455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
- Thread starter Anchor Zero Six
- Start date
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
Hey Goldbeachman, can you post some grouping pics up. I have a lilja also for my 455 but im contemplating selling it. I havent shot it yet, but the stock 22 barrel is pretty damn accurate. If its not a huge difference I may flip it.
Let me know if you could.
Btw, what power USO scope is that?
I have a nightforce 3-15 on mine but thinking of bumping up to the SWFA 5-25.
Hey Goldbeachman, can you post some grouping pics up. I have a lilja also for my 455 but im contemplating selling it. I havent shot it yet, but the stock 22 barrel is pretty damn accurate. If its not a huge difference I may flip it.
Let me know if you could.
Btw, what power USO scope is that?
I have a nightforce 3-15 on mine but thinking of bumping up to the SWFA 5-25.
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
The gun finally arrived last Monday and I've had it out a few times but didn't save any paper. I replaced the Weaver scope with the USO almost immediately for a myriad of reasons.
The gun shoots one hole at 25 yards (not one ragged hole, but one hole) and is minute of angle compliant at 100. Its been warm and windy here so I've held back shooting recorded groups because of conditions and waiting for various brands of .22 ammunition to arrive to try out.
JC Vibby/JC Targets have these nice little 2 inch triangle ar-500 targets that he gave out at the SH Cup and I've been ringing those at 200 for fun. Consistently. The barrel shoots and I'll post up targets in the next few weeks when wind and mirage don't dictate the result.
The USO scope is a sn-3 1.8-10 moa/moa. The magnification ring is covered up with stretchy sports tape because the bolt knob handle would contact the magnification ring running the bolt hard. I replaced the larger bolt knob originally put on the gun with a Badger mini-tactical bolt knob and while it still can (but barely) touch the scope, it does not interfere with trigger finger placement as before.
The gun finally arrived last Monday and I've had it out a few times but didn't save any paper. I replaced the Weaver scope with the USO almost immediately for a myriad of reasons.
The gun shoots one hole at 25 yards (not one ragged hole, but one hole) and is minute of angle compliant at 100. Its been warm and windy here so I've held back shooting recorded groups because of conditions and waiting for various brands of .22 ammunition to arrive to try out.
JC Vibby/JC Targets have these nice little 2 inch triangle ar-500 targets that he gave out at the SH Cup and I've been ringing those at 200 for fun. Consistently. The barrel shoots and I'll post up targets in the next few weeks when wind and mirage don't dictate the result.
The USO scope is a sn-3 1.8-10 moa/moa. The magnification ring is covered up with stretchy sports tape because the bolt knob handle would contact the magnification ring running the bolt hard. I replaced the larger bolt knob originally put on the gun with a Badger mini-tactical bolt knob and while it still can (but barely) touch the scope, it does not interfere with trigger finger placement as before.
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
I've found that the CZ factory 22lr barrel is adequate for hunting and plinking.
Not, by any stretch of the imagination, is it a match grade barrel.
The walnut factory stock isn't all that rigid either. Even after pillaring
and bedding the action, the stock flex still shows up in the patterns
at the target. The CZ455/Lilja requires a great deal of fine tuning before
it can be described as anywhere near a threat, to a purpose built match grade rifle.
Couple of examples, from a test rest at 50 yards
Same day, same conditions, about 10 minutes between the 2 groups.
(barrel change and warm up shots)
CZ455 factory barrel 22lr
CZ455 Lilja Varmint Taper 22lr
CZ455 Lilja, test rest at 100 yards
dropper was an audibly weak round
that really ticked me off, bigtime,
when it messed up this 5 shot group
I've found that the CZ factory 22lr barrel is adequate for hunting and plinking.
Not, by any stretch of the imagination, is it a match grade barrel.
The walnut factory stock isn't all that rigid either. Even after pillaring
and bedding the action, the stock flex still shows up in the patterns
at the target. The CZ455/Lilja requires a great deal of fine tuning before
it can be described as anywhere near a threat, to a purpose built match grade rifle.
Couple of examples, from a test rest at 50 yards
Same day, same conditions, about 10 minutes between the 2 groups.
(barrel change and warm up shots)
CZ455 factory barrel 22lr
CZ455 Lilja Varmint Taper 22lr
CZ455 Lilja, test rest at 100 yards
dropper was an audibly weak round
that really ticked me off, bigtime,
when it messed up this 5 shot group
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
jaia, that looks pretty nice... looks like i might keep this barrel then.
I should shoot it but we (www.griffinarmament.com) are in the process of making new bad ass tactical rings, and I wanted to wait till those are done to fit my scope up and do some shooting.
Rings are almost done though so it should only be a week or two at this point till im punching paper.
I'll post back in this thread when My rifle is done.
I found my rifle shoots best with SK jagd Match, but maybe the lilja will like something else. I have some eley I will probably put through it just to see but I think its a bad lot as my SK has much smaller Standard Deviation and extreme spread of velocity.
In case anyone cares, the 22wmr barrel from CZ shoots like a scattergun. I know 22wmr isnt as tight shooting as match LR due to the velocity, but I was shooting about 2" groups almost at 100 yards. Granted I had a Leupy mk4 M3 3-10 on my rifle. I think it would shoot a bit better with higher magnification.
jaia, that looks pretty nice... looks like i might keep this barrel then.
I should shoot it but we (www.griffinarmament.com) are in the process of making new bad ass tactical rings, and I wanted to wait till those are done to fit my scope up and do some shooting.
Rings are almost done though so it should only be a week or two at this point till im punching paper.
I'll post back in this thread when My rifle is done.
I found my rifle shoots best with SK jagd Match, but maybe the lilja will like something else. I have some eley I will probably put through it just to see but I think its a bad lot as my SK has much smaller Standard Deviation and extreme spread of velocity.
In case anyone cares, the 22wmr barrel from CZ shoots like a scattergun. I know 22wmr isnt as tight shooting as match LR due to the velocity, but I was shooting about 2" groups almost at 100 yards. Granted I had a Leupy mk4 M3 3-10 on my rifle. I think it would shoot a bit better with higher magnification.
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: GOLDBEACHMAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The gun finally arrived last Monday and I've had it out a few times but didn't save any paper. I replaced the Weaver scope with the USO almost immediately for a myriad of reasons.
The gun shoots one hole at 25 yards (not one ragged hole, but one hole) and is minute of angle compliant at 100. Its been warm and windy here so I've held back shooting recorded groups because of conditions and waiting for various brands of .22 ammunition to arrive to try out.
JC Vibby/JC Targets have these nice little 2 inch triangle ar-500 targets that he gave out at the SH Cup and I've been ringing those at 200 for fun. Consistently. The barrel shoots and I'll post up targets in the next few weeks when wind and mirage don't dictate the result.
The USO scope is a sn-3 1.8-10 moa/moa. The magnification ring is covered up with stretchy sports tape because the bolt knob handle would contact the magnification ring running the bolt hard. I replaced the larger bolt knob originally put on the gun with a Badger mini-tactical bolt knob and while it still can (but barely) touch the scope, it does not interfere with trigger finger placement as before. </div></div>
Do you find yourself wanting more power with the USO or are you satisfied at 10x?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: GOLDBEACHMAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The gun finally arrived last Monday and I've had it out a few times but didn't save any paper. I replaced the Weaver scope with the USO almost immediately for a myriad of reasons.
The gun shoots one hole at 25 yards (not one ragged hole, but one hole) and is minute of angle compliant at 100. Its been warm and windy here so I've held back shooting recorded groups because of conditions and waiting for various brands of .22 ammunition to arrive to try out.
JC Vibby/JC Targets have these nice little 2 inch triangle ar-500 targets that he gave out at the SH Cup and I've been ringing those at 200 for fun. Consistently. The barrel shoots and I'll post up targets in the next few weeks when wind and mirage don't dictate the result.
The USO scope is a sn-3 1.8-10 moa/moa. The magnification ring is covered up with stretchy sports tape because the bolt knob handle would contact the magnification ring running the bolt hard. I replaced the larger bolt knob originally put on the gun with a Badger mini-tactical bolt knob and while it still can (but barely) touch the scope, it does not interfere with trigger finger placement as before. </div></div>
Do you find yourself wanting more power with the USO or are you satisfied at 10x?
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">22wmr isnt as tight shooting as match LR</div></div>
If you test under no wind conditions, like I did
you'll find much spread can be tied directly to stock flex.
Match grade 22lr is a subsonic, minimal recoil round.
Produces very little flex from the CZ walnut stock.
but both the 22WMR and 17HMR ammo, produce greater load transfer
twist/recoil which causes the barrel to move off line
due to the lack of stock rigidity. That flex/shift
shows up at the target. I spent a lot of time blaming myself
for the spread, but the same results show up when
the CZ 455 was fired from my low tech test rest.
Not enough wood left on the stock after all that milling.
That's why so many are picking up custom aftermarket stocks
for competitive shooting. Have to lose that flex.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">22wmr isnt as tight shooting as match LR</div></div>
If you test under no wind conditions, like I did
you'll find much spread can be tied directly to stock flex.
Match grade 22lr is a subsonic, minimal recoil round.
Produces very little flex from the CZ walnut stock.
but both the 22WMR and 17HMR ammo, produce greater load transfer
twist/recoil which causes the barrel to move off line
due to the lack of stock rigidity. That flex/shift
shows up at the target. I spent a lot of time blaming myself
for the spread, but the same results show up when
the CZ 455 was fired from my low tech test rest.
Not enough wood left on the stock after all that milling.
That's why so many are picking up custom aftermarket stocks
for competitive shooting. Have to lose that flex.
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
I like the 10x fine so far for 22lr. Seems I usually zero or shoot groups with larger caliber guns at 15 to 20x at 100 yards, and can easily resolve bullet holes, but I haven't felt lacking with the 10x. I used to use it out to 1000 yards and then, yes, I wanted more magnification for sure.
That USO has sat for a couple years collecting dust after I switched from moa to mil based reticle/scopes. Now, ironically, I like the moa system a bit better for this close up stuff with 22lr.
I'll shoot some groups soon. I did chrono two types of 22 ammo through the barrel though. The Rem/Eley that supposedly shoots the best out of this gun had a SD of 14 while the CCI Reg Vel had a SD of 8. I'm not a big 22lr expert or anything but I thought that was pretty good.
I like the 10x fine so far for 22lr. Seems I usually zero or shoot groups with larger caliber guns at 15 to 20x at 100 yards, and can easily resolve bullet holes, but I haven't felt lacking with the 10x. I used to use it out to 1000 yards and then, yes, I wanted more magnification for sure.
That USO has sat for a couple years collecting dust after I switched from moa to mil based reticle/scopes. Now, ironically, I like the moa system a bit better for this close up stuff with 22lr.
I'll shoot some groups soon. I did chrono two types of 22 ammo through the barrel though. The Rem/Eley that supposedly shoots the best out of this gun had a SD of 14 while the CCI Reg Vel had a SD of 8. I'm not a big 22lr expert or anything but I thought that was pretty good.
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jaia</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">22wmr isnt as tight shooting as match LR</div></div>
If you test under no wind conditions, like I did
you'll find much spread can be tied directly to stock flex.
Match grade 22lr is a subsonic, minimal recoil round.
Produces very little flex from the CZ walnut stock.
but both the 22WMR and 17HMR ammo, produce greater load transfer
twist/recoil which causes the barrel to move off line
due to the lack of stock rigidity. That flex/shift
shows up at the target. I spent a lot of time blaming myself
for the spread, but the same results show up when
the CZ 455 was fired from my low tech test rest.
Not enough wood left on the stock after all that milling.
That's why so many are picking up custom aftermarket stocks
for competitive shooting. Have to lose that flex.
</div></div>
Well I ditched the wood stock for a Manners T4. I havent bedded it however. I probably will in the future but need to pick up longer action screws as with the Manners there is only a few turns of threading engaging and I think If I had bedding compound in there I wouldnt get the action together at all.
But sooner or later that will happen, I'll try shooting the 22wmr again and seeing if that does anything. Probably good advice.
Thanks.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jaia</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">22wmr isnt as tight shooting as match LR</div></div>
If you test under no wind conditions, like I did
you'll find much spread can be tied directly to stock flex.
Match grade 22lr is a subsonic, minimal recoil round.
Produces very little flex from the CZ walnut stock.
but both the 22WMR and 17HMR ammo, produce greater load transfer
twist/recoil which causes the barrel to move off line
due to the lack of stock rigidity. That flex/shift
shows up at the target. I spent a lot of time blaming myself
for the spread, but the same results show up when
the CZ 455 was fired from my low tech test rest.
Not enough wood left on the stock after all that milling.
That's why so many are picking up custom aftermarket stocks
for competitive shooting. Have to lose that flex.
</div></div>
Well I ditched the wood stock for a Manners T4. I havent bedded it however. I probably will in the future but need to pick up longer action screws as with the Manners there is only a few turns of threading engaging and I think If I had bedding compound in there I wouldnt get the action together at all.
But sooner or later that will happen, I'll try shooting the 22wmr again and seeing if that does anything. Probably good advice.
Thanks.
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
Stock flex and movement of the receiver and barrel turned out
to be the primary causes of trajectory spread in "no wind" conditions.
After building the test rest to take my physical lack of skill
out of learning process, I was able to isolate and understand the problems.
Pillaring and bedding the receiver eliminated the trajectory spread
caused by the machining/milling tolerances allowed in the production line.
2 thousandths of an inch play left/right along the axis of the action
results in 6 tenths of an inch spread at the target 50 yards down range.
Stock flex, which I measured with a feeler gauge, allows the
barrel to shift approximately 15 thousandths off the line of aim.
That 15 thousandths flex is responsible for up to 2.7 inches
of trajectory spread at the same 50 yards. The problem is predicting
how much flex is going to affect bullet trajectory, as each time
the trigger is pulled, the rifles mechanical components work with
and against each other, adding to or cancelling out some of the total error.
I think that's why bedding the barrel, instead of leaving it free floated
works so well on the CZ 455. The bedding helps cure the stock flex.
Stock flex and movement of the receiver and barrel turned out
to be the primary causes of trajectory spread in "no wind" conditions.
After building the test rest to take my physical lack of skill
out of learning process, I was able to isolate and understand the problems.
Pillaring and bedding the receiver eliminated the trajectory spread
caused by the machining/milling tolerances allowed in the production line.
2 thousandths of an inch play left/right along the axis of the action
results in 6 tenths of an inch spread at the target 50 yards down range.
Stock flex, which I measured with a feeler gauge, allows the
barrel to shift approximately 15 thousandths off the line of aim.
That 15 thousandths flex is responsible for up to 2.7 inches
of trajectory spread at the same 50 yards. The problem is predicting
how much flex is going to affect bullet trajectory, as each time
the trigger is pulled, the rifles mechanical components work with
and against each other, adding to or cancelling out some of the total error.
I think that's why bedding the barrel, instead of leaving it free floated
works so well on the CZ 455. The bedding helps cure the stock flex.
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
Ok, I'm bringing this post back to life since I am seriously looking at the 455/Lilja combo.
So Jaia, if the manufacturing tolerances on the factory CZ stock allows for shifting of the action resulting in a loss of accuracy which therefore requires bedding the barrel, let me ask you this:
What about the 455 Precision Trainer with the Manners stock, or any other 455 with a "high quality" stock for that matter? Would they also require/benefit from barrel bedding? Or would benefits be reduced the with quality stock because of higher manufacturing tolerances/stiffness and therefore less stock flex?
I hope my question makes sense...
Ok, I'm bringing this post back to life since I am seriously looking at the 455/Lilja combo.
So Jaia, if the manufacturing tolerances on the factory CZ stock allows for shifting of the action resulting in a loss of accuracy which therefore requires bedding the barrel, let me ask you this:
What about the 455 Precision Trainer with the Manners stock, or any other 455 with a "high quality" stock for that matter? Would they also require/benefit from barrel bedding? Or would benefits be reduced the with quality stock because of higher manufacturing tolerances/stiffness and therefore less stock flex?
I hope my question makes sense...
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What about the 455 Precision Trainer with the Manners stock, or any other 455 with a "high quality" stock for that matter? Would they also require/benefit from barrel bedding? Or would benefits be reduced the with quality stock because of higher manufacturing tolerances/stiffness and therefore less stock flex?</div></div>
I've tinkered with a ragged Mossberg 144, Marlin 60, Savage 64 SS,
and the CZ 455. All had factory stocks, all showed an improvement
in accuracy when shims were added to prevent the barrel and action
from shifting position in the stock, when the trigger was pulled.
If I was to obtain a custom stock, after pillaring and bedding the receiver,
I'd still take it to the range and test shim the barrel to see if bedding would be useful.
Every rifle is unique and will respond differently to shimming/bedding.
Only way to determine the outcome is by trial and error.
I didn't come up with the concept, just testing accurizing tips found on line.
http://www.fieldandstream.com/pages/facts-about-bedding-rifle-barrel
http://www.rifleshootermag.com/2010/09/23/gunsmithing_bedding_0304/
One more idea to float by you, supporting the bedded barrel concept,
look at the ultimate accuracy bench rest set ups: rail guns.
The barrel is locked down, and the action is free floated!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What about the 455 Precision Trainer with the Manners stock, or any other 455 with a "high quality" stock for that matter? Would they also require/benefit from barrel bedding? Or would benefits be reduced the with quality stock because of higher manufacturing tolerances/stiffness and therefore less stock flex?</div></div>
I've tinkered with a ragged Mossberg 144, Marlin 60, Savage 64 SS,
and the CZ 455. All had factory stocks, all showed an improvement
in accuracy when shims were added to prevent the barrel and action
from shifting position in the stock, when the trigger was pulled.
If I was to obtain a custom stock, after pillaring and bedding the receiver,
I'd still take it to the range and test shim the barrel to see if bedding would be useful.
Every rifle is unique and will respond differently to shimming/bedding.
Only way to determine the outcome is by trial and error.
I didn't come up with the concept, just testing accurizing tips found on line.
http://www.fieldandstream.com/pages/facts-about-bedding-rifle-barrel
http://www.rifleshootermag.com/2010/09/23/gunsmithing_bedding_0304/
One more idea to float by you, supporting the bedded barrel concept,
look at the ultimate accuracy bench rest set ups: rail guns.
The barrel is locked down, and the action is free floated!
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JSig33</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> What about the 455 Precision Trainer with the Manners stock, or any other 455 with a "high quality" stock for that matter? Would they also require/benefit from barrel bedding? Or would benefits be reduced the with quality stock because of higher manufacturing tolerances/stiffness and therefore less stock flex?
I hope my question makes sense...
</div></div>
I recently picked up a 455 Precision Trainer and I'm about to go on the same 'journey' as described in this thread.... I'll be ordering a Lilja no-taper barrel and I'll test it out. BTW- The Precision Trainer/Manners T4 Stock comes with a single front pillar.
I'll post pics and results as well.
.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JSig33</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> What about the 455 Precision Trainer with the Manners stock, or any other 455 with a "high quality" stock for that matter? Would they also require/benefit from barrel bedding? Or would benefits be reduced the with quality stock because of higher manufacturing tolerances/stiffness and therefore less stock flex?
I hope my question makes sense...
</div></div>
I recently picked up a 455 Precision Trainer and I'm about to go on the same 'journey' as described in this thread.... I'll be ordering a Lilja no-taper barrel and I'll test it out. BTW- The Precision Trainer/Manners T4 Stock comes with a single front pillar.
I'll post pics and results as well.
.
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
I'll be watching for your post, RMF.
I'd like to see 50 yard targets, using CCI SV, shot from the factory stock rifle,
then a target shot after the action is pillared and bedded,
and one taken with the barrel shimmed, before you get the Lilja.
Just to see the results at each stage of improvement.
This is how my stock is set up now, epoxy shims with silicon adhesive
to lock the barrel and stock into a single structure.
Important Note: Waxed the shim surfaces and barrel before using the adhesive!
If you don't wax, you won't be able to get the barrel out afterwards!
This setup of the CZ 455 American/Lilja Varmint Taper makes things too easy.
From bipod and rear bag using CCI SV at 50 yards, after about 45 minutes of warmup
I sent a full box, 50 rounds, through the same bullseye...
...bor-r-ring.
That's something the factory barrel and setup couldn't do!
I'll be watching for your post, RMF.
I'd like to see 50 yard targets, using CCI SV, shot from the factory stock rifle,
then a target shot after the action is pillared and bedded,
and one taken with the barrel shimmed, before you get the Lilja.
Just to see the results at each stage of improvement.
This is how my stock is set up now, epoxy shims with silicon adhesive
to lock the barrel and stock into a single structure.
Important Note: Waxed the shim surfaces and barrel before using the adhesive!
If you don't wax, you won't be able to get the barrel out afterwards!
This setup of the CZ 455 American/Lilja Varmint Taper makes things too easy.
From bipod and rear bag using CCI SV at 50 yards, after about 45 minutes of warmup
I sent a full box, 50 rounds, through the same bullseye...
That's something the factory barrel and setup couldn't do!
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
Jaia, is your action bedded too or just your barrel?
Outside of the relm of rail guns and rimfires, how come the top centerfire 'smiths and manufacturers are still free floating their barrels?
Jaia, is your action bedded too or just your barrel?
Outside of the relm of rail guns and rimfires, how come the top centerfire 'smiths and manufacturers are still free floating their barrels?
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
The action on my 455 isn't truly bedded.
What I've done is pillar and epoxy shim to prevent the receiver from shifting.
A rimfire doesn't have to resist the shock loads that a centerfire does.
So all I did was use epoxy dots to shim the receiver, a lot less work and mess
than is required for a true bedding job. It works, so I'm happy.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Outside of the realm of rail guns and rimfires, how come the top centerfire 'smiths and manufacturers are still free floating their barrels?</div></div>
Could it be that it's cheaper and easier to free float every barrel
than it is to test and custom bed each and every one as it comes off the line?
Every rifle is a collection of parts. That makes each rifle unique.
Determining what produces the best results from each setup takes time.
And in the business world, time is money, so the generalized solution is used.
I'm no gunsmith...I just enjoy reading what can be done, to improve accuracy,
then trying it out for myself. Some of what I've tried didn't work.
Amazingly enough, some did. I learned a great deal from both my failures and successes.
Lucky for me, I have no fear of failure...
The action on my 455 isn't truly bedded.
What I've done is pillar and epoxy shim to prevent the receiver from shifting.
A rimfire doesn't have to resist the shock loads that a centerfire does.
So all I did was use epoxy dots to shim the receiver, a lot less work and mess
than is required for a true bedding job. It works, so I'm happy.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Outside of the realm of rail guns and rimfires, how come the top centerfire 'smiths and manufacturers are still free floating their barrels?</div></div>
Could it be that it's cheaper and easier to free float every barrel
than it is to test and custom bed each and every one as it comes off the line?
Every rifle is a collection of parts. That makes each rifle unique.
Determining what produces the best results from each setup takes time.
And in the business world, time is money, so the generalized solution is used.
I'm no gunsmith...I just enjoy reading what can be done, to improve accuracy,
then trying it out for myself. Some of what I've tried didn't work.
Amazingly enough, some did. I learned a great deal from both my failures and successes.
Lucky for me, I have no fear of failure...
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Anchor Zero Six</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not sure if I'm measuring properly...used navigation dividers to get as close to what I thought was center to center of furthest shots and measured that with the calipers. So close together its very difficult.</div></div>
The proper way to measure a group is to measure the widest part of the group, outside edge to outside edge using dial or digital calipers. Measure to the outside of the black rings the bullets made.
Then subtract the bullet dia. from that figure and you have the center to center group size left.
Example: say a group measures .646" at the widest spread of the shot cluster. you subtract .223 bullet dia. You shot a .433" group
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Anchor Zero Six</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not sure if I'm measuring properly...used navigation dividers to get as close to what I thought was center to center of furthest shots and measured that with the calipers. So close together its very difficult.</div></div>
The proper way to measure a group is to measure the widest part of the group, outside edge to outside edge using dial or digital calipers. Measure to the outside of the black rings the bullets made.
Then subtract the bullet dia. from that figure and you have the center to center group size left.
Example: say a group measures .646" at the widest spread of the shot cluster. you subtract .223 bullet dia. You shot a .433" group
Re: 455/ Lilja range report(100yd update)
The "proper" way to measure groups described above, on paper, will give an incorrect measurement as the hole left on paper is not the diameter of the bullet. Another way is "to measure from the outmost edge of one to the inmost edge of the other. This takes into account bullet diameters, ragged edges, etc."
Greg L. said this in another thread and credit to him as he is right.
To me, my proper way to measure groups, is to not.
Good luck!
The "proper" way to measure groups described above, on paper, will give an incorrect measurement as the hole left on paper is not the diameter of the bullet. Another way is "to measure from the outmost edge of one to the inmost edge of the other. This takes into account bullet diameters, ragged edges, etc."
Greg L. said this in another thread and credit to him as he is right.
To me, my proper way to measure groups, is to not.
Good luck!
