Is a bull barrel neccesary on .22 pistol?

[bigp399]

I'm trying right now to get into target shooting via a .22 handgun. I'm looking pretty hard right now at a used Ruger Mark II Target, with a 6.5" standard (tapered) barrel for about $250.00. I've noticed that most of the other Ruger Target models have bull/heavy barrels, in fact that's what I thought made them Target models. This brings me to my question: Is having a bull barrel really critical to accuracy? I recognize the benefit in stiffness and added steadying weight, but does this really translate to a real world gain? My instinct has always been that a bull barrel is mostly unnecessary, but then I've never had a firearm with a bull barrel either. Just curious if having a standard barrel is something I should try to avoid or if it's nothing for me to concern myself with. With luck I can get the price down on the High Standard Sharpshooter from $500.00, and this will be a moot question, and if I get the bug I may upgrade in the future to a S&W 41, I've tried a few out and was highly impressed.
As an aside, this is my first post here, and it appears to be a quality, civil group of enthusiasts here, and hopefully it is a patient bunch, as there may be lots of questions from me in the future as I get started in the sport. Thanks for any advice.

 

[TimboKhan]

It's not necessary to great accuracy, but I find it helps.

I am probably wrong when I say this, because it's just my opinion, but the only real advantage to the bull barrel is weight. I base this off of the fact that standard Ruger MkII's (and other non-BB .22 handguns) are capable of great accuracy and because Olympic style .22 pistols don't really have "bull barrels" per se, though they do have a lot of weight up front.

So, no, I don't think they are strictly necessary for great accuracy. I do think they help me out, as I can shoot my BB MkII slightly better than I can shoot my standard MkII (or at least it seems like I can). Additionally, I just like the looks of the BB better. It's just my opinion, but I would say that you don't need to worry about it one way or the other. Get what you dig and have fun. In the end, that's what .22 pistolas are all about anyway.

Also, let me be the first to welcome you to The High Road. We are a bunch of good people with a few soreheads mixed in. As a group, we keep it pretty civil, but don't take that to mean you can't have fun and crack off some jokes here. Feel free to ask any questions you have. Usually someone much more intelligent than me will answer, lol... Anyway, we love to help out new people to the sport, so never feel a question is to dumb to ask because I guarantee you that we have all asked the same things at some point. Some of our old... errr... more experienced members might not remember ever having to ask a question, but they did...

 

[51Cards]

I have a Mk III Hunter, with the 6-7/8" fluted bull.

1) The fluted bull (and bulls, in general) dissipate heat better. If you shoot a lot per session, or rapid-fire, it might be an edge.
2) Even with the fluting's weight reduction, the thing gets HEAVY after two or three hundred rounds.
3) The thing's a tackdriver --- far, far better than I am, or ever will be.
4) If you like to shoot fast, at least occasionally, the bull keeps flip (even for a .22) pretty minimal.

Love it. Possibly my favorite gun. Hours of fun, pure skill set, minimal hand destruction, accurate and versatile. But, not what stays in the nightstand or holster.

 

[CWL]

Welcome to THR!

I have a bull barrel Ruger Target MKII. I find that the bull barrel stabilizes the pistol so there is almost no recoil at all, it certainly helps making follow-up shots.

 

[Dienekes]

Not really. And that goes about quadruple for those of us who are serious plinkers. I remember when all this bull barrel stuff was getting started. Things go in cycles like women's hemlines. (Maybe that's why I like shorter ones.)

The truth is that light barrels will shoot right along with anything else. Heavy ones are "shooter assistive" in that it might work better for you in a particular kind of shooting (long strings of bullseye) if the weight does not turn out to be actually counterproductive. Personally I like slimmer, shorter barrels as the weight and balance are more to my preference.

I have owned and shot Ruger .22 autopistols since 1959 and almost everyone in the family has one. The only heavy barrelled one I ever really liked for all-around shooting was the 5 1/4" tapered heavy barrel, and that is sort of a rare bird. My best one is a 4 3/4" standard with zeroed fixed sights and an aftermarket Volquartsen target hammer and sear, and steel trigger. The thing is light,handy, and shoots like a house afire. My wife has the same thing in 6" and loves it.

 

[tallpaul]

The bull barrel advantage is that the weight helps steady the pistol. The heat reduction and stiffness are very small advantage- to small to add that much practical advantage in .22 lr bullseye. The feel of the gun to you will make a bigger difference for you.

I believe that a good triggerjob is WAY MORE beneficial for bullseye. Then again I have shot bullseye for 25 years off and on in a league at one of the bigger bullseye clubs in the US... and have more than one ruger and smiths 41's. The funny thing is I use the long barrels in the 41 and the bulls in the ruger... I do have a few goverment model rugers that have the long bulls on em and they ARE TACKDRIVERS!

 

[BlkHawk73]

Absoluely not, neither is the over-marketed fluting.

Hammerli makes some of THE most accuarate .22 target pistols in the world and I don't see them having oversized bull bbls and fancy fluting.





Not to steer you away from here but if your seriuos about the .22 target/match sport go here: http://www.targettalk.org/index.php

 

[Shawnee]

I'm with "TallPaul" on this one. The trigger being great will do a lot more for you than a bull or fluted bull barrel. And personally, I think it is very easy for that extra weight in the barrel to become counterproductive. Fatigue, even tiny degrees of it, is the target shooter's enemy. On the high-end target rimfires you'll see extra weight being used more for balance than for dead weight.

 

[earplug]

If you want to add a red dot sight to the pistol, the lighter barrel might be an advantage. The total weight of the scope and pistol can be a issue during a match.
Recoil recovery and how the pistol hangs in your hand are very subjective for each shooter.

 

[SGW42]

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think what makes a Ruger a "Target" model is that the trigger can be adjusted slightly, if you wanted to strip it down and get into the internals.

I swear I remember reading somewhere the non-bull, tapered barrels on the base Target models are "heavy" barrels. I have not handled one or compared it to my Standard to confirm this, but in pictures they do look slightly larger in diameter.

The bull barrel on my slabside is nice - it has some weight to it, which seems to steady my shots a bit, and reduces recoil. But I wouldn't say it's more accurate than my Standard model, everything else being equal. They both shoot where I point them.

 

[doc2rn]

I have one of every Ruger make, all are blue, MKIII is only one bull barrelled and I wish I had not bought it. All the rest are 6" tapers and the MKII has the best trigger. I can plink with any of them but the tapered barrel is my favorite.

 

[hksw]

Is having a bull barrel really critical to accuracy?

Critical? No.

The target shown is the factory 10 round group at 50 meters.

 

[SwampWolf]

I think a "bull" (heavier) barrel comes into its own when shooting with one hand as is required in Bullseye matches. As Shawnee and tallpaul noted, the greater weight really amounts to better balance. I'm a long time Bullseye shooter and, though everybody's different and no one thing is necessarily right for all, the great majority of us will advocate a relatively heavy barrel for serious competitors in this discipline. The weight effectively "counteracts" hand/arm tremors and helps in maintaining a steadier hold. And, yes, a better trigger is more important than how beefy the barrel is.

Within practical reason, I don't believe that heavier barreled pistols are intrinsically more accurate. If most of your shooting will be done with two hands or your pistol will be carried a lot in the field, the lighter (tapered) barrel may well work better for you. Like so many things in life, there really is no definitive right or wrong answer to your question and, so yes, the dreaded "it comes down to personal preference" and "what works best for you" are unavoidable responses to your "dilemma".