22 LR benchrest question

[doclu60]

Scott, you have suckered me into this conversation because I agree with most of what you have said.

I fully expect whatever I say now to be poo pooed, but so be it.

TKH

Ha! I didn't sucker you into anything Tony, you're your own man. I won't poo poo anything you posted here either. You have helped keep this conversation going and by the grace of the RFBR Gods, no one with limited experience has jumped in to argue!

I will say in total agreement with you, shooting one sighter is not a good plan. I almost never shoot just one sighter, even if that sighter knocks the dot out. Especially indoors where conditions seem to come and go for reasons that are not visible. In my last matches I shot sighters to not only confirm my hold, but to make sure the condition was holding and not going into 'floater' mode. One sighter doesn't give enough data to determine that.

Scott

 

[VLNBYR]

Another sighter "thing". If you are treating sighters with the same respect that you give your record bulls then move off and back on your hold with each sighter. How often have we sat on one spot and hammered shot after shot into the same hole then move to another bull and miss. I try to move off and back on each sighter even if my hold is in the exact same spot.

 

[Tony K Harper]

Teemgeek, I may start another thread on theory of sub vs super. I don't want this thread to get off of good information about conditions shooting.
Refraction \mirage.
Low to no and indoor shooting sometimes is a humbling experience. There's times a person is not aiming at what they think they are. Going back to sighters is just a feeling at times.
Todd

Todd,
I'm sorry I got this off topic. But I do have something to say about sub/super ammo for rimfire.

I was part of the testing team when Federal was developing Federal Ultra Match UM1 .22 rimfire ammo.

They would send me various lots of ammo and I would shoot them and write a report on what I found.

I mostly shot the UM1 against Eley Benchrest Gold which was the ammo I was shooting then.

I shot after work mostly at night under lights. For a long time, I was really impressed with the UM1. So impressed I started using it in local matches on the weekend. That is when I found problems. At night in little to no wind the UM1 shot great but when the wind got up it was very hard to predict. So, I quit making reports on ammo I shot at night and only reported what I shot when there were conditions.

Didn't take long for my contact at Federal to call me and ask what was happening. Thier results and my results on the same lots were very different. I told them I couldn't get it to shoot in the wind. After a couple of arguments, I among others finally convinced them to do some shooting outdoors in the wind.

Long story short, the ammo was supersonic. That made the ammo venerable to deflection when it was in an unstable condition. The problem was they didn't know how to slow it down without killing ignition.

It has long been known in centerfire it is desirable to have the case full of powder and not have a lot of empty space. In a rimfire there is only a tiny amount of powder a lot of empty space. They tried filling and packing the cases with various things, but the plug got pulled by the company before it was completely perfected.

Federal perfected the most common problems we have today with ammo and that is consistency. The cases were nearly perfect. The rim thickness was .042 all day long. The dimpled case head made sure the primer was only in the rim and not splashed over the center. The bullets were beautiful. The driving bands were not deformed and were nearly always the same length. You don't see that in current ammo.

UM1 was the way forward for RFBR accuracy but I'm afraid it has been lost forever.

If the ammo is of the same consistence, I would choose the slower ammo.

TKH

 

[Williwaw]

This is one of the most informative threads I have read by experienced benchrest shooters on any site. Taken as a whole, your thoughts about the application of what is observed in reading environmental conditions, integrating that into the use of sighters, and then applying that to shot placement on record bulls is invaluable.

I am an old shooter, but relatively new to match shooting. I shoot club matches on a perennially windy range. I truly appreciate the willingness displayed here to share insights and techniques for their application. The variety of approaches provides an abundance of options to try in seeing what works best, in which conditions, for improving my scores.

Thanks!

I couldn't agree more. I am new to shooting period, only three years. I live thousands of miles from any matches and have never shot with anyone with experience in competitive 22lr of any discipline. So just picture me alone, stretched out in the snow shooting 50yd F class in a moose meadow every day it is above -18C.

You can imagine how helpful it is when so many of you take the time to share your experience and the details of what you do and why.

Thanks!

 

[linekin]

Staying disciplined to the approach to the target isn't easy for me to do. In fact, I rarely am as I get impatient waiting on my condition, which may or may not be the prevailing condition, which most prefer.
So while shooting a card if my condition isn't coming around I'll shoot sighters in different conditions to have that hold in my back pocket should time become short later in the card should my favored condition not return.
Tony mentions shooting 3 sighters & taking the average which is good advice. Generally when I NEED to shoot a sighter during a card I'll always shoot more than one. I've gone to a sighter for some reason, many times because I'd missed a pickup or something. 1 shot doesn't confirm it for me.

Keith

 

[Todd Earhart]

Mr. Harper, thanks. That was a cool story. The um1 I shot was better than I expected. I would have loved to been able to lot test it when it was in production.
Todd

 

[dhom]

I aim for the center since for me it is easier to judge the amount of difference the shot went from center since it is a constant landmark point so to speak. I shoot at least 2 shots then make the adjustment and see if that is where I need to hold. I find it again easier and faster to adjust doing it this way.
as an example, if I aim center and the shot went to 4'o'clock I know I need to hold around 10 o'clock or there's about. I adjust also by how far it went from center too.

This is another reason I don't use charts. you will run into a condition where you will need to hold opposite of what the chart would indicate. trust your sighters they won't lie!

Lee

The words of a true competitor.

 

[Tim Slater]

It has long been known in centerfire it is desirable to have the case full of powder and not have a lot of empty space. In a rimfire there is only a tiny amount of powder a lot of empty space.

TKH

As an historical aside the British gunsmith W W Greener considered this problem over a century ago. His answer was the "Short Rifle" cartridge: a .22short case with a 40gr bullet loaed to 1050fps mv by RWS.

The ever informative Rifleman.org website has an article: https://rifleman.org.uk/Greener_on_ammunition.html Sadly it doesn't specify whether Greener's "Short Rifle" was loaded with nitro or black powder.

 

[High Noon]

I’ve really enjoyed this informative thread and wanted to respond but decided to start a totally new thread ….Project S-MATCH

Todd

 

[Tony K Harper]

It just occurred to me we may have people on this thread that never saw Federal Ultra Match or Russian Olimp R .22 RF ammo. Here is a look of UM1 and Federal 900 along side the Russian Olimp R ammo.

 

[ADKTIM]

Why did the cartridges have dimples on the heads? More consistent ignition?

 

[Tim Slater]

Why did the cartridges have dimples on the heads? More consistent ignition?

Yes, so the primer is inside the rim, where it can be struck by the firing pin, rather than in the middle.

 

[ADKTIM]

Sence no ammunition companies seem to be dimpling now, was the idea a failure?
While reading some earlier posts on 22 short ammunition has any of the contributors to this post ever experimented with short ammo? Is ammo in current production up to the task?

 

[Tim Slater]

Sence no ammunition companies seem to be dimpling now, was the idea a failure?
While reading some earlier posts on 22 short ammunition has any of the contributors to this post ever experimented with short ammo? Is ammo in current production up to the task?

This is just an opinion, but I wonder if Eley, Lapua, and RWS thought any benefits weren't worth the cost. Incidentally the Soviets didn't invent the dimpled case head, or rather weren't the first to do so; one British manufacturer (King's Norton comes to mind) made dimpled cases during WW2. I doubt this would qualify as match ammo though.

 

[linekin]

It just occurred to me we may have people on this thread that never saw Federal Ultra Match or Russian Olimp R .22 RF ammo. Here is a look of UM1 and Federal 900 along side the Russian Olimp R ammo.

I overpaid for some UM1 a few years ago. Didn't shoot very well in any of my bench rifles but it was the best my Mossberg ever shot!!
Keith