Author Topic: Bull barrel versus standard, which is all around best? (Read 869 times)

His lordship. · « **on:** March 16, 2004, 03:55:14 PM »

I am thinking about another .22 rimfire semi-auto pistol and am wondering what significance there is in performance between thin and thick barrel types on these pistols?

I once had a Ruger Mk. 2 with the bull barrel (5.5 inches) and thought it was a great shooter, traded it for a CZ-75, now I am looking at a Browning Buckmark with lots of choices in barrel options. The light barrels on the both the Browning and the Ruger look tempting, which would I be better off with for all around use, that is, hunting, with a predominent use as a target shooter?

Thanks.

Tc300mag1 · « **Reply #1 on:** March 16, 2004, 03:59:37 PM »

I dont think anyone could tell ya but you i prefer a bull barrel even in just a all around 22. But thats just me

Questor · « **Reply #2 on:** March 17, 2004, 08:51:58 AM »

I like them both. They handle a bit differently, and target shooters are typically enamored of having some extra weight up front. But don't let somebody else's preferences guide your selection.

XP1900 · « **Reply #3 on:** March 17, 2004, 10:11:27 AM »

with my buckmark i prefer the bull barrel. it is better balanced. handle some guns with and without. see which you prefer.

Charles/NM · « **Reply #4 on:** April 05, 2004, 06:34:39 PM »

I have a 1964 vintage Standard Auto with a 6" tapered barrel that handles very nice. My shooting buddy has a MKII with the 5.5" bull barrel. I hate to admit it, but I like his pistol more. Feels really good in the hand. There isn't any difference in accuracy between the two - the bull barrel one just balances a little better for me.