I don't see any advantages or disadvantages. I own both types. Barrel and bushing may work better for barrel replacement, like accurizing or converting 9mm to 38 Super.

 

the heavie r barrel(of the bull) is supposed to make follow up shots easier and faster. I just like the looks and feel of them

 

Don’t really find much advantage to them they add a small amount of weight to the front of the gun which is supposed to lessen felt recoil. Do I notice a difference no not really. They do make takedown slightly harder do to no barrel bushing..

 

Having installed both, a good bushing, such as the new radial bushing from Bunker Arms, provides far better support than a bull barrel. A bull barrel contacts the slide in two upper spots and two, small lower spots. Coned barrels are far superior than the bull barrel design.

 

just trying to learn here. Why would a cone barrel be better than a bull barrel. aren't they both going to contact the slide the same?

 

No. They have better contact. Barrels are odd in their shape and how they wedge in the slide.

 

Hmmm... while I am anything but an expert on this, I can't help but to try to apply some uneducated guesswork here.

The folks at Ruger babe been designing and building guns rather successfully for over 60 years now. When they came out with their 1911 in .45 acp, they made it very true to John M. Browning's original design. Their new 10mm model, however, has the bull barrel design. I can't help but assume that Ruger's engineers did that for a reason, and that it was more than to just give them something interesting to do.

Again, I’m sure not an expert, but there must be a good reason why Ruger made that change with the 10mm model.

 

Easy to mass produce was likely high on the list.... Ruger has about 7 or so years of 1911 building experience as a company. Not sure as I would read too much into their reasoning behind using a certain type of barrel as it being the superior than another.

 

Less machining , no bushing groove to cut or bushing to manufacture .

 

Like stated, the bull barrel adds weight to the front of the gun, which aids in reducing muzzle flip. It also eliminates the need for a barrel bushing. This is particularly more important in shorter barrel guns where th bushing reduces the amount of allowable slide travel, as it would eventually contact the locking lugs once you reduce the gun to a certain length. Not an issue on the 5” gun you’re thinking about.

Accuracy of either is going to be based on the quality of the build and the sum of the parts. Either are capable of superb accuracy, if done properly.

One important thing to consider, if you have any intentions of trying your hand at IDPA or USPSA, IDPA doesn’t allow them in 5” guns, and it would put you at a disadvantage in USPSA.

 

I own both and don’t really see any advantages or disadvantages. My preference is to have a bushing, but that’s strictly because I like a “traditional” 1911.

 

Bull barrel adds weight up front amd a bit easier to fit. Bushing barrel tends to give more accuracy (so i’vebeen told).

For me it’s about what i use it for. In USPSA Single Stack, no Bull barrels allowed...Limited 10 is fine...so if you are lookimg to compete...just be wary what ot can be used for...

 

Id really love to see one done in a fasion as if the 1911 came out 25 years before it did. Brass everywhere and a octagonal bull barrel...

Its a good thing im not a millionaire, my dumb ideas would bankrupt me.

 

I prefer a bushing barrel simply because I like that method of field stripping better. No need for any special tools, paper clips, etc. Just turn the bushing and away you go.

 

I've got two Wilson CQBE's with the bull bbl. and all I do is capture everything in my hand when I disassemble them and do the same when putting them back together. I just like the clean look at the front as far as accuracy goes I can't tell a difference in the ones with a Bushing and the bull Bbl one's. Both my Wilson's have the cut out inside the slide for Bushings so I guess you could fit a bushing style bbl to the slide.

 

I have both. I could almost maybe see it in the 10mm. I prefer the traditional bushing however.



And from the front.....



I would also guess shooting the 9mm target might be like shooting a 22 conversion unit. I have all steel 9mm 5 inch 1911s for target shooting in the form of a SA RO and Colt GCNM. Not a lot of recoil and they have a traditional barrel/bushing and no FLGR.

Now when I first ran into them back in the 1980s in a little Detonics I could see the logic of using them as the slide/barrel was not that long.

 

Adding mass to the barrel seems to moderate recoil better than just hanging a weight on the frame and is apparently preferable to a heavier slide. Look at the typical Open or Limited gun; a bull barrel in a skeletonized slide, even a "sight block." The original Clark Pin Gun had a weight on the muzzle with no gas ports, the expansion chamber compensator came along later.

 

I've seen these comments before, about how a cone locks up/registers better than a bull barrel. Not sure where the heck that came from, but whatever.

I have fit many bull barrels and a few standard barrels that I made cones for. At the front of the barrel where the surface of the barrel interfaces with the inside of the slide, both are concentric (read circular) with the bore axis of the barrel. I have two brand new KKM bull barrels for my Jem I'm building, and recently cut a cone for a commander barrel for my 2011. Where they contact the inside of the slide, they are concentric or round. I know, because I chucked them up in the lathe and measured them.

KKM does do some material relief further back from the business end of the barrel on top, probably to allow the barrel to tilt up, which it has to do to go into battery, but what the heck do I know?

I can cut a cone to fit tighter in the slide, but then I have to remove more material at the contact points to allow the barrel to pivot up. The new 10mm KKM bull barrel had to be relieved like a coned barrel as it was too tight and actually causing barrel springing. Who'd a thunk?

I'm not sure one way is any better than the other, but like anything else, there are going to be folks who are True Believers regarding one way or the other.

 

I have a Guncrafter Industries Model 3 in 50GI , it has a 4" bull barrel, and it feels like a 300# spring in there, I lift weights just so I can clean that thing. The hole for the paper clip is in a really bad spot and I can't see it when I pull the slide all the way back, I get it done though, just a real work out.

 

There is an important matter of discussion on this like many topics.

Are you talking mass produced drop in or are you talking about fit barrels.

People are discussing both in the same conversation, which is leading to arguments and disagreements where people aren't even having same conversation.

If you are talking drop in mass produced like ruger or even Colt...In this instance a bull barrel would be both cheaper and quicker, but I do believe a drop in bushing will provide a better fit than a drop in bull barrel. Ruger's use of a bull barrel is also marketing to stand out and look unique.

When it comes to a fit bushing vs a fit bull barrel? It's probably a wash on fit and support. In regards to other aspects, it's probably a wash as well. I have bushing guns that require a tool that are just as difficult to break down as a bull barrel with a paper clip. The bushing barrel is more traditional but a bull barrel is more noticeable. I saw a bull barrel with a reverse crown on it and that definitely grabbed my attention.

In the end like most things it comes down to personal preference. What you like is what will work better for you.

 

It really depends on what you are after. Accuracy? Recoil dampening?

I've machined hundreds of barrels from forgings and along the way have tried all sorts of designs. Bushing barrels are great for lightweight and accurate guns that typically require a call to EGW to get a good fit.

Coned barrels are pretty intensive to fit correctly, offer excellent accuracy, but IMO, are a compromise to the recoil dampening of a bull barrel. Additionally, I do not like how coned barrel don't have support during the recoil cycle, causing the upper lugs to drag across the inside bore of the slide.

Bull barrels are great for recoil dampening, and the extra mass does make a difference. I've rarely seen a bull barrel group as tightly as a well fit cone or bushing barrel.

Finally, I've designed another option which I fit standard in all of my pistols. It is a full profile .700 diameter cylindrical barrel that locks up like a cone. This offers more mass to dampen recoil than a bull barrel, and offers equal accuracy to that of a cone. This is a very proprietary process of mine.

Here is a muzzle side picture of my proprietary designed bull barrel. Incredibly tight tolerances can be achieved.

 

I would like to try one in Valor.
Do they come with out the ramp in 45?

David

 

Wow, that front end looks great, Eric.

I prefer the aesthetics of a traditional barrel bushing. But when shooting both, I'm not good enough to tell the difference.