RPRR Ammo Testing

[RackOpsTactical]

I'm conducting an ammo test with my newish Ruger Precision Rimfire.

Plan was to test at 50 yds to see what the top several were then use them to do the 100 yds plus.

please review the slides and let me know if i'm missing anything.

 

[RackOpsTactical]

Will update once I've picked up some more ammo to test. I have very limited access to some of these brands.

 

[Eoddave27]

HOLY CRAP! You did a power point presentation for ammo testing! Damn I feel inadequate. I just took a picture of a few targets. In all seriousness the only ammo I saw that you tested that shot well out of my sons RPR was SK and the SK LSU’s only shot okay. SK Match and Pistol Match Special were pretty decent. Wolf ME shot well also. A little more expensive ammo to test would be Eley Edge and Lapua Center X. Unfortunately with 22 ammo you tend to get what you pay for. The one exception is CCI SV sometimes. I have had some that shot fantastic and other that has stunk. If you find a good lot buy all you can get your hands on.

 

[502Chevelle]

That is a great write up. Thanks for taking the time to help us out with this info.

 

[Booner1334]

First-really outstanding!
You have less than 400 rounds through a factory barrel. In my case, it took many more rounds then that before my factory barrel began to perform as well as yours does. Mine was made in the first month of production with a less than stellar reamer. I've got over 8,000 rounds through it now, and the problem has been lapped out Lately I've noticed reports from newer owners that seem to indicate the Q. C. at Ruger has perhaps improved. I hope so, the RPR has turned into one of my favorite guns, even, or maybe because of the work it took to get her to shoot.

Your report---
I don't understand the data in the collums under "weight in grains" and under "oal to datum line" and I see this info is not in the grid in the last slide.

Are you shooting off a bench or prone, rear bags, time between shots, etc. I'm not criticizing, but if I were to replicate your test with my gun at my range,, how would I set it up.

How are you coming up with the BC info?

You said for the tests on day 1 and 2 will only shoot lead. But you're going to use some copper washed Aquila in the next test. Why? And if you do, maybe you should shoot it last.

I like what you're doing, and I would be happy to donate a couple of boxes for testing if you can't get them locally

 

[RackOpsTactical]

Hey folks sorry for the delay I had planned to do a couple more tests however my job has been keeping me crazy busy last few weeks.

HOLY CRAP! You did a power point presentation for ammo testing! Damn I feel inadequate. I just took a picture of a few targets. In all seriousness the only ammo I saw that you tested that shot well out of my sons RPR was SK and the SK LSU’s only shot okay. SK Match and Pistol Match Special were pretty decent. Wolf ME shot well also. A little more expensive ammo to test would be Eley Edge and Lapua Center X. Unfortunately with 22 ammo you tend to get what you pay for. The one exception is CCI SV sometimes. I have had some that shot fantastic and other that has stunk. If you find a good lot buy all you can get your hands on.

@Eoddave27 thank you for the feedback. I do understand the lot to lot variation. I'm looking forward to the next tests assuming i can find a couple more of the better types of ammo to shoot.

That is a great write up. Thanks for taking the time to help us out with this info.

@502Chevelle thank you for the kind words. I do data analysis, training and presentations for my job so I do enjoy not only shooting but the data that comes with it.

First-really outstanding!
You have less than 400 rounds through a factory barrel. In my case, it took many more rounds then that before my factory barrel began to perform as well as yours does. Mine was made in the first month of production with a less than stellar reamer. I've got over 8,000 rounds through it now, and the problem has been lapped out Lately I've noticed reports from newer owners that seem to indicate the Q. C. at Ruger has perhaps improved. I hope so, the RPR has turned into one of my favorite guns, even, or maybe because of the work it took to get her to shoot.

Your report---
I don't understand the data in the collums under "weight in grains" and under "oal to datum line" and I see this info is not in the grid in the last slide.

Are you shooting off a bench or prone, rear bags, time between shots, etc. I'm not criticizing, but if I were to replicate your test with my gun at my range,, how would I set it up.

How are you coming up with the BC info?

You said for the tests on day 1 and 2 will only shoot lead. But you're going to use some copper washed Aquila in the next test. Why? And if you do, maybe you should shoot it last.

I like what you're doing, and I would be happy to donate a couple of boxes for testing if you can't get them locally

@Booner1334 thank you for the feed back! that is interesting on your factory barrel. thank you for your question as I now suppose I should add an explanation of that information on weight and datum line.

1. Weight was measured using my RCBS chargemaster Lite. what I did was measure 10 samples of the box I was going to shoot. then looked at the stats related to that. the running theory in reloading and ammunition in general is that the more consistent the components, powder charge, and especially in this case the primer charge, the better the ammo with perform. this is what leads people to weight sort their components (arguable benefits) in center-fire reloading.

2. Datum Line Testing. I measured the case from base to the datum line with the hornady comparator (on 22 cal) on a caliper. this measurement allows for an apples to apples measurement of overall length of cartridges with different bullet shapes. showing approx where the bullet will touch the rifelings. Also it's an indicator of quality of manufacturing, and another theory is that certain bullet heads or heads with certain lengths may do better with different barrels.

these two were not on the last slide for test 11 because that was a retest of a different lot of CCI SV.

Also a fair question about the shooting setup. All tests at 50 yards will be from a bench, with rear bag, supported by the front bipod. All tests at 100 yards will be prone, with rear bag, supported by the front bipod. i'm not using a lead sled for this test. Yes that will put in a small amount of variation into the process but that's why every test will be 5, 5 shot groups and not less than that.

I researched the BC's from the manufactures website. If the website didn't provide a BC but did provide velocity numbers from 0 to 100 yards (Which most did) I used their velocity numbers and JBM ballistics BC calculator.

The other BC info i got from the Applied Ballistics Phone App and the Strelok Pro phone App. Both of which have been very helpful for Rimfire try dope on my initial (non documented) 100 yard tests.

As to the lead vs copper question, You are correct and I missed the fact that that particular one wasn't lead.

As I stated I live in an area where I am having a hard time sourcing most of the better quality ammo, and i'm limited to what i can get online. I'd welcome any help in that area!

Thank you guys very much for showing interest in this testing. I'll be posting more soon!

 

[RackOpsTactical]

The following initial data analysis is very interesting. Of course it doesn't prove anything yet but still interesting.

Let me know what you guys think.

 

[straightshooter1]

The following initial data analysis is very interesting. Of course it doesn't prove anything yet but still interesting.

View attachment 7127250



View attachment 7127254

Let me know what you guys think.

Yes, it is interesting.

For me, any time we look at data involving MOA/group-size in judging ammo performance, I can't give much weight to it as there are factors included having do do with a shooter's proficiency as well as environmental effects. . . and then there's the difference on how ammo performs in one gun vs. another. So, in taking those factors out, I'm left with looking at the ES and SD numbers to get an idea how some ammo "might" perform in my particular gun. Even then, when just looking at ES's and SD's, I must consider method and quality of instruments used to produce the numbers. Now is one is able to use a very controlled environment and really high quality equipment, along with massive amounts of data, then the numbers would have some real meaning (kind of what Lapua does in their testing facilities).

However, for the ES and SD numbers, I find it great in seeing the data that many shooter's provide here and adding it to my own that gives me a good sense for how various ammo compares to each other and what I might expect of certain ammo.

I really appreciate the effort and the insights that shooter's like you provide with publishing the results of testing like this. It really does help as I add such info to my collection.

Keep up the good work.

 

[RackOpsTactical]

Got a couple more tests done this weekend.

I did the Federal Auto Match 2 times as I've seen some good feedback from people using it and "Sorting" through for the "good" ones. I sorted out the center of the weight and then of those the ones with the same OAL. I did the ones weighing 51.5 grains, and OAL to datum line of 0.764".

As you can see the Fed Auto Match didn't do any better sorted, but overall it did fairly well given the price and availability.

This is the current rankings based on my testing. Remember once I get a few more done i'll take the top contenders and do 100 yds.

 

[straightshooter1]

Got a couple more tests done this weekend.

I did the Federal Auto Match 2 times as I've seen some good feedback from people using it and "Sorting" through for the "good" ones. I sorted out the center of the weight and then of those the ones with the same OAL. I did the ones weighing 51.5 grains, and OAL to datum line of 0.764".

As you can see the Fed Auto Match didn't do any better sorted, but overall it did fairly well given the price and availability.

i've had the same experience with Federal's Auto Match. It was quite a surprise to me for such bulk ammo to do as well as it did. In fact, I found it did better that other Federal ammo I've tested (e.g. Range Pack; Champion . . . though Champion is at a higher velocity). Federal Ultra Match has been top dog out of my RPRR with Center X close behind; even rivals the likes of Eley Tenex and RWS Premium (though price is in their range too ).

 

[013]

Good stuff thanks for posting!

 

[Dewey7271]

Crazy good write up. Nice work.
Mine likes Eley Target and SK Rifle Match

 

[Booner1334]

So my immediate take away with your testing is, at least at 50 yards, your best groups are with ammo that is more consistent in their weights, verses ammo that is more consistent with it's velocity. This is a little surprising to me. One would think that ammo with the lowest spread (SD) would have the tightest groups. Perhaps this is a function of range? The longer the range that one shoots, the more important velocity becomes to a tighter group...….Sounds like you have a lot more testing to do!

And how consistent the weight of the round is (lower S/D), perhaps is an indication of how well the round was constructed? And perhaps this is more important at a shorter range and as you extend the range velocity become more important...…..Sounds like you have a lot more testing to do.

I did like where you did an analysis of cost vs accuracy, as I'm always looking for this. For me right now that's SK rifle match. I'm trying to decide if going to an after market barrel will help in this regard.

 

[straightshooter1]

One would think that ammo with the lowest spread (SD) would have the tightest groups. Perhaps this is a function of range?

We need to keep in mind that Standard Deviation is a statistical measure of probability. You may or may not get groups associated with a particular SD and depends on the size of the sample taken to get the SD figure. But, I think we can make some reasonable conclusions in comparing SD's between various ammo. Just don't be surprised when one doesn't get the grouping the SD might suggest. One could get tighter groups or wider groups for a particular SD (particularly given a small sample) given that just one way out of the norm cartridge can throw things off.

The longer the range that one shoots, the more important velocity becomes to a tighter group...….S

This is pretty much proven in the precision shooting arena. One of the key things in their load development that they're after is getting their velocity as high as possible within a good load node . . . not just to to reach out further, but to flatten the trajectory as much as possible and have as little flight time as possible . . . all to produce as small a group as possible.

And how consistent the weight of the round is (lower S/D), perhaps is an indication of how well the round was constructed?

Yes . . . IMHO, I'd say that SD's of a sufficient number of rounds are the best evidence of how well particular ammo is constructed. That's how I look at SD's and only to that extent.

I did like where you did an analysis of cost vs accuracy, as I'm always looking for this. For me right now that's SK rifle match. I'm trying to decide if going to an after market barrel will help in this regard.

Looking at it as cost vs "accuracy" is really hard to determine . . . since accuracy involved so many factors outside of the manufacturing process. Cost vs consistency, seems to me to be a better approach. . . ???

 

[Booner1334]

We need to keep in mind that Standard Deviation is a statistical measure of probability. You may or may not get groups associated with a particular SD and depends on the size of the sample taken to get the SD figure. But, I think we can make some reasonable conclusions in comparing SD's between various ammo. Just don't be surprised when one doesn't get the grouping the SD might suggest. One could get tighter groups or wider groups for a particular SD (particularly given a small sample) given that just one way out of the norm cartridge can throw things off.



This is pretty much proven in the precision shooting arena. One of the key things in their load development that they're after is getting their velocity as high as possible within a good load node . . . not just to to reach out further, but to flatten the trajectory as much as possible and have as little flight time as possible . . . all to produce as small a group as possible.



Yes . . . IMHO, I'd say that SD's of a sufficient number of rounds are the best evidence of how well particular ammo is constructed. That's how I look at SD's and only to that extent.



Looking at it as cost vs "accuracy" is really hard to determine . . . since accuracy involved so many factors outside of the manufacturing process. Cost vs consistency, seems to me to be a better approach. . . ???

Thanks for the various responses.
And "cost Vs consistency" is the more appropriate term in terms of what I'm looking for.

 

[Kevin1]

Awesome write-up.
So the gun can't shoot anything at or under 0.5" at 50Y.
In a similar price range (or even slightly higher), the Tikka seems to be a better buy.

 

[Booner1334]

Awesome write-up.
So the gun can't shoot anything at or under 0.5" at 50Y.
In a similar price range (or even slightly higher), the Tikka seems to be a better buy.

Wait 'till he tries some better ammo. My rifle doesn't shoot any of the stuff he's tried very well either, with the exception of the SK Rifle.

 

[RackOpsTactical]

Did some more testing today. Tested 2 very expensive (at least to me) brands.

The Federal Premium Ultra Match was very expensive and did OK'ish...

Was very disappointed with Green Tag performance vs cost.



Updated the rankings with latest performance vs cost.

 

[straightshooter1]

Did some more testing today. Tested 2 very expensive (at least to me) brands.

View attachment 7135957

View attachment 7135961

View attachment 7135963

The Federal Premium Ultra Match was very expensive and did OK'ish...

View attachment 7135964

View attachment 7135965

Was very disappointed with Green Tag performance vs cost.



Updated the rankings with latest performance vs cost.

View attachment 7135966

While I've had very similar results with all of these, my ranking typically has to do with ES and SD's in order to take the variable of shooter skill out of the equation. Interestingly, if I were to set up a list like this, it would be very similar. For MY RPRR, the Federal Premium UltraMatch is the one that does consistently well in my rifle and would be at the top with Center X a close second (followed closely by Midas and RWS R50).

One of the surprising things to me was that CCI Green Tag doesn't really do any better for me than CCI SV's and at the price one pay's for Green Tag . . . it's very disappointing. In fact, it mostly did worse and I'm sorry I bought a brick. I just didn't think it'd be that bad.

For most practicee, the CCI SV is what I like to use most followed by Eley Club (which does somewhat better than SV's and is good practice ammo that doesn't cost as much as what you've paid. . . like I get it for around $0.12 round. see: https://www.brunoshooters.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=10852 ). Am surprise you had to pay so much for Eley Club; must be due to having the Remington label on it. . .???

Federal Auto Match and Norma Match 22 has also done well for me, but not as consistently so.

 

[RackOpsTactical]

@straightshooter1 I agree with your point about the ES and SD that's why I spend so much time collecting the data on that stuff. I am honestly a bit surprised that there isn't a stronger correlation with velocity SD and group size. My experience with center fire is almost the opposite of what i've found with rimfire.

on the remington Eley club i'm not sure if there is a difference in this one vs the normal Eley club. I bought it at a local Bass Pro shop. It looked like they were not going to carry them any longer.

on the green tag I was disappointed, i wanted to love it. I'm still going to test it at 100 yards.

the CCI SV has also not done too well overall. although I do plan on testing a couple other lots. I know everyone raves about it and I understand for the price point why.

I was also surprised and disappointed that sorting the Federal Auto Match didn't pay any dividends. However for it's price I do have to say that it did good enough for say when my kids are shooting.

On the Federal UltraMatch I was hoping for better because all of the "numbers" were very good for how consistent. And for the price at least I have a good reference point for where they best is on this rifle setup. After all we've got to remember that I'm into this setup for $650 for both rifle and glass.

I will also be conducting tests at 100 yards for most of the types of ammo tested just to see if there is any info to be gained there. My method has been to buy 100 rds of whatever I'm going to test. 25 seasons the barrel and use those for the velocity numbers. then 25 for 5 sets of 5 shots for groups. that's 50 rds for 50 yds. Then repeat same process for 100 yards. this totals out at 100 rounds for testing.

I'm waiting on a box from Midsouth that has the next batch of test ammo which is:

• SK Long Range Match
• SK Rifle Match
• Federal Target
• Norma Subsonic 40 Grain Lead Hollow Point
• Aguila Target Competition Standard Velocity

 

[straightshooter1]

I'm waiting on a box from Midsouth that has the next batch of test ammo which is:

• SK Long Range Match
• SK Rifle Match
• Federal Target
• Norma Subsonic 40 Grain Lead Hollow Point
• Aguila Target Competition Standard Velocity

Am looking forward to it.

To date, over the last 3 yrs, I've put together a collection of data for .22LR that amount to 1158 lines on a spreadsheet. Almost half of it is of my own shooting and the rest is from others (like you and what you've posted); yes, your data is on my spreadsheet (including links to the web pages to see the actual reports).


FYI:

Testing these in my RPRR I've gotten the following (ES and SD's, that you might compare them to:

• SK Long Range Match: 39, 8.8
• SK Rifle Match: 60, 15.2
• Federal Target: 72, 22.8
• Norma Subsonic 40 Grain Lead Hollow Point: 70, 14.6
• Aguila Target Competition Standard Velocity: 71, 16.O (this one not my numbers and from a Ruger 10/22)

 

[Seymour Fish]

The following initial data analysis is very interesting. Of course it doesn't prove anything yet but still interesting.

View attachment 7127250



View attachment 7127254

Let me know what you guys think.

You have best average 50 yd groups at a speed average of 1035 to about 1050, thus likely on a node. Norma ammo is generally RWS. Consider you have a factory chamber with sub-optimal engraving depth and lead angle as a given. Perhaps this ammo is best fit to your chamber. Also consider that loose chambers often shoot better as the lead ring builds up. This is easily monitored with a borescope. Often there’s an equilibrium reached where accuracy is good for a few hundred reds to perhaps a thousand in said loose chamber. Eventually needs brush or JB/Flitz etc. some bullet/ bbl combos just don’t “like” certain solvents so might try a commonly used one. Basically the accuracy is marginal given the diligence you have applied. I would rechamber or re-barrel

 

[hogkiller#1]

Great write up. I shoot mine with a front bag rest and the rear against my shoulder. I've tried about 10 different brands and I keep going back to CCI SV. I'm getting 1/2" 5 round groups at 50 yards. Interesting about the post from the guy talking about it should perform better after the barrel has more rounds through it. I've only got about 1500 rounds through mine. I just picked up another RPR in 22 Cal. a few days ago. It's going to my grandson this weekend for his 13th birthday.

 

[hlee]

Buy some Lapua CenterX. Then, buy a lot of it...

 

[RackOpsTactical]

Update from Last Week's Testing:

Was a bit surprised that the Federal Target said it was at 1,080 and shot at 1,142. Made me wonder if they accidentally put in the HV match in this Target box by mistake?? All other advertised vs actual velocity readings were at least close.

upcoming ammo testing:
Lapua Center-X

 

[straightshooter1]

Was a bit surprised that the Federal Target said it was at 1,080 and shot at 1,142. Made me wonder if they accidentally put in the HV match in this Target box by mistake?? All other advertised vs actual velocity readings were at least close.

This guy had the same experience with Federal Target:



Apparently, it has some extra velocity out of an 18" barrel. Another person with a CZ 455, 24" barrel, got an average of 1065 fps over 50 rounds: https://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11268887&postcount=289

 

[straightshooter1]

I'm getting quite a collection of data 1177 lines so far:

 

[RackOpsTactical]

Hi all ~ Just did 3 more tests, probably the last until it gets warmer. Do plan on testing these at 100 yds as well at that point.

 

[littlepod]

You must have had some magic lot of SK+! The SD/ES of your SK+ is much lower than Rifle Match and LRM and CenterX... Thanks for doing this testing!

 

[littlepod]

You should do something like cost vs group size comparison.

I don't know what the math is..

Group Size * Cost?, lowest number sorting?

 

[straightshooter1]

You must have had some magic lot of SK+! The SD/ES of your SK+ is much lower than Rifle Match and LRM and CenterX... Thanks for doing this testing!

Interesting to me too is that his results for Center-X are the worst of the over 500 recorded rounds fired that's listed on my spreadsheet. It must be one of those "bad" lots of Center-X.

 

[littlepod]

Interesting to me too is that his results for Center-X are the worst of the over 500 recorded rounds fired that's listed on my spreadsheet. It must be one of those "bad" lots of Center-X.

Are you also on a RPRR? I wonder what an aftermarket would do to improve it. It doesn't look to be shooting that great if the best average is still above 1moa.

 

[straightshooter1]

Are you also on a RPRR?

Yes, I also use an RPRR along with a couple others.

I wonder what an aftermarket would do to improve it.

There a few barrel manufacturers around now. And Timney has a fine trigger for it. Then there are some aftermarket stocks that are said to reduce the flex in the factory one. But, if I were going to upgrade it that much, I'd probably get a better gun . . . maybe something like a Voodoo.

It doesn't look to be shooting that great if the best average is still above 1moa.

Well, this IS just a $400 mass produced rifle. ? I wouldn't expect it to shoot like that of a Voodoo or some high end $4,000 competition rifle. Even so, once in a while a good one comes off the production line that shoots like one of those.

My RPRR, with its factory barrel, did really well with Center-X. I wanted to see what improvement I might achieve by getting a good barrel so in mounted an 18" Shaw SS match barrel. The was a definite improvement for just about all the different ammo I've tried. A bit surprisingly to me, the Shaw barrel resulted in about a 30 fps increase in velocity in the various ammo.

 

[littlepod]

Yes, I also use an RPRR along with a couple others.



There a few barrel manufacturers around now. And Timney has a fine trigger for it. Then there are some aftermarket stocks that are said to reduce the flex in the factory one. But, if I were going to upgrade it that much, I'd probably get a better gun . . . maybe something like a Voodoo.



Well, this IS just a $400 mass produced rifle. ? I wouldn't expect it to shoot like that of a Voodoo or some high end $4,000 competition rifle. Even so, once in a while a good one comes off the production line that shoots like one of those.

My RPRR, with its factory barrel, did really well with Center-X. I wanted to see what improvement I might achieve by getting a good barrel so in mounted an 18" Shaw SS match barrel. The was a definite improvement for just about all the different ammo I've tried. A bit surprisingly to me, the Shaw barrel resulted in about a 30 fps increase in velocity in the various ammo.

I know this is a RPRR thread, but for example the mass produced Tikka T1X for $469 shoots sub moa 6x5's with match ammo @ 100 yards. I don't have a 50 yard berm which is unfortunate, but if looking at the math, it should do around .35-4" 6x5's at 50. (They say multiply/divide by 3 when going from 50 to 100)

Might be a lottery like general 10/22's. Sometimes you get a winner and sometimes you don't.

 

[RackOpsTactical]

I was also a bit surprised about center X. Keep in mind that this is a cheap rifle and I don't plan on upgrading it. I may upgrade to a better rifle down the road but for now it is what it is. I have another lot of Laupa center X i can test. also want to retest the norma.

 

[Funcpottr]

I started shooting Eley Edge and Club with great results when on a bench. Tactical matches don't get much on the stable support side so lately I have been trying Aguila Rifle Match to cut the ammo bill (aka increase time on the range). Not as good in my experience as the Eley but good enough to become a better shooter to work back up to better (more expensive) ammo. Have you seen much variation in the weight v. performance of mid range $ ammo?

 

[Jheikki]

Very nice info, I see I am not the only one pushing the RPRR. I never bothered with the 50 yard shooting all mine have been at 100 yards and soon as the snow melts I will be going to 200 and 300 yards.

i have removed the trigger spring, bedded the action, cut the thread protector face to a 11 degree crown and opening up the hole to the width of the barrel see attached picture.

i have brought 10 shot groups down from 3” to 2 “ it is the fliers that kill a group, my next step was to figure out how to stop fliers! I have started with CCI standard I am weighing each bullet, I have found each batch has different weights I also am taking for granted brass case is close, bullet weight is close and I am just weighing power loads. I have found one box of 100 will vary 1 gr hints our fliers.

i started with .10 gr difference in weight and dropped my groups to 1 1/2” at 100 yards see attached

i have started to separate in groups of .05 gr and see how that tightens things up but it’s still winter up here and been windy. It is important to stay under supersonic, if you look at the ballistics most of what you shoot will go subsonic at 100 yards so the CCI standard is 1080 FPS which is very close. I am convinced I will get sub minute groups at 100 yards with this weapon! More to come if interest is there