GunTalk-Online.com

Are the light barrels like Pac-Lite really that much better than the stock barrels I know they are lighter but are they that much more accurate Maybe I am looking at it wrong or something but I'll take accuracy over weight anytime..

My take on it is that the lighter the gun is, the easier it is to stabalize the gun so you stay on target longer. If your a big strong guy you may not notice the weight. But if your old and weak like me, it may help But I do not think I would every buy one. I just use small dumbells to keep my upper body strength up.

Buy me the short bull barrel and I'll report back on how much it improves the gun.

I think they're for the "customize everything" crowd, or for putting on the frame of a junker or super-basic model that you don't like the setup of, or for slapping on a suppressor. I doubt they'll change your life if you already like shooting your mkII/mkIII ... though I admit to considering a super-basic 22/45 with the shortest bull barrel from TacSol/PacLite ... but at $340 for the barrel I want I'd better find a really good deal on that gun!

How about the next person to come in looking for help with their "too complicated" 22/45 gets told they've broken it and to bring it to me for disposal in NW Ohio?

I just can't justify the cost of a fancy barrel as this little pistol can out shoot me the way it is.

Baldy wrote:I just can't justify the cost of a fancy barrel as this little pistol can out shoot me the way it is.

Most pistols can, will and do outshoot the shooter at most times.

I can't see buying two guns, and still have only one.

I have a PacLite 4.5" threaded barrel for my MkII. I bought it because I wanted to attach a suppressor and didn't want to thread the original 10" barrel. I surely can't claim that its more accurate than any other barrel (haven't tested it) but it is nice and light and serves its purpose well. I've used the pistol (w/o the suppressor) in a few steel challenge matches and its done a nice job.

mwwilkew wrote:I have a PacLite 4.5" threaded barrel for my MkII. I bought it because I wanted to attach a suppressor and didn't want to thread the original 10" barrel. I surely can't claim that its more accurate than any other barrel (haven't tested it) but it is nice and light and serves its purpose well. I've used the pistol (w/o the suppressor) in a few steel challenge matches and its done a nice job.

Now you perked my intrest when you said you used it in steel matches. I used my .22/45 last match but I can't say that I even noticed the weight of the pistol. That will give me something to think about the more I get into this.

I've only shot about 6 steel matches myself so I'm no expert. I usually use my MkII with the 4.5" Pac-Lite barrel. This past weekend I shot both the MkII and my 5.5" SS MkIII 22/45 with a Railway reddot. I just weighed both and they tip the scales at 28.4 oz (MkII) and 38.2 oz (MkIII). The 10 oz (> half pound) difference is very noticable when you are swinging from target to target. The heavier pistol definitly carries more momentum in the swing. As I said, I'm no expert, but for me the lighter pistol is easier to handle for steel shooting where you're acquiring 5 targets in 2 to 10 seconds.

mwwilkew wrote:I've only shot about 6 steel matches myself so I'm no expert. I usually use my MkII with the 4.5" Pac-Lite barrel. This past weekend I shot both the MkII and my 5.5" SS MkIII 22/45 with a Railway reddot. I just weighed both and they tip the scales at 28.4 oz (MkII) and 38.2 oz (MkIII). The 10 oz (> half pound) difference is very noticable when you are swinging from target to target. The heavier pistol definitly carries more momentum in the swing. As I said, I'm no expert, but for me the lighter pistol is easier to handle for steel shooting where you're acquiring 5 targets in 2 to 10 seconds.

Thanks for the info. I am a green horn at this and still trying to get my wheels rolling. I may have to have a Pac-Lite barrel down the road.

I got to handle a TacSol lightweight, I think it was this one:
http://www.tacticalsol.com/index.php?op ... uct_id=157
Or one much like it.

I have to say, it is impressively light, there was one installed on a standard mkII frame and one loose at the gunshow today.

Now I want one, it is way down the list of toys to buy, but I think I'll pick up a cheap or junked/damaged/given-up-on 22/45 and mount a lightweight upper on it at some point. Probably a shorter one to reserve the ability to mount a can in the future.

They look and feel good, it was odd to have all the weight of the pistol in the frame, but I think I might get used to it in the long run ... somehow.

I would guess that the the Pac-Lite barrels are not more accurate as my stock barrel will hold 1/2 to 3/4 inch groups at 50' with most ammo and have put 9 out of 10 rounds in one small hole of a rest with CCI sv.If people prefer a lighter barrel for steel shooting maybe a tapered barrel model would work well. Not sure what a gun smith would charge but having a barrel cut down, fluted,tapered,or machined with slab sides like a ruger competition model might reduce enough weight and be cheaper than an after market barrel/receiver.

I can actually see the value of a carbon fiber barrel in a trail gun or backpacker's gun. What I cannot justify is the price.

Sarge wrote:What I cannot justify is the price.

That's where I'm at, too. I'll wait on a bag-o-parts grip frame to wander through, and then consider an upgraded barrel.
Going through all the silliness of ordering a "firearm" and getting it via 4473 and ending up with as many actual guns in the end just doesn't seem clever to me.
But having an ultralight target pistol ready to accept a can does appeal to me, so I'll just have to wait for a deal on the various parts.

The advantages of a lighter and well balanced gun for speed steel events is well known. However that does not mean everyone should or needs use them either. My .22 racegun is about the lightest setup you can build. Browning Buckmark (aluminum alloy frame), Tac Sol 5.5 alloy barrel w/TS alloy comp, TS alloy grips, Allchin alloy mount with polymer C-More red dot, aluminum gas pedal and mag release extension. The only steel parts are the gun internals, the slide, and the mags. I used to use a TS 7.25" barrel with a machined out VQ steel V-Comp which was slightly heavier. At the time I didn't think about balance as much so I shot it early this year using the ultra-light setup. However I decided the gun was too butt heavy and was getting more muzzle lift than the old setup. I could have stuck the VQ comp on this setup to give the muzzle more weight. But due to a potential sponsorship issue I elected instead to get the TS 2211 comp from their 1911 .22 conversion kit. This turned out really well once I found out how many peelable washer sections it took to line up the comp ports, and adding the thumbrest virtually eliminated all muzzle lift. But that's for me. There are 2 better shooters in my club that are less than half my age (or close to it) both of who shoot unlightened all steel Ruger MK IIIs one of which is a sponsored shooter for Volquartsen with a custom gun supplied by them. Both are stronger than me and have more experience shooting. Both have shot my gun in practice (I've shot theirs also) and both admit mine has much faster transitions than theirs but in fact they tend to over shoot compared to their guns. Obviously practice could overcome that.
So whether you actually need a lightweight gun is a matter of choice. I'm 63 and my upperbody strength is not what it used to be so I feel it helps me. I'm closing in on theim faster than they are improving so as long as I do that I feel I'm going in the right direction.
In 2011 I plan on starting to shoot SC centerfire divisions also (I started shooting club matches seriously in 2009).