A Comparison of Target Results by Lot and Rifle

G

grauhanen

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Super GunNutz
Rating - 100%
178   0   0
Location
Northeastern Ontario
This thread will have a number of posts. I'm going to try to complete them before anyone posts. After that please add your comments if you please.

During the past two seasons, I shot a lot of .22LR match ammo, the great majority of it at 100 yards in ten-shot groups. I go to the range as often as possible in the mornings when conditions appear calm. Of course, not all of these mornings are equally calm nor do conditions remain equally calm during the course of shooting.

I try to optimize results by avoiding conditions obviously influenced by wind. At 100 yards it’s not easy to account for wind even with wind flags. I use them primarily to let me know when wind may be interfering. It’s much more challenging to account for wind at 100 than at 50.

In the last two years I tested extensively nine different lots of Lapua Midas + and one of Lapua Center X. During this period I used seven different rifles, some more than others.

The results were recorded each time at least ten ten-shot groups were shot in relatively calm conditions. The data for the Midas lots was tabulated and put in chart form just this week. The Center X data was tabulated last year and posted on this forum.

My next post will be an overview of the results.
 
Results Overview
Below is an overview of how each lot performed. The averages are with all rifles.



Below is a chart showing how each rifle performed with all nine lots of Midas.



First Impressions

Both the rifles in general and the ammo in general performed similarly. Relatively small differences distinguish the ammo and rifles.
 
More Details

Equipment

To be brief, all rifles used are benchrest style. They have 3" wide fore-stocks and all but one use free-recoil stocks. These stocks have butt stocks in line with the barrel. Unlike other rifles (and shotguns) they have no cast-off where the butt stock is horizontally off-line with the barrel. All are used free recoil-style, which means once the crosshairs are where they should the rifle is not touched the rifle except to operate the trigger. All scopes but one are 45X, the other a 10-50.

The front rest is a heavy John Loh rest with a 3" front bag. I use a mechanical rear rest with the free recoil stocks.

The Anschutz rifles are used with Starik tuners. The Vudoo V22S and Turbo were shot with and without a tuner. It should be pointed out that, with .22LR, when distances become greater it becomes more and more difficult to determine how much, if at all, a barrel tuner makes a difference.

Below is one of the rifles and the front and rear rests.

 
Data

One Lot of Center X

Last year I had on hand a case of Center X of one random lot. I bought it blind, without testing or comparing it to other CX. In May and June of 2025 I shot a quantity of that ammo, some at my club’s 50 yard range but most of it at 100 yards.

The results are tabulated and they are shown below. Each rifle shot at least 300 rounds (a minimum of 30 ten-shot groups). A total of 180 ten-shot groups (1800 rounds) are compared.

 
What does the data indicate?

The group averages for each rifle are remarkably similar. They show little deviation or difference from the overall average.

This is evidence that different good rifles/barrels shoot the same ammo very similarly.

Of course, sceptics might continue to think that the similarity between the averages for each rifle may be nothing more than a coincidence, a fluke, an unusual quirk of chance resulting in similar results for each rifles. Is this sample statistically valid?
 
A statistically valid sample?

Ten-shot groups are much more robust than five-shot groups. They are a more accurate measure because they reduce the element of luck, whether good or bad, that can more easily distort five shot groups. While five shot groups can tell you “this rifle can sometimes shoot small,” ten shot groups tell you much more about “this is what the rifle actually does.”

Comparing thirty or more groups per rifle is a strong sample size. The more groups shot, the “steadier” or more reliable the average becomes. In short, the more groups compared, the more good or bad luck is “smoothed” out. The more mathematically and statistically inclined would say the “standard error” becomes small and the average is reliable.
 
Could it be just coincidence that all these barrels shot the same ammo similarly?

Look at it this way. If the chances that any two barrels perform similarly with the same lot were less than 100%, the chances that additional barrels -- a third, fourth, fifth, or sixth barrel -- shooting the same ammo similarly begin to drop.

The fact is that the more barrels that shoot the same ammo the same way the less likely it is a result of coincidence or chance.

To illustrate, see the chart below. It shows how the addition of more barrels changes the chances that they will shoot the same ammo the same way.



The more barrels there are that shoot the same ammo similarly, the more and more unlikely it is that it’s a coincidence.
 
As unlikely as the possibility of coincidence remains, there is much more data available to shed further light on the question: do good rifles shoot good ammo similarly?

The Midas + Lots

In 2024 and 2025 I bought quantities of each lot of Midas available in Canada. All together there were a total of ten lots available, all made by Lapua in 2023 and 2024. Canada received five lots of Midas in 2023 and another five the following year. As of this moment, no newer Midas has been available in Canada since.

I bought a number of bricks of each of those ten lots, but only nine in quanties sufficient for this testing. Nine other lots of M+ was mostly used at 100.

Four lots of Midas manufactured in 2023 were tested. Two of them were quite similar in target performance.



Both lots had very similar averages and both shot very similarly in each rifle.
 
Deviation from average

This measurement looks at how different an average result is from the overall average.

With the two lots shown above the deviation from the lot average is small for each rifle.

When it is less than 0.050" it is virtually the same performance. When the deviation is up to 0.100" from the average the results can be described as having similar performance.

For the lot M682 (I use the last three digits of the lot number), the average deviation from the lot average was 0.032" (weighted for the different quanties shot by each rifle). That's a very small deviation. The average deviation from the lot average for M715 was a little more at 0.054" which is still similar.
 
More Midas Data
Two other 2023-manufactured lots of Midas. For brevity, less detailed simplified charts are shown hereon in.


Both lots performed very similarly across all rifles. Lot M633 had one rifle, the 54.30SS, deviating from the lot average by more than 0.100".


 
Why are there some anomalies or irregularites in the results? Why are some group averages larger or smaller than might be expected?

Clearly some charts show that with some lots one or two rifles sometimes produced results different enough from the others to warrant attention. Such anomalies can be identified when the deviation from the lot average is plus or minus 0.100" or more. Why did some rifles do better or worse than the others?
 
Explanations for anomalies.

• One simple explanation is that when group averages of a rifle were larger than might be expected, some of the data may have been collected when it was a little windier which means that the results were worse. An explanation for why some group averages were smaller than expected may be that conditions were calmer.

• Another explanation might be that ammo variation, random fliers outside the norm, skewed some averages with larger results. Equally, unusually small groups may have contributed to smaller than expected results.

In short, not all boxes of ammo from the same lot are equal, not even in the same rifle. To put it simply, some boxes have more fliers than others, rounds that are more errant in POI. To illustrate, over the chronograph there can be considerable range between boxes in ES and SD values. For example, with the same rifle and lot, one box can have a small ES, another a much larger one (same for SD). More on this problem at a later time.

• Still another explanation might include shooter error.
 
With .22LR at 100 yards it can be very difficult to isolate the cause of anomalous results.

Changes in air movement over 100 yards is much harder to appreciate than it is at 50. Ammo variation is often much more dramatic at 100 yards than it is at 50. And no system is flawlessly consistent, certainly not the shooter.

Of course, when overall lot averages are calculated they are based on many groups. The size of the data and the averages they produce serve to help mitigate both unusually large and unusually small group averages.
 
Two charts to summarize some of the data shown.

Below are the two charts shown at the beginning.

1. How do the nine different lots compare over all rifles that shot them?




2. How does each rifle perform using all lots?



As an observation, consider how small the deviation from the lot average appears. Since the ammo performs similarly it should be reasonably safe to buy Midas blind – without prior testing. Not all lots are equal. Some will be slightly better. With only one lot of Center X in this testing, however, it’s not clear if most lots of this grade of ammo will perform similarly.
 
Conclusions

This data supports the idea that good rifles/barrels shoot good ammo similarly. There are a few anomalies, but they may be expected when shooting 100 yards outdoors.

And at 100 yards it can be very difficult to produce consistently consistent results. While many sets of ten group averages are under an inch, very few of them include all ten groups under an inch.

This conclusion denies one of the commonly-held ideas with .22LR, namely that each rifle is different and will “like” a certain ammo. A lot that performs well in one rifle may do poorly in another. It’s an idea that is old and taught to .22LR shooters as they become more serious.

Unfortunately, like a lot of old ideas, this one is unsupported by the weight data. While there is anecdotal evidence to support the idea that each rifle is different and will like a certain ammo, there is no body of reliable testing data to support it.

The testing data shown here is sound. The amount of data is considerable. It is robust. It is based on ten-shot groups, hundreds of them. The Midas lots and the one Center X lot comprise over 2000 ten-shot groups (over 20000 rounds). This is a large sample size.

The idea that good barrels shoot good ammo similarly is supported by the statistically valid and strong data.
 
For those interested I have chronograph data for all the rounds used in this data set.

It may be more appropriate to post such information in another thread where its discussion and analysis doesn't overshadow the data and analysis here.
 
A considerable amount of effort to demonstrate effectively nothing, unfortunately.

Simply listing extreme spread values either as individual groups or as averages tells an outside observer nothing of value for how the ammo is actually performing in each rifle. Showing the actual targets without the measurements would have been much more informative.

The number of rifles/barrels used is very small, and I presume the barrel profiles/diameters to be similar. Failure to include a diverse set of barrel diameters and profiles limits the conclusions that may be drawn from any generated data, restricting the extrapolation of results.

Only one brand of ammo was used, where the manufacturer uses the same load recipe then grades the resultant product according to internal standards. Consistency of lots may indeed vary, however the overall behaviour of each lot will be similar, no drastic change to the recipe occurs lot-to-lot. Failure to test multiple brands of ammo, which is the only way to test different load recipes, restricts conclusions to "The particular tested barrels shot similar group size ES values with one ammo recipe". A conclusion of limited utility.

This experiment doesn't come close to making any sort of definitive determination about how different barrels shoot different ammo, because different ammo was not used. Only one type was, and the ES values could simply be coincidental, though they are more likely the result of vertical due to velocity variation. Velocity variation is only one factor in vertical, the other is barrel launch angle. Barrels with similar profiles could be presumed to have similar min/max launch angles, so similar ES values on target also make sense considering this. Not actually seeing the resultant groupings again limits how an outside observer can analyze and interpret results. They can't.

You are welcome for the peer review on your research project. It was my pleasure.
 
Altho the results are of limited scope in some respects, they do indicate that a number of "good rifles" will shoot a 'representative brand' of "good ammo" to a standard variation at a defined distance. I question the importance of the results from the perspective of an 'average person' who 1) does not own several X-thou-$ rifles, and 2) do not use 'top shelf ammo' at ca. twice the cost of 'middle-shelf' ammo that I use, and 3) do not 'regularly' shoot 22LR at 100 yards. I DO appreciate the information as a reference point but it does not 'relate' to my lifestyle, nor that of many persons.
I do track my results with my various rifles and relative chrono data and accuracy data, but hesitate to extend my results beyond the several 'sub-$1000 rifles' I own and the $10/box ammo I use.
My thanks to grauhanen for this effort and thought provoking data.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom