TargetTalk

Aside from locating the front sight further out on the barrel, is there an appreciable difference in accuracy between a standard Anschutz 500mm barrel and a 660 or 690mm barrel? If there is a difference, where is it seen - longer shots (ie. 100 yds or meters) or all distances? Is it worth the extra money?


Todd Ellis

I went through that debate/dilemma about a year ago. I don't think the difference can be noticed in accuracy. Some stated that the bullet leaves the shorter barrel sooner, which it obviously does. (The theory being there would be less chance of shooter influence on the bullet). But if you examine it, the bullet leaves the standard barrel in milliseconds, so it leaves the 190 mm shorter barrel a fraction of that sooner. Not really significant.
I think where the barrel length might be significant is in balance of the rifle. If I am not mistaken, the 660mm barrel is the barrel on the 2012 rifle? somewhat lighter, and possibly of smaller diameter, and without the tube?
I opted for the 690mm barrel, and I use a tube for the extended sight radius. I like the extra weight in the muzzle. There have been several discussions in the past on here, and a search of the archives might be helpful.

As far as I'm aware, the 500mm barrel is the "short" option on the 2000 series action, supplied with a factory fitted extension tube. The 660mm barrel is a light weight, thinner walled barrel, fitted in the factory 1907, 1911, and 1912 models. The 690mm barrel is the "heavy" barrel, fitted on the 1913 and 2013.
The potential level of accuracy from each of them is probably very similar, there are very good examples of all of them.
In my experience in the UK, the 690mm is the most common, with the shorter, lighter options making up a small part of the total.
I see the 660mm barrel used most often by smaller framed shooters, especially when they compete in 3 position competitions.
The 500mm option, coupled with the 2000 series action, is the least common Anschutz combination that I see around.

I have both, 2000 series and can see no difference with accuracy at all distances, the balance is the major difference, especially standing

Velocity maxes out at around 16" or so (not sure what that works out to in mm). I don't think accuracy is going to be affected with the longer/shorter barrel. Harmonics are changed slightly, but I think that the most important thing would be to get a gun that is balanced right as Bruce mentioned.

I have tried all lengths and weights on my 2013, and I settled on the big heavy 690 barrel as the most accurate...for prone shooting.

It now has a Lilja 24" barrel that is an absolutely awsome shooting barrel (for around $375US)