Interest in 100 yard .22LR challenge - 2023 Discussion thread

I was able to continue testing ammo at 100 this morning. I tested two lots of Midas + for the first time and they produced targets with sub-1" averages. That's what I've been looking for.

Below, the average for each target with this lot was under 1".



One of the groups on the first target was very nice to see. It measures 0.836" outside edge-to-outside edge, for .626" center-to-center, the smallest for this season to this point.



The other lot of M+ didn't do as well this morning, but it must be tested again. The bottom right group on the last target below measured .700" center-to-center.



Compared to the two lots of M+ I tested yesterday (see above, post #38), these two lots of M+ are better. The different performance illustrates that lot selection matters.
 
So how does that work for you when trying to find more of the same lot?
Are vendors checking their pallets to find the same? Is it reasonable to think the same lot can be found elsewhere?
Just how large are manufactureers lots in quantity and distribution?
curious, not critical
 
Lapua ammo lots are dependant on the size of the run. For instance a lot of Exact might only consist of one case before it does not meet their standards. Next will be Midas plus and maybe two or three cases of this lot produced until it runs out of spec and then the Center X is made and again three or four or maybe five cases. So if you get a great lot that works you may only get one case or two if your lucky cuz most of the great lots are long gone to comp shooters or BR guys. Its like politics, its who you know that matters. Best is to find out when ammo arrives and buy boxes of every lot number and go test quicklky. Find one, you go back and buy all that you can or they have. Best of luck
 
Grauhanen: A quick look at your Midas+ targets in post #38 shows, to my eye, most groups had a consistent vertical problem (except for that one best group). I am guessing that is why you mentioned the chrono option for testing that lot to see if the velocities were very different. That is a good hypothesis that the V0 in that lot might be wildly variable.

The targets in post #41 with the different lot of Midas+ show a very different pattern to my eye. Most show a good waterline that is roughly the diamter of the 10 ring or less, which is quite good to excellent at 100m/yd. There were a few outliers, but most of those show horizontal dispersion, which looks like wind, so I am wondering if those were wind-caused impacts and not ammo-caused fliers?

In post #41 target sheet #6 bottom left was the only bad vertical pattern, so I am wondering if that group experienced a switching swirling wind, or helical gust wind that can drive POI up or down?
 
boxhitch said:
So how does that work for you when trying to find more of the same lot?
Are vendors checking their pallets to find the same? Is it reasonable to think the same lot can be found elsewhere?
Just how large are manufactureers lots in quantity and distribution?
curious, not critical
Click to expand...

Longstud gives some good information on lot sizes. Even Center X, which can be expected to have lots that have more cases than M+ or X-Act, can be as small as only three cases. Usually match ammo lots, no matter the ammo maker, will have relatively small quantities, typically no more than six-seven cases (30 000 - 35 000 rounds).

Finding more of a particular lot of ammo can be difficult as it tends to sell quickly. Often higher tier lots of Lapua are stocked by more than one dealer in Canada (there are only a few authorized dealers, including the authorized distributor). It's more likely than not that there will not be more than half-a-dozen or so different lots of Midas in new shipments of Lapua. The good lots, of course, can be expected to go quickly as shooters who test soon enough will buy as much as they can.
 
Biologist said:
Grauhanen: A quick look at your Midas+ targets in post #38 shows, to my eye, most groups had a consistent vertical problem (except for that one best group). I am guessing that is why you mentioned the chrono option for testing that lot to see if the velocities were very different. That is a good hypothesis that the V0 in that lot might be wildly variable.

The targets in post #41 with the different lot of Midas+ show a very different pattern to my eye. Most show a good waterline that is roughly the diamter of the 10 ring or less, which is quite good to excellent at 100m/yd. There were a few outliers, but most of those show horizontal dispersion, which looks like wind, so I am wondering if those were wind-caused impacts and not ammo-caused fliers?

In post #41 target sheet #6 bottom left was the only bad vertical pattern, so I am wondering if that group experienced a switching swirling wind, or helical gust wind that can drive POI up or down?
Click to expand...

There does seem to be excessive vertical in some of the earlier targets, but the vertical dispersion can't be explained by MV differences because the amount of dispersion is too great in the most egregious cases. A POI increase or decrease by one inch at 100 requires a round to be 40 fps faster or slower than the others.

I suspect that the MV spread will not be extraordinarily high and that the individual rounds that had higher POI's were themselves not unusually fast. The most likely culprit of such "flyers" (if that term will be allowed here) is bullet irregularity. This could be one of either imperfect heel shape or unbalanced bullets (offset center of gravity) or perhaps a combination of both. If MV's were not unusual, the chronograph would have offered evidence to support that suspicion (but of course not prove it).

It's clear that wind (or air movement at points between shooter and target) played a role in what happened on the targets posted today (and yesterday, too, for that matter). It's usually the case that there never is a situation when there is absolutely no wind. Most of the time we don't have enough flags out to observe it.

At my club's range, a small one that is 100 yards maximum and has a lake at the shooter's end and trees on either side and a long, sloping hill rising behind the targets, the winds are typically swirling and switching. Flags nearest the shooter can point one way and flags further out another. One can be limp and the other fluttering. It makes it difficult to read the wind.

Today when there was air movement, the wind was generally from right to left. This is indicated by a number of bulls showing some POI's drifting to the left. Unfortunately the wind direction wasn't consistent. Flags at different distances occasionally showed winds in both directions. At other times it was relatively calm.

Regarding the vertical in target 6 in post #41, the outliers may be due to winds as suggested. But there's no way to know for sure whether it's a wind result or caused by ammo imperfection or shooter-induced error.
 
In Europe, in the testing facilities, and among position shooters (Olympic-style), sizes are generally ten shot groups measured in millimeters, outside edge-to-outside edge.

A very good result at 50 meters in a test tunnel would be around 11mm (or under, of course). That's ten shots within a circle that's 11mm in diameter. At 100 meters, testing center results in the low 20mm's would be very good.

Data produced at the testing facilities include more than the group sizes obtained with various lots tested. But for simplicity, group size is easiest to understand. If the other data is the focus of the question above, there is information on that also.

For illustrative purposes of comparison, the following Lapua results were published in 2021 on Sniper's Hide. Note that the lot numbers shown may not be the same from one rifle to the next.



 
It's been on the warm side where I am, and fortunately it's been accompanied with very calm conditions for the fifth consecutive day.

I did some testing again this morning and this time some chronographing too. I shot two lots of Center X and one of Midas +, the one that on June 19 (see post #41 above) didn't do as well as another lot of M+. Both lots of CX did well over the chrony, perhaps better than the Midas.

The first box of CX (lot number ending with) 975 had an ES of 32 fps and an SD of 8 fps. The second box of 975 had an ES of 23 fps with an SD of 5.
The first box of CX 084 had an ES of 35 fps with an SD of 8 fps. The second showed an ES of 21 with an SD of only 5 (that's very low).

Both boxes of Midas + displayed the same ES of 36 fps and the same standard deviation of 7 fps. They had average MVs of 1057 fps and 1060 fps.

Based on chronograph figures, both lots of CX might be expected to do well.

CX 975 was the better lot of CX and its best target produced a four ten-shot group average just under 1".



The remaining targets of 975 were less inspiring. Perhaps on another day the results would be a little better.



The other lot of CX -- 084 -- was a bit disappointing, showing that chronograph numbers don't necessarily mean good results on target.
Keep in mind that it was calm when these were shot. Again, it's possible that different results might be obtained on another day.



With the exception of one group out of ten (see the bottom right bull on the target below) the Midas + did better than either lot of CX. (I'll continue this later as supper's being put on the table.)

 
I shot the target below this morning. At under .600" the top left bull was a good start. The bottom left was going nicely and was looking to be similar to the other group -- until the tenth shot, which went high. (It always seems like it's the last shot that screws things up but that's only because everything is going well until then.)

I was chronographing this lot of ammo and tracking the POI with MV. Curiously, that tenth shot on the bottom left bull was not the fastest round of the group's ten. The ES was 22 fps for the ten rounds, from a low of 1035 to 1057 fps. That tenth round had a muzzle velocity of 1037 fps.




_______________________________


On a more general point, I would like to encourage shooters to post their 100 yard entries on the 100 Yard .22LR Challenge thread. If you've done so and achieved an improvement please post it.

If anyone has questions about it or has general comments, please add them to this thread.
 
grauhanen said:
I shot the target below this morning. At under .600" the top left bull was a good start. The bottom left was going nicely and was looking to be similar to the other group -- until the tenth shot, which went high. (It always seems like it's the last shot that screws things up but that's only because everything is going well until then.)

I was chronographing this lot of ammo and tracking the POI with MV. Curiously, that tenth shot on the bottom left bull was not the fastest round of the group's ten. The ES was 22 fps for the ten rounds, from a low of 1035 to 1057 fps. That tenth round had a muzzle velocity of 1037 fps.




_______________________________


On a more general point, I would like to encourage shooters to post their 100 yard entries on the 100 Yard .22LR Challenge thread. If you've done so and achieved an improvement please post it.

If anyone has questions about it or has general comments, please add them to this thread.
Click to expand...

Thats some dam fine shooting and Im thinking your a bit generous in measuring!! Im pretty sure the calipers can just touch the smudge. No need for the spaces your leaving. It is however rather refreshing to see REAL target measurements rather than some of the fictional ones posted on the different forums. Wonder if they actually believe it themselves? Anyhow very well done, really like that wallet group Im gonna says actually more like 0.658-0.660.
 
Good and Ugly at the Same Time -- variation within ammo lots

Thanks, Chris. You're right about the sizes of groups that sometimes get posted. Some are quite literally incredible, as in hard to believe.

_________________________________

This morning it was very calm so I went to the range. I shot two boxes each of two different lots of Midas +. While the targets included a few small ten-shot 100 yard groups, what really caught my attention were the flyers. Each target page had at least one flyer spoil There were enough flyers in both lots that they every so often that spoiled what were in many cases otherwise promising groups. This suggests variation within the lots that makes them too inconsistent to produce reliable results.

The top row shows ten ten-shot groups with the first lot of M+. The second row shows ten ten-shot groups with the other. Some scope adjustments were made during shooting of the first lot.

In both sets, the first target shows the best and worst of each lot.





_________________________________

Of course there remains the possiblity that the results above are the product of one or more of shooter error, wind conditions, rifle-induced inconsistency -- or something else.

Nevertheless, it seems that results like these -- seven, eight, or nine consecutively very similar rounds followed by one or more less consistent ones -- are more characteristic of grades like Midas + than Center X. The latter usually has fewer consecutively consistent rounds, even if they do occasionally produce very small groups.

In short, the smallest groups are more often seen with M+ than CX. The lots of Midas that I've been shooting tend to produce more really good three group averages than any Center X lots I've shot. The problem is they don't seem to maintain that level of consistency over a numerous targets. The most consistent lot of Lapua that I've had was one of Center X. It gave a sub 1" ten shot group average over some 89 groups in two rifles. In my experience that lot of CX was not typical of that variety.

Really good, consistent lots of ammo are obviously hard to find, regardless of the variety or grade. They are rare because few of them get produced. At the same time, some lots that are very consistent and give excellent results at 50 but might not do nearly as well at twice the distance. At 100 yards, the difference between ammos is more obvious than it is at 50. The inconsistencies of the two lots of Midas shown above might be less apparent at 50 yards than at 100. At this time, I haven't compared any of these ammos at shorter distances. Perhaps in this case that's where they are best used.
 
I need a link to the targets please. Every link I see is dead or not working.

DM Me if you need my email, then i'll upload to google drive and link it back here. Im going shooting monday but only have a printer today.
 
Jahnj0584 said:
I need a link to the targets please. Every link I see is dead or not working.

DM Me if you need my email, then i'll upload to google drive and link it back here. Im going shooting monday but only have a printer today.
Click to expand...

The links refered to don't seem to work as they once did. Since a year ago, I have had dozens of requests for targets, including many this year. I would have to search through my files to find your email. If you send it to me it would save time and effort. I'll send you a pdf of the target.

For the benefit of all readers who may be interested in the 100 yard .22LR challenge, the first post in this thread has this:

grauhanen said:
If you are interested, see the details and rules in the 100 Yard .22LR Challenge thread https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/2297200-100-Yard-22LR-Challenge

The target to be used will be the same. Although the link to the target in the first post of the Challenge thread appears to no longer work, I will be happy to email anyone who needs a copy a pdf of the official target. PM me with your email address. Again as in previous years, the targets must be printed on 65 lb card stock.
Click to expand...

Any shooter interested in getting a pdf of the target used for this challenge should send me a PM with an email address. I will send a pdf of the target to you. Note that it must be printed on 65 lb cardstock.

Once again, simply let me know you would like a pdf of the target by sending me your email.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom