

Yes.

Tapered bores, chokes, and tapered barrels are still three seperate things.

• A tapered bore is a bore that varies continously over a long part of the barrel, the entire length from chamber to crown with most of those I asked.
• A choke is where the bore changes quickly over a short distance (around an inch or less) from one size to the other; none of the manufacturers I asked do that. All produce better barrels than Anschutz.
• A tapered barrel is where the outside of the barrel changes diameter over the length of the barrel, not the bore; it's how you get from a largeish action to a thinner barrel.

Tomcat, I just did ask them and that's not what they all say. I didn't go look up their websites on google; I emailed each of them directly and asked directly and was answered directly.
If you think you know what they're doing better than they do, I think you're wrong.
And if you think that your rifle can't shoot well without a tapered bore or a choke, well, half the top manufacturers just plain don't agree with you and the other half just don't seem to care that much - and they do this for a living.

Post 54 ???
Your reply ??

tomcat220t

tomcat220t wrote: »

Bleiker .22lrs use Lilja barrels .
Lilja have a taper in their bore, ie choke !

Whats the problem ....and thats without having to E-mail any compay !
What was your reply to this ?

stick shooter

tomcat220t wrote: »

Bleiker .22lrs use Lilja barrels .
Lilja have a taper in their bore, ie choke !

This is an email query i sent to lilja barrels earlier during the thread and the reply i received

To whom it may concern,
I am interested in more information pertaining to your barrels.

Interested in .22lr blank barrels, my query is if your barrels come choked from the factory?

Regards,

XXXXXXXXX

The reply i received

Hi XXXXXXXXXXX,

Yes we do make our rimfire barrels with some taper towards the muzzle.

Here is a link to our exporting page: http://www.riflebarrels.com/exporting.htm

Best regards,

Dan

Daniel Lilja
Precision Rifle Barrels Inc.
81 Lower Lynch Creek Road
Post Office Box 372
Plains, Montana 59859
Phone: 406-826-3084
FAX: 406-826-3083
www.riflebarrels.com
lilja@riflebarrels.com

I followed this thread from the beginning with a lot of interest and to me one of the best threads ive seen on here this year.

To me and im sure others would agree, that from the start to be fair to tomcat he has been the most consistent and accurate with his views.

The above email clearly shows that when asked about a "choke" lilja replied with a yes and also used the word "taper"

@sparks, potato/spuds different words yet the same thing

Sparks

stick shooter wrote: »

The above email clearly shows that when asked about a "choke" lilja replied with a yes and also used the word "taper"
@sparks, potato/spuds different words yet the same thing

'cept they'e not, and there's a lot of info out there on the difference...

And tomcat, did you not read that list's first entry?

tomcat220t

Sparks wrote: »

'cept they'e not, and there's a lot of info out there on the difference...

And tomcat, did you not read that list's first entry?

If you feel the need to split hairs between choke and taper to the muzzle ....you need to also correct Dan lilja on his e-mail to Stick shooter :rolleyes:.
Show me in your replys on this topic(prior to e-mailing theses companys) where you had an idea what you were trying to explain,please ?

tomcat220t

So it wouldnt matter if you cut from from or back ,youd still affect things to one degree or another .
Please explain ,Sparks .

stick shooter

So just so i have it right guys, even the match barrels deliberately have the tightest part of the bore at the muzzle on .22s??

tomcat220t

stick shooter wrote: »

So just so i have it right guys, even the match barrels deliberately have the tightest part of the bore at the muzzle on .22s??

Yea , top .22lr match barrels have the tighest point of the bore is at the muzzle . But it tapers from futher up towards the breech .
This is less abrupt for the lead slug when been squezzed down the bore .

Where as anschutz ,cz and most other rifle makers choke there bore closer to the muzzle .Cheaper to do !

For some reason non of the cut barrel makers are favored as top .22lr barrel!

In my mind both are choked ,just using different methods !

Glensman

Have read this with interest, great thread.
Had never previously heard of this... But...

A taper and a choke are not the same thing; they may achieve the same end.
But in a different way.


Like a lot of 10/22 owners I took a couple of inches off my Target rifle (muzzle) and got a new target crown. Accuracy did not noticably increase or decline.

tomcat220t

Glensman wrote: »

Have read this with interest, great thread.
Had never previously heard of this... But...

A taper and a choke are not the same thing; they may achieve the same end.
But in a different way.


Like a lot of 10/22 owners I took a couple of inches off my Target rifle (muzzle) and got a new target crown. Accuracy did not noticably increase or decline.

I agree there is a differnce in taper bore (post 28) and a choked bore (anschutz ,cz ect) .
What i dont get is when i stated lilja having a taper bore Sparks assumed by his reply i was talking about the outside taper of the barrel (reply 29).
If Sparks had of known any thing about how they choked their barrels (taper bore) prior to e-mailing ,he would not have answered me about the out side taper of the barrel !
Now if Sparks wants to nit pick through my words and try and suggest i havent a clue what im talking about ,fine !
Im not the one waiting hours for e-mails to be replyed to give my opinion .
My wording my not be exact ,but my understanding of how Anschutz ,Cz ,Lilja ,Shilen ect ...make their barrels is !

Sparks

tomcat220t wrote: »

Yea , top .22lr match barrels have the tighest point of the bore is at the muzzle

No, that's not true. About half of them do and the other half don't. The list above shows which do and which don't.