So from some of us that shoot 22LR ELR we know that the 22LR is really limited by its ammo. Even the Lapua Center X or Midas I use can have muzzle velocities that are 50fps from shot to shot. While this isn't very evident at 100, at 270 like I was shooting the other day, sometimes you can make 4/5 hits on a 4 inch cube like I did and then the next 3 rounds all fly 6+ inches over the target. This is all from the ammo, and can easily be seen if you put a cardboard box behind the target; it looks like you are shooting a ladder test where they are all perfectly vertically strung.
So what I am questioning is, most people use the 22LR to plink or shoot for accuracy at 50 and 100. I know I am taking it out of its comfort zone at 250+ yet have a lot of success. However, being limited by the ammo, would 22 WMR be better for what I am doing?
From my little bit of research the 22 WMR has higher velocity (22LR Lapua is 1060 vs Super X is 1910), roughly the same cost as Lapua Center X/Midas as well as has an actual metal jacket.
Am I missing out, or is again, the spreads in FPS on the ammo the limiting factor?
So what I am questioning is, most people use the 22LR to plink or shoot for accuracy at 50 and 100. I know I am taking it out of its comfort zone at 250+ yet have a lot of success. However, being limited by the ammo, would 22 WMR be better for what I am doing?
From my little bit of research the 22 WMR has higher velocity (22LR Lapua is 1060 vs Super X is 1910), roughly the same cost as Lapua Center X/Midas as well as has an actual metal jacket.
Am I missing out, or is again, the spreads in FPS on the ammo the limiting factor?
