Long Range 22LR 300 yards +, transonic zone, ammo characteristics and quality

[scourge18a]

Hey all,
I thought I'd start this thread after posting in another that I thought most people overstate the effects of the transonic zone.
I was hoping we could use this space to discuss long range 22lr shooting (300-600 yards +) and some of the things you guys see as challenges whether it be wind, velocities, ammo quality or design, the transonic zone etc.
Of course this conversation can vary with the intended purpose (practical style shooting vs utmost accuracy potential & groups). Feel free to discuss 1 or all questions below.

1) Do you guys see problems with accuracy due to transonic turbulence or is the wind and ammo quality a much bigger issue?

2) Has anyone witnessed bullets stable at 50 yards tumbling at 300+?

3) If ammo had the exact same level of initial accuracy, quality, consistency, BC etc, and the only difference was subsonic (say 1070 fps) vs supersonic (say 1435 fps) would you see the same accuracy at extended ranges? Or would one be better than the other and why?

4) Is wind the biggest factor or ammo consistency? We see a lot of wind in the prairies, so wind is always a factor.

5) How much are you guys seeing for vertical dispersion at extended ranges (300+) due to wind changes? And how to you compensate, or do you just rely on ballistic calculators?

6) Do you create custom profiles in your ballistic calculators? Or do you find they match up well at extended ranges, say 300 - 600 yards? What drag curves are you using?

7) Do you guys see 22lr accuracy as a bit of a crapshoot due to the rabbit hole of ammo and changing environmental conditions 1 month or even day apart?

8) For practical style shooting, is decent ammo good enough (eg CCI SV), or will only the best (eg Lapua) suffice?

9) What is your idea of acceptable accuracy at 300 yards, 1, 2, 3 MOA? And what so you feel is consistently achievable, 1, 2, 3 MOA?

10) What kind of ES/SD numbers are you getting?

Let's keep it civil and try to learn from other experiences. I will try to eventually update this initial post with more questions, ideas and consensus.

 

[horseman2]

My experience with 22 rimfire started with BR50.
Even the most expensive ammunition needs to be tested in order to tailor it to a particular firearm.
A "win" at a match was four boxes of Lapua XAct and four other shooters received similar rewards.
No one using that ammo was in the prizes at the next monthly shoot.
My experience as progressed through 100 metre and 100 Yards events.
These events cater to Unlimited, Hunting, 17 HMR, Semi Auto, Precision rimfire and Target Rifles.
Recently we have experimented at 200 Metres and 300 yards and time will tell whether it will gain acceptance in conjunction with the 100 metre events.
Ammo quality and wind are the biggest factors but temperature and humidity are also factors.
An article I read in regards to competitor and his adherence to Density Altitude reading suggested that he had four lots of ammo tested at various readings and as conditions changed he would select a particular lot based on specific readings.
During the course of events while trying to encourage shooters to participate, quotes about their rifles loving Stingers and Blazers, and all the shots going into one hole never materialize on game day.
Testing of ammo is not a matter of life or death . . . it is much more important than that!
MiniMags are capable of one inch groups at 100 yards when velocity is consistent. It is rarely consistent enough for any matches but rarities do occur.

 

[tiriaq]

What match grade ammunition is supersonic?

 

[scourge18a]

What match grade ammunition is supersonic?

I don't think any, I am asking a theoretical question. I think most of us that have been around for a while understand that things in the shooting community change, as does everything, but just because it's not done doesn't always mean it shouldn't be. Sometimes information gets changed through validation, experimentation or different objectives and findings. Shooting 22lr beyond 300 yards is somewhat new, relatively speaking. I remember when people thought a rifle in a chassis couldn't be as good or accurate as one bedded in wood, that bullets once stable begin to tumble through the transonic zone, that bullets went to sleep and stabilized at further ranges and that you can group better at 2-300 yards vs 100 etc etc. I am talking centerfire here, but I think it's relavent, just like there has been much discussion over barrel lengths and twist rates.
The main companies making ammunition for match purposes are generally producing it for what purpose? At what intended ranges?
Most bullets are still in the transonic zone (Mach 0.8-1.2 or 890 - 1340 fps). My understanding is that there is increased drag throughout that zone, which is why you see more wind drift from HV, at least during transonic flight. What effects that may have on a less than optimal 22 bullet is the sort of discussion I am curious about and would like to hear thoughts from others, get a discussion going and see the reasons why.
A big difference between bullets and aircraft is uniform shape and gyroscopic stability.

 

[tiriaq]

Match grade .22 ammunition is subsonic so that it does not go through the transition from supersonic to subsonic.
Would this not be a response to the questions that you raise?
It might be interesting to shoot subsonic match and supersonic hunting ammunition side by side and observe the difference in accuracy at different ranges on each side of the supersonic/subsonic transition zone.

 

[scourge18a]

To some degree yes, but as mentioned, it is not just when you pass through the sound barrier that you will see instability issues arise, although I'm sure much less due to the airflow properties moving from supersonic to subsonic and less time spent through the zone.
But is that change really as much as we make it out to be with gyroscopically stabilized bullets?
Is that why we see reports of a 12 twist potentially having an edge at longer ranges? I haven't tried this personally, for rimfire I shoot a Bergara, Dlask and Savage.

I think we can all agree that subsonic match ammo is inherently and initially more accurate.

Can anyone else comment from first hand experience which might lose more initial accuracy at longer ranges?
Example, if match ammo starts at 1 moa at 100 and degrades to 2 moa at 300+ maybe 2 or 4 moa at 600, will HV ammo see similar degradation in accuracy? Say start at 2 moa at 100, do you see 4 moa at 300? 8-10 moa at 600?
What is causing the loss in accuracy in the match ammo?
Assuming apples to apples in quality, consistency and BC, does the faster projectile, spending less time in the wind and environment, arriving to target quicker, less affected by said wind and environment?

Personally I have seen similar accuracy at extended ranges (400+) between match and HV ammo, which was surprising to me. I know Strelok says that CCI SV has less wind drift than 40 Velocitors, but is that what you guys have seen in the field? At 200-250 and closer I am seeing a clear advantage for match ammo, beyond that it seems to equal out. Of course there are fliers due to inherent inconsistencies. But I still wonder about a match grade HV option, although none seem to exist.

Obviously manufacturers are looking at other options such as high BC 60 grain or more projectiles. So if things go that route, do we really need to worry about that transition? I feel like in centerfire you don't and my understanding was rear heavy, sleek high BC centerfire was more prone to transonic instability, but less to drag. How does that relate to rimfire if high BC bullets are used or not?



This question aside, I'd still love to hear from others regarding some of the other questions above.

 

[grauhanen]

In the other current thread that prompted this one (see posts 64 - 68 here https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/2214752-Vudoo-coming-others-going/page7), a poster discouraged a thread like this one and gave the following advice:

Maybe it'd better to just g-search and see the many-many posts on all sorts of forums (including this one) regarding trans-sonic effects. This issue has been beat to death and prob will continue. The simple solution is to just shoot what works.

Unfortunately, despite the claim that this "has been beat to death," no other information is offered. Furthermore, it's unlikely that a google search would easily produce the best answers. If such a search was so fruitful, the questions regarding .22LR ammo behaviour together with transonic turbulence would be unnecessary.

The question arose in large part due to the information provided in the video included in a post in the thread referred to above.

The video made the claim that hyper high velocity ammo like CCI Velocitor produced the best results in the testing done in the video. The argument, made around the 15:00 mark, was that "because its travelling faster [than the other ammos in the test], it's less timee in the air so there's less conditions to do it...that extra speed is actually helping...".

Without distorting his meaning, to put what the video maker is saying more clearly, Velocitor ammo performs better than the other ammos tested (SV and standard HV) because it's MV is much faster than that of the others.

Those views are not based on a sound understanding or good familiarity with .22LR ammo behaviour.

To keep my post from getting too lengthy, I'll elaborate in another below.

 

[grauhanen]

The first thing of importance to note is that in .22LR ammo, there are many different kinds. To keep things simple, here the issue is high velocity vs standard velocity.

In standard velocity .22LR ammo, there are several kinds. One of these is match ammo, available in many varieties, a lot of which is made to the closest tolerances. This is what gives it its consistent levels of performance. It will generally have among the lowest extreme spreads (low variations in MV), which in turn contributes to its better performance. The other kind is relatively inexpensive SV ammo, such as CCI SV, Aguila, S&B, to name a few; these are not made to the same close tolerances as match ammo.

In high velocity and hyper high velocity .22LR ammo, there is no make that is similar to match ammo in terms of quality and consistency. These ammos will have greater variation in dimensions from one round to the next, and they will typically have higher extreme spreads than match ammo. Extreme spreads in a box of 50 HV .22LR ammo can easily be well over 100 fps, which is not good for accuracy, especially as target distances increase.

Other factors that directly contribute to HV ammo inaccuracy include greater variation in bullet shape and diameter, greater variation in ammo dimensions, and greater variation in propellant and primer consistency.

To summarize, .22LR HV ammo is not designed or made with accuracy as the first and foremost purpose. HV ammo is for hunting and plinking and similar uses, and these don't typically demand the highest levels of accuracy.

Since all .22LR ammo performs worse and worse as the distance to target increases, HV ammo, with its greater shortcomings, is a very poor choice for long distance shooting.

More to follow if supper isn't served sooner than expected.

 

[grauhanen]

Any advantage that might be gained by lower elevations required by faster ammo are erased by the performance inconsistency shooters can expect.

One important factor is the increased susceptibility of HV ammo to wind drift. While it may seem counter-intuitive that a faster .22LR HV bullet drifts more in the same wind than a slower SV bullet, the fact is that's the way it works. To illustrate, below its a ballistics chart comparing the effect of a 1 mph crosswind on CCI Velocitor and Lapua CX, both at their nominal MV.



Clearly the faster round drifts more. In a 5 mph crosswind, the Velocitor would drift 3.1" at 100 yards, 11.4" at 200, and 23.6" at 300. By comparison, the standard velocity CX round in a 5 mph crosswind would drift 1.9" at 100, 6.75" at 200, and 14.5" at 300. When there's wind, the Velocitor ammo is very poor (sucks) by comparison.

(Note: In the video, the shooter said the wider L-R size of his HV groups compared to that of the SV ammo was because there must have been lower winds when he tested the slower ammo. Had he been aware of the difference in how wind affects HV and SV ammo, he might have avoided making that explanation.)

Next, if time allows, the impact of high ES on HV ammo performance. (The effect of the transonic zone on .22LR ammo behaviour will be discussed.)

 

[grauhanen]

High velocity .22LR ammo invariably has a much higher ES than .22LR match ammo. While good match ammo will have an ES around 30 fps, HV ammo, including hyper velocity ammo such as CCI Velocitor, will often have an ES in excess of 100 fps.

Consider that when MV determines POI on a target (it doesn't always but that's another question), a 50 fps difference between one Velocitor round and another results in quite a difference in vertical spread on target. Below is a ballistics chart showing the difference between two Velocitor rounds, one with an MV 50 fps greater than the other.

At 300 yards, the faster round will strike the target 6" higher than the slower round. A problem with ammo that has a very wide ES is that the shooter can't know what to expect in terms of MV from one shot to the next. All he can be certain of is that it might be very bad for results down range.



(Note that in the video referred to previously the shooter explained the vertical dispersion on his Velocitor target as being the result of a few rounds being "loaded" with a wee bit more or less propellant. He appears to believe that in general the MVs published on the ammo boxes are the actual MVs. Not once does he refer to MV variation as a result of the nature of the ammo as being a factor in results.)

It's supper time. More to follow.

 

[emerson]

Glenn is covering the points. This discussion has played out several times that I have seen and Glenn organizes the info well. My experience is that even with substandard ammo like CCISV, my vertical at 200 is 3X+ of my horizontal spread in 10-20 round groups. At 300, the groups are not quite as tall vs wide, but still more vertical than horizontal. An ES of 40-70 is the problem. I think the rule of thumb is 10fps variance moves the impact 1/4” at 100, independent of all the other variables(tuners aside). I’ve got some SKHVM to test, but other’s chrono results show its ES to be big also. I’ve got a 1:12 to try, and I’m really curious if it can tame the vertical at 200+ that SKRM and CCISV show about the same for me. SKS+ is worse. My chrono results show the same. I did not think there is a velocity consistent HV 22 ammo.

 

[Brutus]

Center X

 

[sk8snwmx]

I like a lot of the answers already given. I'm not going to add anything just answer in your list.

1 - wind is a bigger issue, so is ES/SD
2 - not sure, I only shoot subsonic ammo.. Center-X and SK match at long distances
3 - not sure
4 - Both
5 - ...
6- I just have free Strelok and use G1 0.128 for Center-X, my current lot is only 1030fps at 20C out of a 16.5" barrel.
7- Here in Ontario sometimes a match can start at only 0C in the am and be almost 20C in the late afternoon sun...
8- I just usually shoot Center-X
9 - best I have ever shot at 300m with .22LR was just around 2moa, that was rested off the bench... usually I just try and group on an 8.5x11 piece of printer paper. I'm very happy with that, but I suck as a shooter and I shoot a cheap gun (Savage FV-SR), I'm not a serious match shooter but I'm having fun trying.

 

[grauhanen]

That was a good half-can of Campbell's Chicken Noodle soup for supper, heated in the can on the stove. My missus, however, insists I eat it from a bowl.

With regard to the effect of transonic turbulence, it's important to note that the transonic zone is between about 1340 and 890 fps depending on the bullet in question. When a bullet enters this zone, it may experience a turbulent flight.

After it is shot, all standard velocity .22LR ammo, which includes all .22LR match ammo, spends almost its entire flight within the transonic zone, only slowing down out of it after about 150 yards.

Most HV .22LR ammo also spends most of its time (up to about 200 yards) within the transonic zone. Hyper HV ammo, like Velocitor, may spend a short period of its flight (about 20 yards) above transonic velocities, but it remains within it until almost 230 yards.

It was confirmed in 1990 by Robert McCoy that .22LR ammo with transonic zone velocities (from about 1340 fps to 890 fps) doesn't suffer from the increased pitching and yawing that causes the flight instability associated with bullets slowing down into the transonic zone from considerably greater velocities. See conclusion #5, p.11 in Robert McCoy "AERODYANMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF CALIBER .22 LONG RIFLE MATCH AMMUNITION" https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a229713.pdf (This study, for the U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory in Aberdeen, is still the best and only serious study of the subject that's been published.)

In other words, high velocity .22LR doesn't usually have MV's high enough to qualify for transonic turbulence. As a result, it's not transonic turbulence that causes .22LR HV ammo to perform poorly. It's poor performance is directly the result of the quality of the ammunition. Compared to .22LR match ammo quality, .22LR HV ammo quality sucks.

The video maker clearly didn't understand this important aspect of .22LR ballistics.

Some readers might point out that Velocitor ammo has a published MV of 1435 fps and that's above the transonic zone. It's not clear if the transonic zone for the typical .22LR bullet differs significantly from the figures cited previously (1340 and 890 fps). It's not clear what effect, if any, a 20 to 30 yard flight above the transonic zone before entering it will have on a Velocitor round. My guess is that it has little impact.

Furthermore, with regard to the Velocitor-championing guy in the video, it's not clear what MV's he was getting with Velocitor. Remember that all published MV's are like what stop signs are for some drivers -- suggestions only, in this case for what the MV might be like. His narrative sounded like he didn't account for the inevitable MV differences that occur from round-to-round in every box of .22LR ammo ever made.

 

[Eagleye]

My experience in shooting longer ranges with a 22 rimfire thoroughly back up the points made by Glenn in posts 7-10.
Biggest "fly in the ointment" is the velocity variance of ALL rimfire ammo, but particularly HV ammo.

I had a lot of Federal HV LR ammo that the 'graph showed 122 fps high to low. Vertical spread already showed at 50 M.

On a very quiet morning several years ago, I shot 3 consecutive 5-shot groups at 200M that were all under 1 inch.
That was with my 40X Remington, ELEY match EPS @ 1059 fps, using a 36X Weaver with a 1/8 moa dot.

Once in a while, when the stars align, and h3ll freezes over, other unusual thing occur. 3 decades ago, I bought a case
[5000 rounds] of plinking/small game hunting ammo. PMC was just beginning to market their ammo here, and some outfit
in the east had a deal that I could not pass up. This LR ammo was brass cased, unplated lead advertised at 1255 fps, IIRC.

Turns out that this was, hands down, the most accurate HV 22 ammo I have ever used. In competition, I shot several 10-shot
groups at 100 meters that were just over ½ moa. My 541T loved the stuff, and while it was never tried beyond 200M, it was
exceptional, even there. I tried to get more of the same lot #, but alas, it was sold out, and a subsequent lot number of the
same ammo was not nearly as accurate. No HV ammo I have tried since has been as accurate. [even Lapua Speed Ace] Dave.

 

[scourge18a]

Thank you all for your contributions, especially grauhanen. I really appreciate the time taken to explain and provide reason.

There might be some misunderstanding regarding question #3. I think we can all agree that the quality of current HV ammo is not on par with most standard and match ammo. Consistency is key and in anything but match ammo, it just isn't really there. The question was theoretical if all things were equal (initial accuracy, consistency, quality BC etc) aside from initial velocity.


To the original post I have added clarity to the ranges I am talking about, as I am more interested in ranges beginning at 300 yards and on to wherever anyone has experience shooting a 22 LR be it 600, 800 or further. I have also added 1 more question, and I suppose I should try and provide some of my own thoughts.

1) Wind and ammo for sure

2) No

3) I don't know. I look at this a bit like one of the problems Litz writes about if I remember it, whether early wind or late wind in the projectiles flight affects the trajectory more. Early wind has less effect on the bullet with less time spent in it moving faster pushing it off course early vs late wind that might affect the bullet more with more time in the wind and potentially more drag through the transonic zone.
I wonder if HV ammo had the same quality, accuracy, consistency etc at the muzzle, would it at extreme ranges catch up to the standard velocity ammo in regards to wind drift or accuracy? I see initially SV has almost half the drift of HV but as distance goes on it starts to catch up on the ballistic charts. In Strelok Pro, I can't always get a chart past 500 or 700 yards depending on the ammo. But I have shot out to extended ranges and my hit percentage on steel is pretty similar most times. I have not had the opportunity to get a big sheet of cardboard at 600-800 yards for groups, but I think I am going to try. Hell every time yo go out you get different results with rimfire. Really depends on the day, the wind, weather, ammo. I also don't shoot Vudoo, Rim-X or Anschutz and haven't sent anything to Lapua for lot testing or anything crazy.

4) I think it really depends on the ammo your rifle likes, what you have on hand and what the weather is like. I'd say past 300 it's usually wind. I think the wind also plays with the vertical more than a lot of people like to admit too (gyroscopic jump or magnus, I'm not sure of the correct terminology at this moment) Edit: Aerodynamic Jump.

5) Again I think out to 400+ there is more vertical induced by wind than I used to think, but I cannot measure this empirically so...

6) I use Strelok Pro and will confirm distances and DOPE with multiple points as ranges don't seem to mesh with the default calculations when I work out to then back from 500+

7) Yes, it's always different, never as consistent as what I want or am used to with centerfire. But maybe my centerfire comparisons at 1200-1700 yards isn't far enough. I also haven't lot tested my rifles. I buy all sorts of standard and match ammo as its available and shoot whatever works better in my rifles when it matters. I'm not made of money so I shoot a lot more CCI SV than the Lapua, Eley or SK.

8) When you are shooting steel from different positions I am really happy with CCI SV. Yes I can get slightly better results with better ammo, but again I'm shooting a Bergara now, but have more rounds than I can track through a Dlask DAR 22 with a 12.5" barrel in a Axiom stock and bunch through a couple of Savages. I don't have a Vudoo or Rim-x to compare, I am sure they are more consistent. But with practical style shooting, multiple targets, positions and a clock I think an accurate semi can be of benefit.

9) At 300 I think 2 moa is pretty damn good. At 500, I think 3 moa is really damn good too. Both are difficult to do consistently. I think the consistency is the toughest part of rimfire, of course that is due to the ammo. Regarding consistency, I think the 1 or so fliers I might get from CCI SV is worth is in many applications vs the cost. In a lot of practical shooting I don't think its the ammo or the gear responsible for the misses

10) Seems to be all over the place depending on the day, weather, ammo and # of shots. I don't have a lot of early data from before I started using Labradar a few years ago. Just looking at a small sample of my data, I've had 10-50 shot strings of CCI SV see ES of 40-60 and SDs of 8-13. I've had SK see ES of 30-50 or so, similar SDs of 8-13 and Eley quite similar to the SK. One thing I find interesting is the ES is of course better with better ammo, but in many cases the SD is quite similar. That's again where I feel like those 1 or 2 fliers aren't a huge concern as 80-90% group really well with SV. But of course I shoot for fun and I shoot many different styles (long range, precision, practical, rimfire, pistol, shotgun, varminting etc) so I don't throw mad money at any single one.

 

[scourge18a]

My experience with 22 rimfire started with BR50.
Even the most expensive ammunition needs to be tested in order to tailor it to a particular firearm.
A "win" at a match was four boxes of Lapua XAct and four other shooters received similar rewards.
No one using that ammo was in the prizes at the next monthly shoot.
My experience as progressed through 100 metre and 100 Yards events.
These events cater to Unlimited, Hunting, 17 HMR, Semi Auto, Precision rimfire and Target Rifles.
Recently we have experimented at 200 Metres and 300 yards and time will tell whether it will gain acceptance in conjunction with the 100 metre events.
Ammo quality and wind are the biggest factors but temperature and humidity are also factors.
An article I read in regards to competitor and his adherence to Density Altitude reading suggested that he had four lots of ammo tested at various readings and as conditions changed he would select a particular lot based on specific readings.
During the course of events while trying to encourage shooters to participate, quotes about their rifles loving Stingers and Blazers, and all the shots going into one hole never materialize on game day.
Testing of ammo is not a matter of life or death . . . it is much more important than that!
MiniMags are capable of one inch groups at 100 yards when velocity is consistent. It is rarely consistent enough for any matches but rarities do occur.

I don't know how I missed this first response, only reading it a few minutes ago, but I can certainly agree with even the best ammo needing to be tested vs each firearm. And as mentioned, even if you find that "lot" you can go to another location, elevation or different conditions on a different day and it'll be crap, shoot it again another day and it's a performer again. Very finicky, hence why I choose to only shoot higher end ammo when or if it matters. 22 ammo is cheap vs centerfire, and I don't have to load it, but I shoot volumes more of it.
Different guns like different ammo, I've been surprised by lots of different ammo that I thought was crap, but has shot very well. The kids help me use up whatever cheap crap I buy on sale for practice and gophers. I am amazed at some of the groups they have shot with that junk.

 

[scourge18a]

In high velocity and hyper high velocity .22LR ammo, there is no make that is similar to match ammo in terms of quality and consistency. These ammos will have greater variation in dimensions from one round to the next, and they will typically have higher extreme spreads than match ammo. Extreme spreads in a box of 50 HV .22LR ammo can easily be well over 100 fps, which is not good for accuracy, especially as target distances increase.

Other factors that directly contribute to HV ammo inaccuracy include greater variation in bullet shape and diameter, greater variation in ammo dimensions, and greater variation in propellant and primer consistency.

To summarize, .22LR HV ammo is not designed or made with accuracy as the first and foremost purpose. HV ammo is for hunting and plinking and similar uses, and these don't typically demand the highest levels of accuracy.

Since all .22LR ammo performs worse and worse as the distance to target increases, HV ammo, with its greater shortcomings, is a very poor choice for long distance shooting.

I agree 100%, which is why I asked the hypothetical question, if all other things were equal aside from supersonic and subsonic MV, say 1070 vs 1430.
I have to think and hope at some point someone like Hornady, Lapua or others might get into making some heavy high BC 22LR cartridges, but I would assume if that happens, they'll still be subsonic due to the projectile weight and case/chamber limitations. I will also assume that like centerfire, slower higher BC projectiles would be better at extended ranges vs lighter/faster.

One important factor is the increased susceptibility of HV ammo to wind drift. While it may seem counter-intuitive that a faster .22LR HV bullet drifts more in the same wind than a slower SV bullet, the fact is that's the way it works.

Agreed. Why do you think that is? increased drag through the transonic zone? BC or bullet design?

High velocity .22LR ammo invariably has a much higher ES than .22LR match ammo. While good match ammo will have an ES around 30 fps, HV ammo, including hyper velocity ammo such as CCI Velocitor, will often have an ES in excess of 100 fps.

(Note that in the video referred to previously the shooter explained the vertical dispersion on his Velocitor target as being the result of a few rounds being "loaded" with a wee bit more or less propellant. He appears to believe that in general the MVs published on the ammo boxes are the actual MVs. Not once does he refer to MV variation as a result of the nature of the ammo as being a factor in results.).

Agree, the ES is certainly higher in non match ammo. What are you guys seeing for SDs?

I think the point he is trying to make in the video is that it can be harder for manufacturers to make consistent 22lr ammo as 1 kernal of powder difference in 22lr will have a larger overall effect on a 40g bullet vs an extra kernal in something like a 30 cal with a 200g bullet.


Thank you again for the time you have taken to share your knowledge and experience.

 

[scourge18a]

Glenn is covering the points. This discussion has played out several times that I have seen and Glenn organizes the info well. My experience is that even with substandard ammo like CCISV, my vertical at 200 is 3X+ of my horizontal spread in 10-20 round groups. At 300, the groups are not quite as tall vs wide, but still more vertical than horizontal. An ES of 40-70 is the problem. I think the rule of thumb is 10fps variance moves the impact 1/4” at 100, independent of all the other variables(tuners aside). I’ve got some SKHVM to test, but other’s chrono results show its ES to be big also. I’ve got a 1:12 to try, and I’m really curious if it can tame the vertical at 200+ that SKRM and CCISV show about the same for me. SKS+ is worse. My chrono results show the same. I did not think there is a velocity consistent HV 22 ammo.

I have had similar results at 200 and 300 yards. Have you had an opportunity to shoot groups or steel further?
At 300-500 yards I have had very similar results with CCI SV, Eley and SKRM. They will rotate as to which I can get more hits on plate at distance, sometime the CCI wins, others the SK, less often the Eley.
I have also been curious about the 12 twist. Haven't run any 22lr ammo through a twist rate calculator but maybe its just getting it beyond the 1.5 SG, or it needs a little more than 1.5 being a blunt bullet and spending time transoninc shooting out to 1-200 yards, which is a large percentage of its total flight?

Do you track SDs?

 

[scourge18a]

7- Here in Ontario sometimes a match can start at only 0C in the am and be almost 20C in the late afternoon sun...

9 - best I have ever shot at 300m with .22LR was just around 2moa, that was rested off the bench... usually I just try and group on an 8.5x11 piece of printer paper. I'm very happy with that, but I suck as a shooter and I shoot a cheap gun (Savage FV-SR), I'm not a serious match shooter but I'm having fun trying.

I hear you on the weather change, we can get a 30 degree swing in a day and that will mess up your DOPE haha.
That's great shooting and I'll never knock a Savage. They always shoot better than they look or feel. Glad you are having fun, I find 22lr to be some of the most fun and easiest to get others to join. Cheap, no recoil, fundamentals matter, no handloading.