Question about ammo and barrel

G

grauhanen

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
GunNutz
Rating - 100%
178   0   0
Location
Northeastern Ontario
There seems to be two different points. One is heard less often, the other repeated by all kinds of folks (myself included a few years ago). Of course a lot of things rimfire get repeated over the years but that doesn't necessarily make them true. As an example, the idea that for accuracy performance barrels will "prefer" a certain "lot speed" was often repeated over a decade ago. Currently few if any serious RFBR shooters believe it, shooting the best lots regardless of "lot speed".

The first view is that good rifles will shoot good, consistent ammo well. Put another way, if the ammo is good, a good rifle will shoot it well. It's important to remember that not all lots will shoot equally well because not all lots are equally consistent. In other words some ammo lots of the same variety (e.g. Tenex, Midas, or CX) are more consistent in quality than others, making them "better" lots.

Of course not all rifle barrels are equal and as a result not all barrels will shoot the same ammo equally well. This is why an inexpensive rifle will not shoot like an expensive one, even when using the best ammos.

The other view, often repeated on rimfire forums, is that each good barrel, shoots different lots differently. They will shoot some lots well and others not so well. In other words they will "like" or prefer some lots, producing better results with them on average.

According to this view, a lot that doesn't shoot well in one barrel may shoot well in another. That is to say, each barrel will shoot some lots better than others. Lots that don't shoot well in one barrel may shoot well in another. It's a matter of matching the lot to the barrel. It's not a question of ammo consistency and quality.
 
Shorty, if I've got something wrong with the summary above, please post any changes you think are important.

Data and evidence related to good barrels and match quality .22LR ammo are welcome. If anyone has any to share it would be helpful and valuable. Anecdotal reports, of course, have different value.
 
for the sake of conversation speculating how a rifle will shoot is just that a high end rifle may or may not all ammo well a inexpensive may shoot as good as the expensive rifle until each specimen is actually shot and tested it is just conversation
 
struff55 said:
for the sake of conversation speculating how a rifle will shoot is just that a high end rifle may or may not all ammo well a inexpensive may shoot as good as the expensive rifle until each specimen is actually shot and tested it is just conversation
Click to expand...
If there's confusion from the posts above, I apologize. The conversation is about good rifles/barrels and good ammo. Perhaps the question may be made clearer if it's put the following way.

Do good barrels shoot all good quality consistent ammo well? Good ammo is good ammo in good barrels.

or

Do good rifles "like" lots that may not shoot well in other barrels? Each barrel will prefer some lots of good ammo but others. Lots that don't do well in one good barrel may do well in another good barrel.
 
We are blessed…or challenged with the fact that there are so many variables in the world of .22LR accuracy.

If memory serves me well I recall taking a math course in university titled ‘Permutations and Combinations’ dealing with the calculations of probabilities of outcomes. I barely passed the exam, I’m not a smart guy, but I realized I wasn’t gifted enough to beat the odds at the casinos so I never gambled.

What I’m bringing to the table is that there are literally thousands of variables which result in millions of combinations in the outcomes of the game of .22LR accuracy.
….And that is why we will always have a topic to discuss on CGN and other forums to the end of time, or 4.00am if you can’t sleep and are addicted to New Posts on CGN….

I’m too old to repeat all my shooting tests of the past and now when I stumble upon a rifle and ammo combo that really shines together I just accept it and don’t worry about the why anymore. Same as when a hot chick says she loves me I don’t question why, just say please and thank you….Love, weather and .22LR accuracy can change unexpectedly and so we can either fret about it or just move on. I leave the research and speculation to those younger and more gifted than me. lol
….I truly respect and appreciate those that are on the accuracy quest and often post to share their findings…..something to read at 4am for an old fart like me. Cheers!!
 
grauhanen said:
There seems to be two different points. One is heard less often, the other repeated by all kinds of folks (myself included a few years ago). Of course a lot of things rimfire get repeated over the years but that doesn't necessarily make them true. As an example, the idea that for accuracy performance barrels will "prefer" a certain "lot speed" was often repeated over a decade ago. Currently few if any serious RFBR shooters believe it, shooting the best lots regardless of "lot speed".

The first view is that good rifles will shoot good, consistent ammo well. Put another way, if the ammo is good, a good rifle will shoot it well. It's important to remember that not all lots will shoot equally well because not all lots are equally consistent. In other words some ammo lots of the same variety (e.g. Tenex, Midas, or CX) are more consistent in quality than others, making them "better" lots.

Of course not all rifle barrels are equal and as a result not all barrels will shoot the same ammo equally well. This is why an inexpensive rifle will not shoot like an expensive one, even when using the best ammos.

The other view, often repeated on rimfire forums, is that each good barrel, shoots different lots differently. They will shoot some lots well and others not so well. In other words they will "like" or prefer some lots, producing better results with them on average.

According to this view, a lot that doesn't shoot well in one barrel may shoot well in another. That is to say, each barrel will shoot some lots better than others. Lots that don't shoot well in one barrel may shoot well in another. It's a matter of matching the lot to the barrel. It's not a question of ammo consistency and quality.
Click to expand...
I'm going to ask you some questions that I feel I already know the answer to, in order to make an attempt to determine where we might share ideas and where our ideas might differ. You suppose that given good ammo, good rifles will shoot well with it. Suppose we have Good Rifle A and Good Rifle B that have competed against each other quite often, and which one wins the day seems to be up to a coin toss, such that we can likely consider them to be pretty much equals. That is to say, we wouldn't worry too much about selecting one or the other to shoot with if we knew we'd be competing against the one we didn't pick. That's how confident we are in the similarities between their historic performance.

Do you suppose Good Rifle A is likely to shoot as well as Good Rifle B given the same lot number of Good Consistent Ammo? Or are they likely to exhibit different performance with the same ammo? "Will shoot it well" isn't terribly specific.

If you did a bunch of lot testing with the same ammo in each rifle, do you suppose the results would be similar?

Perhaps they don't shoot equally well as each other, but do you suppose the relative performance differences from lot number to lot number would be about the same relative to each other? As in, with Good Rifle A, maybe lot 123 is best, and lot 456 is second best, lot 789 is worst, and when testing the same stuff in Good Rifle B it may or may not shoot equally as well as Good Rifle A did, but it would also show best results with lot 123, second best results with lot 456, and worst results with lot 789?
 
If you are not loading it yourself, as in center fire world, you are always at the mercy of the manufacturer, nothing can be done to make it better.
Throw in low velocity, garbage BC, it's just an exercise in frustration if you are after perfection and consistency.
Some people find this frustrating bull#### fun, and mess around every way possible to make it better. That's fine, I don't judge, it's a hobby to most, very few profit from rimfire shoots, and as already mentioned, roll a dice to see which top shooter on a given day falls in the 1-6 range.
If any you ####ers figure it out, let me know lol, I'm all ears.
 
Mr Bill said:
We are blessed…or challenged with the fact that there are so many variables in the world of .22LR accuracy.

If memory serves me well I recall taking a math course in university titled ‘Permutations and Combinations’ dealing with the calculations of probabilities of outcomes. I barely passed the exam, I’m not a smart guy, but I realized I wasn’t gifted enough to beat the odds at the casinos so I never gambled.

What I’m bringing to the table is that there are literally thousands of variables which result in millions of combinations in the outcomes of the game of .22LR accuracy.
….And that is why we will always have a topic to discuss on CGN and other forums to the end of time, or 4.00am if you can’t sleep and are addicted to New Posts on CGN….

I’m too old to repeat all my shooting tests of the past and now when I stumble upon a rifle and ammo combo that really shines together I just accept it and don’t worry about the why anymore. Same as when a hot chick says she loves me I don’t question why, just say please and thank you….Love, weather and .22LR accuracy can change unexpectedly and so we can either fret about it or just move on. I leave the research and speculation to those younger and more gifted than me. lol
….I truly respect and appreciate those that are on the accuracy quest and often post to share their findings…..something to read at 4am for an old fart like me. Cheers!!
Click to expand...
I think this is where this all ends eventually. The "swordfighting" is unnecessary.

There are far too many variables.

If you find the combination that works for you... run with it!

Don't overthink it.
 
True Shadows said:
I think this is where this all ends eventually. The "swordfighting" is unnecessary.

There are far too many variables.

If you find the combination that works for you... run with it!

Don't overthink it.
Click to expand...
Rimfire ammo is rolling dice. It is so massed produced. with soo many variables that effect accuracy, it ends up being luck.

Same MV doesn't mean same hole.
 
No telling with ammo in my very limited experience. My anny 54(gun A) shoots sk match very good. Where as anny 54(gun B) shoots this lot with larger groups. A different ammo reverses the situation. Must try lot in each rifle.
 
Shorty, before I address your questions, I have one for you and other interested readers.

Say the ammo manufacturer does the incredible and makes a lot of ammo that is uniformly identical, with each round having the same characteristics including priming, propellant, casings, bullets, seating, crimping and muzzle velocity.

Would this hypothetical lot perform very similarly in two or more good rifles/barrels? Why?

Edit to add a related question now occurs to me: With different lots of ammo what is it that might cause them to shoot differently in the same barrel?
 
Last edited:
A couple of other questions.

I don't know the answer or if there is one. What are the chances that any two different barrels "like" the same lot of ammo equally (that is shoot it the same way)? What are the chances that three different barrels shoot the same lot of ammo very similarly?

For two barrels, would it be a 50% chance or better or worse?
 
Rifle A Lot 1
Rifle A Lot 1.png

Rifle B Lot 1
Rifle B Lot 1.png

Rifle A Lot 2
Rifle A Lot 2.png

Rifle B Lot 2
Rifle B Lot 2.png

Rifle A Lot 3
Rifle A Lot 3.png

Rifle B Lot 3
Rifle B Lot 3.png

Rifle A Lot 4
Rifle A Lot 4.png

Rifle B Lot 4
Rifle B Lot 4.png

Rifle A Lot 5
Rifle A Lot 5.png

Rifle B Lot 5
Rifle B Lot 5.png

Comparison table
Rifle A vs Rifle B.png

Rifle A and Rifle B are both very good benchrest rifles, both built off the same actions, with nice benchrest stocks, shot off 1-piece rests, testing 5 different lots of Lapua Center-X. The rifles shot them best in this order:

Rifle A

Lot 3: 0.199 MOA (100%)
Lot 5: 0.219 MOA (110.1%)
Lot 2: 0.224 MOA (112.6%)
Lot 1: 0.236 MOA (118.6%)
Lot 4: 0.255 MOA (128.1%)

Rifle B

Lot 5: 0.252 MOA (100%)
Lot 1: 0.263 MOA (104.4%)
Lot 4: 0.267 MOA (106%)
Lot 2: 0.275 MOA (109.1%)
Lot 3: 0.291 MOA (115.5%)

Rifle A avg: 0.227 MOA
Rifle B avg: 0.270 MOA (19% larger)

All shot on the same range on the same very nice day with conditions that changed very little. Both rifles tend to shoot better than this when fed Eley. Zero of this ammo bought for these rifles after the test because of that. We had a chance at a nice group buy so we all tested these 5 lots of Center-X in our various guns. I could be wrong, but I only recall one of us buying any of it. Shot really well in one of our guns, and they bought a bunch of that best lot for that gun.

You are correct in saying that there are a lot of variables within the ammo itself that account for differences in performance from lot to lot. There are also a lot of variables in each gun itself that account for differences in performance with a given lot of ammo. The fact that a given lot of ammo is consistent doesn't mean it is going to shoot well in a given gun. The fact that a given lot of ammo gives consistent MVs in a given gun doesn't even mean it is going to give similar MVs with similar consistency in another gun. Variables within the gun itself can change the consistency of MV of that ammo. Even two guns built off the same model of action in similar stocks with similar barrels shot off the same rest can and likely will show considerably different results with the same ammo. Every gun is a little bit different. And its unique characteristics get along better with ammo that has certain complimentary characteristics. That's why lot testing is a thing. And that's also why brand A and brand B aren't necessarily going to resemble each other in performance when fed into a given gun. In other words, they have preferences.

I've also got examples of some ammo shot through two or more different rifles that show the same lot of ammo having different BCs depending on which rifle they were shot out of, as well as different MV SDs and ESs. A given lot of ammo doesn't perform the same from rifle to rifle in more than one way. The groups can show significant differences. The MV stats can show significant differences. And, yes, even the BCs can show significant differences because of how the barrel affects the bullets. That means one rifle can show more resistance to wind than the next even when fed the same diet. What comes out of the muzzle isn't the same from rifle to rifle, even when pulled from the same box.
 
RA4 BC tests I happen to have handy. Just two types of cheaper ammo tested with silhouette in mind. Same lots from two rifles.

RWS Semi-Auto

Anschutz 1712
Valid tracks: 23 (out of 25)
BC standard deviation: 0.004527181211843683
Average BC = 0.09170285432235056 (91.7%)

CZ 453 Varmint
Valid tracks: 8 (out of 9)
BC standard deviation: 0.004203595608383747
Average BC = 0.09997344970703126 (100%)

S&B Canadian

Anschutz 1712
Valid tracks: 77 (out of 80)
BC standard deviation: 0.004290779882979969
Average BC = 0.08251045920632089 (100%)

CZ 453 Varmint
Valid tracks: 58 (out of 65)
BC standard deviation: 0.0018947436259274147
Average BC = 0.06886485658842931 (83.5%)

And an old test of two different lots of CCI SV also tested with silhouette in mind.

CCI SV lot 4

Anschutz 1712
high 1091 fps
low 1041 fps
ES 50
SD 12.0
Mean Radius 0.381 MOA (100%)
Anschutz 1712 - CCI 4 #1 2019-11-13.png

CZ 453 Varmint
high 1084 fps
low 1050 fps
ES 34
SD 7.7
Mean Radius 0.546 MOA (143%)
CZ 453 - CCI 4 #1 2019-11-13.png

CCI SV lot 5

Anschutz 1712
high 1097 fps
low 1061 fps
ES 36
SD 10.3
Mean Radius 0.424 MOA (100%)
Anschutz 1712 - CCI 5 #1 2019-11-13.png

CZ 453 Varmint
high 1083 fps
low 1038 fps
ES 45
SD 10.5
Mean Radius 0.608 MOA (143%)
CZ 453 - CCI 5 #1 2019-11-13.png

Obviously none of these are particularly good ammo. But they do provide some comparisons to consider anyway. Both of these silhouette rifles are pretty decent shooters when fed nicer stuff, and both have both been pillar-bedded with Devcon. I was more interested in showing how with one ammo the Anschutz produced better BC results than the CZ did with one ammo, and with another ammo this situation was flipped with the CZ showing better BCs than the Anschutz with another ammo. And with the CCI stuff I was more interested in showing how the Anschutz shot both lots with better results on target than the CZ, despite the CZ showing better MV consistency in one case, and fairly similar MV stats in the other. Interesting that the mean radius growth was very similar in both cases. For some reason it looks like I forgot to jot down the average MVs. And I don't have any LabRadar files that go back as far as these targets. This must've been before I snagged my own LabRadar and I was borrowing one at the time. Oh well. The SD is what matters regarding consistency anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom