Weihrauch Springer Barrel Length Question

The longer barrel is usually for iron sights. The shorter barrels are more accurate because of the shot time reduction. Hold sensitivity increases with added barrel length.

I believe the new style HW98 actually comes with a slightly shorter barrel than previously. I'm paying my monthly bills now and hoping I have enough left over to justify one.

ITACUD said:

I see tons of reviews on HW97K, and HW98 that brag about great accuracy, but the barrel is only 300mm long. (They do make a long version of the 97 with 440mm barrel)... If these reviews are true, why would one want something longer than 300? They have various models with 300, 370, 395, 410, 440, 470 and 500mm barrel length. Sorry for the old-school compare, but all are listed from Krale below..View attachment 272226

Click to expand...

As Bear-of-Grayling mentioned, it has more to do about using iron sights and having a long sight radius.
It's also about ease of cocking as longer barrels give more leverage - nice to have on a HW80 or 90. The HW35E has a long barrel for better sighting.

Unlike a PCP, a longer Springer barrel only slows down the pellet (more drag), but doen't lessen accuracy - just increases lock time requiring a more patient hold. My most accurate springer is my .20 caliber HW80 - 1.25" groups @ 80 yards (no wind).
I personally would never own a HW97 or HW77 long - just added weight (some folks like increased stability with weight).

I prefer the shorter barrel for increased manageability, but also love my (3) HW35E's.

Keep in mind TX200 and Pro-sport only have a 9" barrel and look at their accuracy ........

ITACUD said:

I see tons of reviews on HW97K, and HW98 that brag about great accuracy, but the barrel is only 300mm long. (They do make a long version of the 97 with 440mm barrel)... If these reviews are true, why would one want something longer than 300? They have various models with 300, 370, 395, 410, 440, 470 and 500mm barrel length. Sorry for the old-school compare, but all are listed from Krale below..View attachment 272226

Click to expand...

FWIW,
HW95L

Moderator weighs 4.32 oz, 122.6 g, 1892 gr. Barrel length = 15.75” from end of moderator to end of breech block. Barrel without moderator = 12.188”, (12-3/16”, 309.575 mm), from thread end to breech block end. Moderator is 6” long. Female threads start 2.25” in from beveled end of Moderator. Rifle length = 41.875” from end of moderator to butt center. Thread is 3/4" long & 1/2" diameter with 20 threads per inch.

Longer barrels make for an easier cocking effort, and offer a longer sight radius for open sights.

Plus, go too short, and the proportions start to look off.

ITACUD,
If looking for a shorter barrel with medium power - HW50S, more power HW98 or HW95L.
What's nice about the HW80 in .20, it can shoot about 800 fps, hence lock time not really a problem.
If you start shooting the HW50S, HW98 or HW95L in .22 - were only talking 550 & 675 fps unless you go with a Vortek spring.

I shoot mainly .177 caliber in springers .......

Classic springers - i.e., in the days before we all owned chronos - were usually designed with good handling as a major priority. In the old days, barrel length was much more about proper balance in the hand, than velocity. (Cardew's classic book The Airgun from Trigger to Target determined that an 12 FPE-class spring-piston rifle only needs about an 11-inch barrel to get max velocity.)

IMHO, this is an art that has become a bit lost in a modern market obsessed with max velocity, overblown swoopy styling, big heavy scopes, etc. This opinionated oldster finds a lot of new guns about as much fun to carry and shoot as a railroad tie, which is why I own a lot of old ones.

I will never abandon my springers.
I purchased my first, a big box springer 10-15 years ago, hated it and left it in the closet after a couple tins.

Fast forward to 2020, I purchased an HW30, oh my, it is my most prized possession.
A few months later an HW95 showed up. If I knew then what I know now, I would have sent it back the same day.

Last fall I finally got all the issues solved and it is an excellent shooter. Originally a 177, I added a 22 barrel. Love it in 22, with three coils clipped from the Vortek spring it shoots the AA Falcons @700 FPS and has a very nice shot cycle.

For Christmas my #2 son gave me a 12fpe Vortek kit. So I installed that along with the 177 barrel and wow, shoots like a dream!
I can definitely notice the slower shot cycle which came with an added bonus. It quickly taught me about follow through and my defective trigger pull technique.

I had struggled with finding the correct hold and reproducing it. It’s is less about the hold and more about the other things I was doing wrong.
Now I can get the consistency and enjoy shooting it as much as the HW30.

Later on I may put the slightly less than full power kit back in and see how I do with it in 177. I will keep the 22 barrel for variety.

There are occasions where I need more power, and I want a pcp. So I have a used AA S500 .22 inbound. That will cover my high power need for certain things that need killin’.

All I regret is spending too much time with powder guns when I should have been buying and shooting air power.

Might as well add my two cents. First some trivia on nomenclature. In the firearms world, lock time is the time from trigger pull to primer strike, then there is ignition time and barrel time. All three are components of shot time. Position shooters will add titanium firing pins and stronger springs to shorten lock time so that the bullet will hit as close to the position of the crosshairs when the trigger is pulled as possible. It helps minimize the effect of shooter motion.

For airguns, Daystate claims that barrel length in springers has minimal effect on shot time since most of shot time occurs before the pellet starts moving. I found a research paper that seems to substantiate this claim. These are the times they found for a representative springer:



So 8 milliseconds till the pellet starts to move, and 10.8 milliseconds till it exits, for 2.8 milliseconds travel time in the barrel. Let's say we reduce the 16" barrel length by one half. Since the pellet is accelerating in the first half, but has more or less constant velocity in the second half, it spends more time in the first half of the barrel than in the second, let's say only one third of the time in the second half of the barrel. Thus in this case the total shot time is only reduced by about 0.9 milliseconds, or around 8%. Not enough for most shooters to notice.

For those who would like to read the entire paper, I hopefully attached the PDF. Jump to the last half if you want to skip the math. I did.

View attachment Internal Ballistics of Spring Piston Airguns.pdf

Ever wonder where the term "lock time" comes from? My other squirrel gun gives a pretty good hint...

And it's not the 44 inch barrel that makes the difference

My personal goal is reducing piston bounce to the absolute minimum in spring guns. To me, this is the biggest reduction in shot time that can be made.

Interestingly enough, FWB and Weihrauch must have also thought the same. Take for instance the powerplant on two guns with well known accuracy:

The FWB 150/300 series rifles, and the HW55 series.

BOTH of these guns are setup to have a totally different firing cycle than other springers. These guns are setup to basically piston slam. They have small swept volumes, and large transfer ports. So the "bounce" is pretty much taken out of the shot time altogether. And shoot one and you'll immediately feel the difference. They FEEL quicker. Especially so on the 55, it almost seems recoilless it's so fast.

Just my thoughts. Barrel length is so miniscule compared to the rest of what's going on that it's not worth mentioning.

thumper said:

My personal goal is reducing piston bounce to the absolute minimum in spring guns. To me, this is the biggest reduction in shot time that can be made.

Interestingly enough, FWB and Weihrauch must have also thought the same. Take for instance the powerplant on two guns with well known accuracy:

The FWB 150/300 series rifles, and the HW55 series.

BOTH of these guns are setup to have a totally different firing cycle than other springers. These guns are setup to basically piston slam. They have small swept volumes, and large transfer ports. So the "bounce" is pretty much taken out of the shot time altogether. And shoot one and you'll immediately feel the difference. They FEEL quicker. Especially so on the 55, it almost seems recoilless it's so fast.

Just my thoughts. Barrel length is so miniscule compared to the rest of what's going on that it's not worth mentioning.

Click to expand...

The HW55 is the near perfect harmony/balance yet achieved on a springer. Where the problem lies is so many want to shoot heavier and faster. That pushes everything to the extreme. The harmony and balance is gone. When inertia is not absorbed, it’s felt. Even if a piston could enter complete “lock down” at the completion of its firing cycle with a physical lock the inertia would still continue outside the piston all the way to the shooter. The unspent energy has to go somewhere. The 55’s inertia is all but spent on the completion of the firing cycle. Reducing barrel length gets the projectile out and gone while dealing with the extreme inertia.
Hence the opposing pistons RWS75 or rail system FWB300 that counters the unspent energy. Neither of which I must point out are magnums. Diana has accomplished this in a magnum with the 54 Air King. I personally never cared for it.

Question? Has anyone ever seen or know of a stock with the addition of harmonic dampeners? What a difference they made to the Archery world.

I wonder how a MDT aluminum stock loaded with harmonic dampeners would change the springer world. The receiver could be fastened much more securely to the stock. I have been enjoying shooting 22 long rifle out to 300 yards lately. My Savage B22 Precision has the MDT stock and suppressor. What a difference from a wood stock model. Hitting 3” discs at 300 yards. Take this stock and with the addition of harmonic dampeners like Mathews uses in their bows.....

Interesting indeed. Although there are those who'd defau!t back to wood ( as in traditional archery) just for traditional sake. Wood has a soul. :^)

dasman said:

Interesting indeed. Although there are those who'd defau!t back to wood ( as in traditional archery) just for traditional sake. Wood has a soul. :^)

Click to expand...

Amen. However; wood takes it only so far.
It was previously mentioned that springers will eventually make their comeback. If so, it will take a breakthrough in technology. Maybe a springer with a Aluminum Chassis and a Harmonic Dampening system. The receiver screws can be tightened to 60 in lbs. I think I will build one. (Borrowed pictures)