Is There a Real Sub-MOA .22 Rifle?

[justin amateur]

50 rounds, 1 box of 22lr cartridges isn't a big deal.
Most folks go through 3 or 4 boxes of 22lr per range visit.
Shooting 5 shot groups and then cherry picking the single best random act of accuracy to post.
My question is : What happened to the other 45?
Funny, folks get all butt hurt after that.
You'd think I'd accused them of exaggerating.

So in order to avoid any possible excuses,
if someone claims superb results with rimfire,
I expect to see a single group of 50.
No cherry picking, no pulled shots, no supposedly called fliers,
just one cluster of holes at the distance being bragged about.
If you can't keep sub moa for 50 shots, then "all day long" is just wishful thinking.

Yep, it does have a tendency to annoy folks when they get asked to back up their talk.
But it does make for interesting conversations when they attempt it.

If I really want to make my point, have 'em try hanging 2 USBR Green Monsters on the backer.
One dot, one shot, 50 times, see how well that works out.

 

[SourMash]

50 rounds, 1 box of 22lr cartridges isn't a big deal.
Most folks go through 3 or 4 boxes of 22lr per range visit.
Shooting 5 shot groups and then cherry picking the single best random act of accuracy to post.
My question is : What happened to the other 45?
Funny, folks get all butt hurt after that.
You'd think I'd accused them of exaggerating.

So in order to avoid any possible excuses,
if someone claims superb results with rimfire,
I expect to see a single group of 50.
No cherry picking, no pulled shots, no supposedly called fliers,
just one cluster of holes at the distance being bragged about.
If you can't keep sub moa for 50 shots, then "all day long" is just wishful thinking.

Yep, it does have a tendency to annoy folks when they get asked to back up their talk.
But it does make for interesting conversations when they attempt it.

If I really want to make my point, have 'em try hanging 2 USBR Green Monsters on the backer.
One dot, one shot, 50 times, see how well that works out.

I tried the 25yd green monster challenge and I can make myself humble real quick. (in the CZ section on rimfirecentral)

 

[1badDart]

50 rounds, 1 box of 22lr cartridges isn't a big deal.
Most folks go through 3 or 4 boxes of 22lr per range visit.
Shooting 5 shot groups and then cherry picking the single best random act of accuracy to post.
My question is : What happened to the other 45?
Funny, folks get all butt hurt after that.
You'd think I'd accused them of exaggerating.

So in order to avoid any possible excuses,
if someone claims superb results with rimfire,
I expect to see a single group of 50.
No cherry picking, no pulled shots, no supposedly called fliers,
just one cluster of holes at the distance being bragged about.
If you can't keep sub moa for 50 shots, then "all day long" is just wishful thinking.

Yep, it does have a tendency to annoy folks when they get asked to back up their talk.
But it does make for interesting conversations when they attempt it.

If I really want to make my point, have 'em try hanging 2 USBR Green Monsters on the backer.
One dot, one shot, 50 times, see how well that works out.

I don't get the infatuation with a 50 shot group, it just doesn't strike a cord with me. Personally I'd rather see 10, 5 shot groups or better yet a target like the green monster. We shoot the A-17, 50' target at 50 yards, not as challenging as the green monster but still not a walk in the park. my best score so far is 493/500 shooting a 52E with Unertl 24X scope and SK Std Plus off a front rest and rear bag. It was one of those times that it was just my night when all the planets and stars aligned.

Back in the summer we had a guy show up with one of the new black magic rifles, a 45X leupold and $22 a box ammo. This was a rifle that was supposed to be shooting 3/8" groups at 100 yards. It was handily outshot by several 40-50 year old rifles being driven by 60-75 year old shooters.
I really hope he puts in the time to get it and him shooting to the rifles potential because I'd really like to see what it's capable of.

The bottom line is shoot what you like and have fun, doesn't matter if it's 50 in one group or 50 single bulls.

 

[squishee]

Above post shows how a 22 lr is sub moa capable..
The rifle is but not always the shooter.

 

[NewsShooter]

So in short, the answer is no. So if I get something like a Ruger Precision Rimfire in .22 LR, I'll be doing great if I can do 2 MOA at 50, which is pretty much what a good semiauto will do.

All of my 22's will shoot sub moa at 50 with cci sv, that's four 10/22's, savage MKII, Bergara 14r, my Marlin pump 22 might, but I can't with open sights anymore.

 

[justin amateur]

I'd rather see 10, 5 shot groups

I used to also, until I noticed a small problem.
Yes, each individual group was nice and tight, but the group location shifted relative to the aimpoint.
Go look at the 6x5 pics and notice where each center of group is in relation to the bullseye.
On the same target, some are left, right, a bit below, a bit above showing mv/shooter/wind caused drift.
Build a composite aggregate and the total spread can double or triple.

Examples: CZ 455 Varmint, bipod and rear bag, 200 yards

I'm not interested in small sample references, I like a robust data set to work with.
What use is a 1.5" group at 200 yards when its 2 inches left or right of where y'er aiming?

I believe in Rule #1: Hit what you aim at. For that reason,
the one dot one shot is probably the best method to verify consistent accuracy.
Many absolutely won't use that technique because it makes them look bad.

Me? I have no fear of failure.

 

[1badDart]

I'd rather see 10, 5 shot groups

I used to also, until I noticed a small problem.
Yes, each individual group was nice and tight, but the group location shifted relative to the aimpoint.
Go look at the 6x5 pics and notice where each center of group is in relation to the bullseye.
On the same target, some are left, right, a bit below, a bit above showing mv/shooter/wind caused drift.
Build a composite aggregate and the total spread can double or triple.

I'm not interested in small sample references, I like a robust data set to work with.

One dot one shot is probably the best method to verify consistent accuracy.
Many absolutely won't use that technique because it makes them look bad.

I understand. I have some targets in the 6 X 5 too, one shot with apertures and one with a 11 X 5 average.

I do a fine job of making myself look bad without shooting one shot one bull targets, but they are fun to shoot.

 

[justin amateur]

I hear ya' Dart.
My next hobby is 200 yards for score, 10 shots per target, rimfire, 5 targets.
It'll cut down on my ammo usage but force me to maintain Rule #1.

 

[acudaowner]

I am betting there are many guns that can do it the biggest question that I see is as the shooter can you shoot sub moa groups ?

 

[Buck Wilde]

If you have to test your ammo to get sub-MOA, then for my purposes, I would say sub-MOA .22 LR is not a realistic goal for me. I can take untested random boxes in other calibers out back and get sub-MOA, so it appears that .22 LR poses a lot of problems. I guess I will not waste money on a precision .22.

At 20 cents and up per round, buying boxes just to test and reject is not going to work for me. I would have to buy large lots, test them, reject most, and then shoot whatever remained, and that would jack the price up to the cost of centerfire ammo. And I would not be able to get repeat orders from the same lot, unless some retailer out there is willing to store ammo from various lots and check lot numbers when I come back for more.

 

[justin amateur]

Buck, for precision shooting I have a 223 f-class and reload my cartridges.
Rimfire is how I warm up before sending my hand loads.
Get rid of the yips and remember what I forgot during the work week.
When wandering in the woods chasing squirrels and rabbits,
my 22lr rarely is used to take a shot more than 25 yards.
At that distance there's no problem even with bulk ammo.
It's when you use rimfire at distances beyond 35 yards,
that cartridge quality and wind affect results.
The fact that I use rimfire out to 200 yards means I'm pushing it way past it's intended use.

 

[Hoser]

If you have to test your ammo to get sub-MOA, then for my purposes, I would say sub-MOA .22 LR is not a realistic goal for me. I can take untested random boxes in other calibers out back and get sub-MOA, so it appears that .22 LR poses a lot of problems. I guess I will not waste money on a precision .22.

At 20 cents and up per round, buying boxes just to test and reject is not going to work for me. I would have to buy large lots, test them, reject most, and then shoot whatever remained, and that would jack the price up to the cost of centerfire ammo. And I would not be able to get repeat orders from the same lot, unless some retailer out there is willing to store ammo from various lots and check lot numbers when I come back for more.

You call up a place like Good Shooting or Killoughs and ask for a lot testing pack. They will send you 5-10 boxes (different lots) of whatever ammo you want.

Then you shoot those until you find a lot # that your rifle likes. You call back and order a case or five of that lot.

Or you send your rifle to the Lapua or Eley test centers and have them test it for you. They tell you how all the ammo did and you order whatever ammo you want.

It is pretty simple really.

 

[...]

You call up a place like Good Shooting or Killoughs and ask for a lot testing pack. They will send you 5-10 boxes (different lots) of whatever ammo you want.

Then you shoot those until you find a lot # that your rifle likes. You call back and order a case or five of that lot.

Or you send your rifle to the Lapua or Eley test centers and have them test it for you. They tell you how all the ammo did and you order whatever ammo you want.

It is pretty simple really.

while i agree its pretty simple......it is also a practice we dont accept in any other discipline.

hell, i can buy a box of .308 FGMM and be pretty sure its going to shoot sub MOA without having to lot test.

and while you may get lucky and find a lot that shoots stellar, you really cant claim that the rifle/ammo combo shoots a reliable sub moa if you have to go through and cherry pick ammo for it.

and once that ammo is gone, you have to repeat the process all over again and hope you find another lot that replicates that result.....and the honest answer is we simply dont know if/ when well find another suitable lot of ammo.

hell, i know shooters who have simply refused to shoot matches because they couldnt find a suitable lot of ammo.....personally i would have just shot the match with the best ammo i could have found.......but i understand not wanting to go to a match and spending a bunch of time, knowing your rifle/ ammo will not be competitive.

and its not a rifle issue....we have the best rifles right now that have ever been made....and they are not able to compete with scores set 50 yrs ago.

there is absolutely no reason a Shillen barreled Anschutz action should not RELIABLY shoot Sub-moa....but the fact is they simply dont.....hell, no rifle really does.

and its all down to the ammo....we could have the best rifles ever produced.....but the ammo simply isnt up to par.....at least not anymore.

 

[Tim7139]

Tim, if you look carefully, you'll find I've posted quite a few results in the 6x5 challenge.
22lr, 22wmr and 17 hmr at 100 and 200 yards.
If you feel that a box of cartridges is an expense you can't afford, no worries.
If it's because you think it might be difficult to replace that box of good ammo,
you've already pointed out there's plenty available that's sub moa capable.
Maybe.

As my grandpa said: don't talk about it, show me.

50 at 100, ought to be easy, right?

Tim, if you look carefully, you'll find I've posted quite a few results in the 6x5 challenge.
22lr, 22wmr and 17 hmr at 100 and 200 yards.
If you feel that a box of cartridges is an expense you can't afford, no worries.
If it's because you think it might be difficult to replace that box of good ammo,
you've already pointed out there's plenty available that's sub moa capable.
Maybe.

As my grandpa said: don't talk about it, show me.

50 at 100, ought to be easy, right?

so, blasting through a whole box of bulk am

while i agree its pretty simple......it is also a practice we dont accept in any other discipline.

hell, i can buy a box of .308 FGMM and be pretty sure its going to shoot sub MOA without having to lot test.

and while you may get lucky and find a lot that shoots stellar, you really cant claim that the rifle/ammo combo shoots a reliable sub moa if you have to go through and cherry pick ammo for it.

and once that ammo is gone, you have to repeat the process all over again and hope you find another lot that replicates that result.....and the honest answer is we simply dont know if/ when well find another suitable lot of ammo.

hell, i know shooters who have simply refused to shoot matches because they couldnt find a suitable lot of ammo.....personally i would have just shot the match with the best ammo i could have found.......but i understand not wanting to go to a match and spending a bunch of time, knowing your rifle/ ammo will not be competitive.

and its not a rifle issue....we have the best rifles right now that have ever been made....and they are not able to compete with scores set 50 yrs ago.

there is absolutely no reason a Shillen barreled Anschutz action should not RELIABLY shoot Sub-moa....but the fact is they simply dont.....hell, no rifle really does.

and its all down to the ammo....we could have the best rifles ever produced.....but the ammo simply isnt up to par.....at least not anymore.

more mostly BS. Guys refusing to compete for many reasons, finding decent ammo ain’t one of them.
Far too many guys base their ammo decisions on horseshit forum posts.
FACT.....average ammo today....AVERAGE, has never been better and easier with modest acquisition skills, the best is just simply great.
If you doubt that, simply look at benchrest scores at major tournaments and how many world records have been smashed in the last couple years.
It usually boils down to “I know a guy whose neighbor used to shoot “ type crap.
FWIW, I shoot competitively, have done so a long time, buy a lot of ammunition and know a lot of guys doing same, here and abroad, as well as gunsmiths building world record setting guns.
Don’t need to sound preachy but facts are facts.

 

[jbell]

You have to set some parameters to the question before you can answer it, basically distance and number of rounds (and are you taking about precision or accuracy)? That really changes the question.

Some consider X number of rounds per target (group shooting) as the metric, where others consider a very large quantity at a specific point of aim the metric (precision vs accuracy)...

This is a VERY open ended question with many answers.

 

[...]

so, blasting through a whole box of bulk am


more mostly BS. Guys refusing to compete for many reasons, finding decent ammo ain’t one of them.
Far too many guys base their ammo decisions on horseshit forum posts.
FACT.....average ammo today....AVERAGE, has never been better and easier with modest acquisition skills, the best is just simply great.
If you doubt that, simply look at benchrest scores at major tournaments and how many world records have been smashed in the last couple years.
It usually boils down to “I know a guy whose neighbor used to shoot “ type crap.
FWIW, I shoot competitively, have done so a long time, buy a lot of ammunition and know a lot of guys doing same, here and abroad, as well as gunsmiths building world record setting guns.
Don’t need to sound preachy but facts are facts.

Average ammo might be better......but people shooting at nationals arent shooting "average" ammo.

look the the NRA smallbore records....they dont lie.

in the 70s, shooting a 400-40X was not uncommon.....now a days that would be a record breaking score.

consequently, it was in the 60-70's that the industry deviated from mercury based priming compounds to lead based.

 

[Tim7139]

50 rounds, 1 box of 22lr cartridges isn't a big deal.
Most folks go through 3 or 4 boxes of 22lr per range visit.
Shooting 5 shot groups and then cherry picking the single best random act of accuracy to post.
My question is : What happened to the other 45?
Funny, folks get all butt hurt after that.
You'd think I'd accused them of exaggerating.

So in order to avoid any possible excuses,
if someone claims superb results with rimfire,
I expect to see a single group of 50.
No cherry picking, no pulled shots, no supposedly called fliers,
just one cluster of holes at the distance being bragged about.
If you can't keep sub moa for 50 shots, then "all day long" is just wishful thinking.

Yep, it does have a tendency to annoy folks when they get asked to back up their talk.
But it does make for interesting conversations when they attempt it.

If I really want to make my point, have 'em try hanging 2 USBR Green Monsters on the backer.
One dot, one shot, 50 times, see how well that works out.

not for nothng, but, do you know the likelyhood of any condition shooting outdoors over 50 shots is not ultimately going to render any outcome as basically a “weather report” ?
What, exactly, do you think that shows ? Not likely, equipment, ammo, or much else probably.
the majority of your cardboard groups with the rulers, show mostly, condition.

 

[Tim7139]

Average ammo might be better......but people shooting at nationals arent shooting "average" ammo.

look the the NRA smallbore records....they dont lie.

in the 70s, shooting a 400-40X was not uncommon.....now a days that would be a record breaking score.

consequently, it was in the 60-70's that the industry deviated from mercury based priming compounds to lead based.

The absolute best metric for the guaging of raw ammunition quality is now, and has been for a while domestic and international benchrest performance, if for no other reason these are the most precise guns ever made, best able to extract ammo ability. Even today the unbelievable platforms such as latest offerings from Anschutz, Walther, and Grunnig and Elmiger , costing $7000-$$8000 a pop cannot compete effectively in that world.
NRA smallbore records as a pure metric for ammo quality is BS and FWIW priming now is the best in history, pretty much universally excepted, even among smallbore national champions which I know.

 

[...]

The absolute best metric for the guaging of raw ammunition quality is now, and has been for a while domestic and international benchrest performance, if for no other reason these are the most precise guns ever made, best able to extract ammo ability. Even today the unbelievable platforms such as latest offerings from Anschutz, Walther, and Grunnig and Elmiger, cannot compete effectively in that world.
NRA smallbore records as a pure metric for ammo quality is BS and FWIW priming now is the best in history, pretty much universally excepted, even among smallbore national champions which I know.

i mean thats great....but i also know a few that would strongly disagree....

and who is this "universally accepted" by again?

you claim NRA smallbore is a poor metric......but werent you just using Benchrest as a metric a minute ago?

 

[justin amateur]

50 shots is going to render any outcome as basically a “weather report”

I like that answer. No argument from this side of the keyboard.
But since I don't shoot indoors, I have to rely on wind flags and vegetation on the berms.
Time my squeeze to fit the lulls and know it's going to be a challenge.
Keeps it entertaining.

So Tim, no chance of you attempting a 50 at 100, not even for entertainment value?

 

[Tim7139]

50 shots is going to render any outcome as basically a “weather report”

I like that answer. No argument from this side of the keyboard.
But since I don't shoot indoors, I have to rely on wind flags and vegetation on the berms.
Time my squeeze to fit the lulls and know it's going to be a challenge.
Keeps it entertaining.

So Tim, no chance of you attempting a 50 at 100, not even for entertainment value?

to show what ? Nothing I would be interested in whatsoever.
I shoot registered matches for score, that is my interest. Lay down a few 250’s on an IR target & we’ll talk.
Also, currently it’s 20 degrees, snowing, and my match 22’s are quietly resting until April, although we shoot CFBR for group every Sun until after Easter. It is now PPC season.

 

[Tim7139]

i mean thats great....but i also know a few that would strongly disagree....

and who is this "universally accepted" by again?

you claim NRA smallbore is a poor metric......but werent you just using Benchrest as a metric a minute ago?

universally accepted by 100’s if not 1000’s of top flight shooters throughout international sanctioning bodies.... good enough for me.

Poor metric in regards to extracting pure ammo performance.
several of the best guns made for that discipline, cannot even be competitive in the BR field......again, good enough for me.

Scores across the board, world wide, are off the charts.
they cannot all be shot with the creme of the crop of ammo.
Finally, I buy, test, and shoot a lot of top ammo. Finding the best is often tough because the average is generally so good, separating the difference is very challanging, and I own rifles that have won, state, regional, and national matches/championships, so I’d like to think that’s at least a semi qualified opinion.

 

[Snuby642]

Vudoo. But sub moa at what distance.

9 inch group is sub moa at 1000 yards. Not relative to 22lr just an example.

On the cheaper side of things I have a 10 / 22 that will print 1 moa all day and sub moa for a good part of it till my eyes tire .

I did upgrade to a better than factory barrel and trigger.

 

[...]

universally accepted by 100’s if not 1000’s of top flight shooters throughout international sanctioning bodies.... good enough for me.

and how are you in a position to speak for them again?

Poor metric in regards to extracting pure ammo performance.
several of the best guns made for that discipline, cannot even be competitive in the BR field......again, good enough for me.

i never said sub moa cant be shot.....i said its not likely.
if you are claiming that a $8,000 rifle is not capable of shooting sub moa you are kind of making my point for me.

you are also failing to explain how scores that were fairly common 50 yrs ago with older primer technology are seemingly unobtainable with modern produced ammo

Scores across the board, world wide, are off the charts.
they cannot all be shot with the creme of the crop of ammo.

is that speculation, or do you know the exact setups being used for all of these "record breaking shots"?

 

[thestumper]

At 50 yards, I suspect my Sako might be capable of it - I, however, am not. Certainly not "all day long". I was able to get some pretty good results with Federal Gold match a while back, but I'm not a BR guy so I buy what's cheap and reliable. Aguila Extra these days. Not bad, and cycles reliably in everything I currently shoot .22LR. That includes an S&W MP-15 22 which was NOT bought for accuracy Couple of pistols too.

And yeah, my Savage 93 .17MHR is nuts. Crazy accurate for a very inexpensive rifle. Money well spent.

 

[RTH1800]

Justin is a pessimist about rimfires due to setting unrealistic standards and trying to entice others to accept his metrics.

Most of the "discussion" here is that we have no standard for the 'MOA challenge."

Notice that the OP never mentioned range. Justin assumed it was a 100 yard 50 shot question. Others assumed it was a 5 shot one off, apparently.

Nothing to get angry about, just try to see what the others are actually saying.

My standard is likely different than any of you.

I hunt with my .22 RF's. My most accurate one is a Winchester 52 Sporter with a target weight barrel and a 6X Unertl scope. I go to the range. Set it up and fire a couple of sighters/warming shots with Eley Match or Tenex at 100 yards. Then shoot a 5 shot group. I will post one or two below. They always come back under an inch. Normally well under. Yes I pick my conditions. No, I do not pick my groups.
Justin and I disagree about this as he calls them "wallet groups." What I am checking is the probability of a shot hitting a squirrel in the head at 100 yards. If 5 consecutive shots land under an inch I am happy. The thousands of squirrels I have shot seem convinced as well. I often go 50 or more without a miss at all ranges out to and past 100 yards taking only headshots.

This is posted with all due respect to Justin. He provides a lot of valid information to the SH readers. I simply do not require or have interest in 50 shot groups at 200 yards.

 

[RTH1800]

 

[RTH1800]

This is the rifle.

 

[...]

View attachment 7496422View attachment 7496423This is the rifle.

thats some damn fine wood you got on that thing.

 

[justin amateur]

Wait...pessimist?

RT, really? Pessimist?

I'm a die hard optimist, for sure.
I'm out there most weekends trying to achieve a sub moa 50 shot group at 100 yards.
Now that's most definitely optimism!

And yes, it's true, I do have unrealistic expectations with rimfire.
I actually expect sub moa results at 200 yards, even on windy days.
Damn RT, it's like you know me.

 

[RTH1800]

These squirrels believe the rifle is sub MOA just as I do.

 

[Buck Wilde]

I was not very specific in my first post.

Here is what happened. I saw they were making "precision" rimfire rifles. My Ruger RPR in 6.5 really will do sub-MOA at 100 yards "all day long," with a few flyers due to my lack of skill, so I wondered if "precision rimfire" meant a rifle that could GENERALLY put .22 LR in about a 1" circle at 100 yards. Based on what I read here, it looks like it would be easier to build my own space shuttle, so I have abandoned the idea. I thought it would be a neat, cheap way to practice, but if you have to buy numerous rounds of 25-cent-per-round ammo for every one you can actually use, it's just not worth it. I have all sorts of off-the-shelf .17 HMR ammo that shoots very well at 10.5 cents per round, and .17 HMR is a thousand percent more useful for hunting, so there is no reason for me to struggle with .22 LR.

Creedmoor ammo is loosening up, and S&B FMJ will shoot 1 MOA for less than a dollar per round when it's available, so paying a dollar or more per shot for .22 LR seems like a really bad idea.

Today I got lucky and picked up some Hornady ELD-M, and even in my hands, half-inch 5-round groups are common. In the past, I have paid as little as $1.20 per round, and I expect to see deals like that again, so I am going to forget all about .22 LR. Sad, because I bought heavily before it dried up.

 

[1badDart]

I was not very specific in my first post.

Here is what happened. I saw they were making "precision" rimfire rifles. My Ruger RPR in 6.5 really will do sub-MOA at 100 yards "all day long," with a few flyers due to my lack of skill, so I wondered if "precision rimfire" meant a rifle that could GENERALLY put .22 LR in about a 1" circle at 100 yards. Based on what I read here, it looks like it would be easier to build my own space shuttle, so I have abandoned the idea. I thought it would be a neat, cheap way to practice, but if you have to buy numerous rounds of 25-cent-per-round ammo for every one you can actually use, it's just not worth it. I have all sorts of off-the-shelf .17 HMR ammo that shoots very well at 10.5 cents per round, and .17 HMR is a thousand percent more useful for hunting, so there is no reason for me to struggle with .22 LR.

Creedmoor ammo is loosening up, and S&B FMJ will shoot 1 MOA for less than a dollar per round when it's available, so paying a dollar or more per shot for .22 LR seems like a really bad idea.

Today I got lucky and picked up some Hornady ELD-M, and even in my hands, half-inch 5-round groups are common. In the past, I have paid as little as $1.20 per round, and I expect to see deals like that again, so I am going to forget all about .22 LR. Sad, because I bought heavily before it dried up.

You're probably better off sticking with a CF. Rimfire is a unique challenge and it's not for everyone.

 

[Buck Wilde]

Shooting .17 HMR is great. No reason to stop.

 

[Batemanb12]

Does this count as sub MOA?
Golf balls @400 with a .22 Vudoo

 

[Hoser]

so paying a dollar or more per shot for .22 LR seems like a really bad idea.

I have seen some expensive rimfire ammo before, but never a buck or more a shot. Most of the good stuff averages 15-25 cents a shot.

 

[Tim7139]

is that speculation, or do you know the exact setups being used for all of these "record breaking shots"?

Actually, virtually all of it is published in match reports via sanctioning bodies as well as dealing with and knowing many of those competitors.
Something you might know if you looked anywhere but here.

While this has been great fun, it’s kind of like having a conversation with a spider monkey......you can try but all that happens is he throws shit through the bars of his cage.
you gots lots a learnin to do.

P.S. Nobody said $8000 rifles cannot shoot MOA,what I said was they cannot compete head to head in a benchrest environment, thus rendering a top flight BR rifle a much better indicator of extracting the max out of top flight ammunition. Jesus, learn how to read.

 

[...]

I was not very specific in my first post.

Here is what happened. I saw they were making "precision" rimfire rifles. My Ruger RPR in 6.5 really will do sub-MOA at 100 yards "all day long," with a few flyers due to my lack of skill, so I wondered if "precision rimfire" meant a rifle that could GENERALLY put .22 LR in about a 1" circle at 100 yards. Based on what I read here, it looks like it would be easier to build my own space shuttle, so I have abandoned the idea. I thought it would be a neat, cheap way to practice, but if you have to buy numerous rounds of 25-cent-per-round ammo for every one you can actually use, it's just not worth it. I have all sorts of off-the-shelf .17 HMR ammo that shoots very well at 10.5 cents per round, and .17 HMR is a thousand percent more useful for hunting, so there is no reason for me to struggle with .22 LR.

Creedmoor ammo is loosening up, and S&B FMJ will shoot 1 MOA for less than a dollar per round when it's available, so paying a dollar or more per shot for .22 LR seems like a really bad idea.

Today I got lucky and picked up some Hornady ELD-M, and even in my hands, half-inch 5-round groups are common. In the past, I have paid as little as $1.20 per round, and I expect to see deals like that again, so I am going to forget all about .22 LR. Sad, because I bought heavily before it dried up.

the thing is....if you relax your accuracy standard to 1.25-1.5 MOA.....well you can do that quite easily, cheaply, and reliably.

the recent advent of "easy off the shelf sub-moa" guns has really spoiled us into thinking anything less than 1/2 MOA is "garbage"

the fact is, 1-2 MOA is still really damn good accuracy.....and far more than anyone practically needs.

hell, i think there was someone in this thread who called 1.25 MOA "good enough for hunting".......hell, 4 MOA is good enough for hunting......1.25 is quite good accuracy.

 

[...]

is that speculation, or do you know the exact setups being used for all of these "record breaking shots"?

Actually, virtually all of it is published in match reports via sanctioning bodies as well as dealing with and knowing many of those competitors.
Something you might know if you looked anywhere but here.

While this has been great fun, it’s kind of like having a conversation with a spider monkey......you can try but all that happens is he throws shit through the bars of his cage.
you gots lots a learnin to do.

easy there, your hubris is showing.

dont get to thinking you are the only one with small bore knowledge.

 

[Buck Wilde]

I have seen some expensive rimfire ammo before, but never a buck or more a shot. Most of the good stuff averages 15-25 cents a shot.

You have to look at everything I took into account. People on this thread say you have to buy numerous boxes of ammunition until you find a lot--not a cartridge, but a specific lot--that shoots well. That means you're throwing out box after box until you find lots that shoot. So if you throw out 4 boxes at 25 cents per round and keep one box, you're paying a $1.25 per round.

 

[Buck Wilde]

The thing is, I already have .17 HMR that shoots 1 MOA@100 yards or better (on calm days), it's a much better hunting round than .22, and I don't have to spend $3400 on another rifle.

I'm swimming in 7-cent Mini-mags, and when I read about the Ruger Precision Rimfire, I thought maybe someone had found a reasonably cheap way to turn them into 1-MOA ammo. That's pretty clearly not anywhere close to true.

I went to Youtube and saw people shooting the Ruger, and they were overjoyed to shoot 2 MOA@50 yards. I can do that with my $250 A22, so I'm not even sure why the $500 Ruger is manufactured. I have an RWS air rifle, and I'm starting to wonder if the Ruger can beat it.

I can keep my .22 LR for popping squirrels and playing around with pistols on steel.

I asked a question that was based on my ignorance, and it looks like I've been educated.

the thing is....if you relax your accuracy standard to 1.25-1.5 MOA.....well you can do that quite easily, cheaply, and reliably.

the recent advent of "easy off the shelf sub-moa" guns has really spoiled us into thinking anything less than 1/2 MOA is "garbage"

the fact is, 1-2 MOA is still really damn good accuracy.....and far more than anyone practically needs.

hell, i think there was someone in this thread who called 1.25 MOA "good enough for hunting".......hell, 4 MOA is good enough for hunting......1.25 is quite good accuracy.

 

[jbell]

These squirrels believe the rifle is sub MOA just as I do. View attachment 7496487

Who gives a damn about this MOA shit, I want to talk more about this rifle! It is a friggin beautiful rifle! HA

 

[RTH1800]

Not sure what anyone is hunting with a .22RF that 4MOA is good enough for. Not close to cutting it here.

 

[Hoser]

You have to look at everything I took into account. People on this thread say you have to buy numerous boxes of ammunition until you find a lot--not a cartridge, but a specific lot--that shoots well. That means you're throwing out box after box until you find lots that shoot. So if you throw out 4 boxes at 25 cents per round and keep one box, you're paying a $1.25 per round.

Yup.

Good luck to you.

 

[Criver600]

Sub-MOA at 100 yards is tough. Shot NRA Conventional prone for quite a few years, and you need to test ammo. NRA 100 yard target, me shooting out of a sling 200 18X. Rifle and ammo easily sub MOA, me almost
10 ring is 2" X is 1"

 

[...]

I went to Youtube and saw people shooting the Ruger, and they were overjoyed to shoot 2 MOA@50 yards. I can do that with my $250 A22, so I'm not even sure why the $500 Ruger is manufactured. I have an RWR air rifle, and I'm starting to wonder if the Ruger can beat it.

im thinking the Ruger is made more for people wanting it as a trainer for their centerfire RPR more than it is for its potential as a target rifle.

 

[...]

Not sure what anyone is hunting with a .22RF that 4MOA is good enough for. Not close to cutting it here.

are you hunting for the game?...or hunting for sport?

you can absolutely get within 50...hell, 25 yds of squirrels, rabbits, ect...if you are looking to bag the game.

if you are "long range" hunting for fun/ pest controll......then yeah....you might want something a tick more accurate.

 

[RTH1800]

I never thought about it. When leaves are off I enjoy taking all shots inside 100 yards on sitting squirrels. With leaves on I often shoot a Colt Woodsman Match Target. I enjoy being in the woods at dawn with an accurate rifle.

 

[RTH1800]

I actually have two C Sporters with wood like that. One has the standard 24” light sporter barrel and one a 28” standard target rifle barrel. Each is also equipped and sighted with a Lyman 48 as well.

The heavy one is stunning for accuracy. Holds POI in any position or from any rest. It also likes most quality ammo.

Included in photo is a less highly figured version of a C sporter.

Each was selected from dozens of 52C’s by years of accuracy testing.

@justin amateur would have been impressed with my testing regime.

I literally made a graph and logged every group from 40 plus rifles over dozens of range trips. These three were the “last men standing.”

 

[Vamike9]

I have a few .22 rifles as well as a Savage 93R in .17 HMR. The .22s are not bad guns, but the Savage generally shoots sub-MOA, and the others will not.

I've noticed that there are now a few "precision" .22 rifles out there, and I have a boatload of .22 ammo. Is there anything available that will shoot sub-MOA, or is it a waste of time trying to get there with .22 LR? I've seen some videos of people shooting "precision" .22 rifles, and they seemed really happy with 1.5-2 MOA.

Bergara B14r, Tikka T1x and some Ruger Precision Rimfire rifles.
I'm sure there are more, but these are sub moa at 100 yards, more times than not, using match ammo.