As far as I know, the barrel is the only difference between the 1907 and 1913. Could someone tell me what other differences are between the 13 and 07?
I have always been told that heavier and longer barrels are more accurate. Is this true even with small bore rifles?
What are the advantages to buying a 1907? What are the advantages to buying a 1913 instead?
Will the same world class shooter's scores be any different between the 2 rifles using the same stock?
Lastly, anyone know if there is a price difference between the 1907/2018 and the 1913/2018 and what that might be?
Pros and Cons of 1907 vs 1913 in an Alum stock
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
The balance and weight are set in the 1913, but you can add more weight to the 1907. If you need sight extensions, you can add those also. Either one is fine, but I personally feel the 1907 is better. I doubt the accuracy difference is measurable. When it is time for that kind of accuracy, then you will buy a new barrel ( in a 100,000 rounds). I think the 1913 is priced a little more.
1907 VS 1913
I would agree with the above post. Personally, I shoot the 1907 in a 1813 stock and have found it to be a relatively comfortable weight. I have shot a older and heavier barreled action that was Anschutz and I found that I did not like the extra weight in standing or kneeling. I was fine with it in prone. As for accuracy differences, it is probably negligable between the two, especially since both barrles are thick. The women have to shoot the rifles designated as "sport rifles" (i.e the 1907/1912, and the 2007/660 action) and they can outshoot most any guys with the heavier barreled actions. That being said however, if you look at a world cup in prone, most actions seem to be the heavier ones. However, better to have a rifle that is too light (so you can add weight) than one that is to heavy rifle.