• the Daily hi thread just say hi :)

  • Welcome to the UK's Most Active Airgun Forum

    Looking for expert advice on air rifles and shooting gear? You have found the internet's premier independent airgun forum. Our active shooting community shares daily technical insights on modular PCP air rifles, spring-powered rifles, air pistols, pellet testing, and optics setup. Whether you are troubleshooting an FX or Daystate regulator, discussing legal FAC requirements, planning a night vision hunting trip, or looking for pest control tips, our members are here to help.

short barrels on springers

L

longbarrel333

Busy member
Joined
Jul 13, 2022
Messages
93
Reaction score
162
Points
108
Location
Spain
Hi all,

What have your experiences been with shorter barrels on springers? I'm talking about 20cm barrels for example? I know FX PCPs and other brands have short barrels on some of their models. Obviously, the quality of the barrel is key, but I do wonder if there is a downside to short barrels on springers.
 
My HW80, pictured elsewhere on this forum, has 14" of barrel including the silencer. It takes some effort to cock it, to the point where someone of slighter build than me might not be able to do it. All things being equal, this would not be a problem on an underlever rifle like a ProSport or an Airsporter. Less barrel might mean less accuracy, but also more velocity. An experiment to find the "sweet spot" would not be hard to set up, but would result in the destruction of at least one barrel, and possibly the rifle to which it was attached. Iirc, the Theoben Fenman had not very much barrel at all, but that had a much smoother cocking stroke than any springer I ever shot.
 
Only downside would be cocking effort if running sub12 levels comparative to the same set up with a full length barrel, but even then most are manageable.

Accuracy not an issue in my experience, even if shortening a factory barrel / removing choke, providing it’s recrowned correctly.

Theoben Fenman - 7.5” barrel, great rifles.

I’ve also ran a 99 with around a 9.5-10” barrel in .22, which shot lovely.
 
Nice little rifle the Cometa USC, and the exact barrel length I am looking for. Although for my Diana 48. I am pretty sure, after the many attempts done by many people over the years, that accuracy will be the same. Some even claim it to be better after shortening. I am not looking to increase the velocity, but if that is the case it is fine too.
I had my doubt if a barrel below 25cm would be a good idea, but I feel pretty assured now to make cut it at 20cm.
 
There was an article in one of the mags 40+ years ago by Gerald Cardew where he reasearched barel length, springers of course in those days.
The conclusion was that all the propulsion of the pellet was complete by 8 inches travel and that further length was causing friction slowing down the pellet. There was no loss to in accuracy at 8 inch over the uncut barrel. The theory was that with a short barel the pellet would exit the gun before the full effect if recoil happened.
Based on this I have cut several down to 10 inch over the years, having a steel muzel break to help with cocking and tame muzel flip.
This probably explains why TX200 HC and HW97K are popular with target shooters.

Whatever the other ins and outs are of doing this I think you can cut to 8 inch on a springer and have good power and accuracy.
 
The only problem with a shorter barrel on a springer is that they're less efficient. Meaning the spring and piston have to do more work to achieve the velocity. Take the tx200 hc and full length, I believe for if you take the same internal setup and swapped them from carbine to full length you would gain around 0.5-1 ftlb through the full length. So for a given speed the carbine will recoil more.
 
Arley said:
There was an article in one of the mags 40+ years ago by Gerald Cardew where he reasearched barel length, springers of course in those days.
The conclusion was that all the propulsion of the pellet was complete by 8 inches travel and that further length was causing friction slowing down the pellet. There was no loss to in accuracy at 8 inch over the uncut barrel. The theory was that with a short barel the pellet would exit the gun before the full effect if recoil happened.
Click to expand...
Cardew got it wrong, I'm afraid; it's not the only thing he got wrong, and it's all to do with available piston stroke.

Cardew's experiments were all based on the HW35 with just 65mm of available stroke, and Cardew rightly concluded that the test rifle only accelerated the pellet for 8" of barrel, and that it needed to diesel to make reasonable muzzle energy with the high start pressure pellets of the time. His big mistake was to conclude that all air rifles were the same - they are not; rifles with, say 80mm of available stroke accelerate the pellet way beyond the first 8", and they don't need diesel assistance to achieve 12 ft. lb.

Chopping a springer barrel WILL result in a fall in muzzle velocity if the available stroke is too short to accelerate the pellet further up the barrel, so anyone who has fitted a short stroke kit to a medium stroke rifle may be able to chop the barrel with no muzzle energy penalty.
 
Nomads HFT said:
Cardew got it wrong, I'm afraid; it's not the only thing he got wrong, and it's all to do with available piston stroke.

Cardew's experiments were all based on the HW35 with just 65mm of available stroke, and Cardew rightly concluded that the test rifle only accelerated the pellet for 8" of barrel, and that it needed to diesel to make reasonable muzzle energy with the high start pressure pellets of the time. His big mistake was to conclude that all air rifles were the same - they are not; rifles with, say 80mm of available stroke accelerate the pellet way beyond the first 8", and they don't need diesel assistance to achieve 12 ft. lb.

Chopping a springer barrel WILL result in a fall in muzzle velocity if the available stroke is too short to accelerate the pellet further up the barrel, so anyone who has fitted a short stroke kit to a medium stroke rifle may be able to chop the barrel with no muzzle energy penalty.
Click to expand...
Interesting stuf , not supprised there is more current wisdom on this these days, technology and instrumentation have moved on no end since the late 1970's. Didnt he use a balistic pendulum as chronographs were not available generally then.
What is the current whisdome on barrel length in springers from youre perspective.
 
Last edited:
Arley said:
Interesting stuf , not supprised there is more current wisdom on this these days, technology and instrumentation have moved on no end since the late 1970's. Didnt he use a balistic pendulum as chronographs were not available generally then.
What is the current whisdome on barrel length in springers from youre perspective.
Click to expand...
Cardew was a brilliant experimental engineer who laid the ground for those who followed, but he made the mistake of assuming results with one springer must be the same for other springers, something I've done myself in the past, though less spectacularly wrong.

There is a relationship between stroke, swept volume, pellet and calibre on the one hand, and how far the pellet accelerates on the other, but I don't have any data to help define it.
 
Had a barrel on a tx200hc changed, from .22 to .25, the barrels are short, just appear longer with the shroud
 
If only shooting periodically, as in stalking type hunting, or in close cover, I could kind of understand a shorter barrel, but if putting large quantities of lead downrange at the club, why penalize oneself with extra cocking effort ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top