Actual Accuracy of 22lr Premium Rifles

[hlee]

Are you testing poi or group accuracy. If im testeing for how tight the group us ill dial .2 up so i dont shoot my aim point away. If im testing poi consistency(wich i dont do a lot) ill shoot dots. As far as the original question ive never seen someone held back at a prs22 match becuase of a cz or begara. I wouldn't trade my vudoo but its not a requirement to win by any stretch. Quality ammo is.

The bigger point is that you can catch the edge of a group and say “one ragged hole.” But, it was in the “7 ring” of an otherwise centered up group. Then you (General, not specific) you lie to yourself about your (and the gun’s) performance.

If you shoot one shot per bullseye, you don’t have a ragged hole to hide that errant shot.

Hell, the target I posted has groups dancing around the aim point. I know it does. I can see it on the paper. The average group size is right at 1 moa. But, the aggregate group size is probably closer to 2. (IDK. That was shot a while ago and the target is long since thrown away.

But, for zeroing a rifle? Sure I’ll shoot into the same poi. Same for load dev/ammo testing. But, but, a 25 target X one shot per target score better assesses the accuracy and precision of the system.

To that last point about the Bergara and CZ. I certainly have seen what Vudoo did to rimfire competition. The first 22 comp I went to I saw; a CZ, some squirrel rifles, and a smattering of 10/22 “builds.” Ammo was all over the place. The best shooter won the event- with a Kidd 10/22 and (I believe CenterX). I went back to the drawing board and bought better ammo. The next time out, there were fewer squirrel rifles and more CZ/Bergara level rifles. My Kidd with CenterX took that event and the next 2 as well. After that, the vudoos really came on strong. I heard the match director slip and call the event a “Vudoo match.” He was right. Gone were the CZs and the bergaras. Not a squirrel gun to be seen. CCI SV? Peasant. 2 racks full of Vudoo rifles. And my Kidd 10/22. I think I placed 9th in that event. Against the same guys I was beating handily when they were shooting their (now) mid-grade rifles.

Are they magical? Not in the “shoots any ammo into one 0.224” diameter hole every time at any distance” like you read on the internet. But, they are pretty fantastic.

Make no mistake; 22rf is even more of a gear race than centerfire PRS.

 

[Fasteddie01]

Just wanted to say re this topic - I have a Savage B22-FV with a 6-24x50 FFP scope (ca $500 total scope & gun rig) and get groups like 'hlee' showed on his first post of this thread. 0.075" - 0.300", just of front bag and my shoulder. My CZ455 doesn't do much better for twice the bucks.

 

[krw]

In the world of accuracy, a little better accuracy is a lot of money. 1” guarantee’d rifle vs 1/2” gaurantee rifle is lots. 1” vs 1/4” rifle is lots more

 

[MAJOR2257]

I'm surprised at all the replies but guys I think many of you misunderstood my point and question. I'm not a competition shooter, just a hobbyist. I don't even know the different categories of match shooting. I just know that I like to compete against myself to see how accurate I can shoot. I like to try different ammo and when doing that, I do shoot for groups. I know that shooting at a precise point destroys the poi after a few shots so that is why I like to shoot groups but don't zero my scope until I find the absolute best for accuracy.

I like to shoot the targets that are used in the "tack driver"game where there are 25 circles shot at different distances. There are different targets for different distances... the closer you are shooting the smaller the circles. For 25 yards the circles are 3/8in, for 50 yards, 1/2in and 100yrds, they are 1in. Shooting indoors with no wind off a benchrest and the right ammo, I can usually score hits on all 25 circles. I find this pretty challenging with a good rifle and ammo. I've shot this target with several folks that shoot lesser rifles and bulk ammo that give up before they finish.

Maybe I'm in the wrong forum to be asking my question because most of the replies have come from shooters that compete and probably light years ahead of me! Again, I have read forums the shooters claim to have rifles that shoot one hole groups at 50 yards. I can do that with the right setup but that one hole seems to grow the more shots I take. (I'm adding humor here) Seriously though I can usually shoot 1/2 inch groups, sometimes a little tighter at 50yrds. Is this common for the hobbyist? I'm always striving (and spending money) for better accuracy but what is realistic?

I realize I'm rambling but hopefully someone will get what I'm curious about. I have a good "for instance" example... I have a Ruger 10/22 that has been modified with a Green Mountain barrel that I bought on sale for $100, a Boyds stock, and a Brimstone trigger. I can honestly shoot the "tack driver" target at 50yrds with 25 hits better than half the times I try. I think that rifle shoots pretty darn good. Now I see this beautiful Tony Kidd 22 rifle that I drool over. Being realistic, how could that rifle shoot better than the one I already have? See where I'm going here? Should I be happy with what I already have for accuracy? Or should I keep spending money chasing the ultimate rifle for accuracy?

 

[Turkeytider]

I'm a card carrying curmudgeon now RT.
Officially a member of the old coots that gather at the diner,
for bacon and coffee before adjourning to the range for loud entertainment.
That allows me to be less than politically correct in my opinions.

I've shot groups, way more groups than I care to think about.
They work well for adjusting y'er setup, testing ammo quality and confirming basic skill,
but they don't answer the question: Can you hit what you aim at?
That's the purpose of a rifle, right? To put a bullet where it needs to be.
When you have moved beyond factory Sporters, and have spent the big bucks
on a high end, premium, custom rifle, it's time to exit the realm of close enough,
and take up residence in the land of punching center.
No more posting images of groups that wander around y'er point of aim,
it's time to focus on putting every shot dead center,
exactly where that "premium rifle" was built to deliver them.
Shoot for score, hit where you aim, can you, or not?
That's what a purpose built precision rifle is for.
Not scattering clusters of shots around wherever the wind or ammo quality shoved them.

I thought I had it figured out, tight groups are easy.
Then I made the mistake of measuring aggregate group sizes for 25 and 50 shots.
What I thought was sub moa all day long, was actually 2 moa due to wandering centers of impact.
It took shooting for score and the Grid, to confirm just how sloppy my results actually are.
Sure, I can produce a whole bunch of random acts of accuracy at 50, 100 and 200 yards,
but when you see my results when I have to punch center,
there's no doubt, just another amateur behind the trigger.

I do have a method for improving accuracy.
Works extremely well out in the woods, sneak in really close to the squirrels,
then take the shot. Don't even need match ammo,
when the target is less than 30 yards away, eh?


@MAJOR2257, give up on groups for proving accuracy.
Use one dot-one shot targets.... you'll learn more, faster
and you'll figure out real quick if it's the ammo, wind, or you causing strays.

Yep. Particularly important for me with my hunting 110 in .223 is where my first clean bore, cold barrel shot hits. I`m too old to break habits, so I can`t seem to leave a barrel fouled for very long, so that`s why it`s important to me. In general, I pay much more attention to accuracy ( POA vs. POI ) than precision ( group size ). By the way, the Savage does a great job with that first shot.

 

[Turkeytider]

I'm surprised at all the replies but guys I think many of you misunderstood my point and question. I'm not a competition shooter, just a hobbyist. I don't even know the different categories of match shooting. I just know that I like to compete against myself to see how accurate I can shoot. I like to try different ammo and when doing that, I do shoot for groups. I know that shooting at a precise point destroys the poi after a few shots so that is why I like to shoot groups but don't zero my scope until I find the absolute best for accuracy.

I like to shoot the targets that are used in the "tack driver"game where there are 25 circles shot at different distances. There are different targets for different distances... the closer you are shooting the smaller the circles. For 25 yards the circles are 3/8in, for 50 yards, 1/2in and 100yrds, they are 1in. Shooting indoors with no wind off a benchrest and the right ammo, I can usually score hits on all 25 circles. I find this pretty challenging with a good rifle and ammo. I've shot this target with several folks that shoot lesser rifles and bulk ammo that give up before they finish.

Maybe I'm in the wrong forum to be asking my question because most of the replies have come from shooters that compete and probably light years ahead of me! Again, I have read forums the shooters claim to have rifles that shoot one hole groups at 50 yards. I can do that with the right setup but that one hole seems to grow the more shots I take. (I'm adding humor here) Seriously though I can usually shoot 1/2 inch groups, sometimes a little tighter at 50yrds. Is this common for the hobbyist? I'm always striving (and spending money) for better accuracy but what is realistic?

I realize I'm rambling but hopefully someone will get what I'm curious about. I have a good "for instance" example... I have a Ruger 10/22 that has been modified with a Green Mountain barrel that I bought on sale for $100, a Boyds stock, and a Brimstone trigger. I can honestly shoot the "tack driver" target at 50yrds with 25 hits better than half the times I try. I think that rifle shoots pretty darn good. Now I see this beautiful Tony Kidd 22 rifle that I drool over. Being realistic, how could that rifle shoot better than the one I already have? See where I'm going here? Should I be happy with what I already have for accuracy? Or should I keep spending money chasing the ultimate rifle for accuracy?

I asked a very similar question some time ago. Could I expect better precision and accuracy with another gun? Most answers were, " Yes and No. " Just me, but I decided to concentrate on my own shooting technique, being able to better read environmental conditions ( wind !! ) and finding good lots of ammo that my 17HMR likes. I shoot almost exclusively 100 yard targets. With the notorious variability in 17 HMR ammo, coupled with whatever my own shooting ability might be, I`ve come to believe that sub-MOA rimfire groups, be they 3 shot or 5, are cause for celebration!

 

[littlepod]

I'm surprised at all the replies but guys I think many of you misunderstood my point and question. I'm not a competition shooter, just a hobbyist. I don't even know the different categories of match shooting. I just know that I like to compete against myself to see how accurate I can shoot. I like to try different ammo and when doing that, I do shoot for groups. I know that shooting at a precise point destroys the poi after a few shots so that is why I like to shoot groups but don't zero my scope until I find the absolute best for accuracy.

I like to shoot the targets that are used in the "tack driver"game where there are 25 circles shot at different distances. There are different targets for different distances... the closer you are shooting the smaller the circles. For 25 yards the circles are 3/8in, for 50 yards, 1/2in and 100yrds, they are 1in. Shooting indoors with no wind off a benchrest and the right ammo, I can usually score hits on all 25 circles. I find this pretty challenging with a good rifle and ammo. I've shot this target with several folks that shoot lesser rifles and bulk ammo that give up before they finish.

Maybe I'm in the wrong forum to be asking my question because most of the replies have come from shooters that compete and probably light years ahead of me! Again, I have read forums the shooters claim to have rifles that shoot one hole groups at 50 yards. I can do that with the right setup but that one hole seems to grow the more shots I take. (I'm adding humor here) Seriously though I can usually shoot 1/2 inch groups, sometimes a little tighter at 50yrds. Is this common for the hobbyist? I'm always striving (and spending money) for better accuracy but what is realistic?

I realize I'm rambling but hopefully someone will get what I'm curious about. I have a good "for instance" example... I have a Ruger 10/22 that has been modified with a Green Mountain barrel that I bought on sale for $100, a Boyds stock, and a Brimstone trigger. I can honestly shoot the "tack driver" target at 50yrds with 25 hits better than half the times I try. I think that rifle shoots pretty darn good. Now I see this beautiful Tony Kidd 22 rifle that I drool over. Being realistic, how could that rifle shoot better than the one I already have? See where I'm going here? Should I be happy with what I already have for accuracy? Or should I keep spending money chasing the ultimate rifle for accuracy?

A benchrest rifle with matched ammo shooting indoors should be able to shoot .45" (edge to edge) 10 shot groups at 50y. So center-to-center groups of .23".

So meaning that you can clean your 25yd target at 50 yards.

 

[carbonbased]

The answer here boys is to shoot more.



A LOT more. You’ll probably hit the target.



C’mon! This is in jest!

 

[littlepod]

The answer here boys is to shoot more.



A LOT more. You’ll probably hit the target.



C’mon! This is in jest!

Yeh you can totally do 1 hole. It will just be a 4" hole.

 

[carbonbased]

Yeh you can totally do 1 hole. It will just be a 4" hole.

Yes! And in my case, the varmint would be dead. Double yes!!

My Kidd will suffice, I guess. I will console myself with the fact that the American 180 wouldn’t reportedly run subs, and ran the best with loud CCI Stingers/Stangers.

Not alerting the pdogs too much with subs + can is better, I guess, but a man can dream.

Anyway, carry on with your discussion. My only purpose was to provide an intermission for bathroom breaks and one or two fruit roll-ups and to administer bit of humor.

 

[ma smith]

Make no mistake; 22rf is even more of a gear race than centerfire PRS.

+1. Its all the rage to use a $5k rifle to shoot "better" off a $2 bucket....
Sometimes...I wonder if we are missing the whole point

 

[carbonbased]

+1. Its all the rage to use a $5k rifle to shoot "better" off a $2 bucket....
Sometimes...I wonder if we are missing the whole point

Shuriken is the answer, ma smith. Throwing stars.

Next up, NRAShuriken.

Harder to game. But someone will eventually cobble together a throwing star to Arca/tripod/bag adapter, I’m sure.

 

[Hoser]

Here is a 60 shot group shot on electronic targets at the Olympic Training Center here in Colorado Springs. I shot lots of 595-599s before I managed a perfect 600. That is about a 3/8 - 1/2 inch group holding center of mass on a 6 inch black blob. The first 10 shots before this were all better than 10.2 so a 70 shot group would have also looked just like this, but when you "go for score" it deletes your sighters.

Bottom picture is what the old fashioned paper target looks like.

 

[MAJOR2257]

I'm a card carrying curmudgeon now RT.
Officially a member of the old coots that gather at the diner,
for bacon and coffee before adjourning to the range for loud entertainment.
That allows me to be less than politically correct in my opinions.

I've shot groups, way more groups than I care to think about.
They work well for adjusting y'er setup, testing ammo quality and confirming basic skill,
but they don't answer the question: Can you hit what you aim at?
That's the purpose of a rifle, right? To put a bullet where it needs to be.
When you have moved beyond factory Sporters, and have spent the big bucks
on a high end, premium, custom rifle, it's time to exit the realm of close enough,
and take up residence in the land of punching center.
No more posting images of groups that wander around y'er point of aim,
it's time to focus on putting every shot dead center,
exactly where that "premium rifle" was built to deliver them.
Shoot for score, hit where you aim, can you, or not?
That's what a purpose built precision rifle is for.
Not scattering clusters of shots around wherever the wind or ammo quality shoved them.

I thought I had it figured out, tight groups are easy.
Then I made the mistake of measuring aggregate group sizes for 25 and 50 shots.
What I thought was sub moa all day long, was actually 2 moa due to wandering centers of impact.
It took shooting for score and the Grid, to confirm just how sloppy my results actually are.
Sure, I can produce a whole bunch of random acts of accuracy at 50, 100 and 200 yards,
but when you see my results when I have to punch center,
there's no doubt, just another amateur behind the trigger.

I do have a method for improving accuracy.
Works extremely well out in the woods, sneak in really close to the squirrels,
then take the shot. Don't even need match ammo,
when the target is less than 30 yards away, eh?


@MAJOR2257, give up on groups for proving accuracy.
Use one dot-one shot targets.... you'll learn more, faster
and you'll figure out real quick if it's the ammo, wind, or you causing strays.

Thanks for the advice. I've been trying to do just what you suggest. Does everyone get this worked up when asking a simple question? I'm just trying to get better, not criticized for doing what I thought I was right.

 

[chutinlead]

I’ve shot my 457 and CCI standard at 50 yards and gotten one hole groups. But they are FAR from average…

There’s no question, if you’re on the range enough shooting a few hundred rounds, you’ll eventually shoot a group that’s impressive.

I shoot one shot - one hole groups all the time. Its the damn second shot that ruins my group lol

 

[hlee]

Thanks for the advice. I've been trying to do just what you suggest. Does everyone get this worked up when asking a simple question?

Yes

 

[carbonbased]

Thanks for the advice. I've been trying to do just what you suggest. Does everyone get this worked up when asking a simple question?

Rimfire forum is a tough crowd of badgers, man. I’m early fifties and I think I’m a youngster around these parts.

Laugh emojis come to rimfire accuracy posts to die lol. STERN faces bruh STERN

 

[CBeck]

Ten 5 shot groups at 50 yards averaged .290. Shot in just over 2 minutes alternating targets.
Day At the Range Z Challenge First Attempts - New Modacam Vudoo https://youtu.be/gmQsyqiGzZg

 

[Turkeytider]

Thanks for the advice. I've been trying to do just what you suggest. Does everyone get this worked up when asking a simple question? I'm just trying to get better, not criticized for doing what I thought I was right.

Welcome to Snipers Hide.

 

[littlesister]

Reread your OP looking for that simple question that it took two long paragraphs to ask. I'm still not sure I found it but I'll give it my best shot. If you're asking the question, are their rifles that offer more consistent accuracy than a Vudoo,Tikka or CZ. then the simple answer is yes. If you're asking the question should I spend the money to obtain this level of accuracy? The simple answer is. Ask yourself that question!

 

[justin amateur]

Major, you asked a simple question, but the topic is rimfire accuracy.
Some will base their opinion on a single five shot group and claim "all day long"
Others of us might have OCD tendencies and want to see 50 or 100 shots, minimum,
before we are satisfied with the data and offering an opinion.
I prefer trying things out myself in order to determine what works and what is eqine fecal material.

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Tell me is this proof of accuracy or a waste of ammo. 50 shots at 100yds. or is these 25 shots at 50yds. or maybe 20 shots at 50yds.

Lee

 

[littlesister]

Tell me is this proof of accuracy or a waste of ammo. 50 shots at 100yds. or is these 25 shots at 50yds. or maybe 20 shots at 50yds.

Lee

Throw me a little bait and I'll bite every time! Waste of ammo as far as I'm concerned. I would rather see 25 individual shots at lets say a ARA factory class target at 100. and 25 shots at a ARA unlimited target at 50.

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Throw me a little bait and I'll bite every time! Waste of ammo as far as I'm concerned. I would rather see 25 individual shots at lets say a ARA factory class target at 100. and 25 shots at a ARA unlimited target at 50.

Yes I do too.

Lee

 

[ma smith]

Throw me a little bait and I'll bite every time! Waste of ammo as far as I'm concerned. I would rather see 25 individual shots at lets say a ARA factory class target at 100. and 25 shots at a ARA unlimited target at 50.

Yes I do too.

Good shooting. The standard distance is 50m and (arguably) very little is gained testing at 100M if you are concerned purely about shooting skill. At 100, you are testing atmospheric stability and ammo quality, on top of fundamentals. If you run the analysis, the FPS variation accounts for significant % of the degradation in group size from 50 to 100m. Likewise, small deviations in wind speed or wind angle (or both) as inputs to your ballistic solution will negatively impact your groups at 100. You can/verify test these effects my checking your ballistic solver of choice. If you can shoot good groups at 50M you have good shooting skils.

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Good shooting. The standard distance is 50m and (arguably) very little is gained testing at 100M if you are concerned purely about shooting skill. At 100, you are testing atmospheric stability and ammo quality, on top of fundamentals. If you run the analysis, the FPS variation accounts for significant % of the degradation in group size from 50 to 100m. Likewise, small deviations in wind speed or wind angle (or both) as inputs to your ballistic solution will negatively impact your groups at 100. You can/verify test these effects my checking your ballistic solver of choice. If you can shoot good groups at 50M you have good shooting skils.

thanks, I also think you need good ammo and a good barrel. these are only 3 shots at 50yds. but under the conditions it showed me both good ammo and a good barrel. FYI, these shots were the first 5 out of a new barrel no tuner. rifle a M12. later on, the news that evening they said there was a measure gust of 50 mph I kind of think that shots 1 & 2 were during that time.

Lee

 

[MarkCZ]

I'm surprised at all the replies but guys I think many of you misunderstood my point and question. I'm not a competition shooter, just a hobbyist. I don't even know the different categories of match shooting. I just know that I like to compete against myself to see how accurate I can shoot. I like to try different ammo and when doing that, I do shoot for groups. I know that shooting at a precise point destroys the poi after a few shots so that is why I like to shoot groups but don't zero my scope until I find the absolute best for accuracy.

I like to shoot the targets that are used in the "tack driver"game where there are 25 circles shot at different distances. There are different targets for different distances... the closer you are shooting the smaller the circles. For 25 yards the circles are 3/8in, for 50 yards, 1/2in and 100yrds, they are 1in. Shooting indoors with no wind off a benchrest and the right ammo, I can usually score hits on all 25 circles. I find this pretty challenging with a good rifle and ammo. I've shot this target with several folks that shoot lesser rifles and bulk ammo that give up before they finish.

Maybe I'm in the wrong forum to be asking my question because most of the replies have come from shooters that compete and probably light years ahead of me! Again, I have read forums the shooters claim to have rifles that shoot one hole groups at 50 yards. I can do that with the right setup but that one hole seems to grow the more shots I take. (I'm adding humor here) Seriously though I can usually shoot 1/2 inch groups, sometimes a little tighter at 50yrds. Is this common for the hobbyist? I'm always striving (and spending money) for better accuracy but what is realistic?

I realize I'm rambling but hopefully someone will get what I'm curious about. I have a good "for instance" example... I have a Ruger 10/22 that has been modified with a Green Mountain barrel that I bought on sale for $100, a Boyds stock, and a Brimstone trigger. I can honestly shoot the "tack driver" target at 50yrds with 25 hits better than half the times I try. I think that rifle shoots pretty darn good. Now I see this beautiful Tony Kidd 22 rifle that I drool over. Being realistic, how could that rifle shoot better than the one I already have? See where I'm going here? Should I be happy with what I already have for accuracy? Or should I keep spending money chasing the ultimate rifle for accuracy?

I have a Kidd Supergrade in a Titan stock, with Titan's rear anchor. It is a 1/2moa gun out to 200 yds in good wind conditions. I would say a Kidd Supergrade would out shoot your 10-22, but is it worth $1500+ to get 0.1" or 0.2" better in groups. Same thing goes for Vudoo's vs CZ. is it worth 3 times the money for a few 0.1's. Be happy with what you have. Put your money into ammo and shooting. trying top ammo is way cheaper than a new gun.

And yes, guys get worked over most anything on this site. post go completely off the rail.

 

[ma smith]

It is a 1/2moa gun out to 200 yds in good wind conditions.

If anyone has stockpiles of <5 SD ammo in 22LR please send me a PM

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

I'm surprised at all the replies but guys I think many of you misunderstood my point and question. I'm not a competition shooter, just a hobbyist. I don't even know the different categories of match shooting. I just know that I like to compete against myself to see how accurate I can shoot. I like to try different ammo and when doing that, I do shoot for groups. I know that shooting at a precise point destroys the poi after a few shots so that is why I like to shoot groups but don't zero my scope until I find the absolute best for accuracy.

I like to shoot the targets that are used in the "tack driver"game where there are 25 circles shot at different distances. There are different targets for different distances... the closer you are shooting the smaller the circles. For 25 yards the circles are 3/8in, for 50 yards, 1/2in and 100yrds, they are 1in. Shooting indoors with no wind off a benchrest and the right ammo, I can usually score hits on all 25 circles. I find this pretty challenging with a good rifle and ammo. I've shot this target with several folks that shoot lesser rifles and bulk ammo that give up before they finish.

Maybe I'm in the wrong forum to be asking my question because most of the replies have come from shooters that compete and probably light years ahead of me! Again, I have read forums the shooters claim to have rifles that shoot one hole groups at 50 yards. I can do that with the right setup but that one hole seems to grow the more shots I take. (I'm adding humor here) Seriously though I can usually shoot 1/2 inch groups, sometimes a little tighter at 50yrds. Is this common for the hobbyist? I'm always striving (and spending money) for better accuracy but what is realistic?

I realize I'm rambling but hopefully someone will get what I'm curious about. I have a good "for instance" example... I have a Ruger 10/22 that has been modified with a Green Mountain barrel that I bought on sale for $100, a Boyds stock, and a Brimstone trigger. I can honestly shoot the "tack driver" target at 50yrds with 25 hits better than half the times I try. I think that rifle shoots pretty darn good. Now I see this beautiful Tony Kidd 22 rifle that I drool over. Being realistic, how could that rifle shoot better than the one I already have? See where I'm going here? Should I be happy with what I already have for accuracy? Or should I keep spending money chasing the ultimate rifle for accuracy?

I started off exactly like you are doing. like most with a 10/22 then Marlin bolt actions 880SQ got my first Anschutz a 64 Mark10 after that my first Anschutz match 54 a 1613 and I was hooked. I had 3 Baity Falcon custom actions at one time. for me the accuracy road was about tinkering trying to make the rifles shoot better. as I accomplished that I wanted to see how I could do the same with better quality rifles. I went the whole 9 yards ammo, barrels, tuners, 1 piece rest, custom stocks. shot groups for years as I tried to see how much accuracy I could get. I was sort of forced to only shoot groups as there were no competitive shooting near where I live at least for type of rifles I shot UL RFBR. then Feb. 2017 I learned a private club had RFBR matches and had a UL class I could shoot in. shot my first match and won shooting an Anschutz 1411 most thought I shoot competitively and was stunned that it was my first match. Last Sunday I was given my 5th UL Champion award. In reflecting what I have done over the last 11 years all of this has happened because I got to wondering how accurate is accurate.  just remember to have fun otherwise is it really worth it?

Lee

 

[SmileMaker]

Indoor Anshutz 54:18 MSR off sandbags. I had to adjust the POI down from the colored grid square to keep the 5 shot group
as small as possible.

 

[308pirate]

If you shoot 20 shots at 20 dots your group is what 12-15”? That group sucks.

WTF?

 

[308pirate]

I would say that is some pretty rigid criteria. I cannot do that well all the time. When things go just right yes. All the time for me, no.

Rigid criteria is good

 

[308pirate]

I have another fantasy I play at the range.
3/4 inch diameter red or orange stickers at 100 yards.
Put 10 stickers on a backer, then try to put 5 shots into each sticker.
Best edge scoring, even just touching the edge of the dot counts.
If all 5 shots hit the dot, at 100 yards it's a sub moa group.
Think of it as shooting groups and you have to hit what you aim at.
It's kicking my adze too. .

I like this

 

[308pirate]

Mass production at an affordable price just doesn't lend itself to the quality control needed for consistent accuracy.

You missed something............

A mass production process can indeed be setup to provide extreme consistency. The question is, can you afford the product?

 

[Turkeytider]

Rimfire forum is a tough crowd of badgers, man. I’m early fifties and I think I’m a youngster around these parts.

Laugh emojis come to rimfire accuracy posts to die lol. STERN faces bruh STERN

Agree. Snipers Hide in general, for some reason, while perhaps not in the majority, has more than its fair share of real Richards.

 

[littlesister]

I guess we have strayed somewhat from the OP but what the heck. Never heard the term Real Richards but I'm probably one. Baby Boomer would be more appropriate . Been shooting over 50yrs. Most of this time chasing accuracy whether it be CF,RF or pistols. It is somewhat an obsession. There's no substitute for experience! I've sold several very accurate guns over the years that I didn't consider accurate. I finally realized that it wasn't the guns. It was me. I really didn't know how to shoot. I made it priority to learn how. You can't determine a guns accuracy .You can't tune a barrel. You can't lot test ammo And you can't win matches unless YOU CAN SHOOT! and you can't learn to shoot over the internet!

 

[carbonbased]

Agree. Snipers Hide in general, for some reason, while perhaps not in the majority, has more than its fair share of real Richards.

Ah yes, the shortened version of the name Richard. I get it. Ha!

I added a laugh emoji to your post to increase the thread’s laugh emoji count and to save the world.

 

[BILL7532]

Good shooting. The standard distance is 50m and (arguably) very little is gained testing at 100M if you are concerned purely about shooting skill. At 100, you are testing atmospheric stability and ammo quality, on top of fundamentals. If you run the analysis, the FPS variation accounts for significant % of the degradation in group size from 50 to 100m. Likewise, small deviations in wind speed or wind angle (or both) as inputs to your ballistic solution will negatively impact your groups at 100. You can/verify test these effects my checking your ballistic solver of choice. If you can shoot good groups at 50M you have good shooting skils.

But taking into account the added variables in shooting at 100m and adjusting to effectively accommodate those variances would that not also be considered an added and learned shooting skill?
If not why ever try to shoot past 50m and improve your longer-range target impacts and/or groups?

 

[ma smith]

But taking into account the added variables in shooting at 100m and adjusting to effectively accommodate those variances would that not also be considered an added and learned shooting skill?
If not why ever try to shoot past 50m and improve your longer-range target impacts and/or groups?

I though about this before writing my comment. A good response to your point requires more context.

The basic answer lies in you ballistic calculator. We know there are no such things as "1/2 MOA groups" at 200 yards, except as stochastic outcomes. So if you are talking a .25 in rifle (1/2 MOA) at 50m and shooting 1MOA groups at 200 yards, the ES of the bullet will be responsible for approximately 50% of the group size. The ES is a stochastic variable over which the shooter has no control.

Long range standards are typically 1 moa gun, 2 moa target. Shooter's skill is hitting the targets in that 1MOA of margin for error. As we use different systems to play the same game, its important to keep a focus on knowing what is the equipment margin, what is the shooters margin, and understanding the proportions.

That doesn't mean anything, other than its useful to understand the context. In my earlier comment I was only saying, if you want to test your shooting skill, in relation to shooting small groups, and hitting the things you aim at, precisely, it works best to work in the most reliable zone of your equipment. Where there is less stochastic noise, so both your corrections and your evaluations have higher signal to noise ration.

I could be wrong in all of this, but please consider at least the merits of looking at it this way, in addition to other ways.

 

[littlepod]

I though about this before writing my comment. A good response to your point requires more context.

The basic answer lies in you ballistic calculator. We know there are no such things as "1/2 MOA groups" at 200 yards, except as stochastic outcomes. So if you are talking a .25 in rifle (1/2 MOA) at 50m and shooting 1MOA groups at 200 yards, the ES of the bullet will be responsible for approximately 50% of the group size. The ES is a stochastic variable over which the shooter has no control.

Long range standards are typically 1 moa gun, 2 moa target. Shooter's skill is hitting the targets in that 1MOA of margin for error. As we use different systems to play the same game, its important to keep a focus on knowing what is the equipment margin, what is the shooters margin, and understanding the proportions.

That doesn't mean anything, other than its useful to understand the context. In my earlier comment I was only saying, if you want to test your shooting skill, in relation to shooting small groups, and hitting the things you aim at, precisely, it works best to work in the most reliable zone of your equipment. Where there is less stochastic noise, so both your corrections and your evaluations have higher signal to noise ration.

I could be wrong in all of this, but please consider at least the merits of looking at it this way, in addition to other ways.

For longer distance shooting, the shooter's action on the rifle also imparts more effect the longer the distance as well. So while yes group size doesn't scale linearly, so at 200 yards, you're closer to moa/1.5 moa, but also a poor shooter will exaggerate those results further. I've seen people shoot group sizes of 3/8" at 50yds, but then do something like 6" at 200y because of the uncontrolled recoil pushing down on the bag, flinging the round higher. And if they're not consistent in prone, then it shows a 6" vertical string, outside of say a 30 ES which should only be a 3" group at 200y.

 

[Csafisher]

I have a Kidd Supergrade in a Titan stock, with Titan's rear anchor. It is a 1/2moa gun out to 200 yds in good wind conditions. I would say a Kidd Supergrade would out shoot your 10-22, but is it worth $1500+ to get 0.1" or 0.2" better in groups. Same thing goes for Vudoo's vs CZ. is it worth 3 times the money for a few 0.1's. Be happy with what you have. Put your money into ammo and shooting. trying top ammo is way cheaper than a new gun.

And yes, guys get worked over most anything on this site. post go completely off the rail.

1/2 moa at 200….. pffffft lol. If you said you did it in a 200yd tunnel with a custom rest/fixture I’d still call BS.

 

[MarkCZ]

1/2 moa at 200….. pffffft lol. If you said you did it in a 200yd tunnel with a custom rest/fixture I’d still call BS.

I did do it in a under ground gopher hole. I call BS on that. I did say under great wind conditions. I have won many 200yds steel matches with guys shooting Vudoo's in the match. I would post pics, But you will call BS on that also.

 

[Csafisher]

Ya not just me. Nobody will. Consistent 1/2moa at 100 is pretty crazy good. 200 is bs.

 

[Cowpokey]

I have won many 200yds steel matches with guys shooting Vudoo's in the match. I would post pics, But you will call BS on that also.

People LOVE to say, "I beat a Vudoo with ______". I'll let you in on a little secret most people already know, you beat other shooters, you didn't beat other guns. The very first MARS match I participated in, a guy with a slightly* modified Ruger 10/22 took second place overall. There were quite a few Vudoo and Rim-X shooters in that match. The overall winner happened to be shooting a Vudoo. It's the Indian not the arrow.

I also raise the BS flag on your rifle being "1/2 MOA at 200". Could you do it in one three shot group, probably. Could you do it consistently? Highly doubt it. .22lr with the best ammo out of the best ever rifle won't do that "consistency"; the ammo varies too much even when it comes out of the same box.

*Factory Ruger bull barrel, receiver and bolt.

 

[akmike47]

Calling 50yd benchrest shooters Fudds pretty much tells everyone that your opinions as related to shooting are useless!

Found them.

 

[akmike47]

I shoot one shot - one hole groups all the time. Its the damn second shot that ruins my group lol

I had a miracle happen and shot 4 rounds into a .09" group at 50 a few weeks ago and had a 5th shot flier about a half inch away....FML.

 

[hlee]

I had a miracle happen and shot 4 rounds into a .09" group at 50 a few weeks ago and had a 5th shot flier about a half inch away....FML.

Never shot the 5th shot in an otherwise wallet group.

 

[grauhanen]

While it's possible to shoot 0.5 MOA at 200 with .22LR, such a result is most likely the result of random accuracy. If a shooter shoots enough groups at 200, eventually he'll have a 1" five-shot group. But it's unlikely he can repeat it when required.

A ballistics calculator shows that each of the five rounds must all be within 10 fps of each other. Why? At 200 yards a 10 fps difference in MV between two .22LR rounds will result in about 1" of vertical dispersion. To be sure, a box of decent ammo may have a few random sets of five rounds with no more than a 10 fps difference in MV. But no shooter can know when they will appear before shooting them.

Absolute calm or extraordinary wind reading is required. Over 200, an increase in crosswind by 1 mph between shots results in about 1.3" of drift. Ant movements of air masses between shooter and target at a distance of 200 yards is difficult to anticipate and account for.

Everything has to go right to purposely shoot 0.5 MOA. With a good rifle, some decent ammo, very calm conditions and enough groups, most everyone would be able to do it once in a while.

 

[akmike47]

Never shot the 5th shot in an otherwise wallet group.

I never count it if it isn't 5 shots lol...I should have not followed my rule.

 

[carbonbased]

I had a miracle happen and shot 4 rounds into a .09" group at 50 a few weeks ago and had a 5th shot flier about a half inch away....FML.

That sucks