We are living in a time where 22lr is at its best ever! We have smiths who are bringing so much innovation for reliability and accuracy. We are seeing repeaters showing accuracy almost as good as benchrest builds. We have many actions that these builders have to do there magic with. And the barrel manufacturers are making the best barrels ever. Lets give a big shout out to your smith, what action was used and what barrel. All these companies have earned a great deal of respect!
Shout out about your builds
- Thread starter Kahrhart63
- Start date
Nothing you say can be disputed. Fully in agreement.
Yet no mention of ammunition quality, price or availability.
Also, I wonder why we really are not doing much better groups today than we did 50 years ago in rimfire.
As you say, all is “better” no question but have 100 yard groups shrunk to match?
Yet no mention of ammunition quality, price or availability.
Also, I wonder why we really are not doing much better groups today than we did 50 years ago in rimfire.
As you say, all is “better” no question but have 100 yard groups shrunk to match?
Quote It is with a heightened degree of caution that I am responding to this thread.
I fully appreciate what the OP suggest in terms of state of the art development of precision rimfire rifles and the talented makers that produce them. At the same time I have a deep appreciation for guns such as RTH1800 has exhibited in the past. His fine array of 52s and more recent 63 has occasioned the following.
I remember 25 years ago spending two solid days walking the isles of the American Gunmakers Guild in absolute awe of the artistry and craftsmanship exhibited. To think that such exquisite functional art could be created largely by hand was and is to my mind miraculous. To hold such a gem in ones hands, to feel the perfect balance and see the exquisite lines of a tool created largely by hand tools was/is spell binding.
Yes, I am in total agreement with those who appreciate the precision of the component parts that go into the production of the guns we utilize in what has become a shooting event that has captured the interest of the shooting community world ( Me Included ) On the other hand being 70 plus years old I cannot escape the wonderful tactile feeling of holding a perfectly executed firearm/art form with baton like balance enveloped in a 100 year old piece of wood with the appearance of marble.
I wonder if in 50, 60 or 75 years time , a enthusiast will hold a modern day rifle with it aluminum chassis screwed to a barrel and action that was largely created by machine will daydream about the mans hands who that cradled it during it's birth???
I know there will be appreciation as there should be but I think it will be a different emotion than what is derived viewing a masterpiece produced by a man at a bench.
Please do not take this as any descension against modern day precision or the machining practices that occasion it. The above are simply the ramblings and ruminations of an Old Guy.
I fully appreciate what the OP suggest in terms of state of the art development of precision rimfire rifles and the talented makers that produce them. At the same time I have a deep appreciation for guns such as RTH1800 has exhibited in the past. His fine array of 52s and more recent 63 has occasioned the following.
I remember 25 years ago spending two solid days walking the isles of the American Gunmakers Guild in absolute awe of the artistry and craftsmanship exhibited. To think that such exquisite functional art could be created largely by hand was and is to my mind miraculous. To hold such a gem in ones hands, to feel the perfect balance and see the exquisite lines of a tool created largely by hand tools was/is spell binding.
Yes, I am in total agreement with those who appreciate the precision of the component parts that go into the production of the guns we utilize in what has become a shooting event that has captured the interest of the shooting community world ( Me Included ) On the other hand being 70 plus years old I cannot escape the wonderful tactile feeling of holding a perfectly executed firearm/art form with baton like balance enveloped in a 100 year old piece of wood with the appearance of marble.
I wonder if in 50, 60 or 75 years time , a enthusiast will hold a modern day rifle with it aluminum chassis screwed to a barrel and action that was largely created by machine will daydream about the mans hands who that cradled it during it's birth???
I know there will be appreciation as there should be but I think it will be a different emotion than what is derived viewing a masterpiece produced by a man at a bench.
Please do not take this as any descension against modern day precision or the machining practices that occasion it. The above are simply the ramblings and ruminations of an Old Guy.
I’m with RTH , early 1900’s they shot out to 200 yards with 22 in match’s iirc , I believe 3 position , are the new rifles that much better than the “Best “ old rifles ?
I agree we can get new components to build rifles of extreme quality and accuracy easier than in the past , and the learning curve is still going in the accuracy department
I think ammo consistency accuracy is holding us back
I agree we can get new components to build rifles of extreme quality and accuracy easier than in the past , and the learning curve is still going in the accuracy department
I think ammo consistency accuracy is holding us back
Ammo clearly seems the weakest link now in rimfire for the masses, much more than it's ever been before. Ammo has always been the weak link in rimfire at the highest levels, but today the big difference I see is that just about anyone can go down and buy a Tikka/CZ/Bergara off the shelf and it's probably going to shoot pretty darn well with match ammo. 30 years ago you didn't get that unless you spent the money for Anchutz or a few of the other target guns, or had something built custom, or you just got really really lucky in the factory barrel lottery. Most guys if they were trying to customize something it was a 10/22. 35 years ago when I was shooting competitive 3/4 position smallbore, basically no one was lot testing ammo, most folks just bought Eley Black box and figured if there were issues, it was them. I can't ever remember a coach I had talking about the importance of testing lots or even across brands. It was assumed that the higher Eley tiers were better, but no one really felt it was a concern. Of course at that time most indoor 3/4 position was shot at 50ft and outdoor at 50yds. Considering the size of most people's groups at 50 yds kneeling/standing it's highly unlikely ammo consistency was ever a significant dent in overall scores. Benchrest of course was a different story.
It's truly the "easy button" for rimfire these days. Pretty much anyone can go buy a sub $1000 CZ put descent quality match ammo through it and it's going to shoot really well at 50yds. Better than the best rimfire guns of 50 years ago, nah, but the difference is you can buy them in just about every gun store now for $500 and up, and overall they are likely easier to shoot, more adjustable, etc.
Of course the consumer has changed too and is much easier to part from their $$$. 30 years ago no one outside of serious competition folks would dream of spending over $1000 on a rimfire, now guys line up to drop $2-3k on one that are just weekend range shooters. It's like when I bought my first swarvoski gear probably back in the 2002 timeframe. You almost never saw anyone at the range with high end optics gear. These days there's not a day I go to the range where I don't see multiple several thousand dollar setups. It's like the other day when I was walking in Target and noticed they had $700 coffee machines sitting on the shelf for sale. 20 years ago, no one was spending $700 on a coffee machine in Target, now I hear new hires at work out of college that drop $1000 on an espresso machine. It's not inflation, it's just easier to convince people to drop lots of $$$.
I doubt we'll ever see ammo improve significantly for rimfire, unless they abandon the rimfire aspect of it which seems to be the real problem with it's consistency. If they do I can't even imagine who expensive it will be considering the top rimfire ammo now is pushing $25-$30 a box. I could see high end custom ammo for rimfire possibly improving extreme long range groups, but I think they'd have to go away from the typical lead/lube stuff that's been done.
It's truly the "easy button" for rimfire these days. Pretty much anyone can go buy a sub $1000 CZ put descent quality match ammo through it and it's going to shoot really well at 50yds. Better than the best rimfire guns of 50 years ago, nah, but the difference is you can buy them in just about every gun store now for $500 and up, and overall they are likely easier to shoot, more adjustable, etc.
Of course the consumer has changed too and is much easier to part from their $$$. 30 years ago no one outside of serious competition folks would dream of spending over $1000 on a rimfire, now guys line up to drop $2-3k on one that are just weekend range shooters. It's like when I bought my first swarvoski gear probably back in the 2002 timeframe. You almost never saw anyone at the range with high end optics gear. These days there's not a day I go to the range where I don't see multiple several thousand dollar setups. It's like the other day when I was walking in Target and noticed they had $700 coffee machines sitting on the shelf for sale. 20 years ago, no one was spending $700 on a coffee machine in Target, now I hear new hires at work out of college that drop $1000 on an espresso machine. It's not inflation, it's just easier to convince people to drop lots of $$$.
I doubt we'll ever see ammo improve significantly for rimfire, unless they abandon the rimfire aspect of it which seems to be the real problem with it's consistency. If they do I can't even imagine who expensive it will be considering the top rimfire ammo now is pushing $25-$30 a box. I could see high end custom ammo for rimfire possibly improving extreme long range groups, but I think they'd have to go away from the typical lead/lube stuff that's been done.
I think that was possibly in Houze's book? I remember seeing that at one point as well doing 52 research iirc
