CCI SV Past 250 yards

[st1650]

So I was a looking at the prices and unavailability of my usual Eley Match and I was wondering since I stocked up on a lot of CCI SV, maybe there’s a way to improve on the LR ballistic.

My RimX can shoot them into 1/2 or better at 50m and I used a tuner to find the least vertical at 200 yards and it seems to do fine at that range.

I’ve also crono-ed a 25 rounds string and I have really good numbers (SD of 10.2 avg 1086) yet past 250 yards, when I try to hit a 6in plate in no wind, I can usually do 8-9/10 with Eley match without tuning and maybe at best 4-5/10 with the CCI SV, and it’s all vertical spread.

So could it be the shape of the bullet causing this ? Would it be worth it to get one of these dies to flatten the bullet.

Normally I would never care but at the current prices, I can almost load subsonic 300blk for cheaper than Eley match/tenex

 

[justin amateur]

People are optimists...rimfire folks moreso than most.
CCI makes hunting and plinking ammo, not precision paper punching cartridges.
Watch the factory tour video... it's old technology still being used in the 21st century.
Watch how many times the bullets are dropped, bumped, banged, dinged and dented,
before they are sent to the seating machine. Then watch
as they are shaken, rattled and slid along the line before being boxed up.
Watch how a squeegee and punch plate are still being used
to manually measure and load primer into the empty brass.
It is in no way a competition quality cartridge when it exits the factory.
You can easily see the rough handling visible on the bullets.
Would you expect center-fire cartridges to produce repeatable trajectories
after seeing the abuse taken on the CCI assembly line?
Chronograph every shot for a month using any CCI made cartridges.
All will show hot and weak rounds occuring so often it will make you wonder
how anyone can claim it's "great target ammunition"?

It's not...it's hunting and plinking ammo for use at close range.

 

[Ravenworks]

Like these?

 

[Colt45guy]

I chased this rabbit too. Spent time and money (Waltz die set), chrono, bricks of CCI SV. The fact of the matter is that while CCI SV is probably the best of the cheap bulk stuff, it's not in the same league as the good stuff.

I still prefer CCI SV in my 10/22 because it's reliable and more accurate than other bulk stuff, but my precision rifle gets fed a different diet.

 

[Milo 2.5]

So I was a looking at the prices and unavailability of my usual Eley Match and I was wondering since I stocked up on a lot of CCI SV, maybe there’s a way to improve on the LR ballistic.

My RimX can shoot them into 1/2 or better at 50m and I used a tuner to find the least vertical at 200 yards and it seems to do fine at that range.

I’ve also crono-ed a 25 rounds string and I have really good numbers (SD of 10.2 avg 1086) yet past 250 yards, when I try to hit a 6in plate in no wind, I can usually do 8-9/10 with Eley match without tuning and maybe at best 4-5/10 with the CCI SV, and it’s all vertical spread.

So could it be the shape of the bullet causing this ? Would it be worth it to get one of these dies to flatten the bullet.

Normally I would never care but at the current prices, I can almost load subsonic 300blk for cheaper than Eley match/tenex

My B14R shot SV decent at 250 & 300 yards in no wind. It seemed like a 7mph wind from any direction and it became futile to continue. It's a 10 cent rd, guy has to be realistic.
I cannot see myself using a die to make SV any better.

 

[beetroot]

I found in both my 22s CCI SV starts showing significant verticle dispersion after about 150m.
From memory at 200m I could hit a 12" square with every shot easily, dropping to an 8" I would get a bunch of high/low misses.

I used to shoot a lot of it due to being the cheapest ammo on the market, even cheaper than (total garbage) bulk HV ammo.
Locally it's gone up in price a lot and last time I checked was more expensive than Eley Standard, with shoots considereably better in my rifles.

 

[st1650]

Yeah I found some Eley team at a reasonable price and I bought as much as possible so I’ll carry me over for summer, hopefully it’ll do pretty close to the match stuff since it has the flat nose and the beeswax and was half the price of tenex/match

 

[beetroot]

Yeah I found some Eley team at a reasonable price and I bought as much as possible so I’ll carry me over for summer, hopefully it’ll do pretty close to the match stuff since it has the flat nose and the beeswax and was half the price of tenex/match

I believe Eley Team, Match and Tenex are effectively all the same with batch testing results beign the only difference.

AKA, the most accurate batches will be Tenex, ammo that doesn't meet the accuracy spec becomes Match, ammo that doesn't make Match spec becomes Team.

Happy to be corrected.

 

[grauhanen]

AKA, the most accurate batches will be Tenex, ammo that doesn't meet the accuracy spec becomes Match, ammo that doesn't make Match spec becomes Team.

It may not be so straightforward. Tenex may not always be the most accurate. As many shooters will have observed, there will be some lots of Tenex that are outperformed over the chronograph and across many rifles by some lots of Match and Team.

The same is true of Lapua .22LR match ammo. Some lots of X-Act will be outperformed over the chronograph and across many rifles by some lots of Midas + and Center X. Similarly, some lots of CX outperform some lots of M+ across many rifles.

 

[justin amateur]

With the methods used at the factory when lot grading,
expecting all of the cartridges in that batch to be identical is foolish.
Statistical sampling is a mathematical technique to produce a calculated level of confidence
that the conclusion drawn is correct, not a guarantee.
Fact...no two rimfire cartridges are identical.
When no two cartridges are ever identical, then no two boxes,
bricks or cases are going to produce identical results.
Lot grading and lot testing allow us to improve the odds we will obtain the better quality ammo.
But every purchase is still a gamble. It's mass produced ammunition,
subject to variations in components, assembly tolerances, chemistry and handling.
That's the reason CenterX out performs X-Act and Team sometimes does better than Tenex.
It's due to the failure of the sampling process in establishing the true level of cartridge quality.
Same cartridges from the same factories from the same components on the same machines.
Only difference is the labeling as determined by statistical sampling.
X-Act, Midas+ and CenterX...Tenex, Match and Team,
sometimes the factory gets the labeling right, sometimes not.

 

[45cal4life]

Agree with Beetroot, keep the max distance at 150 on metal targets where a hit is a hit with SV. My experience, after 150 it rapidly goes to crap

 

[grauhanen]

It's due to the failure of the sampling process in establishing the true level of cartridge quality.

j.a., is it an egregious failure of sampling, or can there be something else that's involved?

Often those poorly performing lots of X-Act, for example, can be so poorly performing across many barrels (and the chronograph) that it's a wonder how any sampling process could err so much. In other words, a poor lot of X-Act that gets regularly outperformed by a significant percentage of Midas + lots is not labeled X-Act because it's the product of sampling error.

As a possible explanation for this, it's conceivable that a poorly performing lot of X-Act was labeled as such because it was predestined to be a top tier lot by virtue of the manufacturing process itself.

To elaborate, how likely is it that the ammo makers don't have an idea where in the production run the "best" ammo is to be expected? While a production run of Lapua (or Eley) produces three grades of match ammo, it seeems unlikly that the top tier lots come randomly off the production line, arbitraily interspersed between various lots of what will become CX or M+.

It seems possible that decades of experience allow ammo makers to have reasonable expectations of where in the production run certain varieties are produced and that this, more than random sampling, determines what label is put on a lot of ammo.

 

[justin amateur]

G, the weekend gathering at the diner of old coots,
for coffee and BACON before heading to the range,
has been avidly arguing the possible reasons for poor results
with what is supposed to be the best cartridges of the brand.
Yeah, the usual explanations were covered...bad day for the nut holding the trigger,
incorrect timing of the squeeze relative to wind,
mechanical issues with the rifle and setup, but,
when all else is being done correctly and the chronograph is out front
and the vertical strays show up with matching high and low mv's,
or a totally random stray spins off to the left or right,
the consensus is there was a problem with the ammunition.
We've agreed that the batches of ammo are tested according to the email replies from the manufacturers,
but feel that as the method of statistical sampling used,
with the level of confidence considered as acceptable being hidden,
are not effective enough to trust the labeling. Testing is expensive.
So a lower level of confidence is used in order to minimize the size of the sample tested.
As you have pointed out before, small samples can cause incorrect conclusions.
We think that's what is taking place at the factory.
Cost versus profit and profit makes the final decision in regards to quality control.
Not that the testing is eliminated from each batch produced,
rather the amount being tested is minimized to increase profit.
The factory can still claim every batch is tested, yet the results and labeling
are not at a level of confidence necessary to produce a trustworthy product.

It really is the rimfire assembly line lottery.
You make the effort to find the best, pay y'er money, takes y'er chances.
The only guaranteed winner is the house, not the gambler.

 

[beetroot]

It may not be so straightforward. Tenex may not always be the most accurate. As many shooters will have observed, there will be some lots of Tenex that are outperformed over the chronograph and across many rifles by some lots of Match and Team.

The same is true of Lapua .22LR match ammo. Some lots of X-Act will be outperformed over the chronograph and across many rifles by some lots of Midas + and Center X. Similarly, some lots of CX outperform some lots of M+ across many rifles.

Fair enough, but it's still the case that Tenex, Match and Team is effectively the same ammo and it can be asssumed that the more expensive it is the better it SHOULD be.

Unless you are in the position of being able to test each batch before buying 5000 rounds of it, if you want the most accurate of the three Tenex would be the safer bet.

In the OPs situation Team would be a better option for him that CCI SV as it should keep the same basic trajetory and zero the same as the Tenex he was using. Unless he is considering CCI SV as a super cheap training round.

 

[grauhanen]

Fair enough, but it's still the case that Tenex, Match and Team is effectively the same ammo and it can be asssumed that the more expensive it is the better it SHOULD be.

Unless you are in the position of being able to test each batch before buying 5000 rounds of it, if you want the most accurate of the three Tenex would be the safer bet.

In the OPs situation Team would be a better option for him that CCI SV as it should keep the same basic trajetory and zero the same as the Tenex he was using. Unless he is considering CCI SV as a super cheap training round.

While the logic of the argument seems sound, laying safe bets to get the best ammo is itself risky. It explains why things like "my rifle doesn't like Midas but likes Center X" gets repeated. Before laying out $1500 - $2000 or more for a case on the chance that it will shoot well, test first whenever possible. Buying blind is chancy.

 

[beetroot]

test first whenever possible

As is everything in life.

The OP identified that Eley Team appears to be very similar to the Tenex he is currently using.
My post was to tell him that it is indeed the same ammo but in theory will be less accurate than what he is used to, and gave a rough guide to what the difference between Tenex, Match and Team is.
What you have said is not wrong but it is outside the context of what my posts where trying to say.

The OP might get lucky and find a particular batch of Team is just as, if not more accurate than the Tenex he usually uses, if so great for him and he should buy as much Team as he can.

Either way the Team should be considerably more accurate than the CCI SV he is considering.

 

[sparkyv]

LOL!

People are optimists...rimfire folks moreso than most

 

[Topstrap]

I spot for every shooter that shoots my longrange rimfire matches and even though some say their gun really likes CCI SV I watch each round impact the targets from 25 to 197 yards and I haven't seen any CCI that is as consistent as the higher end Lapua, SK or Eley stuff. You may get a few that hit center mass but when you get that flyer it's really a flyer and usually falls in under/above the target. You still get the occasional flyer in higher end stuff but it's not near as bad and hopefully will catch the edge of a target instead of dropping in under it. This is just what I've seen and is not to be taken as an absolute but if you want better consistancy spend a bit more ammo and then start your lot testing if you want to pursue it even further. Take a look at the thread on here and other sites with the 50 at 200 yards, very interesting.

And to make it even more fun the perfect round you find that will guarantee you a win at the next match may not shoot worth a crap the next day due to some atmospheric condition variable or the shooter just having a lucky day he tested. It's really hard to prove you found what makes your gun happy without several test runs and taking the average of all that info and the others you have tried and compared them. I just throw some SK Biathlon in mine and head out, usually becoming friends with Mother Nature that day yields me better results than endless days chasing lot numbers.

Topstrap

 

[bwall57]

I spot for every shooter that shoots my longrange rimfire matches and even though some say their gun really likes CCI SV I watch each round impact the targets from 25 to 197 yards and I haven't seen any CCI that is as consistent as the higher end Lapua, SK or Eley stuff. You may get a few that hit center mass but when you get that flyer it's really a flyer and usually falls in under/above the target. You still get the occasional flyer in higher end stuff but it's not near as bad and hopefully will catch the edge of a target instead of dropping in under it. This is just what I've seen and is not to be taken as an absolute but if you want better consistancy spend a bit more ammo and then start your lot testing if you want to pursue it even further. Take a look at the thread on here and other sites with the 50 at 200 yards, very interesting.

And to make it even more fun the perfect round you find that will guarantee you a win at the next match may not shoot worth a crap the next day due to some atmospheric condition variable or the shooter just having a lucky day he tested. It's really hard to prove you found what makes your gun happy without several test runs and taking the average of all that info and the others you have tried and compared them. I just throw some SK Biathlon in mine and head out, usually becoming friends with Mother Nature that day yields me better results than endless days chasing lot numbers.

Topstrap

Very good discussion that covers the entire 22 ammo story from CCI to Lapua. Once you get the fundamentals down and equipment dialed in with thousands of rounds CCI, it just makes sense to step up and get top tier ammo that performs. Good hardware requires good ammo. To get the job done right it takes having the right stuff. I enjoyed everyone's comments on their journey in the pursuit of accuracy. Outstanding!

 

[MarkCZ]

So I was a looking at the prices and unavailability of my usual Eley Match and I was wondering since I stocked up on a lot of CCI SV, maybe there’s a way to improve on the LR ballistic.

My RimX can shoot them into 1/2 or better at 50m and I used a tuner to find the least vertical at 200 yards and it seems to do fine at that range.

I’ve also crono-ed a 25 rounds string and I have really good numbers (SD of 10.2 avg 1086) yet past 250 yards, when I try to hit a 6in plate in no wind, I can usually do 8-9/10 with Eley match without tuning and maybe at best 4-5/10 with the CCI SV, and it’s all vertical spread.

So could it be the shape of the bullet causing this ? Would it be worth it to get one of these dies to flatten the bullet.

Normally I would never care but at the current prices, I can almost load subsonic 300blk for cheaper than Eley match/tenex

I shoot with a group of guys every Friday, We shoot out to 400 yds on steel knockdown's. We have been trying cheaper ammo to cut cost. I have picked up a lot of CCI SV during the last ammo shortage. CCI SV shoots very good out to 150yds, but you start to see a lot of vertical at 200yds and beyond. I don't think there is anything you can do to make cheaper ammo ( and higher priced ammo), shoot better. Ammo is going shoot how it shoots.
I have been working on a new Bergara B14R. I have been shooting a lot at 285yds and 330yds lately. I shoot at clays on the berm to see what kind vertical the ammo getting. I dial off to the side of the clay and watch for the spread of vertical, then I know what the ammo can do.
We shoot the cheaper ammo knowing we will only get 50% hits rate. We have had good luck shooting, CCI SV, Fed Auto match and HV, Eley Force, Norma Tac22, Norma match, etc. We have found that ammo, that does not shoot well at 50yds can shoot good at longer range.

I would not spend the money to make cheaper ammo shoot better. Shoot it as is and know how it shoots. Spend the money on your good ammo.

Mark

 

[Sniperwannabee]

No reloaders here?

 

[MarkCZ]

I shoot with a group of guys every Friday, We shoot out to 400 yds on steel knockdown's. We have been trying cheaper ammo to cut cost. I have picked up a lot of CCI SV during the last ammo shortage. CCI SV shoots very good out to 150yds, but you start to see a lot of vertical at 200yds and beyond. I don't think there is anything you can do to make cheaper ammo ( and higher priced ammo), shoot better. Ammo is going shoot how it shoots.
I have been working on a new Bergara B14R. I have been shooting a lot at 285yds and 330yds lately. I shoot at clays on the berm to see what kind vertical the ammo getting. I dial off to the side of the clay and watch for the spread of vertical, then I know what the ammo can do.
We shoot the cheaper ammo knowing we will only get 50% hits rate. We have had good luck shooting, CCI SV, Fed Auto match and HV, Eley Force, Norma Tac22, Norma match, etc. We have found that ammo, that does not shoot well at 50yds can shoot good at longer range.

I would not spend the money to make cheaper ammo shoot better. Shoot it as is and know how it shoots. Spend the money on your good ammo.

Mark

We had good conditions yesterday at the range Hot 90 degrees humid but very little wind. We shot at 225yds, 285yds and 330yds. I got the Tikka T1X out to test cheaper ammo. Norma match and Tac 22 shoot about the same, they ran around a 12" of vertical out to 330yds. I had a old lot of Wolf match target ( made by Lapua ) That ran about 24" of vertical at 330yds. Lots of drop out's. Fed Auto match was just a little better than the wolf. I have 2 lots of CCI SV that shoots moa at 150yds. They ran about 7" of vertical at 330yds. It still had a few drop out's, but not as many as the others. With any 22 lr ammo you will see drop out's and high hits. SK Std + ran about the same as the CCI SV. with less flier.
I run SK Biathlon and Eley Club for my match ammo. They will run 4" at 330yds. Now that I have the vertical worked out. Now you are working with the wind. My range is on Windy Gap MT., We have some wind most of the time, and it will add to vertical also. We shoot, see our misses and make corrections.

 

[FuhQ]

We had good conditions yesterday at the range Hot 90 degrees humid but very little wind. We shot at 225yds, 285yds and 330yds. I got the Tikka T1X out to test cheaper ammo. Norma match and Tac 22 shoot about the same, they ran around a 12" of vertical out to 330yds. I had a old lot of Wolf match target ( made by Lapua ) That ran about 24" of vertical at 330yds. Lots of drop out's. Fed Auto match was just a little better than the wolf. I have 2 lots of CCI SV that shoots moa at 150yds. They ran about 7" of vertical at 330yds. It still had a few drop out's, but not as many as the others. With any 22 lr ammo you will see drop out's and high hits. SK Std + ran about the same as the CCI SV. with less flier.
I run SK Biathlon and Eley Club for my match ammo. They will run 4" at 330yds. Now that I have the vertical worked out. Now you are working with the wind. My range is on Windy Gap MT., We have some wind most of the time, and it will add to vertical also. We shoot, see our misses and make corrections.

I do get a couple dropouts/fliers every now and then with CCI SV, but for the price compared to the high-dollar shit, I just can't justify the "good stuff". Especially when my Ranger 22 is shooting sub-MOA at 100 and 200, and regularly puts down 0.3xx" to 0.5xx" groups at 100 with it.

Here's a 7-shot string with CCI SV in my Ranger showing the ES and SD... Pretty good for bulk plinking ammo, IMO...

 

[justin amateur]

Looks pretty good their Q.

So, what would happen if you were to shoot all 50 at a single aimpoint at 100 yards,
while you recorded the mv's of each shot? Would it still continue to be as good?

 

[FuhQ]

Looks pretty good their Q.

So, what would happen if you were to shoot all 50 at a single aimpoint at 100 yards,
while you recorded the mv's of each shot? Would it still continue to be as good?

 

[justin amateur]

Wrong answer Q....the right one is: Let's find out.

We can always use another post added to the Whole Box At 100 Yards...

The whole box at 100 yards

Just a thought...what do y'all think would happen, if 5 shot groups went the way of the dodo, and if ya' were going to show off how well ye'r rifle can do at 100 yards, was accomplished by sending all 50 shots at a single aimpoint. I have a feeling it'd pretty much end claims of "sub-moa all day...

www.snipershide.com

 

[littlesister]

I do get a couple dropouts/fliers every now and then with CCI SV, but for the price compared to the high-dollar shit, I just can't justify the "good stuff". Especially when my Ranger 22 is shooting sub-MOA at 100 and 200, and regularly puts down 0.3xx" to 0.5xx" groups at 100 with it.

Here's a 7-shot string with CCI SV in my Ranger showing the ES and SD... Pretty good for bulk plinking ammo, IMO...


View attachment 7908661
View attachment 7908662
View attachment 7908659

 

[littlesister]

I do get a couple dropouts/fliers every now and then with CCI SV, but for the price compared to the high-dollar shit, I just can't justify the "good stuff". Especially when my Ranger 22 is shooting sub-MOA at 100 and 200, and regularly puts down 0.3xx" to 0.5xx" groups at 100 with it.

Here's a 7-shot string with CCI SV in my Ranger showing the ES and SD... Pretty good for bulk plinking ammo, IMO...


View attachment 7908661
View attachment 7908662
View attachment 7908659

What are you calling a sub moa group. two shots. three shots, Four shots? can you repeat these groups on any given day? I've been shooting and competing at 200yds for nearly 10yrs, Money has been no object when it comes to guns and ammo! I have yet to find or see any one else find a 22lr that was capable of consistently shooting 10 shot sub moa groups at 200 yds outdoors. Now I find out that someone can take a Ranger and cci sv which is crap ammo at best and shoot sub moa groups at 200 yds! All I can say is. I've waisted a lot of money!!!

 

[FuhQ]

What are you calling a sub moa group. two shots. three shots, Four shots? can you repeat these groups on any given day? I've been shooting and competing at 200yds for nearly 10yrs, Money has been no object when it comes to guns and ammo! I have yet to find or see any one else find a 22lr that was capable of consistently shooting 10 shot sub moa groups at 200 yds outdoors. Now I find out that someone can take a Ranger and cci sv which is crap ammo at best and shoot sub moa groups at 200 yds! All I can say is. I've waisted a lot of money!!!

You must be a shitty shot, with lots of money to burn.

 

[littlesister]

You must be a shitty shot, with lots of money to burn.

Both, but I don't try to blow smoke up peoples butts on this forum!

 

[FuhQ]

Both, but I don't try to blow smoke up peoples butts on this forum!

I’m not. You obviously haven’t seen my thread with pictures, descriptions, explanations, and all the info you’ve felt necessary to try to call bullshit on. So you might want to watch that attitude.

 

[littlesister]

I’m not. You obviously haven’t seen my thread with pictures, descriptions, explanations, and all the info you’ve felt necessary to try to call bullshit on. So you might want to watch that attitude.

Not going on and on . My final reply. The remfire portion of this forum is dominated by long range shooters. People who have spent thousands of dollars on guns' ammo and rest just trying to shoot consistent groups at 200+yds. Not sub moa, just consistent groups. Now you take a $900 gun , crap ammo and lay it on a sandbag and post sub moa groups at 200yds. I'll let the other shooters on this forum decide if I was justified in doubting your claims.

 

[FuhQ]

Not going on and on . My final reply. The remfire portion of this forum is dominated by long range shooters. People who have spent thousands of dollars on guns' ammo and rest just trying to shoot consistent groups at 200+yds. Not sub moa, just consistent groups. Now you take a $900 gun , crap ammo and lay it on a sandbag and post sub moa groups at 200yds. I'll let the other shooters on this forum decide if I was justified in doubting your claims.

Go for it hoss. Don’t care if you believe me or not. I have nothing to prove to anyone, as I have no vested interest in any company, brand, optics, ammo, or anything…Unlike many of the shooters here.

I’ve let plenty of people shoot that rifle who have never even shot that gun, much less a .22 at 100 yards, get behind it and first shot ring a 5” steel gong at 200 yards with “crap ammo”. And their face and smile says it all. So, not my problem if some internet rando like you doesn’t believe me.

 

[Sniperwannabee]

Go for it hoss. Don’t care if you believe me or not. I have nothing to prove to anyone, as I have no vested interest in any company, brand, optics, ammo, or anything…Unlike many of the shooters here. I’ve let plenty of people shoot that rifle who have never even shot that gun, much less a .22 at 100 yards, get behind it and first shot ring a 5” steel gong at 200 yards with “crap ammo”. And their face and smile says it all. So, not my problem if some internet rando like you doesn’t believe me.

Not going on and on . My final reply. The remfire portion of this forum is dominated by long range shooters. People who have spent thousands of dollars on guns' ammo and rest just trying to shoot consistent groups at 200+yds. Not sub moa, just consistent groups. Now you take a $900 gun , crap ammo and lay it on a sandbag and post sub moa groups at 200yds. I'll let the other shooters on this forum decide if I was justified in doubting your claims.

You guys are both in Alabama ….let’s settle this real time. Is this Auburn vs Alabama?

 

[Shifty6BR]

I had a 452 that absolutely loved loved the cci sv. I've taken it out 400yds and they were able to put hits on 12" steel. They performed well out to 320yds at our rimfire range with consistency.

This was with the old box style, not sure but it seems that the newer label box did not perform as well. My rimx with Hart barrel does not care for them but the older bricks of cci sv was a winner in my 452.

2017

 

[Gleedus]

I have to chuckle a little on these threads.... sub moa at 200? Well buddy I've done it twice with 10 shot groups. Thats 2 groups out of a lot! Your in the wrong place to blow off about a claim that ridiculous.

But to the OP my app is messing up I cant read a bunch of the posts so could be this has been covered.

50 yard groups have no correlation with 200 yard and beyond. Your CCI SV very well could shoot in the 5s at 50 but if Eley Match was in the 7s at 50 it will still out shoot the CCI on average once your at 200.
You can try all the "tricks" rim thickness weight etc. But its impossible to bring CCI up to high end ammo capability.
Velocity variation is only a small part of what all effects there are. BC variation is a factor that has as great or greater effect at long range then velocity does. Bullet damage is huge once again really showing up down range.
Bullet shape in this case has nothing to do with it.
Use CCI SV as practice ammo just size your targets as much larger as your CCI group size is bigger then your match ammo. Chris Way has a good podcast explaining how to do that effectively. I agree with his explanation with the exception of wind training I think the high end ammo has benefits. I do most of my training (22lr is all I do) at 50 yards and find it very effective. Then your CCI is perfect!
Cheers

 

[littlepod]

The word consistent is key here. I've yet to see any sort of rifle/ammo combo shoot groups outdoors at 200y consistently sub moa. Maybe in an indoor range I might have a chance. I've seen an ES of 18 for a string of 30 once, and that could theoretically land me like a sub 2" group.

CCI SV at 200 yards has been a pretty consistent 6" group when you factor in all the different lots and strings of shooting. I'm sure you might get the luck of a draw and have a string of a few shots shoot really tight, but I'd never rely on CCI SV to consistently reproduce results at distance.

Center-X for me has consistently held about 3-3.5" groups of 10.

Just picked up some Eley Match and landed a 2.5" group, it had an ES of 18, so probably could've shrunk it down more if there was less wind involved.

 

[Rimdenter]

I had a 452 that absolutely loved loved the cci sv. I've taken it out 400yds and they were able to put hits on 12" steel. They performed well out to 320yds at our rimfire range with consistency.

This was with the old box style, not sure but it seems that the newer label box did not perform as well. My rimx with Hart barrel does not care for them but the older bricks of cci sv was a winner in my 452.

2017
View attachment 7909808View attachment 7909809

I had some old Wolf match extra were talking 13-14 years ago that would shoot .200 all day long at 50 yards in my 453 I've found nothing close to that since and certainly none of the current Wolf.

 

[grauhanen]

I do get a couple dropouts/fliers every now and then with CCI SV, but for the price compared to the high-dollar shit, I just can't justify the "good stuff". Especially my Ranger 22 is shooting sub-MOA at 100 and 200, and regularly puts down 0.3xx" to 0.5xx" groups at 100 with it.

I'll let the other shooters on this forum decide if I was justified in doubting your claims.

No one is regularly shooting sub-MOA at either 100 or 200 with CCI SV in either five or ten shot groups. The ammo itself isn't up to the job, regardless of the rifle used. When sub-MOA results occur with CCI SV at 200 yards, again regardless of rifle, it should be considered a random act of accuracy.


More interesting is the idea implied in the observation below.

We have found that ammo, that does not shoot well at 50yds can shoot good at longer range.

This suggests group size can improve MOA-wise as distance increases. In other words, poorer groups at 50 can improve once out to 100.

What would cause rounds to begin to converge once past a certain point? That is to say, for example, what could cause an ammo that shoots 1 MOA at 50 to shoot less than 1 MOA at 100 or beyond?

Below, the natural linear dispersion compared with group convergence in which the group is smaller MOA-wise as distance grows.



Usually the "best case" scenario is that when distance doubles, group size doubles, as shown in the diagram below. The group size at 100 is twice its size at 50, and at 200 twice that of 100. Of course, as .22LR shooters are aware, group size almost invariably more than doubles as distance doubles.



Obviously, it's difficult to compare apples to apples in the sense that the exact same rounds of ammo can't be compared at two distances, unless the comparison is made in a testing facility where electronic targets can record results for the same rounds at 50 and 100 meters.

To be sure, there have been a few, perhaps only a very few, occasions when some testing has produced better results MOA-wise at 100 than at 50.

Is this repeatable with the same lot? With different rifles? And what explains why this may occasionally happen?

 

[Gleedus]

The word consistent is key here. I've yet to see any sort of rifle/ammo combo shoot groups outdoors at 200y consistently sub moa. Maybe in an indoor range I might have a chance. I've seen an ES of 18 for a string of 30 once, and that could theoretically land me like a sub 2" group.

CCI SV at 200 yards has been a pretty consistent 6" group when you factor in all the different lots and strings of shooting. I'm sure you might get the luck of a draw and have a string of a few shots shoot really tight, but I'd never rely on CCI SV to consistently reproduce results at distance.

Center-X for me has consistently held about 3-3.5" groups of 10.

Just picked up some Eley Match and landed a 2.5" group, it had an ES of 18, so probably could've shrunk it down more if there was less wind involved.

Interesting I do 20 shot groups.. so slightly larger ES then what you would see. But.... on average for me at 200 yards
Cheap grade (CCI SV and equivalent ammo) 7-8"
Mid grade 4-5"
Lapua 3-3.5"
Eley match / tenex 2-2.75"

Velocity ES well a factor hasnt proven a rule to use. 18 over 30 is pretty stinking good!
I use strings of 90 for velocity testing (because a magnetospeed resets and erases data at 100 and I want 10 chances to remember and stop lol)

Cheap grade ES 50+
Mid grade 30-50
High grade 20-30

Cheers

 

[Gleedus]

No one is regularly shooting sub-MOA at either 100 or 200 with CCI SV in either five or ten shot groups. The ammo itself isn't up to the job, regardless of the rifle used. When sub-MOA results occur with CCI SV at 200 yards, again regardless of rifle, it should be considered a random act of accuracy.


More interesting is the idea implied in the observation below.

This suggests group size can improve MOA-wise as distance increases. In other words, poorer groups at 50 can improve once out to 100.

What would cause rounds to begin to converge once past a certain point? That is to say, for example, what could cause an ammo that shoots 1 MOA at 50 to shoot less than 1 MOA at 100 or beyond?

Below, the natural linear dispersion compared with group convergence in which the group is smaller MOA-wise as distance grows.



Usually the "best case" scenario is that when distance doubles, group size doubles, as shown in the diagram below. The group size at 100 is twice its size at 50, and at 200 twice that of 100. Of course, as .22LR shooters are aware, group size almost invariably more than doubles as distance doubles.



Obviously, it's difficult to compare apples to apples in the sense that the exact same rounds of ammo can't be compared at two distances, unless the comparison is made in a testing facility where electronic targets can record results for the same rounds at 50 and 100 meters.

To be sure, there have been a few, perhaps only a very few, occasions when some testing has produced better results MOA-wise at 100 than at 50.

Is this repeatable with the same lot? With different rifles? And what explains why this may occasionally happen?

I have NEVER I repeat NEVER seen a ammo shoot a smaller group in moa at 200 then at 50 or 100.
But I have seen many many ammo/barrel combinations that the best ammo at 50 & 100 yards that was not the best at 2-300 multiple days and groups.

Now one of my friends did a experiment with a tuner where he got the same groups in inches at 100 and 150. But it was pointless because a stiffer barrel out shot that thing at all distances.

 

[littlepod]

Interesting I do 20 shot groups.. so slightly larger ES then what you would see. But.... on average for me at 200 yards
Cheap grade (CCI SV and equivalent ammo) 7-8"
Mid grade 4-5"
Lapua 3-3.5"
Eley match / tenex 2-2.75"

Velocity ES well a factor hasnt proven a rule to use. 18 over 30 is pretty stinking good!
I use strings of 90 for velocity testing (because a magnetospeed resets and erases data at 100 and I want 10 chances to remember and stop lol)

Cheap grade ES 50+
Mid grade 30-50
High grade 20-30

Cheers

I've noticed that all of my random test lots of Eley Match have been better than my lots of Center-X/Midas from a chrono perspective. It had lower SD (5-6 vs 7-9) and an ES that was lower 18 vs 25, or in longer strings, 25 vs 35. Now at 50y the Center-X tends to shoot tighter for whatever reason. I'm not sure why. At 100y they come out to be about the same, and at 200y the tighter ES has led to the smaller groups.

 

[st1650]

I've noticed that all of my random test lots of Eley Match have been better than my lots of Center-X/Midas from a chrono perspective. It had lower SD (5-6 vs 7-9) and an ES that was lower 18 vs 25, or in longer strings, 25 vs 35. Now at 50y the Center-X tends to shoot tighter for whatever reason. I'm not sure why. At 100y they come out to be about the same, and at 200y the tighter ES has led to the smaller groups.

this has been my experience as well.

 

[Gleedus]

I've noticed that all of my random test lots of Eley Match have been better than my lots of Center-X/Midas from a chrono perspective. It had lower SD (5-6 vs 7-9) and an ES that was lower 18 vs 25, or in longer strings, 25 vs 35. Now at 50y the Center-X tends to shoot tighter for whatever reason. I'm not sure why. At 100y they come out to be about the same, and at 200y the tighter ES has led to the smaller groups.

Same here. If I'm going for 50 and 100 yd bragging rights then I grab lapua. I did a high end ammo testing spree a bit ago. Lapua, Eley, RWS. I had 1 or 2 groups go over 1" at 100 with lapua (I didnt use CenterX only the good stuff) I was very pleased with it. This is multiple lots too not just a 1 off. But 200 and 300 almost same ES and SD as Eley but never better but not enough difference to account for group differences.

 

[grauhanen]

The changing performance of different ammos as distance increases seems especially relevant for shooters at longer distances.

Ammo/rifle combinations that produce better results MOA-wise as distance increases must be relatively uncommon, even very rare, so they aren't relevant here.

More significant for shooters is what causes different lots of the same ammos in the same good rifle to produce different group dispersion rates at further distances? In short, the ideal dispersion rate is 2, that is, groups will be 2 times the size at twice the distance. In practice, however, with .22LR it will be more, often quite a bit more.

To illustrate, at testing facilities conditions are constant and the shooter is removed from the equation, and the results of the same rounds can be compared at both 50 and 100 meters. Results commonly show that with the same rifle different lots of CX produce different rates of dispersion as distance increases. This happens with all rifles.

Why do some lots produce different rates of dispersion than others?

This would seem to have implications for results even further out.

 

[MarkCZ]

No one is regularly shooting sub-MOA at either 100 or 200 with CCI SV in either five or ten shot groups. The ammo itself isn't up to the job, regardless of the rifle used. When sub-MOA results occur with CCI SV at 200 yards, again regardless of rifle, it should be considered a random act of accuracy.


More interesting is the idea implied in the observation below.

This suggests group size can improve MOA-wise as distance increases. In other words, poorer groups at 50 can improve once out to 100.

What would cause rounds to begin to converge once past a certain point? That is to say, for example, what could cause an ammo that shoots 1 MOA at 50 to shoot less than 1 MOA at 100 or beyond?

Below, the natural linear dispersion compared with group convergence in which the group is smaller MOA-wise as distance grows.



Usually the "best case" scenario is that when distance doubles, group size doubles, as shown in the diagram below. The group size at 100 is twice its size at 50, and at 200 twice that of 100. Of course, as .22LR shooters are aware, group size almost invariably more than doubles as distance doubles.



Obviously, it's difficult to compare apples to apples in the sense that the exact same rounds of ammo can't be compared at two distances, unless the comparison is made in a testing facility where electronic targets can record results for the same rounds at 50 and 100 meters.

To be sure, there have been a few, perhaps only a very few, occasions when some testing has produced better results MOA-wise at 100 than at 50.

Is this repeatable with the same lot? With different rifles? And what explains why this may occasionally happen?

I said. "We have found that ammo, that does not shoot well at 50yds can shoot good at longer range." I said it shoots good at longer range, not better. We have found ammo that shoot sub moa at 50yds. but has a lot of vertical past that. ( Norma tac22, and Norma match are two )

We don't shoot groups, we shoot steel knockdown targets, out to 400yds. We are looking for hit %. with the any ammo. We shoot 5 targets with 10 rounds in our long range match. The cheaper ammo may only run 40% to 60% hits out of 10 shots. Our match ammo can run 80% to 100% out of 10 rounds. It all depends on the wind, most misses are due to wind.