Lapua X-Act ammo

[garandman]

Anyone test drive this ammo ?

Here's Lapua's website blurb:

Lapua’s X-ACT .22 LR ammo has been developed after an extensive research program to unite all of the best properties of each of the components of the cartridge. The shooters can depend on the absolute accuracy and consistency of the X-ACT cartridge, known as extremely sophisticated rimfire ammo of highest quality. X-ACT has been tested by most of the world’s top smallbore shooters, and the comments have been nothing but praise: “The best .22 LR ammunition I ever shot.” Lapua’s X-ACT rimfire ammunition is the 1 embodiment of our Passion for Precision.

At $25+ / box of 50, its some of the pricey-est 22rf ammo I've found. I ordered a box and will see how it stacks up compared to Center-X, SK, Eley, etc.

What should I expect from this stuff?

 

[brianf]

it is a slightly better ammo but not worth the price over center X
maybe for a BR comp because other guys are running Eley
but IMO dont waste your money

 

[padom]

it is a slightly better ammo but not worth the price over center X
maybe for a BR comp because other guys are running Eley
but IMO dont waste your money

Wasnt worth $25/box when I tested it. Center X, SK RM and PM and Eley Tenex, which I got at a blowout price or wouldnt be shooting it, all shoot better for the money

 

[A-Rob]

It shot better than anything else for me on 6x5 test targets, but just slightly. It averaged .270 and Center X was second, averaging .291. It wasn't worth twice the cost for my purposes.

 

[justin amateur]

Yep, like any rimfire purchase it's a gamble.
Due to the methods used in grading the quality at the factory
there is no guarantee the entire batch will be as good.
I've had X-act produce extremely good results and very low ES for 50 shots
and then produce chrony numbers and strays like cheap plinking ammo from the next box.
It's rimfire, welcome to the lottery.

 

[jbell]

Yep, like any rimfire purchase it's a gamble.

It's rimfire, welcome to the lottery.

HA, well said!

I have had the same results as everyone else. I am at the point where I had rather test for excellent lots of lower priced ammo than test for the best of the top end ammo, because in the end the best of each are very close. The only thing is the lesser quality ammo will have a much worse “bad lot” than the higher quality, but who really cares about that...

 

[lapuaBR]

what I have found to be of the up most importance for long range 22lR shooting is consistency . run some of your cheaper ammo over your chrono for long range 22 shooting we must have great standard deviation from shot to shot I shoot center x for practice and midas as well but on comp day I shoot x-act in my LGP built RimX Makes a difference, Lee

 

[Merlin O]

A number of bullets for other target disciplines cost .50 apiece not counting the other components. People pay the price because they are the best component for the intended purpose. A-Rob compared .270 to .291. Damned sure a valid point! But, In some competitions that might be 20 places on the leader board. For me shooting NRA metallic silhouette lever action rimfire I won't be buying it by the case. For someone shouting ASSA competitions it might be the difference in one of the boys and being the National Champion.

Just saying... Speed cost money. How fast do you want to go?

 

[hlee]

A sub moa gun can clean a kyl target rack with a 1/4” target at 50 yards. That’s the smallest target I’ve ever seen at a nrl22 style comp. Most of the targets are “generous”, and you don’t get extra points for a center-punch. Going from sub moa to “more sub moa” might buy you a couple of points, but it is likely to not be the biggest factor when adding in variable wind and unstable props. Granted, there are disciplines other than NRL/PRS, and this might be just the ticket somewhere. But, my money is better spent on more- lower priced- ammo for these positional games.

 

[padom]

My go to lots of CenterX that sit at the top of the 50 and 100yd SH 6x5 lists with my RimX have SD's of 5 over my Labradar over 50rds. Some of the best SD's Ive seen of all the 22lr ammo Ive tested. That includes Polar Biathlon, Tenex, UM22 and R50. I have not tested X-Act and dont plan to. I see no reason why when I shoot 10x5 agg in the .1's @ 50 and 6x5 agg at .5 @ 100 with 300 and 400yd targets of MOA or less...

 

[Jefe's Dope]

The Center X I've chrono'd over my MagnetoSpeed has been disappointing.

I'll try and find my data and post it up.

 

[Jefe's Dope]

Found it.

Lapua Center X
Both shot indoors at 100 using a MagnetoSpeed attached via Picatinny rail via chassis, mounted at 3:00. Approx. temp of 73*. No accuracy data collected. I assume it mostly shot right at 1 MOA.

Series 1: 8 Shots, Min 1073, Max, 1108 Avg. 1090, SD 12.1, ES 35

Series 2: 10 Shots, Min 1067, Max 1106, Avg. 1081, SD 11.8, ES 39

Series 3: 10 Shots, Min 1069, Max 1115, Avg. 1087, SD 13.9, ES 46 (Wow!)

Series 4: 70 Shots, Min 1073, Max 1115, Avg. 1090, SD 8.9, ES 42

Average MV for first data = 1087

Different lot/Different day

Series 1: 8 Shots, Min 1062, Max 1083, Avg. 1073, SD 7.3, ES 21

Series 2: 12 Shots, Min 1056, Max 1080, Avg. 1067, SD 7.7, ES 24

Series 3: 8 Shots, Min 1054, Max 1081, Avg. 1067, SD 9.2, ES 27

Series 4: 12 Shots, Min 1069, Max 1101, Avg. 1081, SD 9.1, ES 32

Average for second data = 1072.

Accumulated data: Min 1054, Max 1115, Avg. 1079.5*, SD no data, ES 61 (JHFC!)

*1080 is what I use as correction in my Strelok Pro. I don't use just one lot number for matches. I use many lots as I have yet to send my rifle to Lapua for testing and I'm not committing funds to one unknown lot number until I do send it off. I've shot out to 400 and the indian is still the biggest factor.

 

[orkan]

It's worth it, if it's worth it for you.

Midas+ is better than centerX. X-act is better than Midas+.

No amount of hand wringing will make that not true.

 

[justin amateur]

And again, it's rimfire.
Maybe the higher priced cartridges will be better, maybe they won't.
I use a ballistic chronograph every trip to the range.
Sometimes the cheaper ammo produces tighter numbers.
I've had a box of SK Pistol Match, a mid grade 22lr,
produce a smaller ES than 50 shots with Tenex, Midas+, RWS R50 and Lapua X-Act.
That's why lot testing is so important for top competitors.
The factory lot grading is a statistical sample and only applies to the small amount tested.
No guarantee the rest of the batch will be as good, or as bad.
That's why you can find batches of CenterX that will outshoot Lapua's higher priced offerings.

 

[padom]

And again, it's rimfire.
Maybe the higher priced cartridges will be better, maybe they won't.
I use a ballistic chronograph every trip to the range.
Sometimes the cheaper ammo produces tighter numbers.
I've had a box of SK Pistol Match, a mid grade 22lr,
produce smaller a smaller ES than 50 shots with Tenex, Midas+, RWS R50 and Lapua X-Act.
That's why lot testing is so important for top competitors.
The factory lot grading is a statistical sample and only applies to the small amount tested.
No guarantee the rest of the batch will be as good.

EXACTLY!

Its all about lot testing. You have a better chance of better numbers from the higher priced ammo but blanket statements of Midas+ and X-Act are always better is just not true and all the testing and results prove that.

 

[littlepod]

When I chrono'd my center-x out of my new Vudoo it was having an SD of 11-14. It shot fantastically out of my Tikka. Chrono'd it out of the Tikka and the SD was 7-8.

Looking at the Lapua testing center data, I see some lots of Center-X have the best scores with Annie's, but the worst scores with Vudoo in the test. So it's possible, the way the chamber is, the way the ammo fits to the rifle, that it generates a different set of velocities/SD's.

When listening to lowlight's interview with Brian Litz and they talk about Lapua. Every ammo starts off as X-Act. They run ammo through their rifle setup and check for groups. If it groups < some # it becomes X-Act, otherwise Midas+, otherwise Center-X. What runs well in their rifle isn't necessarily what runs best out of your rifle, so they say do you own lot testing.

 

[justin amateur]

Here's something to think about...how do you know if it's the rifle that likes a particular batch of cartridges
or if the reason it appears one rifle did well and the other didn't isn't due to the rifles, but due to differences in the cartridges?
I find variations in rimfire ammunition quality not just lot# by lot#, but also case by case, brick by brick, even within the same box.
Cartridge uniformity is not a constant, not even within the same box, let alone an entire run of cartridges.
Most of us test small amounts of ammunition and base our comments on an extremely limited sample size.
Conclusions derived from a minimum of results, are often incorrect. Especially when dealing with rimfire.

Just to offer an example, I have a delivery of the new Eley Outlaw and Semi-Auto Benchrest on the way.
250 cartridges of each to send over the chronograph at 200 yards. That should provide a decent idea of their quality.
Not 5 or 10 shots, or even a single box to determine what's happening. And there's no guarantee the results from
this order of 22lr will produce the same results the next time I make a purchase of the same brands/types.

 

[orkan]

I would have thought it was a given that I was referencing LOT TESTED ammo of each... but I guess that requires clarification.

If you do lot testing with all... you will usually not find the best lot of center X out shooting the best lot Midas+ and the best lot of midas+ will usually not out shoot the best lot of X-act. It can happen, but it isn't a regularity. People most frequently start their ammo testing search with budget being the first deciding factor... and as a result, most people spend their lot testing efforts with 11'ish dollar a box ammo. They don't spend their time with the high end stuff. If that weren't true, you'd see people other than me talking about it. Instead, its post after post about center x, SK std+, and other similarly priced grades.

I've fired over 22,000 rounds of high end 22lr so far this year... and most years I'll fire between 20k - 30k annually, and have done so for the past 15+ years. A couple of those years were maybe down around the 10-15k mark... but that's still a pretty healthy firing schedule. When I order ammo, it shows up on a pallet. That's hundreds of lot numbers and dozens of types of ammo in many dozens of rifles. Just this year I've worked with about 30 different lot numbers of Center-X alone. I'm pretty sure I'm qualified to talk about trends. The concept that the cheap ammo is "just as good" as the expensive stuff, is probably the most widely propagated myth among rimfire shooters. That isn't to say some great performance can't be found at $11 per box. It's simply to say that anyone expecting the same level of performance from $11 a box as they get from $25 a box, WHEN LOT TESTED, is deluding themselves. Lots of happiness can be found with lot tested mid-grade ammo such as Center-X... and for most peoples expectations, that's likely where their efforts should best be spent. Yet the argument that the more expensive ammo isn't better as a rule, is silly, and has no backing in reality. Conversely, the argument that the mid-grade ammo is "good enough" for many... is a good argument.

If you'd like to disagree with me... fine. Unless you can show me demonstrations of your first hand experience with a true lot test looking for the BEST ammo at any price for a specific rifle, I'll go ahead and ignore it. A minimum of 2 boxes of each lot number, of each product... would be required for that test. At least 6-12 lot numbers per product. 2 bricks, of each product, comprising of 5 lot numbers each... would be a good start for a comparison. I've done that several times... and I have NEVER once run into a situation where Center-X beat out Midas+ nor Midas+ beat out X-act. Just as I've never seen Eley Match beat out Tennex. The best lots of the lower grades have never once beat out the best lots of the higher grades. I bet the guys working the test tunnels have seen it... but I bet if you ask them where customers put their focus... you'd find it in the lower tiers rather than the higher. Everyone always wants something "special" for less money. Not that I'm saying it's bad to want it, but it's bad to think that's the reality.

Spend more money, get better things, almost always. THAT is the reality of the world we live in. Kick and scream about it all you want. Don't agree with me if you want. It won't change what is. If you don't like the facts I'm providing... fine. ... but it isn't as if I came by this information and this belief regarding 22lr ammo without extreme expense and ridiculous amounts of time. Dismiss it if you want, but I won't be suffering you.

@littlepod you are correct that chamber and barrel configuration has a significant impact on how ammo will shoot.

 

[Hattrick]

Hard to Argue to that

 

[padom]

 

[RainierRimfire]

It's worth it, if it's worth it for you.

Midas+ is better than centerX. X-act is better than Midas+.

No amount of hand wringing will make that not true.

I also have found this to be true time and time again, albeit for me the progression is minimal.

 

[orkan]

I also have found this to be true time and time again, albeit for me the progression is minimal.

It's awesome that you've done your own work and saw the truth of it yourself. Good job on that, sincerely.

The sad part is, there are people that have significantly more experience than I that can validate what I'm saying, but wouldn't dream of posting here. They've learned their lesson and have no interest in public debate. When someone that hasn't put in the work, wants to attack, marginalize, and belittle people that have... there is no reasonable hope of worthwhile discussion.

This pic represents about 2/3 of my personal ammo. Roughly 80-90,000 rounds of nearly every type of applicable match 22LR available, which gets cycled through in 2-5 years time. Some sits around a while, as I only shoot it during testing. Most of my lapua and eley is at a different location... since I basically am out of room at the moment and have been focusing on R50 anyway. With any luck by years end, I'll have some custom shelving made which will allow better storage, and have room enough for several more cases.

 

[RainierRimfire]

It's awesome that you've done your own work and saw the truth of it yourself. Good job on that, sincerely.

The sad part is, there are people that have significantly more experience than I that can validate what I'm saying, but wouldn't dream of posting here. They've learned their lesson and have no interest in public debate. When someone that hasn't put in the work, wants to attack, marginalize, and belittle people that have... there is no reasonable hope of worthwhile discussion.

This pic represents about 2/3 of my personal ammo. Roughly 80-90,000 rounds of nearly every type of applicable match 22LR available, which gets cycled through in 2-5 years time. Some sits around a while, as I only shoot it during testing. Most of my lapua and eley is at a different location... since I basically am out of room at the moment and have been focusing on R50 anyway. With any luck by years end, I'll have some custom shelving made which will allow better storage, and have room enough for several more cases.

Couldn’t agree more with your thoughts.
I “tested” the three mentioned Lapua’s on 6x5’s at 50, 100 and 200 yards, with my Vudoo, over about 8 months and uncountable thousands of rounds. I kept all group measurements on a spreadsheet listing date and weather as well. X-Act was always the tightest, followed by Midas+, then Center X. I was hoping Midas + and X-Act would be a push, but it just didn’t happen. X-Act is crazy consistent!

 

[orkan]

The cool thing is with rimx's, voodoo's, benchrest rifles, and high end classics becoming more the norm... we're seeing an upswing in people's knowledge, finally. A lot of myths are being busted. If only some folks with ego's that outweigh their experience would remain silent at worst, and at best put in the time to learn the truth instead of harassing those of us with experience. Then the myths could get crushed all together and we could all benefit. Especially those new to the sport, that stand to benefit the very most.

The only thing special about me, is the amount of time and money I have to devote to this. Others can reach the same conclusions, were they to devote similar resources. Most folks don't have that kind of time... and that's why misinformation hurts them the most. They listen to someone they shouldn't be listening to... and it sets them back years and thousands of dollars.

That kind of thing really upsets me.

 

[littlepod]

I've never experienced people claiming x-act would not shoot better. I've only heard people saying it's just not worth it in the amount of the improvement. I'm in that boat. I use SK+ and Center-X. I'll be sending my stuff to Lapua and compare Center-X and Midas+

 

[*rim-star*]

My experience with SK & Lapua ammo went as follows, Rifle Match was decent, Center X was a bit better and Midas + was the best, in my mediocre rifle. YMMV

 

[Schütze]

The cool thing is with rimx's, voodoo's, benchrest rifles, and high end classics becoming more the norm... we're seeing an upswing in people's knowledge, finally. A lot of myths are being busted. If only some folks with ego's that outweigh their experience would remain silent at worst, and at best put in the time to learn the truth instead of harassing those of us with experience. Then the myths could get crushed all together and we could all benefit. Especially those new to the sport, that stand to benefit the very most.

The only thing special about me, is the amount of time and money I have to devote to this. Others can reach the same conclusions, were they to devote similar resources. Most folks don't have that kind of time... and that's why misinformation hurts them the most. They listen to someone they shouldn't be listening to... and it sets them back years and thousands of dollars.

That kind of thing really upsets me.

Orkan, I believe there are more folks learning from all the great information you have posted than you think. Please don’t take the harassing reply’s from some NOT as an indication of that your incredible knowledge isn’t very much appreciated.
Guys like me are just learning from you and keep mostly quiet because there is nothing of value to add to your posts.

 

[68hoyt]

What I’ve noticed reading (I have never sent one of my rifles off to lot test nor have I bought several lots to test myself ) other peoples lot testing when they send it off to test ,,,,sometimes eley black box match or center x tested better than the higher end lots ,,,, that were available at the time of testing ?, but I’ve also noticed that lower quality rifles sometimes don’t like the high end at all , have y’all noticed the same thing ?

 

[orkan]

but I’ve also noticed that lower quality rifles sometimes don’t like the high end at all , have y’all noticed the same thing ?

If a rifle is only capable of .4's or .6's... then obviously it won't matter if you're shooting center-x or x-act. If you have a rifle that will shoot center-x in the .2's or .3's ... then there's almost definitely a benefit to be had by testing higher grades. Fewer flyers per box in the higher grades than the lower.

 

[1badDart]

Thanks orkan for sharing your experience and knowledge. Being new to accurate .22 rifles I enjoy reading and learning from people with experience. This being the internet there will always be keyboard experts. I like hot rods, guns, old machining equipment and I see the same thing on all the forums. The only thing I'm an expert at is making my wife mad and I'm good enough that I can do it without even realizing why. LOL

I shoot older rifles for the most part, 52's and a 40X. My ammo reflects what I'm willing to accept accuracy wise from the combination of ammo, rifle and the shooter, me. Mostly I shoot SK Std Plus, five lots in four cases of ammo. They range from shooting very well for one lot to not so good for a couple others. I understand my "standards" for "very well" may only be fair for better shooters with better equipment. I do have a brick of Center-X and it shoots better in all of my rifles than the "good" lot of Std Plus. I have no illusions that with the equipment and skill I have I'll ever shoot shoot consistently with good shooters. For the moment I'm content learning and improving with the tools I have. At 59 I don't have time to get good.

Recently I bought a brick of RWS Target Rifle and a brick of Special Match. The Target rifle shot decent, almost a good as the good lot of STD Plus. The Special Match shot great in everything I ran it through, again great by "my " standards. I'm debating on ordering a case of it if I can get the same lot number. Man I hate to spend that much money just to punch holes in paper. LOL

 

[68hoyt]

If a rifle is only capable of .4's or .6's... then obviously it won't matter if you're shooting center-x or x-act. If you have a rifle that will shoot center-x in the .2's or .3's ... then there's almost definitely a benefit to be had by testing higher grades. Fewer flyers per box in the higher grades than the lower.

what I meant was I had seen and experienced some lower quality rifles don’t like expensive ammo at all , it shot worse than bulk , now maybe if it was lot tested we might find some it likes, I don’t have the experience you do just asking and sharing in the group discussion

 

[Merlin O]

If your cheap fat overly long ammo shoots better than the good stuff your rifles chamber is likely oversized and sloppy and the fat bullets are what it takes to find and fill the lands.