How far have you shot a 22

Was shooting the 300m 12" gong yesterday with my 10/22. CCI Standard, Bushnell 3-12, 16.5" barrel. 55 MOA up from my 25m zero.

Pretty easy, actually. I don't think I have enough adjustment to dial 400m with this scope, but I might have enough hash marks to hold over reliably. Going to try that next time out.
 
Tried some longer range 22 shooting today. Had enough elevation to dial in at 300m with my 10/22, and a 16" square plate was fairly easy to hit. Got 10 out of 10 on it. The 8" round plate at 256m was a different story, only managed 4 out of 5 on it, but I was also holding under with mil dots, rather than adjusting the scope. Hit a 16" plate at 400m a few times too, with lots of holdover. Rifle was a 10/22 target, with a 4-16 Mueller scope.
Kristian
 
The question should be, how far can you accurately shoot a .22

That's the $64 000 question.

As indicated... start by defining the size of the target and the hit ratio

Define what you mean by ACCURACY....

The current ELR standard is a 12"X12" plate... 3 shots in the row. for this, I think 500yds is pretty much the max for that lucky 'world record'.... at 300yds, you can pound it all day with the right set up.

Somewhere between the two... is the accuracy limit on that size of target.

Now make that target 36"X36"..... until a definition or standard is created, the question is not readily answered.

Jerry makes a very relevant point. You can shoot a .22LR at long distances and hit things, but until there's a meaningful standard defining accuracy it's apples and oranges. It's possible to hit a 12"X12" steel plate three times in a row at 500 yards, but how difficult is it to do regularly or on command? Perhaps there isn't yet an answer to that question. The problem remains -- how should long range .22LR accuracy be measured? What are some reasonable standards so shooters can be discussing the same thing?

The word "precision" gets used to describe all kinds of things. During World War II, the US Army Air Forces conducted what it euphemistically termed "daylight precision bombing." Among its most enthusiastic proponents was Theodore Barth, the president of Norden, the bomb-sight maker. He optimistically declared in 1940 that a 15 square foot target was not difficult to hit from 30 000 feet. Events were to prove, however, that such predictions were rose coloured. Bombing accuracy, measured as a percentage of bombs that land within 1000 feet of the target, was throughout the war never more than one-third of all bombs, even when averaging in radar-controlled bombing, which was developed late in the war. In other words, daylight precision bombing was never precise. It was by the sheer weight of numbers of bombers and bombs that made the difference in strategic bombing.

The point is that optimism should not be allowed to characterize what is meant by accuracy or precision. If hitting a 12x12 inch plate three times in a row at 500 yards with a .22LR is considered a top-level measure or standard of accuracy -- just as repeatedly shooting 12mm edge-to-edge or better ten-shot groups (about .25" center-to-center) is a measure of a high level of accuracy at 50 yards, and quite challenging to achieve -- then it would not be a regularly achievable objective. The comparison may not be apt, but the top standard must be something that is indeed very difficult to achieve, but possible with a combination of three things, the rifle, the ammo, and the shooter.

Since the upper-most levels of accuracy are by definition not easily achieved, and certainly out-of-reach for the average shooter, it is imperative that there be a standard of accuracy that most everyone can relate to and agree on. Perhaps there are reasonable limits in terms of distance. The further the distance, the greater the role of good fortune comes into play. Considering the impact of wind and the limitations of all .22LR ammo, that alone should give pause when considering standards for extreme long range standards of accuracy. Standards in accuracy at any distance should not depend on the happy circumstances that can sometimes arise by virtue of sending enough rounds downrange, or, as in the case of bombing in WWII, dropping enough bombs so as to be sure that the target is destroyed.

Until there is that standard, comparisons of accuracy will be like discussing apples and oranges. It may well be that like daylight precision bombing during WWII, it will take some time to more fully understand what accuracy standards at very long .22LR distances really ought to be. Unlike WWII and precision bombing, where there were great efforts and achievements in technology, such as the ability to launch bombing raids involving hundreds of bombers at a time over many days, as well as radar-controlled bombing, it is questionable whether there are any realistic expectation of technological developments developments in .22LR rifles or ammo that will significantly improve what's available today.
 
I guess I always like the challenge of not being able to hit 100% of the time, yes 80% is a good average but when speaking distance if you are 100% your target is big. Why not push yourself and find your limitations get better and keep going.
Last April I did a match in 50 km/h wind, cold, snow. Worst possible day for a rimfire match, had some new shooters and another guy who is very good, we struggled to hit the 300 yards (2/3 ipsc) but once we did we were on it. Had a pile of windage but it was a good day overall. After a summer of shooting those matches and getting better every month I can say if I was to do another one the 300 yard gong would only be 12 inch, and the 400 yard would be the 2/3 ipsc.
My point is that you will not improve until you push it, so back to my question what do you shoot at distance and how far
 
I guess I always like the challenge of not being able to hit 100% of the time, yes 80% is a good average but when speaking distance if you are 100% your target is big. Why not push yourself and find your limitations get better and keep going.
Last April I did a match in 50 km/h wind, cold, snow. Worst possible day for a rimfire match, had some new shooters and another guy who is very good, we struggled to hit the 300 yards (2/3 ipsc) but once we did we were on it. Had a pile of windage but it was a good day overall. After a summer of shooting those matches and getting better every month I can say if I was to do another one the 300 yard gong would only be 12 inch, and the 400 yard would be the 2/3 ipsc.
My point is that you will not improve until you push it, so back to my question what do you shoot at distance and how far

And if it's a reference target/distance for everyone it has to be reachable for a relative newbie so they don't give up and can start building their hit percentage at that distance, but still challenging enough for an expert, maybe hit count in a "Mad Minute" or trying to consistently not miss (maybe a "Clean Mad Minute"?).

Is the 12" target at 300 a good reference goal?
 
If we explore this mathematically, and you found a load with a 30 FPS ES, then that would result in about 7.1 inches of vertical drop between a fast round and a slow one at 400 yards.

If the rifle was producing MOA accuracy at 100 yards in calm conditions then at 400 yards, that would be a 4.16 inch group.

If we combine the two, then we get a group 4.16 inches wide and 11.26 inches high under ideal conditions.

What we could therefore achieve in reality would be 4.16" W x 11.26" H plus bullet to bullet BC variances and environmental factors.

Wind effect is roughly 4.8" per MPH at 400 yards, so if we could shoot under conditions with with a 2 MPH wind error, our group would likely be about 13.8" W x 12" high at 400 yards. To shoot any better than that at 400 yards would illustrate exceptional skill and load prep.
 
Last edited:
And if it's a reference target/distance for everyone it has to be reachable for a relative newbie so they don't give up and can start building their hit percentage at that distance, but still challenging enough for an expert, maybe hit count in a "Mad Minute" or trying to consistently not miss (maybe a "Clean Mad Minute"?).

Is the 12" target at 300 a good reference goal?
12 inch at 300 is a good reference, easily done but still some margin of error. If you were to shoot a group at 300 I’m going to say about 5 inch I would be content
 
12 inch at 300 is a good reference, easily done but still some margin of error. If you were to shoot a group at 300 I’m going to say about 5 inch I would be content

For general readers some perspective may be helpful.

A 5-inch group at 300 yards with a .22LR would probably be cause for more than being content. All other things aside -- including shooter error, limitations on the rifle's inherent accuracy, wind, ammo imperfection that affects POI other than difference in MV between individual rounds shot -- a 300 yard 5-inch group that isn't the result of a random act of accuracy might be considered something more significant.

At 300 yards, every 1 fps difference in MV between one round and another results in very close to .23" in vertical spread. If there were a 10 fps difference in MV between rounds, the vertical would be 2.3" while a 20 fps difference between rounds would double that -- 4.6" of vertical. It's impossible to know what the MV of a given round is unless it is chronographed or gives some indication on the target downrange. Even among the best .22LR match ammo there may be as much as a 30 fps spread between rounds over a whole box of ammo.

If the wind was considered, a 1 mph difference in wind between one round and the next, which is barely noticeable, would move a bullet over 2.8" -- more if the bullet itself has a faster MV. A 2 mph wind difference between rounds would double the 2.8" and drift a faster round further still.

Even with a perfect gun and perfect shooting, a repeatable 5-inch group at 300 yards may be a tall order because the ammo-induced vertical spread and even a slight change in wind will increasingly play havoc on results the further the target. Is it doable? Of course it is. Is it repeatable? It probably won't happen very often.
 
When I had my BSA Martini Int'l Mk II, I did a run up on the Sierra Infinity Program using Eley TEAM at 1073 fps.
It showed I needed 40 minutes of elevation from 100 metres to 300 yards.
Three shots t the bank and my spotter suggested it was a go.
7 rounds from that box was just over 7" and 5 shots from another lot was just under 7".
Never tried it again after being refused to shoot at the Club 300.
 
Hunting small game with still head shots, 20-25 yds., with some sorta natural rest. How's that for honesty?

Even longer with a scope.
 
With a cz452 and cci standard velocity at 250m and a calmish day), I can shoot tim hortons cups 80% of the time, and empty 12guage hulls 10-20% of the time.

It would be cool to have a standard worked out as to what is an achievable (albeit not easily) objective at distance. I like the way you guys are thinking. Figure out the limitation of caliber (with its variables of wind and ammo consistancy) in a perfect world, then consider reasonable accuracy for an above average rifle.
 
I shoot mine into space.

a-trip-to-the-moon.jpg
 
On a very calm morning a couple of years ago, I shot three consecutive 5-shot groups at 200 meters
The largest of the 3 groups measured 13/16", C to C, which was about as good as it gets. Dave.
 
I only use stinger rounds. 200 yards on a 12" target with stinger rounds. 5" target 100 yards with ease. 200 yds not too bad if I don't miscount my clicks on my cheap Bushnell lol.

I've seen YouTube videos of .22 hitting 800 yds. Projectile bounces off the target. Essentially no velocity at that range.
 
I only use stinger rounds. 200 yards on a 12" target with stinger rounds. 5" target 100 yards with ease. 200 yds not too bad if I don't miscount my clicks on my cheap Bushnell lol.

I've seen YouTube videos of .22 hitting 800 yds. Projectile bounces off the target. Essentially no velocity at that range.

It will depend on what the target is made whether the bullet will bounce off the target at 800 yards.

CCI Stinger (32 grain) rounds are moving at about 352 fps at 800 yards, with CCI Mini Mags (40 grain) are doing about 487 fps. The Stinger has 9 foot pounds of energy, while the Mini Mags have 21 fpe.

For further comparison, a Winchester Super-X LRN 40 grain round will be 521 fps at 800 yards with 24 foot pounds of energy. A standard velocity CCI SV 40 grain bullet will be about 431 fps at 800 yards with 16 foot pounds of energy.

Clearly the Stinger is the most anemic round at longer distances. But even at 8 fpe it's still enough to be quite dangerous.
 
Back
Top Bottom