New Center X accuracy

[Chopping Broccoli]

Nothing matters except consistent impacts on target. Not the brand or price tag on the box. Not the es/sd. Nothing matters short of performance on target and there is no way of figuring out what ammo is better in your rifle than to test, either on your own or at a manufacturers test center. Simply paying more and hoping for better is actually statistically unlikely to equate to better groups. Thunderbolts and golden bucket of bullets and the like not withstanding.

I just returned from the Mesa test center. I was fortunate that they had 16 lots of CenterX and Midas to test. I was also fortunate that my rifle LOVED a particular lot of Center X. I was absolutely blown away at how much variation there was between the best lot and the worst. The worst being nearly 3x larger groups than the best. None of the Midas lots compared to the best two Center X lots.

Devan further proved that MV isn’t EVERYTHING. After testing. Confirming. And finally reconfirming the best lot, we strapped a Magnetospeed to my gun and compared impacts at 100m to their individual MV’s. One would assume that slower rounds would impact lower while faster ones impact higher. NOPE. Zero correlation between MV and impacts above or below an imaginary waterline. One would think that at some distance (150,200,250 yards or more) that MV and vertical impact would have to correlate and it might. But there is more to it. The BC of the bullets is poor and variable. Especially if the bullet is dinged, dented, scratched, or otherwise imperfect in any way. Perhaps even minutely. These are some of the variables that single shot bench-rest and, to some extent, controlled feed repeating rifles attempt to avoid.

The cliff’s notes takeaway message from the experts at the test center: There are huge differences in rimfire ammo. Test test test until you find a winner and then hopefully you can stock up on that one. If you are competing in the NRL/PRS game, it takes a lot of ammo to generate an accurate MV/temp table, dsf and MV calibrated ballistic curve(s). Doing all this with only one or two bricks of ammo only to have to start over again in a month or two makes for a lot of wasted time and ammo. Let the groups be your guide, not the es/sd. While poor es/sd will likely never shoot well, excellent es/sd is no guarantee in and of itself. Do not bother with weight or rim thickness sorting of ammo. When you weight sort, what component are you measuring? Powder? Lead? Brass? Primer compound? Who knows so don’t bother. In most all match chambers, the bullet is imprinting in the lands. In a match chamber, rim thickness will affect bolt closure effort, not headspace. This may not apply to looser, non match chambers.

This is the advice given to me from Lapua. YOUR mileage may vary.

CB

 

[Appalachian]

Nothing matters except consistent impacts on target. Not the brand or price tag on the box. Not the es/sd. Nothing matters short of performance on target and there is no way of figuring out what ammo is better in your rifle than to test, either on your own or at a manufacturers test center. Simply paying more and hoping for better is actually statistically unlikely to equate to better groups. Thunderbolts and golden bucket of bullets and the like not withstanding.

I just returned from the Mesa test center. I was fortunate that they had 16 lots of CenterX and Midas to test. I was also fortunate that my rifle LOVED a particular lot of Center X. I was absolutely blown away at how much variation there was between the best lot and the worst. The worst being nearly 3x larger groups than the best. None of the Midas lots compared to the best two Center X lots.

Devan further proved that MV isn’t EVERYTHING. After testing. Confirming. And finally reconfirming the best lot, we strapped a Magnetospeed to my gun and compared impacts at 100m to their individual MV’s. One would assume that slower rounds would impact lower while faster ones impact higher. NOPE. Zero correlation between MV and impacts above or below an imaginary waterline. One would think that at some distance (150,200,250 yards or more) that MV and vertical impact would have to correlate and it might. But there is more to it. The BC of the bullets is poor and variable. Especially if the bullet is dinged, dented, scratched, or otherwise imperfect in any way. Perhaps even minutely. These are some of the variables that single shot bench-rest and, to some extent, controlled feed repeating rifles attempt to avoid.

The cliff’s notes takeaway message from the experts at the test center: There are huge differences in rimfire ammo. Test test test until you find a winner and then hopefully you can stock up on that one. If you are competing in the NRL/PRS game, it takes a lot of ammo to generate an accurate MV/temp table, dsf and MV calibrated ballistic curve(s). Doing all this with only one or two bricks of ammo only to have to start over again in a month or two makes for a lot of wasted time and ammo. Let the groups be your guide, not the es/sd. While poor es/sd will likely never shoot well, excellent es/sd is no guarantee in and of itself. Do not bother with weight or rim thickness sorting of ammo. When you weight sort, what component are you measuring? Powder? Lead? Brass? Primer compound? Who knows so don’t bother. In most all match chambers, the bullet is imprinting in the lands. In a match chamber, rim thickness will affect bolt closure effort, not headspace. This may not apply to looser, non match chambers.

This is the advice given to me from Lapua. YOUR mileage may vary.

CB

What rifle did you take? What did your final 20 round group measure? I have a rifle there (Mesa) now. I’m just curious how good the lots that they have right now are. I’ve been to the Marengo, Ohio location a couple of times. It is surprising how much difference there is between the best lot and the worst lot. In my case the worst lot’s groups were at least double the size of the best lot’s groups. It makes you want to never buy blind again.

 

[Chopping Broccoli]

It makes you want to never buy blind again.

I agree 100%. There is just so much variation lot to lot.

14.00mm @ 50m
22.84mm @ 100m

Vudoo V22 Gen3
22” ACE MTU target crown no threads.

I also asked them if they “knew” in advanced what the good lots where. After all they test rifles all day every day. Did they see the same lot(s) consistently performing well in multiple rifles? Answer: Absolutely not. The lot my rifle preferred is likely to be crap in the next and vice versa. Absolutely no way for them to know or predict without first going through the testing.

The ammo they use for fouler/burner ammo is a lot that they happen to have on hand that is no longer available from the warehouse. They don’t want to test a rifle with an ammo that is unavailable for purchase so as the warehouse runs out of a lot, they notify the test center to move any remaining stock they have of it to their burner pile.

 

[Bgriff008]

Best lot vs worse lot. It’s all dependent on the rifle shooting the lot. Your best lot could be someone’s worst lot and visa versa. Crazy to think though there is that much difference between lots. What’s that say about QC of the assembly and the QC of all the parts that make up a round and the lot. I definitely love the discussion but this is long tiring work for 22 precision. I’d drive myself crazy doing lot tests. It would be totally different is I was at a higher level of shooting. The thing that is really nice about the testing at Lapua. The gun is sled shot and indoors, so it has the least amount if any, shooter and weather influence on the round. Once that lot is found, the groupings have to be crazy tight. One would think anyway. I have one buddy who went to the Ohio shooting center to test his vudoo. The center is actually just up the road from me. 20 min drive.

 

[1813Benny]

Statistics NEVER lie! Not once in the entire history of this area of science have they ever lied.

Even on those rare occasions it might seem like they lie, peer review by fellow scientists quickly reveals a mistake and it's rectified.
It's too bad there isn't any peer review for politicians with a bias! They only use the data to support their position while ignoring the opposing data.

The problem, simply put, is that I've never seen more than a handful of people on any forum who have any knowledge whatsoever of how to properly use statistics.

For the most part sample sizes are too small, measurements of things like group size are shoddy at best, often some bias, and no one has the ability to analyze their results properly.

The end result is that most of you make conclusions stating one ammo is better than another or some test is better than another, but in many or most cases, the two may be nearly equal statistically.
Considering that, is there any wonder why posters squabble so much on every forum over anything they're curious about?

Landy

Landy,
Your post should be framed, placed on a wall under a spotlight and surrounded by velvet ropes.

Best Regards,
ken

 

[grauhanen]

Devan further proved that MV isn’t EVERYTHING. After testing. Confirming. And finally reconfirming the best lot, we strapped a Magnetospeed to my gun and compared impacts at 100m to their individual MV’s. One would assume that slower rounds would impact lower while faster ones impact higher. NOPE. Zero correlation between MV and impacts above or below an imaginary waterline. One would think that at some distance (150,200,250 yards or more) that MV and vertical impact would have to correlate and it might. But there is more to it. The BC of the bullets is poor and variable. Especially if the bullet is dinged, dented, scratched, or otherwise imperfect in any way. Perhaps even minutely.

If any influence imparted by the Magnetospeed on the barrel can be disregarded for the moment (and I'm not saying there necessarily is one), CB makes a very good observation about POI and MV.

There isn't always a direct relationship between the MV of a round and where it strikes on the target. While it's not clear whether BC variation is the cause, there are other factors that help explain why POI and MV may not always be directly linked.

First, it's impossible to know if the heel of a .22LR bullet is as it should be without examination. A mishapen or imperfect heel can affect bullet performance, regardless of MV. Unfortunately, however, if the heel is examined the round is destroyed.

Second, the center of gravity of .22LR bullets can vary between rounds. This may at times be related to the characteristics of a bullet's heel. In any case, an offset Cg can cause a bullet to follow a trajectory that is not predicted by its MV.

It's likely that lesser grades of ammo will be more likely to have greater numbers of individual rounds that don't behave as expected based on MV.

 

[justin amateur]

Statistics NEVER lie! Not once in the entire history of this area of science have they ever lied.

Okay....I can accept that.

Can I say that the results of the statistical analysis can be misinterpreted,
due to incomplete understanding of the process and applied incorrectly?

 

[vaguru]

If all of this ammo lot is specific to just certain rifle barrels, how does one explain that a known good lot of ammo in one rifle produces similar groups in many rifles?

I have 3 different lots of a now extinct ammo, each has ES of less than 30 fps and muzzle velocities within 5 fps of each other out of the same rifle. These lots shoot sub .250" 5 shot groups out of 5 different rifles at 50 yds in good conditions.

Now you're going to say 5 shot groups are not enough, but I have shot numerous groups out of these 5 rifles totaling well over 3,000 rounds. Guns in question are KIDD barreled 10/22 build, Bergara B-14R, Ruger RPR RF, Remington 541 T and a lowly Winchester 320. All groups were shot off a bench using a Rock BR and rear bag, each rifle scoped with 24-25 power.

Best groups with each of these rifles is low to mid .100's, with one rifle under .100". I understand the conditions for those groups were near ideal.

I have read that a good lot of ammo will shoot well in many rifles on the bench forums, my experience seems to bear this out.

 

[mccannicalbob]

That’s a good observation vaguru. As someone else mentioned, sometimes Killough’s will have several lots of Tenex or Match available. The ”good” lots don’t last long, while others will be on the shelf a long time.

I think the point is, ammo that tests “good” at the factory, like X-act or Midas+, will generally, but not always, shoot well in a good barrel, but it’s not a guarantee it will shoot well in your barrel. Conversely, just because a run of ammo performs at a lower level in factory testing isn’t a guarantee it will shoot poorly in your gun. That’s how you get awesome lots of Center X or SK std+—ammo that didn’t test well in the factory test barrels, but for whatever reason shoots well in your barrel.

If you can do ammo testing at a test center, you’ll probably be money ahead over just getting lucky when buying random ammo. But even then, there is variation within a given lot of ammo. It is mass-produced, and there’s no way to make each round identical.

 

[littlepod]

If all of this ammo lot is specific to just certain rifle barrels, how does one explain that a known good lot of ammo in one rifle produces similar groups in many rifles?

I have 3 different lots of a now extinct ammo, each has ES of less than 30 fps and muzzle velocities within 5 fps of each other out of the same rifle. These lots shoot sub .250" 5 shot groups out of 5 different rifles at 50 yds in good conditions.

Now you're going to say 5 shot groups are not enough, but I have shot numerous groups out of these 5 rifles totaling well over 3,000 rounds. Guns in question are KIDD barreled 10/22 build, Bergara B-14R, Ruger RPR RF, Remington 541 T and a lowly Winchester 320. All groups were shot off a bench using a Rock BR and rear bag, each rifle scoped with 24-25 power.

Best groups with each of these rifles is low to mid .100's, with one rifle under .100". I understand the conditions for those groups were near ideal.

I have read that a good lot of ammo will shoot well in many rifles on the bench forums, my experience seems to bear this out.

I've witnessed this as well. I have a lot of Center-X that through most of the rifles will have an ES of 20 with an SD of 4-6. This has shot really well out of 2 RimX's, 2 Vudoo's, RPRR, and an Ultimatum Deuce. Sadly it doesn't shoot well out of MY Vudoo though lol.

I would have to say that when I say not well, it's not like it's garbage. I'm talking about on my Vudoo shooting in the high .3's instead of the low .2's. But on other rifles it's clearly the winner for them. My Vudoo really likes a slower lot of 24xx that so far has shot well out of 2 similar builds, (22" Benchmark), but did not shoot well out of 3 RimX's.

 

[Manning5R]

.......

I also asked them if they “knew” in advanced what the good lots where. After all they test rifles all day every day. Did they see the same lot(s) consistently performing well in multiple rifles? Answer: Absolutely not. The lot my rifle preferred is likely to be crap in the next and vice versa. Absolutely no way for them to know or predict without first going through the testing.

........

I'm a bit skeptical of that. If they admitted that lot xyz is awesome, and the rest were sub-awesome, they'd never get any chance at selling the sub-awesome lots.

 

[Lastsaint21]

this is why you can get GREAT lots of RWS in an version..Each line has it's own machine, that is just ran faster the cheaper you go..with the same components. RWS50 and 100 is on the only exception, they are ran slow and on the same machine, that is why you usually find one or the other..If you buy RWS Rifle match, you can get a great lot of ammo..they test the ammo, and if it's amazing, it is still RWS Rifle Match, it can never become RWS50. I would also have to believe the opposite is the case to but "I think" the stuff that falls under the min. requirements gets turn into Tac-22.

 

[HuskerP7M8]

Statistics NEVER lie! Not once in the entire history of this area of science have they ever lied.

Okay....I can accept that.

Can I say that the results of the statistical analysis can be misinterpreted,
due to incomplete understanding of the process and applied incorrectly?

Yes, you can say that. After all, it was the whole point of my previous post.

BTW, the oft quoted words attributed to Samuel Clemens in your meme aren't his, but he did use them in his autobiography. They were used by Benjamin Disraeli as stated by Clemens and a quick search revealed they may have originated in the early 19th century and have been used for quite some time apparently by many others.

I even found one earlier example where the phrase was taken out of context and was actually used by a college Professor to point out how ill-informed average people were on the complex science of statistics and how it led them to erroneous conclusions.

Gee, that sounds eerily familiar to what I posted, depending on the context of course. LOL

Landy

 

[HuskerP7M8]

Landy,
Your post should be framed, placed on a wall under a spotlight and surrounded by velvet ropes.

Best Regards,
ken

Thanks Ken,

Coming from someone with your resumé in the shooting sports means a lot to me and I really appreciate it!

Landy

 

[Masojoh]

Ammo will drive a guy nuts. I am not able to lot test or send my rifle away to a test center. I just buy a case, tune for it and try to maintain the highest average score that it will do.

I have a brick left from a case of SK Standard Plus that shot a 16.2 mm(edge to edge, 50yds) 40 shot group outdoors in the snow at -2C (Anschutz 64MPR). Meanwhile I'm just hoping something shows up that my Vudoo shoots well.

Just curious - why do you say that you can’t you send your rifle to get lot tested? I’ve sent two in so far (one is there now), and the process is straightforward. You’ll be out of your rifle for maybe 6 weeks, but the results are pretty straightforward. I was able to buy 2 cases for my vudoo last fall, which will last me well over a year as I practice positional shooting with cheaper ammo.

FWIW, I was quite surprised to see the lot to lot variations in my vudoo. I would caution anyone from giving up on a certain brand of ammo given those results. The most expensive rimfire ammo I have is a lot of Midas plus I picked up from another member here. It shoots bug holes at 50 yards out of my Vudoo and b14. At 100? It is very disappointing (2.5-3” 5 shot groups). Does that mean all Midas plus is garbage? Not to me. But this lot is garbage beyond 50 yards to me.

 

[Williwaw]

Just curious - why do you say that you can’t you send your rifle to get lot tested? I’ve sent two in so far (one is there now), and the process is straightforward. You’ll be out of your rifle for maybe 6 weeks, but the results are pretty straightforward. I was able to buy 2 cases for my vudoo last fall, which will last me well over a year as I practice positional shooting with cheaper ammo.

FWIW, I was quite surprised to see the lot to lot variations in my vudoo. I would caution anyone from giving up on a certain brand of ammo given those results. The most expensive rimfire ammo I have is a lot of Midas plus I picked up from another member here. It shoots bug holes at 50 yards out of my Vudoo and b14. At 100? It is very disappointing (2.5-3” 5 shot groups). Does that mean all Midas plus is garbage? Not to me. But this lot is garbage beyond 50 yards to me.

I live in northern Canada. I wouldn't ship the rifle internationally and the distribution from the test centers is not international. Also the expense of shipping up here is very high. Eley has a test center in Canada but they only test Tenex which is a little beyond my means.

 

[littlepod]

Just curious - why do you say that you can’t you send your rifle to get lot tested? I’ve sent two in so far (one is there now), and the process is straightforward. You’ll be out of your rifle for maybe 6 weeks, but the results are pretty straightforward. I was able to buy 2 cases for my vudoo last fall, which will last me well over a year as I practice positional shooting with cheaper ammo.

FWIW, I was quite surprised to see the lot to lot variations in my vudoo. I would caution anyone from giving up on a certain brand of ammo given those results. The most expensive rimfire ammo I have is a lot of Midas plus I picked up from another member here. It shoots bug holes at 50 yards out of my Vudoo and b14. At 100? It is very disappointing (2.5-3” 5 shot groups). Does that mean all Midas plus is garbage? Not to me. But this lot is garbage beyond 50 yards to me.

Very odd to shoot bug holes at 100 and then 2.5-3" at 100 yds! My Midas+ from my test ended up being #1 at 50 and 100m. I've seen fluctuations but not that dramatic between 50 and 100.

 

[Masojoh]

Very odd to shoot bug holes at 100 and then 2.5-3" at 100 yds! My Midas+ from my test ended up being #1 at 50 and 100m. I've seen fluctuations but not that dramatic between 50 and 100.

I’ll sell it all to you if you want it.

More than happy to recoup some of my $180 per brick expense. This ammo only gets shot now to season our guns after cleaning, and before we stay shooting center X.

 

[Masojoh]

I live in northern Canada. I wouldn't ship the rifle internationally and the distribution from the test centers is not international. Also the expense of shipping up here is very high. Eley has a test center in Canada but they only test Tenex which is a little beyond my means.

I see. Some guys I shoot with have resorted to tuners to tweak the only ammo they could find last year. I’m not sold on the tuner as something to make bad ammo good. But it may make mediocre ammo better.

 

[Fuckmikebush]

I see. Some guys I shoot with have resorted to tuners to tweak the only ammo they could find last year. I’m not sold on the tuner as something to make bad ammo good. But it may make mediocre ammo better.

That's not what tuners do. They will not tune bad ammo into good ammo. They will not make mediocre ammo good. You don't tune for each lot of ammo either.

 

[grauhanen]

Very odd to shoot bug holes at 100 and then 2.5-3" at 100 yds! My Midas+ from my test ended up being #1 at 50 and 100m. I've seen fluctuations but not that dramatic between 50 and 100.

A good observation. If a lot shoots very well at 50 it should perform well at other distances. The bullets don't have a built-in distance measuring system that tells it when to quit performing as it has. Ammo performance diminishes with distance, but that's inevitable and predictable.

 

[Masojoh]

Y’all are too funny. I guess my eyes have failed me multiple times when shooting groups with my rifles. I’m surprised the comments haven’t come about “well, what conditions were you shooting? How good of a shooter are you really? How many rounds did you shoot? How often do you clean your rifle?” Honestly, I don’t give a hoot what you think.

The test center data shows that lot to lot there is significant variation in the Lapua ammo. I guess we should argue that isn’t valid? The topic of this thread was how the new center X was no bueno. I was trying to offer some suggestions to the OP as to how he might think about it along with my personal observations. I didn’t bother with sharing the SD and ES that I captured on my many outings either, because it isn’t likely relevant to anyone other than me.

 

[littlepod]

I’ll sell it all to you if you want it.

More than happy to recoup some of my $180 per brick expense. This ammo only gets shot now to season our guns after cleaning, and before we stay shooting center X.

Thanks for the offer, but I just dropped way too much money on 2 cases of my Midas+... I'll probably sell off half of it myself as I won't be shooting that much.

 

[Lastsaint21]

Y’all are too funny. I guess my eyes have failed me multiple times when shooting groups with my rifles. I’m surprised the comments haven’t come about “well, what conditions were you shooting? How good of a shooter are you really? How many rounds did you shoot? How often do you clean your rifle?” Honestly, I don’t give a hoot what you think.

The test center data shows that lot to lot there is significant variation in the Lapua ammo. I guess we should argue that isn’t valid? The topic of this thread was how the new center X was no bueno. I was trying to offer some suggestions to the OP as to how he might think about it along with my personal observations. I didn’t bother with sharing the SD and ES that I captured on my many outings either, because it isn’t likely relevant to anyone other than me.

I have seen this too..I have two lots of center x that won’t perform at a 100..don’t know why.. just won’t..I used it to season for some SKLM until I switch les to RWS..

 

[Bgriff008]

Just curious - why do you say that you can’t you send your rifle to get lot tested? I’ve sent two in so far (one is there now), and the process is straightforward. You’ll be out of your rifle for maybe 6 weeks, but the results are pretty straightforward. I was able to buy 2 cases for my vudoo last fall, which will last me well over a year as I practice positional shooting with cheaper ammo.

FWIW, I was quite surprised to see the lot to lot variations in my vudoo. I would caution anyone from giving up on a certain brand of ammo given those results. The most expensive rimfire ammo I have is a lot of Midas plus I picked up from another member here. It shoots bug holes at 50 yards out of my Vudoo and b14. At 100? It is very disappointing (2.5-3” 5 shot groups). Does that mean all Midas plus is garbage? Not to me. But this lot is garbage beyond 50 yards to me.

Excellent point. If test ammo at the test center is only 50 yds, and shoots lights out at 50, could be terrible at further distances. I bought my B14 used off this guy (Corey) that tested different ammo brands. Some he tested shot lights out at 50 but further distances of that ammo opened up and grouped worse.

 

[Rats dad]

I also have a Ruger 10-22. I put a target bull barrel and a 2lb. trigger on it. A target stock, and a vortex scope. It shoots a .3in (yes .3) at 50 yards. The gun is a little heavy, but when you pull the trigger, it hits. I shoot center x.