TargetTalk

I've been waiting for a Morini 162EA short barrel version for several months now. I'm beginning to wonder about the wisdom of buying a short barrel gun. The difference seems only 25 or 50mm at the most. Sight radius seem close. Any feedback on short vs. normal length barrels?
Thanks,
Stu

For some reason I shoot better (more tens) with the Morini 162EI Short than I do with my Anshutz LP@. I have not been able to put this down to anything in particular. Both have Rink grips. I just put it down to the geometry and balance of the overall package. It sits in the hand and lines up very comfortably.

Hi John, is there a Morini agent in NZ?

Ít would seem not. I buy most of my gear (nearly everything) from Potter Firearms in Brisbane, Australia; I think they are the Australasian agent for Morini. Rob (Potter) is very knowledgable of the ISSF disciplines and his performance in terms of servicing, repair or replacement is second to none in my experience. Go to his website www.potfire.com.au and phone him up.

Thanks John

Stu,
Assuming equal quality barrels, the intrinsic accuracy of a short and long barrel should be the same. A long barrel will provide a higher velocity due to the longer bore time, although for 10m air pistol I believe that is insignificant. A long barrel usually has a longer sight radius which should make it have a higher practical accuracy. A long barrel tends to exaggerate any hand movement/shakes however. To us mortals, hand motion can lead to bad trigger habits like trying to snatch a shot when the sight picture looks good. So for some a short barrel with a shorter sight radius may actually have greater practical accuracy. Most adult, more fit, experienced shooters probably do best with the long barrel. But for young shooters, females, and seniors like me, a short barrel may be preferable. It is really a matter of choice. In my opinion, either length is capable of shooting top scores. It is unfortunate that some manufacturers label the short barrel guns as "Juniors".

The short barrel has the same sight radius as the long barrel if it has the rear sight extension fitted. It also has a shorter tank (but still enough for sighters/ full match/ sighters/ final, if the velocity is tamed to 140-142 m/s).

The balance is a lot further back, the long barrel balances about 10-12mm in front of the trigger blade, the short virtually back on the trigger blade.

The lighter weight and rear balance changes the character of the wobble of the pistol (shows up on the scat) the long pistol has a longer and slower cyclic wobble and the short has a shorter and higher frequency wobble (tighter).

The result is that over a match the short has been worth 3-5 points for me by pulling 9.8's and 9.9's into the 10 ring. Beware, the lighter weight is not so forgiving, any trigger error will pull the shot way out into the 8-7 ring.

Thanks for the input David and Gary. This is what I had been thinking and why I ordered the short version in the first place. Just getting anxious about whether I'll ever see it. Something about Morini production problems?

Stu

As always, David has provided some excellent feedback.

I've owned both a 162 long and short and can honestly say there is a significant difference in their weight (almost 300 grams difference in the units which I owned) and a rather huge difference in balance point. It was the latter that really convinced me to use the short pistol as my primary airgun; I can't tolerate a nose-heavy pistol, so the "short" was the way to go for me.

With that having been said, I did group testing on both pistols and found that I could easily reproduce the factory test target with the long pistol, but not so easily with the short pistol. After some additional experimentation I found the "sweet spot" for my short pistol is actually a combination of heavy pellets and a relatively low velocity of approximately 143 m/s. With this setting I am good for 120+ shots before the low pressure lockout engages.

Mark Briggs wrote:As always, David has provided some excellent feedback.

I've owned both a 162 long and short and can honestly say there is a significant difference in their weight (almost 300 grams difference in the units which I owned) and a rather huge difference in balance point. It was the latter that really convinced me to use the short pistol as my primary airgun; I can't tolerate a nose-heavy pistol, so the "short" was the way to go for me.

With that having been said, I did group testing on both pistols and found that I could easily reproduce the factory test target with the long pistol, but not so easily with the short pistol. After some additional experimentation I found the "sweet spot" for my short pistol is actually a combination of heavy pellets and a relatively low velocity of approximately 143 m/s. With this setting I am good for 120+ shots before the low pressure lockout engages.

Mark (think your best Arnold voice) "you got to start working on those pipes and stop being a girly man". If you'd like I can lend you my Walther with the barrel weights LOL.

I've tried the 162 short and the the long and even though I don't mind a nose heavy pistol I prefered the short, overall just had a better ballance point and feel.

My initial impetus for the short was my Bullseye gun. I started with a short barrel Mod 41, then tried a long barrel 41 and then a High Standard Military 107 which I eventually replaced the barrel with an aluminum/steel 5" barrel. This put the weight back into my hand, sort of like the 162 short, and for me, it became a tack driver. I was quite successful with that final version. This input has been very supportive and I think I shall continue waiting for my 162 short.
Stu