I'm not a Mannlicher collector but I do happen to have a few more than the average bear. In my experience with these and rifles with conventional stocks I've seen no diference in accuracy when comparing them with my other best and most accurate hunting rifles. Nor did I expect to see any difference, why should I?
In his opening statement, the OP offers the presumption that rifles with "free floating" barrels are, or should be, more accurate than non-free floating rifles. And thereby, rifles with barrel length Mannlicher type stocks may suffer an accuracy disadvantage. Which further implies that even rifles with standard length non-free floating stocks suffer a similar handicap. Which is contrary to my own experience and observation which is that a tightly fitted and
properly bedded stock offers the best, and most reliable accuracy which a rifle is capable. Note the emphasies on properly bedded because free floating a barrel has become popular because at the industrial level such stocks are cheaper and easier to manufacture and likewise at the professinal and amateur level because it's so much faster and easier to gouge an oversize slot in a stock than learning how and taking the time to bed it properly. Among the most accurate factory rfles I and many other shooters have tested are the Remington Models 721 and 722. Derspite their obviously plain and economic manufacture, the Remington of those days knew how bed a barreled action and their rifles made the mystical sub-minute group a reliable reality.
Here is a quintet of Mannlicher style rifles: Rifles at top and bottom are real Mannlichers made in at the Austrian factory. Others, going down, include a .17 javalina made by Paul Marquart at the legendary A&M rifle shop, a SAKO .222 Rem and .260 Rem from Remington's Custom Shop. Other pics are with original Mannlicher 9.3X62 with boar and couple of mouflon bagged in Europe.
View attachment 1176038View attachment 1176040View attachment 1176041View attachment 1176042