Results from Ten Rifles at 50 and 100 Meters in Test Tunnel

grauhanen

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
GunNutz
Rating - 100%
178   0   0
I've often wondered about what kind of accuracy results are possible in as near perfect conditions -- no wind and moderate temperatures -- as rimfire shooters dare hope for. The best way to accumulate results is by shooting in an ammo testing facility test tunnel. There's no wind and it's room temperature.

The major ammo makers have such facilities, including Eley's in Okotoks, Alberta. There shooters' rifles can be tested from a vise or fixture in a testing tunnel to evaluate ammunition and rifle performance. Lapua has two in the U.S., one in Arizona and one in Ohio. There, electronic sensors record data at 50 and 100 meters so that the exact location of where a round would strike a target at these distances is recorded. As a result it's easy to record accurate results and group sizes at the two distances.

The testing is done with the barreled action in a special fixture or the rifle itself in a special vise. The testing facility staff can test a number of different lots of ammo with the barreled action/rifle fixed solidly, giving consistent results. Below are examples from one of the Lapua facilities, very likely the one in Ohio.



To see what kind of results rifles are getting, the following data was collected for ten different rifles. All the ammo was from different lots of Lapua Center X. The rifles are identified at the top. The sizes are for ten ten-round-groups, measured outside-to-outside in millimeters. DRMS is a statistic that refers to distance root mean square which can be defined as "the radius of a circle that will be expected to contain the center points of ~65% of all future shots fired based on those already fired."

Please note that Lot 1 may not have been the same between each rifles because the rifles were tested on different days and the order of lots used may be different from day to day and rifle to rifle.

What will become apparent, is how much variation there is between lots. In most simplest terms it means is that not all lots of a particular ammo, in this case Center X, shoot the same. It would have been interesting to see how the same lots fared between the different rifles, but that data is not available.

I can't seem to get the complete table image to load here in a size where all the information is easily visible. What I've done is to post the complete chart first. I divided it in the middle and posted each half below the full chart, first the left side and then the right.







This table is from h t t p s://www.snipershide.com/precision-rifle/22lr-lot-testing-at-lapuas-indoor-100m-test-facility-what-should-you-expect-in-gains/

There will be variation in group sizes within any lot being tested. As a result no one would select a lot on the basis of the results of a single ten shot group. But clearly these results begin to give an indication of how much variation there is between lots of the same ammo with the same rifle. Whenever testing any ammo it's always best to test as much of the ammo as possible in order to see how much variety in performance there is in a lot. One good group doesn't guarantee a lot of good groups, and one bad group doesn't mean that it's truly representative of how the lot shoots.

Regarding the performance of the ten different rifles, the mean (average) ten-shot-group sizes are an indication of a particular rifle's performance. The three rifles with the best mean at 50 meters were the same rifles with the same mean at 100. The poorest means at 50 meters were from those rifles with factory barrels.

Surprisingly, the differences at 100 meters seemed less pronounced than at 50. Only the custom Stiller and Turbo had 100 meter groups less than 29mm OD. All the others were from just over 31mm to just under 34.
 
Very interesting. So it looks like the mean for most of these rifles is over 1” Center to Center at 100 for 10 shot groups with topend ammunition. My Savage Mk2 with a mean of about 2 3/8” for 10 round groups at 100 with CCI SV doesn’t seems so bad now.
 
Good thread.
For those that can't/won't open photobucket with all the advertisements.

uljvl1t.jpg
 
Groups are measured outside to outside

Outside of what, though, is the key question. Outside of the bullet to outside of the bullet? That wouldn't make much sense in terms of an electronic target that surely provides the position of the center of the bullet.
 
Very interesting stuff.... most interesting to me was that the 'mean' value for ALL of these rifles were within the range of error of the test. ie... 1 shot further or closer in a group could move the value of the mean enough to matter.

I would have expected a larger difference due the massive range in costs for all these rifles.... and the differences between bolt and semi.

Was interesting to see that the Turbo and stiller set ups did average better overall. wonder how they were speced?

Jerry
 
Not to jack your thread, that wasn't my intention.

Maybe it's a PC thing and doesn't happen on a cel phone.
Think you'd have to log out of Photo/B, clear your cookies...then you would see this page.
It has about 4-5 other full advertisements on it by scrolling...and no sight of the table.

XNQVEY6.jpg


After they held all my pics as ransom if I didn't pay them...I bailed.
Sure they pissed off a lot of people too.
Again sorry for the jack.


Anyway...
Sure wish we had a test facility like that in BC. Even @ $50us a test, it would be fantastic.
Don't have to do all your rifles, just a few chosen ones. :redface:

To have a test printout with groups and analysis would be a great asset.

Good Post
Thx for sharing.
 
Outside of what, though, is the key question. Outside of the bullet to outside of the bullet? That wouldn't make much sense in terms of an electronic target that surely provides the position of the center of the bullet.

It is quite simple. The sizes are measurements of the outside edges of the group at its widest part. Ammo evaluations at testing facilities are often outside-edge-to-outside-edge and in millimeters -- even at a U.S.-based Lapua test facility -- because it's the commonly accepted practice.

Below is an example of a ten-shot-group measured outside-to-outside. The caliper shows 10.38mm for this test target ten-shot-group.



Anyway...
Sure wish we had a test facility like that in BC. Even @ $50us a test, it would be fantastic.
Don't have to do all your rifles, just a few chosen ones. :redface:

To have a test printout with groups and analysis would be a great asset.

As noted in the first post, there's an Eley testing facility in Okotoks, Alberta. You can make arrangements to go there or to send your rifle and have them test different lots of Eley Tenex. I believe they produce the electronic results for you.

Regarding what you appear to see, I can't offer a comment, except that I only use a PC for stuff on forums. Indifferent to modern phone technology, I use my cell phone for very occasional phone calls only.
 
I know. I subtracted the 5.6mm diameter of the bullet to compare to the way most of us measure groups.

This exact method -- subtracting 5.6mm or .22" -- is freqently used and is an easy way to measure for center-to-center group size. There's nothing wrong with it for obtaining results from casual shooting.

But shooters wishing to have more accurate information about their results should consider this question. While 5.6mm is .22", is that the appropriate size to use?

If a .22LR is shot through something like tin foil, the bullet hole would be very consistent with the bullet's diameter -- .22". But when shot through paper it isn't. In fact, depending on the type of paper used, the correct amount to deduct can vary between as little as .196 and .210. To convert that to metric, it is about 5.0 to 5.4.

The result is the unresolved question of what size to use when subtracting from outside-to-outside size to get center-to-center. The outside group dimensions leave this question irrelevant and no one can be in doubt as to the size of the group.

As an example, the paper target used below is 65 lb card stock which, unlike printer or photocopier paper, doesn't easily tear. It leaves relatively clean holes and the grey smudge or lead smear is readily seen. A single bullet hole is somewhat less than .22" in diameter. When using this particular paper, the bullet hole is .205" or 5.2mm.



As for why testing facilities use outside-to-outside group size measurements, perhaps it's because in Europe it's a very common way to measure results. As it happens, all the match ammo makers are in the U.K. or in Germany, where outside measurements are usual. Standard practice for evaluating group sizes for different ammos has long been outside-to-outside. For example, a standard convention among shooters and ammo makers is that an ammo that produces ten-shot-groups under 13mm (oto) is generally pretty good.

In any case, in most serious .22LR competition, results are rarely, if ever, scored by group size. In World Cup and Olympic style ISSF shooting, results are calculated from scored targets with rings. The smaller the ring hit the greater the score. In competitve, sanctioned, BR shooting, competitors shoot at targets with one shot at a single bull 25 times.
 
The result is the unresolved question of what size to use when subtracting from outside-to-outside size to get center-to-center. The outside group dimensions leave this question irrelevant and no one can be in doubt as to the size of the group.

No, it doesn't. Quite the opposite: It causes substantial ambiguity in the results.

Your long, elaborate post is an excellent case for why outside-to-outside is a terrible method of measuring groups. I can't think of a single instance where it is superior to center-to-center.
 
No, it doesn't. Quite the opposite: It causes substantial ambiguity in the results.

Your long, elaborate post is an excellent case for why outside-to-outside is a terrible method of measuring groups. I can't think of a single instance where it is superior to center-to-center.

He probably used outside measurement leaving it up to the reader to subtract bullet diameter.

The 30 BR is quite popular in bench rest over say 22BR when shooting for score because the larger 30 cal bullet will violate the scoring ring of the higher value and improve the score over the same group size with the 22 BR.

F Class targets are for the most part based upon MOA minus .308 for the same reason... When the impact violates the higher scoring ring, the shooter gets the higher value. This results in a scoring disadvantage to those who shoot smaller cartridges like the .223

So when measuring center to center or outside values for all of the same size, the end result is completely valid. It would illustrate a scoring ring advantage if comparing multiple size bullet holes.

If when shooting for score, a shot that violates a scoring ring went to the lower value, there would be an advantage to using the smallest possible bullet instead of the largest bullet. Is there perhaps some type of 22LR competition where violating the scoring ring goes to the lower value?
 
Last edited:
No, it doesn't. Quite the opposite: It causes substantial ambiguity in the results.

Your long, elaborate post is an excellent case for why outside-to-outside is a terrible method of measuring groups. I can't think of a single instance where it is superior to center-to-center.

I'm really sorry you found my answer in post #10 to your original question too long. I never imagined anyone posting here would find five sentences and a single picture overly lengthy.

The second last paragraph of my recent post $12 is about why outside-to-outside measurements are used. It was four sentences long.

Is it possible that your complaint is misguided or unintentionally revealing?

Outside-to-outside measurements involve no math based on real or imagined bullet hole sizes. They should be easier to understand than calculating center-to-center, which might appeal to some people.

Of course, even this is too long because counting this one it's eight sentences long.
 
Results from Ten Rifles at 50 and 100 Meters in Test Tunnel- great information about some higher quality 22lr rifles at the windless test facility- regardless of how it's measured


thanks for the information - very valuable if you spend some time looking at it - and compare what an individual can do with their own rifle and their chosen lot
 
He probably used outside measurement leaving it up to the reader to subtract bullet diameter.

The 30 BR is quite popular in bench rest over say 22BR when shooting for score because the larger 30 cal bullet will violate the scoring ring of the higher value and improve the score over the same group size with the 22 BR.

F Class targets are for the most part based upon MOA minus .308 for the same reason... When the impact violates the higher scoring ring, the shooter gets the higher value. This results in a scoring disadvantage to those who shoot smaller cartridges like the .223

So when measuring center to center or outside values for all of the same size, the end result is completely valid. It would illustrate a scoring ring advantage if comparing multiple size bullet holes.

If when shooting for score, a shot that violates a scoring ring went to the lower value, there would be an advantage to using the smallest possible bullet instead of the largest bullet. Is there perhaps some type of 22LR competition where violating the scoring ring goes to the lower value?

The X/22 game this year will have worst edge scoring on the paper stages

The scoring targets were based on other games which also have worst edge scoring.... maybe it is 50BR?????

Jerry
 
There is a difference in ammo from lot to lot. A particular rifle will "like" one lot and barf on another.

If you are buying a case or more of ammo, the ammo maker will test your rifle for you and supply the lot that your rifle does best with.

It has been a few years since I saw this done. maybe the deal requires more than 1 case now.
 
It is quite simple. The sizes are measurements of the outside edges of the group at its widest part. Ammo evaluations at testing facilities are often outside-edge-to-outside-edge and in millimeters -- even at a U.S.-based Lapua test facility -- because it's the commonly accepted practice.

Below is an example of a ten-shot-group measured outside-to-outside. The caliper shows 10.38mm for this test target ten-shot-group.





As noted in the first post, there's an Eley testing facility in Okotoks, Alberta. You can make arrangements to go there or to send your rifle and have them test different lots of Eley Tenex. I believe they produce the electronic results for you.

Regarding what you appear to see, I can't offer a comment, except that I only use a PC for stuff on forums. Indifferent to modern phone technology, I use my cell phone for very occasional phone calls only.

Name and number of testing facility??
 
Back
Top Bottom