100M/YD 22LR 10 rnd groups

A couple targets shot today with my CZ 455 Custom. Wind had it's gusty moments and some calm inbetween.





Edited to add, I was gunna save this one for horseman2's new 100y challenge, but, whatever. Maybe I can do a little better another day. Been awhile since I've shot this rifle or 100y for that matter.

 
Last edited:
On 'hole size' all valid (and varied) points made there. The 'lead smear' could be larger than the bullet if the paper 'folds around' the bullet, tho that's what I use to measure groups. I've slugged a couple of my 22s a couple years ago and found my Marlin 60 had 0.224 grooves and my Sav-64 had 0.223. Haven't done my other 22s yet and may not unless I do some of these thread challenges. I'm just curious as there doesn't seem to be a "Standard" for any of them.
PS - None of my 22 rifles cost more than $400, but this summer I may try some challenges. And none of my ammo cost over $5/box, so far.
 
On my post above please note that I'm using a $20 Cantire caliper, so there could be 1-5 thous error ^o^, who knows. Mine keeps 'adding 0.002 every few times due to slippage when I return to zero between measurements. I'd guess many of these posts are using similar equipt too. Maybe if All used SAAMI specs as a basis there would be a "constant". Grauhanen's post indicating the holes possible being smaller due to paper tear etc and then the possibility of 'smears' being larger leads to a potentially confusing result. I haven't had any group attempts that missed by 0.001-2 but have had some that were close. If a group measures more than 2-5 thou inside a challenge range it would be valid anyway, but how accurate? When I would use 0.224 and another (I've seen) uses 0.217, he's getting 'robbed' of 0.007 advantage on his group . . . even tho it may be the same bullet and same gun. BTW - my slugs showed 0.217 " for lands, so unless everyone has verifiable slugs, we're all just ballparking this anyway. And measuring slugs is not super accurate unless one has a dial micrometer with pins and other equipment. Now don't let me get going on the 'corkscrew' thing I've seen in another thread . . .
 
Bullet holes from a 22 long rifle as small as 0.189 ( used on the 50 yard/metre) and I will only go so far as allowing 0.22 as a standardized value.
What would you suggest Jerry? I have never measured a hole that large and that is why quality index card is recommended.
If using 20 lb. paper . . . you may as well use TP! Target dots of any description do not give clear cut holes but are okay for an aiming point.
Smear to smear and forget about any tears in the paper. Tears do not occur on quality index card material.
Last week a 17 HMR appeared a little egged and might be two bullets in one hole.
That hole measured 0.174" and other holes on the target measured 0.164". Scored as two shots.
 
Got no suggestion beyond if we standardise a diameter, we can try and remove some of the squabbling that might occur. We aren't trying to set world records and this is as much for fun as it is for education. When shooters are as likely to shoot a 3/4" as a 1.5", a few thou in bullet diameter isn't going to change the overall average.

Because this is the most readily available paper used in the typical home computer printer, just use good ole white paper. I think my stuff is 20lbs. I just don't see many going out to buy card stock to use in their printer... but I could be wrong.

If shooters want to take it seriously, then by all means build the demands accordingly. My guess this will be more to answer the question what a generic shooter using generic firearms shooting common 'match' ammo is going to group for 3X10rds at 100 something units of distance... more then likely without wind flags.

Whomever wants to set up the game, set up the rules....

Jerry
 
Definitely its for fun, and the education can come along with thoughtful rules and measures.

I suggest:
- Shooters can draw on an aiming dot or square or sticker or whatever they like to preserve their aiming point. E.g. aiming point drawn on target at 12 o'clock and click down for your preferred group location.
- Hole diameter for subtraction from outer max measure = 0.22 inches. A thousands decimal is not needed because of lack of standardized paper, lack of standard exact range distance for each shooter's range, different judges (ourselves measuring our own targets), tolerance of measuring tools, and as Jerry mentions the magnitude of the diameter we are talking. If your digital calipers are cheapos (like mine), the accuracy of the third decimal place is probably +/- 2 or 3 thou anyways.
- I have always used bullet smear edge as the edge for measurement. I suggest that is objectively standardize-able for all since we are using white paper targets.
 
What if you make it a requirement to have one bullet hole away from the official groups with the caliper showing its size and use that for your subtraction
 
Underthegun said:
What if you make it a requirement to have one bullet hole away from the official groups with the caliper showing its size and use that for your subtraction
Click to expand...

I think because one cannot objectively measure a bullet hole, due to variability in the bullet tearing fragments away. There is also a blast back from the backing board that is variable and that affects how those petals of paper tear. Look at the back of a paper target and you will see faint black/gray variable blast marks around some of the holes. And if the bullet hits an old staple in the backing board, there can be a big fragmentation back into the paper. Each hole in paper is a slightly different size...I think.

The bullet smear (lead, carbon) on the other hand, should be consistent because it marks where the bullet touched the paper (gray), with a distinct boundary where the bullet did not touch the paper (white). The petals of paper can usually be turned back inwards to see the arc of the gray smear boundary.
 
Buck1950 said:
Grauhanen's post indicating the holes possible being smaller due to paper tear etc and then the possibility of 'smears' being larger leads to a potentially confusing result. I haven't had any group attempts that missed by 0.001-2 but have had some that were close.
Click to expand...

To be clear, I didn't say anything about the bullet hole in the paper being smaller due to paper tear. It is simply that because of the nature of paper, the hole made by a .22LR bullet is invariably smaller than the bullet's diameter. If someone was to shoot through tin or aluminum foil, they might find that the hole was indeed very similar to the bullet diameter.

It's worth noting as well that the bore is smaller in diameter than the .225" of the pre-fired bullet. No .22LR bullet will retain its original, pre-fired size after it goes down the barrel.
SAAMI bores are .217" and grooves are .222" (5.51mm and 5.64mm, respectively).
CIP bores are .212" and grooves are .220" (5.38mm and 5.58mm, respectively).

As far as concern over what size to use, unless shooters show on each target what size a hole one bullet makes in their paper target, it will remain unresolved. More importantly, since groups shot at 100 yards will not be as small as the groups shot on the 50 yard 1/2" challenge, it's not worth worrying about.

Use .22" or .21". If participants and observers are going to start to quibble about group sizes down to .01" or .02" then they may have too much time on their hands. One or two hundredths of an inch on 100 yard groups in not significant enough to really matter in the whole scheme of things.
 
Early this morning I saw Rabid's nice targets early this morning and they stayed in my mind when I went to the range. I was testing tuners and after another morning of inconclusive results I put them away and decided to try shooting at 100 yards sans tuner in an effort to wash away my tuner frustration.

I haven't shot at 100 in a few years. I measured the distance to the "100 yard" target backers and found that it was inches shy of 98 yards. It appears the 100 yard distance at my range is closer to accurate than the actual 57 yards that is the 50. I put a few targets up that I made for 50 yard shooting and then adjusted my scope for 100 yards.

What I saw confirmed that not only lot number can make a difference that is readily apparent at this distance, but I also saw that ammo within the same lot, and indeed within the same box, could produce very different results. I used ammo left over from my 50 yard tuner testing. Some was older Center X, some was made in 2020.

I think more practice is needed.






 
Whatever you folks are seeing as the hole diameter on your targets with your ammo, half that should help you find the centre and get a group size. And for what we're doing here, just slap a ruler on already and don't bother with a micrometer.

I was hoping to see something to help me gauge my own performance, eg if I get over a given group size with CCI SV and a decent bolt gun at 100 metres then I should spend some remedial time with Project Mapleseed, or under that group size means I'm ready open the piggy bank and try to find some better ammo.
 
My cz452 lux with a vx3 4.5-14 40mmAO shoots 1”-1.5” groups at 100 on a dead calm day.
That’s with CCI SV.
I hold over on a 22” steel plate at 350yds and can hit it every time once I know where to hold.
I just got some 30mm rings for the cz
Going to swap scopes with my 204ruger
Vx3 8.5-25x50mm SF. See how far I can adjust out to and see what groups I can get.

I also just biuld a full Dlask/Kidd 1022. But only have a Red dot on it. I can manage 3/4” groups at 50yds with a 4moa dot.
Think it will be a real shooter with a scope but don’t have any Pictiny rings at the moment to put a scope on to try.
 
old303 said:
Whatever you folks are seeing as the hole diameter on your targets with your ammo, half that should help you find the centre and get a group size. And for what we're doing here, just slap a ruler on already and don't bother with a micrometer.

I was hoping to see something to help me gauge my own performance, eg if I get over a given group size with CCI SV and a decent bolt gun at 100 metres then I should spend some remedial time with Project Mapleseed, or under that group size means I'm ready open the piggy bank and try to find some better ammo.
Click to expand...
I’ll try to shoot 3x10 tomorrow with CCISV out of my factory T1X barrel.
 
grauhanen said:
Early this morning I saw Rabid's nice targets early this morning and they stayed in my mind when I went to the range. I was testing tuners and after another morning of inconclusive results I put them away and decided to try shooting at 100 yards sans tuner in an effort to wash away my tuner frustration.

I haven't shot at 100 in a few years. I measured the distance to the "100 yard" target backers and found that it was inches shy of 98 yards. It appears the 100 yard distance at my range is closer to accurate than the actual 57 yards that is the 50. I put a few targets up that I made for 50 yard shooting and then adjusted my scope for 100 yards.

What I saw confirmed that not only lot number can make a difference that is readily apparent at this distance, but I also saw that ammo within the same lot, and indeed within the same box, could produce very different results. I used ammo left over from my 50 yard tuner testing. Some was older Center X, some was made in 2020.

I think more practice is needed.






Click to expand...

Those are nice groups,went yesterday afternoon and never came close to under an inch.im going to change my target out to a grid to see if I cant get it to tighten up.your right about groups expanding even with same lot number.a little gust of changing wind has a big impact on 22lr at 100.i prefer 50 yrds myself but goin keep working at 100.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom