-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Actual Accuracy of 22lr Premium Rifles
- Thread starter MAJOR2257
- Start date
Thanks for your reply. Even though I have a Vudoo the Kidd still makes my mouth water! As far as spending my money on ammo I would like to do just that but finding quality 22lr ammo is like finding buried Confederate gold! I get emails from companies saying they have it in stock but by the time I see the email it is all already gone. I get so many emails that if I set it up to give a notification every time one comes in I'd go bats***!
I’ll raise you for fun. Here’s 13 10 shot groups with 13 different lots
Attachments
Hmm, how about 2 5-shot groups at 100yds. or 50 at 100 I rarely shoot groups now, only when I tune a rifle. I get my fun now trying to take out a little dot 25 times my best has been 22 & 21 still trying though.
Lee
Attachments
Paying attention to keyboard commandos posting or talking about selected small groups is a fools errand. If you look at people shooting on YouTube, their setups, methodologies and performances are nothing short of dismal. I quit watching them on their first error.
There are a number of sites on the web that write articles about what champions in the sport do. Focus on those. I am one that in rimfire I get what I think is really accurate consistency (I said accurate, not precision) on 5 shot groups at 50 yards - bug holes. I can do that about 4-5 out of ten times at 50-yards - and in the bullseye. Shooting tight groups is not the same as accuracy.
On the internet try to read stuff from people that win matches, consistently. The discipline or calibers matter not. Look closely at articles about smallbore F-Class and smallbore bench rest.
I've been shooting for a long time. Decades before most posters were even born. And as an analyst by profession I pay attention to what matters.
What matters most is the shooter. It's all about the hold - where the rifle is asleep, trigger press - very slow, watching the reticle to make sure the rifle stays asleep, the firing hand (for right handers a bad grip shot's go right), Bad cheek weld (right handers shots go left). And so on. I could elaborate on request but I'm making this short.
Again, read stuff from champions in the game, pretty much take everything with a huge grain of salt. Work on accuracy first, not precision that's the gun's purview.
You can start by going to accurateshooter.com and click rimfire.
Shot a .15 and a .2 at 50 with my 10/22 back to back. Still can't tell if Center-x is really worth it in that rifle.
Sucks at 100 for groups but good on small plates(2-3") one was a .5 then opened to 1.34 with a 5th shot flier
Sucks at 100 for groups but good on small plates(2-3") one was a .5 then opened to 1.34 with a 5th shot flier
Last edited:
IME at 100 yds. it is about the ammo. lots can shoot really good at 50 and fall apart at 100.Shot a .15 and a .2 at 50 with my 10/22 back to back. Still can't tell if Center-x is really worth it in that rifle.
Sucks at 100 for groups but good on small plates(2-3") one was a .5 then opened to 1.34 with a 5th shot flier
Lee
With regard to .22LR, can you elaborate on what's meant by a rifle being "asleep"?
Indeed. It's always about the ammo.
______________________________________
In general, just as performance at 50 varies by lot, performance with increasing distance varies by lot. One lot of CX, for example, may do well at 50 and 100 and beyond, while another lot of CX may do well at 50 but does poorly at 100 and further out.
To complicate matters, performance as distance increases may also differ from one barrel to the next, even barrels that both can do very well. When bullets pass through the barrel's leade and bore they obturate, potentially affecting the bullet's center of gravity. When the Cg offset is adversely affected the results show downrange.
The outcome may be that a lot that shoots well at distance with one rifle may not do well in another.
I enjoy tracking results produced at 25, 50, 100 and 200 yards.
I save posted target images to a hard drive, then run them though OnTarget or a CADD program
so as to be able to quantify the information. What is interesting, is the amount of dispersion
that even the best rifles and shooters incur during the course of a few boxes of rimfire.
Most all of us generate quite a few random acts of accuracy, that end up wallet groups.
On the other end of the game, we all encounter those cartridges that ruin targets.
Be it velocity caused spread, or assembly line/component defect that slings the stray
not even the best rifle available, or the most highly skilled shooter can eliminate those annoyances.
I found the Eley and Lapua factory run test centers provide the most honest data.
No cherry picking the computer recorded results. It's easy to see just how much
cartridge quality varies box by box from the same lots during testing.
Vertical spread indicates just how much those muzzle velocities shift in the same box
and from the same lot numbers. Thousands of targets worth of results
and every box of cartridges produces a different impact pattern.
Same rifle in a fixture in a tunnel with no wind, and those trajectories are all different.
That ain't the rifle, that's simply the assembly/components of each cartridge varying during manufacture.
I save posted target images to a hard drive, then run them though OnTarget or a CADD program
so as to be able to quantify the information. What is interesting, is the amount of dispersion
that even the best rifles and shooters incur during the course of a few boxes of rimfire.
Most all of us generate quite a few random acts of accuracy, that end up wallet groups.
On the other end of the game, we all encounter those cartridges that ruin targets.
Be it velocity caused spread, or assembly line/component defect that slings the stray
not even the best rifle available, or the most highly skilled shooter can eliminate those annoyances.
I found the Eley and Lapua factory run test centers provide the most honest data.
No cherry picking the computer recorded results. It's easy to see just how much
cartridge quality varies box by box from the same lots during testing.
Vertical spread indicates just how much those muzzle velocities shift in the same box
and from the same lot numbers. Thousands of targets worth of results
and every box of cartridges produces a different impact pattern.
Same rifle in a fixture in a tunnel with no wind, and those trajectories are all different.
That ain't the rifle, that's simply the assembly/components of each cartridge varying during manufacture.
Given a motionless target, the rifle is asleep when there is zero movement between the crosshairs and the point of aim, and it stays that way for an extended period of time.
All movement you see in the scope comes from the shooter. A rifle sitting by itself does not move (asleep).
Asleep, I like it.
I avoid waking my 455 Lilja as it's the best method to produce consistent results.
Sinclair F-Class bipod and rear bag means once it's adjusted,
it'll maintain point of aim until I touch the rifle again.
The less contact I have with the rifle, the better my results.
I avoid waking my 455 Lilja as it's the best method to produce consistent results.
Sinclair F-Class bipod and rear bag means once it's adjusted,
it'll maintain point of aim until I touch the rifle again.
The less contact I have with the rifle, the better my results.
I need to get a bolt gun in RF think it'll up my game a bit just can't decide if I should go B14r, 457 MTR, or save several times longer and get a vudoo.
Cost vs gain on the vudoo is pretty subjective I've seen cheaper rifles keep up with them.
Cost vs gain on the vudoo is pretty subjective I've seen cheaper rifles keep up with them.
I think you and I have had a discussion similar to this. Given what we talked about before; I would suggest the Bergara B14R, get the steel barrel. It's not a Vudoo, but probably the closest thing for on a reasonable budget. Since it's based on the Remington 700 footprint, you could upgrade the trigger and put it in a better stock/chassis down the road. I think it would meet your expectations. Keep in mind, Bergara started off as a barrel manufacturing company, and they make some good ones.
I wouldn't get a CZ, sure you could swap out the barrel for something good, put in a better trigger, on and on...but by the time you get it to "Vudoo level" you will have spent Vudoo money, and it's still a CZ.
I'm sure the CZ folks will be along shortly to argue my advice.
Edit add: It's not completely unthinkable that a less expensive rifle can "keep up" with a Vudoo...but it's more about the Indian than the arrow in most of those cases. The very first MARS (PRS22) match I competed in, a guy with a slightly upgraded Ruger 10/22 took 2nd place over all...a guy with a Vudoo won, there were a lot of Vudoo shooters in that match, including me.
There is a lot of knowledge in this thread and I’m going to use it to my advantage. Had a b14r, sold it for baby stuff. Itch is back, can’t find a mtr 457 so t1x in krg bravo or b14r again?
Really depends on what you want to do
Change chassis etc then a 700 footprint
Be competitive in BR..no Vudoo or b14 etc
plink, good enough accuracy and pee through cheap ammo as fast as you can with friends at times 10/22
I’m at a similar spot. A Frankengun T1X in an ACC does the job for now. A CZ would do the same, probably with a simpler build path. Unless you are now or are planning to be podium competitive in Rimfire, a full on custom with chassis and proper dedicated optic is not necessary. If you will regularly be podium bound, a pro level system adds consistency that matters when a few extra points moves you from 6th to 3rd, or 3rd to 1st. If your budget allows, buy the full no expense spared system right away. Without a lot of focus and practice, some poor but obsessive practicer dude with a stock CZ will finish higher though.
A Vudoo or any other premium rifle can't do well with poorly selected ammo. No rifle, whatever the make, can outperform the ammo.
What he said. ^^^
I remember a quote from a book I read years ago...
"To obtain repeatable accuracy, everything has to happen exactly the same, each time you squeeze the trigger"
So the conditions, setup, rifle and the ammunition, all need to be as close to identical as possible.
That's where rimfire ammunition is the variable I have no control over.
Finding well made cartridges with tight muzzle velocities is extremely difficult.
Brand is no guarantee of cartridge uniformity. It's mass produced ammunition
subject to variations in components and assembly. The only method that
allows me to obtain acceptable accuracy with different ammunition,
is to match cartridge quality to the distance from muzzle to target.
At 15 yards any brand of 22lr can punch center.
At 25 yards the junk stuff starts to show strays.
At 50 yards most decently made rimfire will impact less than 1/2 inch from point of aim.
At 100 yards, it'll take the best you can find to consistently hit 1/2 inch or less from center.
My questions after each shot fired: Did I hit where I intended? If I didn't, why?
I remember a quote from a book I read years ago...
"To obtain repeatable accuracy, everything has to happen exactly the same, each time you squeeze the trigger"
So the conditions, setup, rifle and the ammunition, all need to be as close to identical as possible.
That's where rimfire ammunition is the variable I have no control over.
Finding well made cartridges with tight muzzle velocities is extremely difficult.
Brand is no guarantee of cartridge uniformity. It's mass produced ammunition
subject to variations in components and assembly. The only method that
allows me to obtain acceptable accuracy with different ammunition,
is to match cartridge quality to the distance from muzzle to target.
At 15 yards any brand of 22lr can punch center.
At 25 yards the junk stuff starts to show strays.
At 50 yards most decently made rimfire will impact less than 1/2 inch from point of aim.
At 100 yards, it'll take the best you can find to consistently hit 1/2 inch or less from center.
My questions after each shot fired: Did I hit where I intended? If I didn't, why?
Last edited:
Given a rifle capable of good precision, and good ammunition then the only variable left is the human being behind the rifle.
I've given this a lot of thought. The truth is that pretty much all off the shelf modern rifles of known high quality built today are very accurate. Most all components are built on CNC machines with very tight tolerances. These are not the rifles from decades past. High end benchrest rifles are a different story. Those are complete systems designed for one thing only - to shoot multiple rounds into a single hole - with very little shooter interaction.
Everything else is really good but these days but still involve the shooter. I posted this on another thread and will repeat it here:
We humans are amazing creatures. We can take a rifle, put a scope on it and with some coaching or the right practice start getting close to or under 1 MOA at 100 consistently. That is an incredible thing. Why? because any movement produced by the human behind the rifle/pistol, whatever translates to a change in the point of impact, but what is really amazing is that the deviation is SO slight.
How slight?? Do you have a cheap plastic protractor laying around? If you do, pull it out and look at the spacing for the one degree lines. It's tiny. How tiny? How about adding 6000 more lines between those?
Now some simple math. I aim with mils so I'll use that. Mil scopes have mostly .1M clicks. And we humans can see the impact change of a .1 click -.36 inches at 100. How big is that in the world? Well, .1 mil at 100 yards is exactly 0.005729578 of a degree! That is super tiny and a testament of what we humans can see, and what we do.
But, it doesn't take much to get off by 0.005729578 degrees from Point of Aim by human induced motion. All firearms today are pretty much more precise than most of us. And, I have a drill that I fall back on when my wheels fall off. And it starts at 50 yards. That's how I practice when I lose it. I do it with my CZ 457 based .22 magnum purpose built built rimfire trainer.
I hold aim for no less than 4-6 seconds on a dot a little less than 1/16 of and inch. This is critical. I wont shoot unless I can do that hold. The rifle is asleep, so to speak. All this time I'm applying more and more pressure on the trigger until it goes off. If the rifle was sentient it would say: WHAT the hell just happened!! And that is called accuracy.
And it works.... The point is that I can see what can actually happen when I make changes, even slight ones, and it all goes right - that IS the foundation, and it is repeatable, With results like this - 5-shots on each target at 52 yards with not the most accurate cartridge in the world by a far shot (1-inch targets - 1/2-inch center):
Edit: Forgot to post a pic of the trainer:
The only CZ 457 part is the action. The barrel is a Lilja match 23-inch barrel.
Last edited:
There was some SK Match Gold around which was excellent. Likely the same stuff. Around 2007 iirc.
Hey Guys!
I'm the OP of this thread and astounded at the number of replies it received. My intent of the question that started it all was to find out if the equipment being used by the folks claiming the smallest of groups can produce those results consistently or if it it only happens occasionally. If they can do it consistently it is definitely a combination of their ability and their equipment. My thought is that shooting for tiny groups tells me that my equipment is performing consistently. My ability to shoot accurately isn't what I'm looking for. I figure that my ability to hit what I'm shooting at will either improve with practice or it won't because I just don't have the talent. By shooting for groups, again I'm trying to test my equipment. I may be wrong in the way I'm thinking about this but my thought is that by doing it this way I'm not destroying my poi and I get an idea of how consistent my equipment is performing. If I have tiny groups, I can then adjust my scope and hopefully "hit what I'm aiming at"! The way some of you went off took me by surprise and I suppose in retrospect it opens my eyes the importance of my questions be worded more carefully and see how reading someone else's questions can be misinterpreted. I'm in my mid sixty's and just started learning about precision 22lr in the last few years. I never realized how complex it is to be able to hit that little dot every time I pull the trigger... Difficult? YES! But complex because everything has to come together to be able to do it consistently. With my age came the wisdom to listen to people who know more about something than I do and to not be offended by the ones who do know more than me but their replies make me sound like an idiot.
I'm the OP of this thread and astounded at the number of replies it received. My intent of the question that started it all was to find out if the equipment being used by the folks claiming the smallest of groups can produce those results consistently or if it it only happens occasionally. If they can do it consistently it is definitely a combination of their ability and their equipment. My thought is that shooting for tiny groups tells me that my equipment is performing consistently. My ability to shoot accurately isn't what I'm looking for. I figure that my ability to hit what I'm shooting at will either improve with practice or it won't because I just don't have the talent. By shooting for groups, again I'm trying to test my equipment. I may be wrong in the way I'm thinking about this but my thought is that by doing it this way I'm not destroying my poi and I get an idea of how consistent my equipment is performing. If I have tiny groups, I can then adjust my scope and hopefully "hit what I'm aiming at"! The way some of you went off took me by surprise and I suppose in retrospect it opens my eyes the importance of my questions be worded more carefully and see how reading someone else's questions can be misinterpreted. I'm in my mid sixty's and just started learning about precision 22lr in the last few years. I never realized how complex it is to be able to hit that little dot every time I pull the trigger... Difficult? YES! But complex because everything has to come together to be able to do it consistently. With my age came the wisdom to listen to people who know more about something than I do and to not be offended by the ones who do know more than me but their replies make me sound like an idiot.
Very well worded sir. I appreciate your reply.Given a rifle capable of good precision, and good ammunition then the only variable left is the human being behind the rifle.
I've given this a lot of thought. The truth is that pretty much all off the shelf modern rifles of known high quality built today are very accurate. Most all components are built on CNC machines with very tight tolerances. These are not the rifles from decades past. High end benchrest rifles are a different story. Those are complete systems designed for one thing only - to shoot multiple rounds into a single hole - with very little shooter interaction.
Everything else is really good but these days but still involve the shooter. I posted this on another thread and will repeat it here:
We humans are amazing creatures. We can take a rifle, put a scope on it and with some coaching or the right practice start getting close to or under 1 MOA at 100 consistently. That is an incredible thing. Why? because any movement produced by the human behind the rifle/pistol, whatever translates to a change in the point of impact, but what is really amazing is that the deviation is SO slight.
How slight?? Do you have a cheap plastic protractor laying around? If you do, pull it out and look at the spacing for the one degree lines. It's tiny. How tiny? How about adding 6000 more lines between those?
Now some simple math. I aim with mils so I'll use that. Mil scopes have mostly .1M clicks. And we humans can see the impact change of a .1 click -.36 inches at 100. How big is that in the world? Well, .1 mil at 100 yards is exactly 0.005729578 of a degree! That is super tiny and a testament of what we humans can see, and what we do.
But, it doesn't take much to get off by 0.005729578 degrees from Point of Aim by human induced motion. All firearms today are pretty much more precise than most of us. And, I have a drill that I fall back on when my wheels fall off. And it starts at 50 yards. That's how I practice when I lose it. I do it with my CZ 457 based .22 magnum purpose built built rimfire trainer.
I hold aim for no less than 4-6 seconds on a dot a little less than 1/16 of and inch. This is critical. I wont shoot unless I can do that hold. The rifle is asleep, so to speak. All this time I'm applying more and more pressure on the trigger until it goes off. If the rifle was sentient it would say: WHAT the hell just happened!! And that is called accuracy.
And it works.... The point is that I can see what can actually happen when I make changes, even slight ones, and it all goes right - that IS the foundation, and it is repeatable, With results like this - 5-shots on each target at 52 yards with not the most accurate cartridge in the world by a far shot (1-inch targets - 1/2-inch center):
Edit: Forgot to post a pic of the trainer:
The only CZ 457 part is the action. The barrel is a Lilja match 23-inch barrel.
Similar threads
