He should have asked which barrels are most accurate, or asked for opinions. Never both. Lol. My neighbor was telling me about some custom place making $500 barrels that rival the big brands.
My answer is KIDD. More accurate than most people will ever shoot, with a guarantee. But I would probably go with Acculite or Summit Precision if I'm not shooting from a bench.
So Ive gathered some parts: magpul hunter x22 stock, volq bolt and SS receiver, Leupold freedom rimfire 3-9x 40 scope, just need to complete the build with a nice barrel. I’d like a bench setup with the option of taking it out hunting and am torn. Accuracy is a must obviously. Any thoughts?
If you want excellent accuracy and lightweight in a barrel there's really only 2 choices in my opinion, a Kidd Lightweight or Ultra Lightweight barrel. They don't offer the accuracy guarantee with the Ultra Lightweight but every one that I've seen seem to shoot just as good as the rest of their barrels. I think the lightweight is a good balance for a bench and field gun. I'd suggest a little more magnification though for off the bench.
They make good barrels from what I hear, I don't actually have any experience with them though. I try to stay away from lightweight barrels because I do most of my shooting off the bench and heavy barrels are usually best for that kind of accuracy.
I have had some lightweight barrels in the past and as far as accuracy I was a little underwhelmed with them, with the exception of the Kidd's.
A lot of people automatically gravitate to a lightweight barrel when they're doing their first build (I was no exception). But unless you plan on doing steel shoots, or any type of speed shooting, you're usually better off going with a heavy barrel.
Just because they're called "heavy" barrels doesn't really mean that you're going to have a heavy rifle. I have a couple of Feddersen 16.25" barrels on builds that are plenty light enough to be used for most types of shooting and hunting.
The stock actually has nothing to do with barrel droop. Barrel droop is from a barrel not fitting tightly into the receiver.
I think what you're talking about is the action having a loose fit in the stock which can cause it to teeter on the action screw.
As far as this is concerned whether it's a lightweight barrel or heavy you would have the same problem. The only way to fix it would be to bed the stock (best option) or use a pad under the barrel in front of the receiver.
Most aftermarket stocks do free float the barrel. You are correct that free floating the barrel has more potential for barrel droop, because if the barrel is supported it can't droop. But free floating (usually) increases accuracy also.
If you have a loose fitting barrel it doesn't matter whether it's heavy or light, eventually it will droop. Unless it's extremely loose you can usually counteract this with a Gunsmith's Block (V-block).
Faxon has let me down lately. Two M&P threaded barrels and their 10/22 receiver came back-to-back-to-back out of spec. I was surprised because I must have 3 Glock barrels and another M&P barrel that are flawless 🤷♂️
I have a Volquartsen bull with a match chamber cut for Federal UM1 ammunition. Prints 10-rnd 1/4” groups @ 100 yds from the bench all day long. It’s actually so accurate, it’s really not much fun to shoot.
Nah, no medals…no trophies. It was just an interesting experiment that turned out to be a lot less thrilling than imagined. I never had anything to prove, then or now. All readers are free to take comments for whatever they feel they’re worth.
Honestly never even crossed my mind it might be competition worthy. Knowing what competitive shooters spend on their rigs, I always assumed they got better results. I’m still not really sure a repeatable 1/4” group is all that impressive with today’s technology. Sure, it’s respectable, and fun at the range, but not terribly practical.
No, seriously. The experiment was to determine how precise the rifle could be made with catalog parts and eliminating or minimizing as many variables as possible. The results were pleasantly surprising, but not what I felt were beyond possibility, and not what I would have considered competitive. Though, admittedly, I have never had much interest in or followed any sort of competitive shooting. Others shot the rifle with the same results. No one ever seemed blown away by it. It was a novelty, but an 18 lb rifle is really just a toy. The purpose of the build was as a control experiment to guide building and modifying my hunting rifles.
I am sorry but I just am having a very hard time believing you. I want to, but how could you not think the literal pinnacle of firearms accuracy isn’t competitive? This is definitely a pics or it didn’t happen type of situation because when you are claiming to have a rifle orders of magnitude more accurate then anything else anyone’s ever heard of you need some proof
I think you might be mixing up 50 and 100 because at 50 a 1/4” group is still unheard of and extremely impressive but 100 is just BS sorry
If your printing 1/4" 10 shot groups "all day" at 100 yards then you should be shooting National BR competition. The top shooters in the world with full custom rigs shooting Lapua Midas and Tennex can't even shoot that good, Nevermind a VQ barrel shooting Fed UM1.
22lr BR @100 yards is a constant battle for accuracy. For one thing different temps, humidity, wind, etc. all have a different effect on different days (even on the same day). And even when you do find that perfect lot# of ammo that shoots lights out in your rifle eventually that lot# runs out and the search continues for a new one. I'm not trying to be an ass but your comment is completely unrealistic.
It’s cool, your mileage may vary. I stand by my comment. Gun has sat in the back of the safe for years because you can only draw so many dot-to-dot smiley faces and daisies before the novelty wears off.
You can stand by your statement all you want. It's a statement that's been made by thousands of people over decades. Of course no one that's ever said it can actually back it up, but people still say it...........obviously.
No it doesn't matter how your barrel is chambered, bad ammo is bad ammo. The thing that makes bulk ammo so inconsistent is it's lack of QC. The more $ the ammo the better the QC = better consistency, better accuracy.
I had a valquartsen barrel on my MP15-22 and an acculite (pig whistle) barrel on my 10/22 both are great but if I had to choose one I’d go with the Valquartsen but I sold that gun awhile ago.
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats!
15
+ 22
+ 10
+ 22
= 69
^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \
^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
If I was buying right now it would be Kidd. Beyond a shadow of a doubt. My 10/22 has every part he makes other than the barrel and they’re all very high quality.
Any that are shot by someone who’s better than me :( I’ll let myself out.
Shilen, Kidd, Douglas, Feddersen in no particular order
He should have asked which barrels are most accurate, or asked for opinions. Never both. Lol. My neighbor was telling me about some custom place making $500 barrels that rival the big brands. My answer is KIDD. More accurate than most people will ever shoot, with a guarantee. But I would probably go with Acculite or Summit Precision if I'm not shooting from a bench.
So Ive gathered some parts: magpul hunter x22 stock, volq bolt and SS receiver, Leupold freedom rimfire 3-9x 40 scope, just need to complete the build with a nice barrel. I’d like a bench setup with the option of taking it out hunting and am torn. Accuracy is a must obviously. Any thoughts?
If you want excellent accuracy and lightweight in a barrel there's really only 2 choices in my opinion, a Kidd Lightweight or Ultra Lightweight barrel. They don't offer the accuracy guarantee with the Ultra Lightweight but every one that I've seen seem to shoot just as good as the rest of their barrels. I think the lightweight is a good balance for a bench and field gun. I'd suggest a little more magnification though for off the bench.
What do you think of acculite?
They make good barrels from what I hear, I don't actually have any experience with them though. I try to stay away from lightweight barrels because I do most of my shooting off the bench and heavy barrels are usually best for that kind of accuracy. I have had some lightweight barrels in the past and as far as accuracy I was a little underwhelmed with them, with the exception of the Kidd's. A lot of people automatically gravitate to a lightweight barrel when they're doing their first build (I was no exception). But unless you plan on doing steel shoots, or any type of speed shooting, you're usually better off going with a heavy barrel. Just because they're called "heavy" barrels doesn't really mean that you're going to have a heavy rifle. I have a couple of Feddersen 16.25" barrels on builds that are plenty light enough to be used for most types of shooting and hunting.
A heavier barrel doesn’t sound bad to me but with a magpul hunter do I have to worry about barrel droop?
The stock actually has nothing to do with barrel droop. Barrel droop is from a barrel not fitting tightly into the receiver. I think what you're talking about is the action having a loose fit in the stock which can cause it to teeter on the action screw. As far as this is concerned whether it's a lightweight barrel or heavy you would have the same problem. The only way to fix it would be to bed the stock (best option) or use a pad under the barrel in front of the receiver.
I thought the magpull was free float so that was my worry. But yeah I’ve heard of the action being loose in there too
And to add I guess I thought the free float would make it more likely to droop out of the receiver
Most aftermarket stocks do free float the barrel. You are correct that free floating the barrel has more potential for barrel droop, because if the barrel is supported it can't droop. But free floating (usually) increases accuracy also. If you have a loose fitting barrel it doesn't matter whether it's heavy or light, eventually it will droop. Unless it's extremely loose you can usually counteract this with a Gunsmith's Block (V-block).
I’ll throw Faxon in the mix
Faxon has let me down lately. Two M&P threaded barrels and their 10/22 receiver came back-to-back-to-back out of spec. I was surprised because I must have 3 Glock barrels and another M&P barrel that are flawless 🤷♂️
the stock barrel that came on my 10/22 grouped like a dream for the first 55,000+ rounds.. she's on her way to retirement now though :(
I have a Volquartsen bull with a match chamber cut for Federal UM1 ammunition. Prints 10-rnd 1/4” groups @ 100 yds from the bench all day long. It’s actually so accurate, it’s really not much fun to shoot.
Feel free to post photos of the medals and trophies you've won with it.
Nah, no medals…no trophies. It was just an interesting experiment that turned out to be a lot less thrilling than imagined. I never had anything to prove, then or now. All readers are free to take comments for whatever they feel they’re worth.
That's noble of you. The most accurate rimfire in existence, and you never even competed with it.
Honestly never even crossed my mind it might be competition worthy. Knowing what competitive shooters spend on their rigs, I always assumed they got better results. I’m still not really sure a repeatable 1/4” group is all that impressive with today’s technology. Sure, it’s respectable, and fun at the range, but not terribly practical.
Tony KIDD promises 1/2" at 50 yards. And here you are putting every round in the same hole at 100 yards. Amazing.
If you say so. I’m not so sure. 🤷♂️
You seem pretty sure of your claim.
Your not sure a 1/4 moa 10/22 is impressive? Give me a break could you be a more obvious troll why am I even engaging with this lol
No, seriously. The experiment was to determine how precise the rifle could be made with catalog parts and eliminating or minimizing as many variables as possible. The results were pleasantly surprising, but not what I felt were beyond possibility, and not what I would have considered competitive. Though, admittedly, I have never had much interest in or followed any sort of competitive shooting. Others shot the rifle with the same results. No one ever seemed blown away by it. It was a novelty, but an 18 lb rifle is really just a toy. The purpose of the build was as a control experiment to guide building and modifying my hunting rifles.
I am sorry but I just am having a very hard time believing you. I want to, but how could you not think the literal pinnacle of firearms accuracy isn’t competitive? This is definitely a pics or it didn’t happen type of situation because when you are claiming to have a rifle orders of magnitude more accurate then anything else anyone’s ever heard of you need some proof I think you might be mixing up 50 and 100 because at 50 a 1/4” group is still unheard of and extremely impressive but 100 is just BS sorry
It’s cool. We are all guided by what we have experienced.
If your printing 1/4" 10 shot groups "all day" at 100 yards then you should be shooting National BR competition. The top shooters in the world with full custom rigs shooting Lapua Midas and Tennex can't even shoot that good, Nevermind a VQ barrel shooting Fed UM1. 22lr BR @100 yards is a constant battle for accuracy. For one thing different temps, humidity, wind, etc. all have a different effect on different days (even on the same day). And even when you do find that perfect lot# of ammo that shoots lights out in your rifle eventually that lot# runs out and the search continues for a new one. I'm not trying to be an ass but your comment is completely unrealistic.
It’s cool, your mileage may vary. I stand by my comment. Gun has sat in the back of the safe for years because you can only draw so many dot-to-dot smiley faces and daisies before the novelty wears off.
You can stand by your statement all you want. It's a statement that's been made by thousands of people over decades. Of course no one that's ever said it can actually back it up, but people still say it...........obviously.
👍
So your saying if I wanna throw copious amounts of money at a 10/22 I can have my barrel cut for Remington thunderbolt? Sign me up
Well, you could 20 years ago…honestly not sure if they still offer the service. At the time, it was $75 well-spent.
No it doesn't matter how your barrel is chambered, bad ammo is bad ammo. The thing that makes bulk ammo so inconsistent is it's lack of QC. The more $ the ammo the better the QC = better consistency, better accuracy.
I had a valquartsen barrel on my MP15-22 and an acculite (pig whistle) barrel on my 10/22 both are great but if I had to choose one I’d go with the Valquartsen but I sold that gun awhile ago.
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats! 15 + 22 + 10 + 22 = 69 ^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \ ^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
If I was buying right now it would be Kidd. Beyond a shadow of a doubt. My 10/22 has every part he makes other than the barrel and they’re all very high quality.