Testing various brands 22RF

[garandman]

Seemed like the best place for this question.

When doing initial testing of 22 rimfire ammo for group size, I've heard various theories about changing ammo types ....

1. Just shoot groups of five and don't worry about it.

2. Clean between different ammo types, then fire 5 fouling shots before firing for record.

3. Don't clean, but fire 10-20 fouling shots to transition btwn powder types and lubes, before firing for record.

What say you?

 

[BigRed308]

Shoot them all and take the averages of the groups. Going to need more data than a box or two in my opinion. Spread it out across a couple range sessions.

No matter what you do, keep your testing consistent.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[garandman]

Yes. My Question has to do with what if anything should be done in between switching brands of ammo .

 

[BigRed308]

I’d do option 2 or 3. Shoot the foulest for groups and get the training out of them. If it’s that close between two brands then break it down and get serious. Otherwise, there is usually a clear(ish) better ammo for your barrel

 

[Booner1334]

When ever I test different brands of ammo, I do a light cleaning of the barrel between each brand just to get some of the loose powder and primer residue out,. Sometimes my light cleaning is no more than running a spit patch through.
And I don't remember where I saw it, but after a good cleaning, it takes something like one round per barrel length to put a wax coating back into the barrel. I don't know if I believe that, as there are times that I shoot a pretty good group out of a clean barrel.
What ever you do, be consistent in how you test.
And maybe you might want to shoot the groups over a chronograph to determine ES and SD for each brand.

 

[padom]

I pull a bore snake 2x through the bore when switch ammo then shoot 2x 10 shot groups. By the second 10 shot group you usually see things tighten up

 

[BlastersAreCool]

My blaster has shown 'above acceptable' performance (for me) with the two lots of Lapua center x ive tried and a few (some better than others) of SK Std. + lots. I screwed around with torque tuning ...but found that what I'm seeing is plenty acceptable once you start to see what rimfires limitations are. Fun none-the-less!

 

[BlastersAreCool]

From what I've experienced, the best advice I could provide would be to get some decent stuff like SK std. + or above, lot test a couple on a scrubbed bore and settle on the raw results. For me I gamble on SK standard. It seems to do well enough to keep under .5" at 50y, under1 3/4" at 100y and hits the 6" plate most every time at 200y...above 50% hit probability raw data wise on the 8" 277yd plate. For rimfire I have fun enough with that

 

[MarkCZ]

I will shoot same make of ammo ( Lapua and Sk) together. I do not clean, It takes 10 round or so ( more when changing makes) to settle down., then shoot groups.

Mark

 

[garandman]

In both my previous factory 457 and 455 Lilja bbls, Lapua Midas + ... THE most expensive RF ammo in the known universe ... shot best.

Done tons of testing 22rf. Nrver been sure what was right way to do it.

In this discussion thus far, I've had all 3 separate ways pretty much confirmed as THE right way to test rim fire ammo… lol

 

[Eoddave27]

What I typically do when changing ammo is fire one 10 round magazine of the new ammo and then look at group size after that. Usually The first 5-6 rounds go a little crazy then the new ammo settles in. If I am going from one ammo to another with the same wax coating though like going from Eley Edge to Wolf ME it doesn’t seem to need the extra rounds to settle in and just shoots well from the start. Different rifles may behave differently though. This is out of a T1x and a Savage MKii.

 

[garandman]

What I typically do when changing ammo is fire one 10 round magazine of the new ammo and then look at group size after that. Usually The first 5-6 rounds go a little crazy then the new ammo settles in. If I am going from one ammo to another with the same wax coating though like going from Eley Edge to Wolf ME it doesn’t seem to need the extra rounds to settle in and just shoots well from the start. Different rifles may behave differently though. This is out of a T1x and a Savage MKii.

Makes sense. How do I tell its "the same wax coating?" Do you mean both are wax coated? Or is it specific type of coating?

As I understand it, the type of coating, its consistency the length of the bbl, etc affects how well the bullet engages the rifling / stabilizes / groups.

 

[BlastersAreCool]

Eley and Wolf from what I understand come off the same assy. lines and share the same brass, primer, powder, projectile and wax lube...and just like Eley/ Wolf...from what I understand... SK and Lapua come off the same assy. lines and they too share all same components. Correct me if I'm wrong please, as I too care to see who know and does what on this thread?

 

[Near miss]

In both my previous factory 457 and 455 Lilja bbls, Lapua Midas + ... THE most expensive RF ammo in the known universe ... shot best.

Done tons of testing 22rf. Nrver been sure what was right way to do it.

In this discussion thus far, I've had all 3 separate ways pretty much confirmed as THE right way to test rim fire ammo… lol

Lapua Exact is the most expensive RF cartridge. Makes Midas look like a bargain lol.
I have noticed less shift with clean barrel than with a fouled on the first shots. For casual experimenting with ammo I still just use foulers.

I think use 2x 10-shot groups.
When comparing ammo, with many groups it gets difficult to compare between them really fast.

I mean, is it not easier to compare 10 groups of 5 different ammo than 20 groups?

It is easy favor the one ammo that made average score but had one great group than the one that did steadily better but only slightly.

And not sure but sometimes feels like that some ammo changes more POI between shot groups, whereas some stay more in the same POA

 

[garandman]

Lapua Exact is the most expensive RF cartridge. Makes Midas look like a bargain lol.

I stand corrected. X-Act = $24.95 ...... Midas + = $15.91 LOL

I measure groups with a micrometer, so not that hard to compare groups. I think as long as its minimum 5 shots, its a legit group.

10 shots may actually introduce shooter fatigue, and widen the group in a way not reflective of the rifle / ammo.

But..... 2 each his / her own.

 

[TOP PREDATOR]

when i was super active in testing ammos, my procedure was:

waiting on a day were conditions where favorable....low to mid humidity, baro pressure, around 70 deg f. cloudy if possible, <5mph wind, setting rifle on a bench, front and rear rest, chronograph 10 ft in front of muzzle. if i felt that i "pulled" a shot i'd note where it printed and shoot another in a 15 round group.

if i couldn't get the ammos tested in the same session either due to time or a big shift in environmental factors, i'd stop there and not do a thing until another day where the environmentals were comparable to the previous session.

i'd so the same procedure below at different distances (usually 50 & 100 as a baseline). if they were "specialty" subsonics i'd do 25, 50, 100Y.

i'd weight sort and rim thickness sort each of the ammos to give the best "randomness" that i can get. i'd notate that and also the type (if any) factory lube or wax. i'd also notate the amount of bullet drop between testing distances

after firing i'd also notate the amount of fouling remaining in the barrel before dry swabbing it and the muzzle crown before an ammo switch.

i'd give each ammo a "rating" either with a clean barrel, dirty barrel, etc. the rating would also be further broken down into the distances shot, and then cumulatively over all the distances. also included those pesky "fliers".

by no means is it based on anything other than after crunching the data into spreadsheets and trend analysis, it spit out for the the ammos tested (at least for me) the best ammo to use at a specific or multiple distance or particular discipline competing in, and adding a cost per round factor that allowed me to decide that if i wanted to pay top dollar for the best performer or is short on cash how much consistancy i was willing to give up for available funds vs the amount of and type of shooting to be done.

at the end of it the data proofed out what groups were printed on target and visca versa.

one thing i've realized since i did oodles of tests i ran circa 2009 - 2012 is that i had a whole lotta time on my hands!

copied and pasted from an old post (please excuse the all caps):

THESE ARE THE TERMS, RATING #’S, AND EQUATIONS USED WITH MEASUREMENTS AND TESTING PARAMETERS TO GIVE AN OBJECTIVE JUDGEMENT ON THE AMMO USED.​

MG = MEASUREMENT OF “MAJOR GROUP” (EXCLUDING FLYERS) EG = MEASUREMENT OF “EXTENDED GROUP” (INCLUDING FLYERS)

(THINKING OF MG AND EG AS THE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE SPREAD ON A DEER RACK)

FL = FLYERS (SHOTS NOTICABLY DEVIATED FROM MG) FR = FLYER RATIO (# OF FLYERS / OUT OF 15 ROUNDS)​

CBR = CLEAN BARREL RATING - (BARREL WAS DRY SWABBED, SHOT 5 RDS (30 SECONDS BETWEEN, DRY SWABBED AGAIN BETWEEN CHANGING AMMO). THIS RATING WAS DERIVED BY ADDING MEASUREMENTS OF MAJOR GROUP, EXTENDED GROUP, AND NUMBER OF FLYERS, DIVIDED BY 3 (# OF CATAGORIES). GAVE AMMO THAT SHOT WELL IN A CLEAN BARREL A RATING.

MG + EG + FLYERS DIVIDED BY 3 = CBR​

DBR = DIRTY BARREL RATING - BARREL WAS DRY SWABBED, SHOT 10 RDS (30 SECONDS BETWEEN, DRY SWABBED AGAIN BETWEEN CHANGING AMMO). THIS RATING WAS DERIVED BY ADDING MEASUREMENTS OF MAJOR GROUP, EXTENDED GROUP, AND NUMBER OF FLYERS, DIVIDED BY 3 (# OF CATAGORIES), AND GAVE AMMO THAT SHOT WELL IN A DIRTY BARREL A RATING.

MG + EG + FLYERS DIVIDED BY 3 = DBR​

CR = CONSISTANTCY RATING - INCLUDED THE ALL OF THE FACTORS OF CBR AND DBR, DIVIDED BY 6 (# OF CATAGORIES). IT WAS DESIGNED TO GIVE A CONSISTANTCY VALUE, AS SOMETIMES TIGHT GROUPS ARE SPOILED BY A DISTANT FLYER OR TWO AND MORE OPEN GROUPS WERE HELPED BY CLOSER FLYERS. SINCE THIS RATING USES ALL THE FACTORS IN A CLEAN AND DIRTY BARREL, AND ANY FLYERS ASSOCIATED, I THOUGHT IT WOULD GIVE AN ALL AROUND GRADE OF PERFORMANCE / CONSISTANTCY. THINK OF IT AS THE MOST SHOTS YOU CAN GET INTO AND / OR “NICK” A QUARTER AT 50 YDS, CONSISTANTLY. IT GAVE AMMO A RATING SHOT THROUGH A CLEAN AND DIRTY BARREL, AND GAVE RATING OF THE AMMO USED THROUGH BOTH. USED ALL 15 ROUNDS.

MG + EG + FLYERS OF CBR AND DBR = CR​

VR = VALUE RATING - THIS ADDED A PRICE PER ROUND (PPR) FACTOR, WHICH AT FIRST I DIDN’T THINK WAS IMPORTANT, HOWEVER AS WE KNOW SOME MATCH / TARGET AMMO CAN BE PRICEY. THIS “PERFORMANCE PER COST” ACTUALLY HELPED ME OUT ON PICKING A PRACTICE AMMO THAT GIVES SIMILAR PERFORMANCE TO MY TOP SHELF AMMO. THIS ALSO HELPED ME RATE LOWER PRICED AMMO COMPARED TO FLYERS, ETC. WHICH HELPED IT OUT IN THE OVERALL RATINGS. CLEAN AND DIRTY BARREL MEASUREMENTS, PLUS PRICE PER ROUND, DIVIDED BY 7 (THE AMOUNT OF FACTORS USED).

MG + EG + FLYERS (OF CBR) + MG + EG + FLYERS (OF DBR) + PPR DIVIDED BY 7 = VR​

OAR = OVERALL RATING - BASICALLY TOOK ALL THE RATINGS AND CAME UP WITH AN “OVERALL RATING” WHICH I WOULD BELIEVE JUDGES AN AMMO USING ALL FACTORS DESCRIBED ABOVE, AND GIVES THE BEST USAGE OVER MANY FACTORS.

CBR + DBR + CR + VR DIVIDED BY 4 = OAR

IN ORDER TO KEEP THINGS SOMEWHAT SIMPLIER, IF A GROUP WAS JUST UNDER 1”, 1/2” (.5’), ETC., IT IS MARKED -1”, -1/2” (-.5”), JUST OVER +1”, +1/2” (.5”), ETC. IT WAS THEN ROUNDED TO THE NEXT WHOLE NUMBER IN RATINGS.

then came the "multi yard rating" MULTI YARD RATING (MYR), which was an average of 50 & 100Y data to come up with an overall performance metric across multiple ranges, clean / dirty barrels, and "fliers"
CBR OF 50 + 100 DIVIDED BY 2 = CBR / MYR
DBR OF 50 + 100 DIVIDED BY 2 = DBR / MYR
CR OF 50 + 100 DIVIDED BY 2 = CR / MYR
VR OF 50 + 100 DIVIDED BY 2 = VR / MYR
CBR + DBR + CR + VR OF 50 AND 100 = MYR OAR​

---------------------------------------------------------------------

.....and then came the rimthickness tests, weight sort tests, bullet sizers and DIY bullet lube tests.

i can't picture doing the same break down today with as much specialty target & "long range" ammo that is out there today and bumping it up against the stuff available 10 years ago. but then again it just might shake out that the "new generation of .22lr" may or may not be all that it's cracked up to be vs the time tested wolf, sk, CCI std vel, etc.

wish i still had the time and "gumption" to do it.

 

[Booner1334]

when i was super active in testing ammos, my procedure was:

waiting on a day were conditions where favorable....low to mid humidity, baro pressure, around 70 deg f. cloudy if possible, <5mph wind, setting rifle on a bench, front and rear rest, chronograph 10 ft in front of muzzle. if i felt that i "pulled" a shot i'd note where it printed and shoot another in a 15 round group.

if i couldn't get the ammos tested in the same session either due to time or a big shift in environmental factors, i'd stop there and not do a thing until another day where the environmentals were comparable to the previous session.

i'd so the same procedure below at different distances (usually 50 & 100 as a baseline). if they were "specialty" subsonics i'd do 25, 50, 100Y.

i'd weight sort and rim thickness sort each of the ammos to give the best "randomness" that i can get. i'd notate that and also the type (if any) factory lube or wax. i'd also notate the amount of bullet drop between testing distances

after firing i'd also notate the amount of fouling remaining in the barrel before dry swabbing it and the muzzle crown before an ammo switch.

i'd give each ammo a "rating" either with a clean barrel, dirty barrel, etc. the rating would also be further broken down into the distances shot, and then cumulatively over all the distances. also included those pesky "fliers".

by no means is it based on anything other than after crunching the data into spreadsheets and trend analysis, it spit out for the the ammos tested (at least for me) the best ammo to use at a specific or multiple distance or particular discipline competing in, and adding a cost per round factor that allowed me to decide that if i wanted to pay top dollar for the best performer or is short on cash how much consistancy i was willing to give up for available funds vs the amount of and type of shooting to be done.

at the end of it the data proofed out what groups were printed on target and visca versa.

one thing i've realized since i did oodles of tests i ran circa 2009 - 2012 is that i had a whole lotta time on my hands!

copied and pasted from an old post (please excuse the all caps):

THESE ARE THE TERMS, RATING #’S, AND EQUATIONS USED WITH MEASUREMENTS AND TESTING PARAMETERS TO GIVE AN OBJECTIVE JUDGEMENT ON THE AMMO USED.​

MG = MEASUREMENT OF “MAJOR GROUP” (EXCLUDING FLYERS) EG = MEASUREMENT OF “EXTENDED GROUP” (INCLUDING FLYERS)

(THINKING OF MG AND EG AS THE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE SPREAD ON A DEER RACK)

FL = FLYERS (SHOTS NOTICABLY DEVIATED FROM MG) FR = FLYER RATIO (# OF FLYERS / OUT OF 15 ROUNDS)​

CBR = CLEAN BARREL RATING - (BARREL WAS DRY SWABBED, SHOT 5 RDS (30 SECONDS BETWEEN, DRY SWABBED AGAIN BETWEEN CHANGING AMMO). THIS RATING WAS DERIVED BY ADDING MEASUREMENTS OF MAJOR GROUP, EXTENDED GROUP, AND NUMBER OF FLYERS, DIVIDED BY 3 (# OF CATAGORIES). GAVE AMMO THAT SHOT WELL IN A CLEAN BARREL A RATING.

MG + EG + FLYERS DIVIDED BY 3 = CBR​

DBR = DIRTY BARREL RATING - BARREL WAS DRY SWABBED, SHOT 10 RDS (30 SECONDS BETWEEN, DRY SWABBED AGAIN BETWEEN CHANGING AMMO). THIS RATING WAS DERIVED BY ADDING MEASUREMENTS OF MAJOR GROUP, EXTENDED GROUP, AND NUMBER OF FLYERS, DIVIDED BY 3 (# OF CATAGORIES), AND GAVE AMMO THAT SHOT WELL IN A DIRTY BARREL A RATING.

MG + EG + FLYERS DIVIDED BY 3 = DBR​

CR = CONSISTANTCY RATING - INCLUDED THE ALL OF THE FACTORS OF CBR AND DBR, DIVIDED BY 6 (# OF CATAGORIES). IT WAS DESIGNED TO GIVE A CONSISTANTCY VALUE, AS SOMETIMES TIGHT GROUPS ARE SPOILED BY A DISTANT FLYER OR TWO AND MORE OPEN GROUPS WERE HELPED BY CLOSER FLYERS. SINCE THIS RATING USES ALL THE FACTORS IN A CLEAN AND DIRTY BARREL, AND ANY FLYERS ASSOCIATED, I THOUGHT IT WOULD GIVE AN ALL AROUND GRADE OF PERFORMANCE / CONSISTANTCY. THINK OF IT AS THE MOST SHOTS YOU CAN GET INTO AND / OR “NICK” A QUARTER AT 50 YDS, CONSISTANTLY. IT GAVE AMMO A RATING SHOT THROUGH A CLEAN AND DIRTY BARREL, AND GAVE RATING OF THE AMMO USED THROUGH BOTH. USED ALL 15 ROUNDS.

MG + EG + FLYERS OF CBR AND DBR = CR​

VR = VALUE RATING - THIS ADDED A PRICE PER ROUND (PPR) FACTOR, WHICH AT FIRST I DIDN’T THINK WAS IMPORTANT, HOWEVER AS WE KNOW SOME MATCH / TARGET AMMO CAN BE PRICEY. THIS “PERFORMANCE PER COST” ACTUALLY HELPED ME OUT ON PICKING A PRACTICE AMMO THAT GIVES SIMILAR PERFORMANCE TO MY TOP SHELF AMMO. THIS ALSO HELPED ME RATE LOWER PRICED AMMO COMPARED TO FLYERS, ETC. WHICH HELPED IT OUT IN THE OVERALL RATINGS. CLEAN AND DIRTY BARREL MEASUREMENTS, PLUS PRICE PER ROUND, DIVIDED BY 7 (THE AMOUNT OF FACTORS USED).

MG + EG + FLYERS (OF CBR) + MG + EG + FLYERS (OF DBR) + PPR DIVIDED BY 7 = VR​

OAR = OVERALL RATING - BASICALLY TOOK ALL THE RATINGS AND CAME UP WITH AN “OVERALL RATING” WHICH I WOULD BELIEVE JUDGES AN AMMO USING ALL FACTORS DESCRIBED ABOVE, AND GIVES THE BEST USAGE OVER MANY FACTORS.

CBR + DBR + CR + VR DIVIDED BY 4 = OAR

IN ORDER TO KEEP THINGS SOMEWHAT SIMPLIER, IF A GROUP WAS JUST UNDER 1”, 1/2” (.5’), ETC., IT IS MARKED -1”, -1/2” (-.5”), JUST OVER +1”, +1/2” (.5”), ETC. IT WAS THEN ROUNDED TO THE NEXT WHOLE NUMBER IN RATINGS.

then came the "multi yard rating" MULTI YARD RATING (MYR), which was an average of 50 & 100Y data to come up with an overall performance metric across multiple ranges, clean / dirty barrels, and "fliers"
CBR OF 50 + 100 DIVIDED BY 2 = CBR / MYR
DBR OF 50 + 100 DIVIDED BY 2 = DBR / MYR
CR OF 50 + 100 DIVIDED BY 2 = CR / MYR
VR OF 50 + 100 DIVIDED BY 2 = VR / MYR
CBR + DBR + CR + VR OF 50 AND 100 = MYR OAR​

---------------------------------------------------------------------

.....and then came the rimthickness tests, weight sort tests, bullet sizers and DIY bullet lube tests.

i can't picture doing the same break down today with as much specialty target & "long range" ammo that is out there today and bumping it up against the stuff available 10 years ago. but then again it just might shake out that the "new generation of .22lr" may or may not be all that it's cracked up to be vs the time tested wolf, sk, CCI std vel, etc.

wish i still had the time and "gumption" to do it.

Nice post!
Since you're obviously anal about shooting 22rf, (and I mean that in a good way!), did you ever notice a shift in group size, or the opening up of groups when it gets really hot out? I was shooting yesterday, the temps were in the low 90's and humidity in the 80's, but no wind. Out of a clean barrel on a rifle that previously shot very will with the same lot of ammo, (SK Rifle Match), after 50 shots or so the groups began to open up by maybe 1/2 inch or so. I'd clean the rifle, and let it set for awhile then start shooting again and the same thing would happen. I'd get a few small 5 shot groups, maybe 3 or 4, then they would open up again.

I'm thinking that the cause was a combination of chamber and ambient temperatures either changes the chemistry of the powder, and/or a warm chamber causes the wax to melt off the bullet . Last night I went through my notes from last summer and it seemed the same thing had happened when the temps get high. I store my ammo in the house where it gets no warmer than the mid 70's, drive to the range in a car with a/c, but then it sits on the bench where it warms up to the ambient temperature. It does seem that I get my best groups when the temps are above 45 and below 80 degrees.

I'd like to know if you or others have noted something similar.

 

[Eoddave27]

For what it is worth I have found Lapua Center x and Eley Edge to be very consistant lot to lot. I can typically change from lot to lot another with no POI shift of change in dope. That is to say Eley to Eley or Lapua to Lapua. That is not the case with most of the other rimfire ammo I use. I’m sure the more expensive flavors of Lapua and Eley are just as consistant too but my limit is around $11 a box for ammo. I find that to be the point of diminishing returns for positional shooting. Anything more expensive may shoot better at distance but balancing off a ladder or rooftop that very slight accuracy advantage and outweighed by the additional cost. For practice ammo I normally just use Wolf or CCI. For me it is more about building a stable position quickly and getting that first round down range fast. I also doo most of my practice inside 100 yards where the better ammo doesn’t make a huge difference.

 

[garandman]

Upcoming testing...

 

[BigRed308]

I saw a Canadian based shop that was selling 22lr sampler packs. Thought it was a great idea for someone to do stateside with the NRL market taking off. Oh well guess I’ll just have to keep building my own sampler packs

 

[CaptNightForce]

Have shot them all. We used to train people starting out with .22 rifles to take that discipline into center fire. We would go as far as weighing each round and batching them together by brand. Using a volquartsen barrel fully flouted using a stock 1968 Ruger stock. We found Lapua Center-x the go to in temperatures between 55-75 degrees. Second we found Eley almost as good. Keep in mind we shot between 50 to 200 yds. Still remarkable grouping even at 200 yds. Next up SK Standard Plus and Wolf... all brands started are my preferred .22 ammo.
Unfortunately living behind enemy lines in California our training had to stop due to no longer being able to have ammo shipped directly our residents.

 

[Kisssofdeath]

Well, here are my feelings toward testing ammo. I have a backyard range and sometimes shoot 1,000's of rounds in a week. I have shot 750 rounds this week so far. Way back when I shot IHMSA I used to weigh and check rim thickness. What I have come to find out from my experience is that was a waste of my time and would be today too. There are too many other variables that cause flyers or bad shot other than the rim thickness or weight like, wind, slight movement of the rifle, different trigger finger location, more shoulder pressure, changing grips styles, and the list goes on. Not saying it's a bad thing or a waste of someone else's time, just that I don't do it.

@ garandman, I don't shoot fouling shots unless I have just cleaned a barrel. Fouling shots are generally 5 or 10 rounds. Why, because that's what my mags hold, either 5 or 10. Other than that, I won't shoot fouling shots even when going from a CCI SV to a slicked up SK to a lubed up Eley. If anything happens, it's the first round to be a little off but that's generally it. Every now and then the first 5 round group will be larger than the rest. Here are my answers to your questions.

1. Just shoot groups of five and don't worry about it. YES

2. Clean between different ammo types, then fire 5 fouling shots before firing for record. NO

3. Don't clean, but fire 10-20 fouling shots to transition btwn powder types and lubes, before firing for record. NO

When I test, I shoot the entire box of 50. Ten 5-shot groups on one target. My goal is all ten groups at or under 1/2". If I have a known issue I will note it such as wind, movement, AD's and others.

As far as accuracy and ammo types go, it's really a numbers game IMO. For example, if you shot Center-X in 10 different rifles, 6-7 of 10 would probably shoot good. If you used CCI SV in those same 10 rifles, maybe 3-4 would shoot good On the other end if you took an Anschutz 54 action and shot 10 different types of ammo the Anschutz would probably shoot good 6-7 out of 10 ammo types where a CZ, Savage, Ruger, ect would shoot good probably 3-4 out of the 10 ammo types. This is an overall generalization of rifles and ammo based on what I have seen, there will always be exceptions. My definition of good is 8 of 10 1/2" groups no matter what gun/ammo is shot.

Bottom line, is you have to do what you have confidence in. You can gather people's opinion which is what I just said above along with others but in the end you will have to do what you feel is right for you. This is just like cleaning a rimfire, only wrong way is to clean a rimfire is from the muzzle end and/or use a steel bristle brush. Just because one person's cleaning method is not like others doesn't make it incorrect, it's just different. Same applies to what you are doing now.

Attached are a few photos.

 

[garandman]

Well, here are my feelings toward testing ammo.

Thanx for a detailed and helpful post.

You may have heard I'm a pastor. I beleive in God, His son Jesus and His Word, the Bible. In it you wll find many universals...tho not as many as some ppl claim (not at all interested in a religious discussion )

In the world of shooting, there are darn few universals. Combining my personal shooting experience with what other highly experienced shooters (like yerself) have told me, I've come to beleive that what works in someone elses gun may not work in my gun. The variables of the two shooters aside, the gun / ammo introduce more than a dozen additional variables.

Even 5 sequentially serialized precision rifles will have significant variables. Ammo from high end makers production line will shoot different in different guns. Rimfires and semi autos really accentuate this reality.

There's no substitute for the individual shooter finding what will work in *their* gun. Ppl here gave me a heads up on a 6.5CM load ( 41.5gr of 4350) but I still had to test the load myself (ended up at 41.4 gr) and then had to play with seating depth.

Find what works for you, gives you confidence. And even then, stuff happens that will produce occasionalinexplicable erratic results.

Thanx again.

 

[garandman]

Unfortunately living behind enemy lines in California our training had to stop due to no longer being able to have ammo shipped directly our residents.

Wow. Fer realz? Had no idea. I knew the Peoples Republic of Kommiefornia was bad, but.... wow.

I would hafta move. Would never even consider taking a job there. Am sorry for your troubles.

 

[Kisssofdeath]

Two back to back post where garandman hit the nail on the head.

 

[CaptNightForce]

As of July backgrounds check to buy ammo. The intellectuals who write these laws could care less about any hardship it creates. I reload, but .22 ammo I must drive an hour one way to deal with this BS.

 

[MOwens79]

A good friend of mine has a 50yd test tunnel. In fact before Lapua and Eley built thier tunnels they consulted with my friend on how to build a test tunnel. We take testing to the extreme but have found ammo, Eley and Lapua, that will consistently place in the top 5 at indoor ARA benchrest matches. We typically shoot 50 rounds of each lot we are going to test. I don't know if you guys know this but the match grade ammo manufacturers, Eley, Lapua, SK Jagd, RWS, tear down the presses every night and rebuild them changing everything along the way. That is why you see such huge variations lot to lot on rimfire ammo. i have talked to Eley engineers, that if they would build one consistent ammo I could build and tune a rifle to shoot it. It fell on deaf ears. They said they do it thier way so there is a variety of ammo that shooters can hopefully find a lot that shoots in thier gun. That is why consistency in rimfire ammo is so tough.

When we test we shoot 2 ARA targets (50 rounds total) and we hold on the center dot every time not compensating for drift, mirage, etc. in any way. We clean in between targets and always shoot 5-10 foulers before we shoot our record target. Your gun will tell you how many foulers it needs before it settles down. We use a variation of on target software for ARA and compile the data. We are looking for ammo that has a mean radius across 25 rounds under .100". Typically we are looking for ammo that shoots in the .080 range to be competitive in a match. When we find a lot of ammo we then test it 2-4 more times and if it performs we will buy up as much as we can. Typically this is a case or two and will last about half a season. With rimfire benchrest you are constantly chasing ammo.

I have tested in the Eley test center and if they would let you test with your own rifle in its stock and rest instead of thier fixture that would be ideal. It kind of skews the data not testing your full setup. For NRL 22 the test tunnels would work great because you don't need the extreme accuracy that benchrest does. But every bit of accuracy and consistency helps in any shooting sport.

 

[garandman]

I think my biggest take away from this discussion is to shoot an entire Box ( 50 rounds ) in a 10 x 5 format for each ammo, before testing another ammo.



Then move to the next ammo without cleaning ... shoot another 10 by 5 and then see what I've got for both groups size and ammo settling down between brands.

 

[littlepod]

If purely for testing ammo/rifle combination why not strap everything down in a sled? As a newish shooter I make too many mistakes to really accurately tell if it's ammo or me without testing hundreds of rounds. I did 2 6x5's yesterday with SK's LR Match, and I was just doing horribly. Couldn't get my NPA and sight alignment to be perfect and felt i was fighting it every group. Ended up showing with an avg of 1.1" over 60 rounds. Where the previous day I was able to do 0.9" on my 6x5's. And I was alone at the range, no wind/distraction factors on either day. Just a bad day I guess. So far I haven't seen SK+ or LR Match have any real significant difference grouping at 100 yards. SK+ is 1070 and LR Match is 1090, so about a .36 vertical inch shift @ 100 yards. Have another 400 rounds to burn through of SK LR Match to make a better decision.

 

[justin amateur]

Most everything has been covered, except...inspect the cartridges.
If you reload, you already know just how finicky you have to be to build a decent cartridge.
Do a close visual inspection of the rimfire cartridges you plan on testing.
The same things that cause centerfire accuracy problems apply to rimfire.
Variations in OAL, seating depth, seating angle, smeared or damaged driving bands/cannelures,
out of spec brass dimensions, damaged/dented/dinged/asymmetric bullets will cause unpredictable strays
that have nothing to with the problems caused by primer/powder chemistry or amounts.
It's rimfire, for small game at 30 yards or less, more than adequate,
For precision shooting at 50 yards or more, ammo quality will bite you in the adze.

 

[Kisssofdeath]

I think my biggest take away from this discussion is to shoot an entire Box ( 50 rounds ) in a 10 x 5 format for each ammo, before testing another ammo.



Then move to the next ammo without cleaning ... shoot another 10 by 5 and then see what I've got for both groups size and ammo settling down between brands.

This has been my experience. I have cleaned between different rounds in the past and I could not tell a significant difference in doing it or not.