Is SK standard ammo Match ammo??

[Mark-II]

I tried some of the stuff. The stink and the oiled cases turned me right off. Very hard to load a mag with those greased pigs.

Most off the shelf SV ammo shoots about the same in my rifles. I tend towards CCI because it's all around adequate and I can almost always blame myself for a poor shot, rather than some random factor in the cartridge.

 

[hoytcanon]

I think a definition of "match ammo" that includes, as you say, "'match grade' QC" is heading in the right direction. At the same time, however, simply using an ammo while shooting a match does nothing to justify calling it "match ammo". If someone is using .22LR ammo made by Winchester or Remington in a shooting match, that doesn't mean he's using "match ammo".

My point was, that I have heard people apply the term MATCH AMMO, to whatever ammo was used in a literal MATCH, or to one that achieves what they consider to be "match" level results... and it would seem that a few people on this thread would concur with that definition, but I feel that to do so, while perhaps literally true in one broad sense, is misleading.

I have never been to a manufacturing plant and have never witnessed the process on how LOW and HIGH grade ammunition differs in production with regard to materials, equipment and QC control & testing, but I would assume that QC would add the bulk of the cost to the final product... the difference between 10 cents per round and fifty cents per round should ultimately show up on paper somewhere... perhaps not in groups that are 500% better, but at top levels there are many that would pay 500% more to net a 10% return, because the cost of the ammo is unimportant compared to the difference between first place and fourth place.

It is all semantics... I am prepared to accept the manufacturers definition of what constitutes "Match" ammunition... I know that regardless, I have no high competition aspirations and will not pay 50 cents for every trigger squeeze regardless of how it is labelled or defined... but I do enjoy the process of finding which ammo will give the best results for each rifle from the pool of ammunition that I am actually willing to buy... none of which do I consider to be "match" ammunition, regardless of how well it shoots from any given rifle.

 

[grauhanen]

It is all semantics... I am prepared to accept the manufacturers definition of what constitutes "Match" ammunition...

Indeed. There's a lot of parsing of words. But accepting the manufacturers definition of what constitutes "match ammunition" begs the question, how do ammo makers define "match ammo"? No definition derived from ammo makers has been provided for the question over the seven pages of this thread. Deferring to what the manufacturer says may be wise, but we don't know what they say from the contents of this thread to this point.

 

[hoytcanon]

Indeed. There's a lot of parsing of words. But accepting the manufacturers definition of what constitutes "match ammunition" begs the question, how do ammo makers define "match ammo"? No definition derived from ammo makers has been provided for the question over the seven pages of this thread. Deferring to what the manufacturer says may be wise, but we don't know what they say from the contents of this thread to this point.

In conclusion ()... when the cost per round approaches 15 cents (and I prefer 10 cents)... I am solidly out, afterall, a grouses head is the same one inch at 5 yards or 50 yards... I can do that "all day long" with various bone stock hunting rifles.

As Forest Gumps says; "That is all I've got to say about that..."

 

[AikiNut]

Hitting the dot wasn't the point of the exercise.

Understood. the point of the exercise was tightest possible groupings. I still don't understand why the tightest possible grouping in the dead centre of the target wouldn't be part of it, but then I like shooting for accumulated points (like a 577 out of 600 in a standard pistol match, or 574 in centrefire pistol) which means pretty tight groupings, but mostly around the centre of the target.. Each to his own - those REALLY are good groupings and better than anything I have at the moment.

 

[grauhanen]

Understood. the point of the exercise was tightest possible groupings. I still don't understand why the tightest possible grouping in the dead centre of the target wouldn't be part of it,

If the center of the target was shot out, there would no longer be a precise point of aim. In other words, if the dot is obliterated, it's no longer there to aim at.

 

[AikiNut]

If the center of the target was shot out, there would no longer be a precise point of aim. In other words, if the dot is obliterated, it's no longer there to aim at.

Yep yer rite of course. If group is all you're shooting for you may as well just use one dot and move the groups around via scope adjustment off the zero. Unless I'm mistaken though, that's a precision competition target designed for one shot per circle to be scored based on how precisely the puncture is centered in the dot. Shooting for groups, one could put a sharpie mark in the middle of a bit of paper and shoot all day just adjusting the sights a few minutes per group, while never even nicking the aiming mark. I just hope that whomever is shooting these amazing groups remembers to re zero for the last few rounds so that when they're trying to hit something other than the previous bullet hole, they're not off to the right or whatever. Why waste a competition target (ok, it's a bit of printer paper) to shoot groups?...

 

[grauhanen]

Why waste a competition target (ok, it's a bit of printer paper) to shoot groups?...

I think I see your point.

There's an argument to be made that it is wasteful to use a photocopied target such as the one shown in post #35. It can be said that it's a shame that such a target can only accommodate ten groups of five shots each, or a box of 50 rounds. What's more the target shown shows only five groups, with the rest of the target wasted.

After all, if the target is printed on regular printer paper it costs almost $0.10 per copy. If instead the target is copied on 60lb card stock, which will allow the bullets to punch clean, non-tearing holes, that's about $0.30 per target at places like Staples. With card stock it will cost anywhere up to 60 cents if a profligate shooter uses a two targets (25 rounds each) per box of bullets. If ten target sheets are shot on a trip to the range ($3.00 worth) that clearly is wasteful and expensive. It's almost as much as a Tim Horton's coffee and doughnut.

 

[PGW Steve]

We've gone from the OP buying two premium rimfire rifles, not firing a single round out of either before putting them up for sale to analyzing the cost savings of using photocopied targets and only shooting five of the ten bullseyes and not hitting them for that matter. LOL people need to get out and shoot more.

 

[Toolman]

Lol, I agree with Steve.....worry less and shoot more!

That target is one I found online, printed on some paper and used it to shoot at. Nothing I would ever see or use in a match.

Match targets look like this;

50 yards, outdoors. And before anyone says the holes don’t cover the dots keep in mind that I don’t score my own target and a scoring plug is used.

 

[grauhanen]

I'll wager those USBR targets cost a bit more than anything from a photocopier.

 

[armorman]

The SK Standard doesn't shoot quite as well as the Rifle Match does out of my Vudoo. That being said it still performs admirably and, if shooting well out of your rifle, would make an excellent practice round due to the slightly reduced cost.

Here are 4 - 10 round groups that I shot yesterday evening with SK standard, 121 yards. No complaints with those results. No drama either like rim sorting or anything crazy like that. I just loaded up 4 mags from a random box and started shooting.

 

[redryder]

Curious what you are using for an aiming point on each group. Aiming at the first bullet impact of each group?

 

[TrxR]

I'll wager those USBR targets cost a bit more than anything from a photocopier.

The expense for USBR or IBS or IR50/50 targets is not so much the cost of the target but the shipping is ungodly expensive.

 

[armorman]

Curious what you are using for an aiming point on each group. Aiming at the first bullet impact of each group?

Same aim point, just using the elevation adjustment in the scope.

 

[grauhanen]

The expense for USBR or IBS or IR50/50 targets is not so much the cost of the target but the shipping is ungodly expensive.

Yes, I'm aware. I was being facetious. Unfortunately in post #69 my reply to #67 was taken literally.

 

[AikiNut]

I think I see your point.

There's an argument to be made that it is wasteful to use a photocopied target such as the one shown in post #35. It can be said that it's a shame that such a target can only accommodate ten groups of five shots each, or a box of 50 rounds. What's more the target shown shows only five groups, with the rest of the target wasted.

After all, if the target is printed on regular printer paper it costs almost $0.10 per copy. If instead the target is copied on 60lb card stock, which will allow the bullets to punch clean, non-tearing holes, that's about $0.30 per target at places like Staples. With card stock it will cost anywhere up to 60 cents if a profligate shooter uses a two targets (25 rounds each) per box of bullets. If ten target sheets are shot on a trip to the range ($3.00 worth) that clearly is wasteful and expensive. It's almost as much as a Tim Horton's coffee and doughnut.

Oh... Not to worry - I know it's not a huge expense - but I'm regularly surrounded by eco-freaks who think it's a horror to print anything and who rejoice in the fact that they haven't used a paper coffee cup (from TH or McD) in x number of months. I am also surrounded by stacks of printouts (because I like hardcopies of documents and receipts) - but if you're shooting for groups, you really only need one aiming point and adjustable sights - if you're shooting for score, (or food) you need a zeroed firearm.

I print targets out, too, and shoot a few holes in them before consigning them to the burn barrel. the targets I keep are the (rare, these days - old age sucks) ones where I get over 97/100.
Now... I'll need to find some SK ammo and get testing it myself.