Long Vs Short Air Morini

Winstanley94 · Post by **Winstanley94** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:05 am

As I started shooting at a young age and bought my first air pistol when I was probably around 12, I opted for the compact Morini CM162Ei.
Now 18 I am considering a change.
I have looked at the full size next to mine and the sight radius is exactly the same meaning no improvement in accuracy in that aspect is possible.
Are there any other possible advantages e.g. stability and advice.

Seeking advice from national-international experience opposed to club level. (Not being a dick but have had a bit of advice on here which I knew to be immediately wrong from people who were club level/non competative.)

David Levene · Post by **David Levene** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:24 am

You really need to try a few options to see which you prefer.

Don't just go on reading reports as this could hamper your advancement.

I'm sure that virtually every type of air pistol will be on the island (at JPC). I'm certain that you just need to ask and everyone will be only too happy to let you try theirs.

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 10:10 am

Use that search function, this has been covered multiple times.

BPBrinson · Post by **BPBrinson** » Mon Aug 05, 2013 10:22 pm

Tom Rose, long time USAMU uses a short Morini to excellent effect for the last 10+ years. Google Thomas Rose, AMU. I like the " less barrel time" theory. I had considered a short once. I have/had 2 Morinis, one EI and an M. Both excellent.

Brooks

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:41 am

Perhaps this is pointing out the obvious, bit if less barrel time (as in either a shorter barrel or a higher velocity setting) is of measurable benefit, then this would seem to reinforce the benefit of using a well designed recoil absorber. If the barrel is actually moving upwards significantly during pellet transit due to recoil that is, not just due to hand movement. But as no hand movement could possibly be as fast as the slight recoil of an AP, and since recoil begins at the instant the pellet begins its forward movement (basic Newtonian law of phisics), it would seem only logical to assume that an absorber/damper mechanism of some sort would be desirable in addition to having a shorter barrel (or adjusting velocity higher).