by in2anity » 31 Jul 2017, 2:17 pm
I'm not sure exactly what you are asking here? Are you stating that a (short-)barrel rifle is inherently inaccurate? If so, I fiercely disagree; barrel length does not improve inherent accuracy. In fact, often a shortened barrel suffers from less whip and can often be more accurate than the longer big brother version (of the same metallurgy). Barrel diameter/weight/quality on the other hand, now that can affect accuracy.
Short barrels will effect velocity, so over longer distances, rounds will go sub-subsonic sooner (causing tumbling/destabilisation), so in this sense, you want a nice long barrel for long range F-style shooting (to suit the longer burn time on a slower burning powder).
You can get target rifle performance out of a quality short, stiff, little bull barrel; take for example the Remington 700 SPS Tactical 16.5" - those things drive absolute nails (at short and medium ranges), and are regarded to be capable of accurate fire out to around 750yds. Beyond that, the slower bullet speeds really start to hurt you; they are not a 1-mile rifle.
Another factor is sight radius; with iron sights a short sight radius is your enemy; that's one of the reasons those old 45/70s with creedmoor style sights are so damned long. When hitting those gongs way way out there it's much easier to line the two sights up when they are a long distance apart. This is obviously NOT a factor for fancy modern optics and scopes however (where the front sight is irrelevant).
But perhaps I'm missing the point of OP here?
Last edited by
in2anity on 31 Jul 2017, 3:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
At what point does lack of maintenance become patina?