Non-target 22 LR in non-target rifles — flogging a dead horse?

[Naphtali]

I have been working with Ruger MK. III target pistol, Ruger 10/22 in Hogue stock with Nikon (Philippines) 4X, and circa 1950s Marlin 39. I am trying to improve my ability to hit within a one-inch circle — squirrel or rabbit's head. Much of my work to achieve the goal has been by futzing (technical term for spending a great deal of money before analyzing specifics of how to achieve intended goal) with firearms.

I am now at the stage where I request information from experienced 22 LR shooters. Having large quantities of standard Hi-speed 40-grain solids and 37??- grain hollow points to use, the range at which my one-inch circle ceases to be routine is about 35 yards. Since I have never owned a target rifle or shot any target ammunition, I'm beginning to think 35 yards is it unless I invest in different firearms and hugely more expensive ammunition.

[mozeppa]

bolt action is your friend.

[Burnt Fingers]

That's about what I would expect from all three of those firearms.

A good bolt action might take you out to 50 yards. I bought a Ruger American Rimfire a couple of years ago. It's a real joy to shoot. You could get the Ruger Precision Rimfire for about twice the money and it would probably outshoot my RAR by about 10-15 yards for your 1" circle.

Consistent accuracy of 1" at 50 yards or greater with a 22 LR requires a lot of ammo testing and a very good quality firearm. Also note that while it's really not hard to get 1" at 50 yards getting less than 2" at 100 is a LOT harder.

[ShooterAZ]

22LR is a funny animal, in that sometimes cheap off the shelf ammo can group very, very well. Sometimes even better than Match grade. It pays off to test a lot of different ammo to see what the particular firearm likes. Other factors come into play too, such as trigger pull, quality of sights, eyesight and the shooter's ability. One inch at 50 yards is my benchmark, but I don't always meet that goal. I sure have fun trying though! I own a Marvel 1911 conversion that will shoot that well when I do my part.

[MostlyLeverGuns]

Better ammunition - my Henry .22's shoot MUCH better with quality standard velocity ammunition. Bulk 500 boxes go about 3 MOA at 100 yards. With CMP Aquila standard velocity, I can get under 2" with my 24" octagon-barreled Henry and its 4-12 Nikon Monarch scope. Proper bench technique and good glass can make a significant difference when working with lever guns. Our little H001 Henry( the 'cheap one') will do 1" at 50 yards with the good ammo and its 3-9 Leupold Vari-X2 Compact, but seems I haven found the secret to under 2.5" at 100 yards, a different brand of good ammo, more scope, less wind, different hold? Trying different brands of higher quality .22 ammo makes a big difference with many rifles.

[Outpost75]

Greatest limitation is the larger diameter of the typical .22 LR Sporting chamber and the reduced bullet diameter of high velocity ammunition, which is a sloppy fit in the chamber, but so dimensioned to ensure feeding reliability when guns are heavily fouled and seldom cleaned.

Start carrying a micrometer when shopping for ammo and buy the lots having "fat" bullets of .224" diameter or larger. CCI Standard Velocity and Eley Sport generally make the grade.

Waxed or greased rounds having unplated bullets are generally more accurate because the bullet bases are not dinged up from having been tumbled in a barrel plater.

[45DUDE]

You need a better scope. A Ruger 1-2-or 3 will shoot plenty good. I have one set up just to test ammo.278430 I have shot a 1"group 10 shot at 50 yards with several brands of cheap ammo. This one likes Remington Target. It shoots the lighter HP good also. You don't have to buy high dollar ammo for 50 yards.

[stubshaft]

It doesn't matter too much what it costs, you have to try a wide variety of ammunition types to find what your gun likes. Just because it says "Match" doesn't mean it will shoot great out of your gun.

[Traffer]

There are factors involved with both the 22 rim fire ammo and the 22 rifles that work to create difficulty for consistency.
1) With a charge of 1.0 to 2.0 grains of powder just a tenth of a grain will quite noticeably effect the group.
2) The Primer charge can even vary in weight causing a variation.
3) The diameter of 22lr varies from .222" to .225". Usually not per batch or ever per brand...But that brings us to ..
4) The shape of the chamber. There are WILD variations of ream configurations for 22lr rifles. I believe that Lilja ALONE has 3 different reamers for 22lr. The chambers (as you can imagine) are what cause the particular rifles to favor a particular brand or batch of ammo over another. Match rifles tend to have smaller chambers (narrower diameter).
And perhaps the GREATEST factor in the craziness in poor consistency of 22lr is the CRIMP.
22lr's performance is very contingent on the crimp. Both the consistency of the crimp and the depth of the crimp (pull weight).
AND the crimp pull weight is also interdependent on the burn rate of the powder.
These things all have to be balanced...And tuned for the rifle (or pistol) that they will be fired in.
I have found that the poorest performing 22lr has the lightest and least consistent crimp. You may notice that shot placement may be in a up and down string with these. Or if you chrono them they will vary a great deal in speed.
This is why people who desire good accuracy from their 22lr's try lots of ammo and even buy large batches of a single run in order to get accurate-consistent shooting.

[John Boy]

I am trying to improve my ability to hit within a one-inch circle — squirrel or rabbit's head.
Best you should upgrade your sights if presently they are stock iron sights. Ammo is not your issue

[Mk42gunner]

I realize that Montana is different than Missouri, but I have rarely shot at a squirrel or cottontail rabbit at over thirty five yards with a .22. The only one I can think of was a squirrel at about forty yards, and that was with a .22 Short HP.

Sometimes I think we want more accuracy than we really need.

With that written, if your Marlin is drilled and tapped, put a scope on it. I had a late 50's version that was plenty for small game around here. Wish I still had that rifle.

Robert

[Drm50]

I hunt a lot of small game and varmit with 22s. My hoard of ammo is pre Obama. I have 14 22 rifles and 12 handguns. That’s what I have left as of today. All 22s are pre 1960 except for a 77/22 Ruger. The point is every 22 rifle I have will shoot an inch at 40yds. That’s the distance they are all sighted for. Today you have poor QC on 22ammo and rifles aren’t put together as they were in the past. Opps I lied I forgot about 3 other 22 rifles I have not sold yet. Run of the mill single shots that are 70-80 yrs old. I guarantee you they will shoot an inch at 40yds. I don’t believe in paying for Target ammo that is no more consistent than regular ammo. You can gain a bit of accuracy by using standard velocity.

[AZ Pete]

I think you have reasonable "field" accuracy now. You aren't likely to have a bench rest when hunting the "wiley wabbits" or squirrels.
Experiment with some ammo and see what your gun really likes and even consider segregating your ammo by rim thickness to see if that gets you closer to your goal.

If you want assured match accuracy from a hunting .22, you might consider Anschutz, Cooper, CZ or some other $$ rifles.

[35remington]

A stock Ruger 10/22 barrel is something of a lost cause with high speed hollowpoints or any high speed ammo, and while grouping improves with good quality subsonic hollowpoints (Eley or CCI, etc) it still is not inspiring. It is fine for plinking and keeping vermin out of the yard but squirrel sniping accuracy leaves me feeling unfulfilled.

Hitting the easy button involves getting a barrel with a better bentz type chamber. When so doing about 3/4 inch at fifty yards for an average is possible and very usable. This is once again best attained with subsonic ammo. A friend and I got fond of the SK match subsonic flatpoints that are far more viable hunting ammo than target RN which kills trees squirrels poorly with body shots.

I’d much rather have a 3/4 inch 22 than a 1.5 inch 22. That’s about the level of difference I find from stock to improved results.

[uscra112]

Not to overdo it - (I've commented on this on three threads here recently) - but there are two inexpensive things you can do to improve results using commodity ammo in commodity rifles. One is weight-sorting. The other is "bumping" the bullets up to a uniform diameter of .2250" using a Paco Kelly or Waltz tool. About six years ago I cut groups from a box stock 10-22 in half using these two methods, starting with Thunderbolt ammunition. A caution, however: bumping only works for cheap ammo; it does nothing but spoil better grade target ammo.

The Waltz tool is considerably better, IMHO, but Neil seems to have "gone dark". A pretty good replica can be made using the Lee "expander" die body and a couple of simple lathe parts, at a cost under $40, not counting the price of the Lee die. I have a drawing to share.

[M-Tecs]

http://www.portercalls.com/neal_waltz_die.htm

http://www.dayattherange.com/?page_id=5338

[uscra112]

Good info.

The portercalls post is from 2015.

"Day_at_the_range" very, very obviously did not use the Waltz tool correctly. Maybe they didn't want to?

I did not see a lot of improvement starting with Wolf Match. The brands that improved most were Thunderbolt, Auto Match, and (surprise) MiniMags.

Bumping made little difference in my competition-chambered Ballard, which to me confirms the idea that the improvement seen in the 10-22 was from sizing to bullet up to better fill the throat.

[Nueces]

The Waltz tool is considerably better, IMHO, but Neil seems to have "gone dark".

Good news for the modern rimfire shooter: I called and talked to Neal on Wednesday, then mailed my order the next day. 330-837-4818, central time zone.

[MostlyLeverGuns]

There is a book by Bill Calfee - THE ART OF RIMFIRE ACCURACY that goes into extensive detail on what it takes for rimfire accuracy, probably more than most want to know. Amazon lists it and there is a Kindle version.

[uscra112]

Good news for the modern rimfire shooter: I called and talked to Neal on Wednesday, then mailed my order the next day. 330-837-4818, central time zone.

That IS good news.

[Bigslug]

Not flogging a dead horse, but maybe trying to sew silk purses out of sow's ears.

Match grade rimfire barrels and the ammo painstakingly crafted to be fired in them is kind of like selecting ultra-high octane aviation gas for the P-51 Mustang you know it's going to get poured into.

With 87-octane grade stuff and and the mass-market guns made to shoot it, you're basically trying different part and lot numbers and hoping the variables combine to give results like Eley Tenex out of an Anschutz 54. Sometimes it happens, but (A.) it's not the way to bet, and (B.) good luck on those results holding up long term across multiple lots of the same part number.

You CAN do very well by playing around with the entry level (AKA "club" quality) match rounds (note - they may not cycle semi autos). Wolf Match Target (rebranded SK Jagd) is astounding stuff. It's gone up since it's U.S. introduction 25 or so years ago, but still stings less than the true international-grade stuff.

Something else to consider - if you're looking for field performance on game, match ammo may not be your best friend anyway. It's of lower velocity and had more of a rainbow trajectory. Fine if you KNOW you're shooting at the ISU-regulation 50 meters, but not so much if you're guestimating range to a bunny's head. The faster round may be PRACTICALLY more accurate because of it's flatter trajectory and less time exposed to crosswinds.

[Krag 1901]

Shooting squirrel offhand is a lot different than bench resting an eight pound target gun too. my BL 22 and 582 Rem do every thing I need for an offhand 25-100 yard gun. Though I have to say that Rem Thunderbolts are trash!

[303Guy]

My Remington 512 with a nice scope shoots some nice groups with regular ammo, both subsonic and supersonic. However, there are always outlyers to some degree that spoil the groups. Some ammo shoots better than others. For off hand shooting it shoots fine - better than I can aim it. With target or semi-target ammo it does seem to shoot better though but regular ammo is quite satisfactory if one accepts the percentage of outlyers (which unfortunately makes it difficult spot my own errors).

https://i.postimg.cc/hvdV6NRB/01-11-20-512-3.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

This only 25m so not really all that great. That's a five shot group. It doesn't always do that though.

[NWPilgrim]

You are getting good accuracy with what you have. You can get a bit better:
- Add an optic. For close in like that’ll I like just a 1-4x or fixed 4x.

- Try some decent but not match grade ammo. I have tried several match grade ammo brands in my 10/22 and 15/22 with no noticeable change. BUT going from Remington or Winchester to CCI, Aguila or some Federal drastically improved, except the Mini-mags are so-so. Blazer is surprisingly good and one of the cheaper. I have heard but not tried yet that Fiocchi is likewise similarly accurate. Wolf Match, Norma, Eley etc were a waste on my guns.

- A barrel and trigger upgrade isn’t too much and can also have noticeable improvement.

But to get much smaller groups than these changes you need a better bolt action like a CZ, Tikka, Ruger (77/22 is very good) etc or other Europeans. For squirrels some guys prefer the .17 HMR for less drop out to 75 yds or more and seemingly better made ammo overall (more expensive too). The couple I have seen Savage and Ruger American were relatively inexpensive yet tack drivers.

[uscra112]

High velocity bullets are actually affected MORE by wind than subsonic. Counterintuitive, but true. The rate of deceleration due to aerodynamic drag turns out to be the controlling factor.

[uscra112]

Not to overdo it - (I've commented on this on three threads here recently) - but there are two inexpensive things you can do to improve results using commodity ammo in commodity rifles. One is weight-sorting. The other is "bumping" the bullets up to a uniform diameter of .2250" using a Paco Kelly or Waltz tool. About six years ago I cut groups from a box stock 10-22 in half using these two methods, starting with Thunderbolt ammunition. A caution, however: bumping only works for cheap ammo; it does nothing but spoil better grade target ammo.

The Waltz tool is considerably better, IMHO, but Neil seems to have "gone dark". A pretty good replica can be made using the Lee "expander" die body and a couple of simple lathe parts, at a cost under $40, not counting the price of the Lee die. I have a drawing to share.

Made a prototype tonight. Works great. Talked to Al Nelson at NOE Molds this afternoon. He is going to add it to his product line.

[725]

I think if you go to standard velocity ammo, you'll do better.

[Norske]

Every rimfire barrel is a law onto itself. Buy a 50 round box of every brand/"model" 22LR ammo you can find (CCI has a bunch of different 22LRs). Somewhere in a large selection you will find an accurate round, or at least find a velocity range yo0ur barrel likes better. Then it's a accuracy vs. budget.

[uscra112]

LOL! In today's world, scoring one box of ANYTHING is chancy, much less one box of everything.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

I have been working with Ruger MK. III target pistol, Ruger 10/22 in Hogue stock with Nikon (Philippines) 4X, and circa 1950s Marlin 39. I am trying to improve my ability to hit within a one-inch circle — squirrel or rabbit's head. Much of my work to achieve the goal has been by futzing (technical term for spending a great deal of money before analyzing specifics of how to achieve intended goal) with firearms.

I am now at the stage where I request information from experienced 22 LR shooters. Having large quantities of standard Hi-speed 40-grain solids and 37??- grain hollow points to use, the range at which my one-inch circle ceases to be routine is about 35 yards. Since I have never owned a target rifle or shot any target ammunition, I'm beginning to think 35 yards is it unless I invest in different firearms and hugely more expensive ammunition.

My opinion and experience:

There are two kinds of accuracy. (1) Hunting accuracy (2) Target accuracy.
With an inch at 35 yds. you certainly have hunting accuracy.
For target accuracy you need target quality rifles and ammo.

For your purpose of hunting you're "good to go." Consistent head shots on squirrels at 100 yds. is possible but not very realistic.

DG

[OS OK]

THERE ARE MANY VARIABLES...that 'all' have to be addressed when trimming that last little bit off group size & consistently keeping'er under an inch.

I think it's an admirable endeavor...there is much to learn about this 'lowly .22lr.'
Keep us posted as to what you have been doing in this regard, 'what you have tried & the results' of your efforts, take pictures...they add so much to a technical thread like this one.

Like it's been said already regarding the ammo...
you can weigh-sort it with an accurate little jewelers scale...

https://i.imgur.com/nRt9k7H.jpg

you can make a handy lil-jig & rim sort by rim thickness and/or make one to measure the 'COAL/fdb' (Cartridge Over All Length/ (to the) Front Drive Band) to insure a more consistent chamber placement and headspacing...

https://i.imgur.com/OO2sJ7p.jpg

or you can make a COAL/fdb sorting & go in and weight sort a particular length..

https://i.imgur.com/xNgKSIE.jpg

But one of the most significant things that make a positive difference with any mfgr's ammo is that chamber.
When you see land marks on an extracted round, your going to see a significant difference in how that round will group...with cheaper ammo-not so much...but definitely a difference.

https://i.imgur.com/6eY7VSc.jpg

After 70 years of thinking that center-fire is king & .22lr's were for training kids & popping cans...I've had a change of heart and quite the education from these boys here that are giving you such good advise.
Good advise won't get it unless you take the time to experiment, log your efforts & results..."get down in this Rabbit-Hole' and enjoy this 'lowly .22lr' for what you can learn and do with it in any rifle."
Speaking of the rifle...there's several checks & inexpensive mods you can do with that too...haha...this Rabbit Hole is deep my friend.

keep us posted . . . charlie

[uscra112]

It certainly is! Wait 'til you meet the guys who are pulling the bullets, dumping the powder, then breech-seating a bullet specially designed for that purpose in a single shot rifle, refilling the case with *gasp* BLACK powder, just for for target competition. They shoot some pretty good groups, too.

Good summary there, OS OK!

[OS OK]

It certainly is! Wait 'til you meet the guys who are pulling the bullets, dumping the powder, then breech-seating a bullet specially designed for that purpose in a single shot rifle, refilling the case with *gasp* BLACK powder, just for for target competition. They shoot some pretty good groups, too.

Good summary there, OS OK!

Thank you uscra112... Kind words are appreciated, I feel like I've just come through '.22lr - 101 class' this past six months with the two threads I have been running. You and quite a few others have been very generous with your hard earned knowledge.

Another thanks out to MostlyLeverGuns... for that mention of the book 'THE ART OF RIMFIRE ACCURACY'

https://i.imgur.com/dTre09s.jpg

... I just ordered a paperback copy from Amazon.
It is like one criminal said to another in a movie called ''HEAT" ... the one criminal ask the other how he finds out about all these details he was selling...he replied...
"The information is out there, all you have to do is let it in!"

[wv109323]

I have seen 2 magazine articles where exhaustive tasting of .22 rf has been conducted. Both tests were like 5 to 8,000 rounds through target rifles. Both articles showed the worst at 1 3/4" and the best at .3" @ 50 yards. The accuracy followed the price tag of the ammo generally.
Generally speaking ,CCI std. Velocity is a solid performer for the money. My experience shows that std. Velocity is all about the same. This is based on Ransom resting target .22 pistols.

[uscra112]

TARGET rifles. Aye, there's rub. (apologies to Shakespeare). This thread is about ammo for common "sporting" and/or "plinking" rifles.

[303Guy]

Well, for what it's worth, I am going down the 'turning a sporting rifle into a target rifle' rabbit hole myself. I think the trick is to realize the rifle ammo limitations and do what one can to improve those then strive to achieve what the rifle can do. I've fired twenty shot groups, then fifteen then ten and found that a percentage of shots form a group while the rest get scattered.

https://i.postimg.cc/K8mkgvg1/Fiocchi_Subs_11_10_20.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://i.postimg.cc/RVj7Nn74/Rem_Subsonic_HN.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

This sort of thing. This is with open sights so it's quite a challenge for me. Are those flyers or shooter error? That's the challenge.

I have the luxury of being able to try different brands and types of ammo which has been part of the fun.

[uscra112]

There are so many process characteristics in .22 ammo manufacturing that are inaccessible to us, given our modest financial means, that we'll never make even marginal target ammo out of commodity ammo like Blazer/Wildcat/Thunderbolt/AutoMatch et.al. But the things we can do will get rid of a lot of outliers. The rest we'll just have to live with. Fun trying, though. And definitely a learning experience that will stay with us.

If you let it, you will get an inkling of how high volume manufacturing is really managed. You'll start thinking about process control, not quality control. Whether it's ammo or automobiles, the concepts are the same. It can be a rewarding career, but as my old Dad once said "you'll never have cocktail party conversation".

[Drm50]

Do you see the difference in 10/22 barrels from 60s to ones made later? I’ve had a good bit of experience with them but not technical barrel measurement. I have one left from 60s and it shoots under 1” at 40yds. The others I had in small collection of them I bought as they came out in 60s.
They all shot under 1” at forty, including the Mannlicher. Certainly not target rifles but much better than what I have run across since. I end up with a lot of stock parts from putting them together for people. I have found that sometimes switching out stock barrels doesn’t work. I don’t know if it is tolerances from a different batch or maybe just tooling wearing out on a run. I was a cheer leader for Ruger and 10/22. Now I feel it’s just another 22 rifle.

[John Boy]

I was at the range this last Fall with a JM Marlin Ballard with a vernier rear, shooting my black powder reloads with Western 40gr cast bullets weighed within a small Bell Curve, 4.5gr Swiss Null-B with a velocity of 1230 FPS at 50 yards. Of the 20 shots for the target, 3 fliers and 17 holes in the center that tore the center completely out

[Bigslug]

there are so many process characteristics in .22 ammo manufacturing that are inaccessible to us, given our modest financial means, that we'll never make even marginal target ammo out of commodity ammo like blazer/wildcat/thunderbolt/automatch et.al. But the things we can do will get rid of a lot of outliers. The rest we'll just have to live with. Fun trying, though. And definitely a learning experience that will stay with us.

If you let it, you will get an inkling of how high volume manufacturing is really managed. You'll start thinking about process control, not quality control. Whether it's ammo or automobiles, the concepts are the same. It can be a rewarding career, but as my old dad once said "you'll never have cocktail party conversation".

There is massive truth here!:goodpost:

About 10 years ago, a group of guys from my department went to shoot in the smallbore matches of an international shooting event. Our snipers were using one of the lesser grades of Federal Gold Medal as a training aid - not a competition tool. When compared to the Eley and other prime grade stuff that most of the other players were using, it had two key attributes (1.) it was what we had, and (2.) it was paid for.

So over the course of the next couple months I sorted about 5,000 cartridges by rim thickness and weight to ensure that each of our competitors had about a brick's worth of ammo that within itself was as consistent as I could make it. They came back with a bunch of medals too, but you learn a few things:

1. Your time is worth something too. Eley and the like put the time in ahead of assembly so you don't have to slap band aids on someone else's assembly. And it's easier on your eyes, back, and sanity.

2. The sorting process is good, but can't be 100% foolproof. If that 2/10's of a grain separation is powder on one round, and bullet weight on the next, it's probably all for naught. The only way to catch that is pre-assembly of the round - - which is why Eley gets the big bucks.

3. Unless you've got a team coach or supportive sap like me doing it for you, you time is probably better spent getting in shape to spend 45 minutes slung up in position, dry-firing, reading wind flags, etc... with ammo that is cheaper but still good enough to give you good feedback, and spend the money on the good stuff for when it counts.

[farmbif]

some folks over at accurate shooter did some extensive accuracy testing several years ago with a huge quantity and variety of 22 ammo and surprisingly bulk winchester Dyna points came out somewhere near the top as far as accuracy.

[AZ Pete]

thanks for the reference to Accurate Shooters test. Premium ammo will, all things considered, be more consistent. But each .22 is unique and many will not benefit from the extra expense, or perform the same from brand to brand.

[OS OK]

thanks for the reference to Accurate Shooters test. Premium ammo will, all things considered, be more consistent. But each .22 is unique and many will not benefit from the extra expense, or perform the same from brand to brand.

"AMEN!"

I think you can improve to some measurable extent most all the .22lr offerings out there by tuning & by improving the platform they are shot in....to do that, get ready for a trip into a deep rabbit'hole!

One of the most educational trips I've made in years...way too much we all just take for granted these days.

[samari46]

MostlyLeverGuns hit the nail on the head. "The Art of 22 Rimfire Accuracy" by Jim Calfee is a great book. Jim published many articles in "Precision Shooting" magazine years back before it went under. Costs about $48 from Barnes and Noble and is about 718 pages long. Just got my copy today and haven't read it yet. But it does cotain all his published articles plus just about anything you'd want to know about shooting and gunsmithing 22's. Frank