The first part of the response, regarding the status of improved accuracy in fimfire.......that, is correct, lots of improvement in equipment, ammo and shooter ability.
Last edited:
Accurize my hunting 22lr
- Thread starter Joseph112830
- Start date
The first part of the response, regarding the status of improved accuracy in fimfire.......that, is correct, lots of improvement in equipment, ammo and shooter ability.
Thank you Tim, I believe we're back on track
I can't deny that there has been progress, especially in the last few years. This, I believe has been driven by the popularity of rimfire BR.
On the other hand, if we try and take the skill of the shooter out of the equation, fixed action, tunnel range type scenario. With a high quality centrefire BR rifle with suitable ammunition, the groups would be tiny - measuring little more than the calibre.
The reason for this almost unbelievable accuracy is that the ammunition has continued to evolve because individuals, such as Palmisano/Pindell and many others were never satisfied and search for better. They could do this because the centrefire cartridge is easy to modify in almost any way your imagination takes you.
Very few of these step changes are lead by the manufacturer, they are usually one step behind but are eventually forced to produce the "new hot calibre"
If the .22lr ammo/rifle was consistently producing, say .7 moa at 100yds fifty years ago with a factory target rifle, why are we not approaching any where near centrefire accuracy now with our superior barrels, actions and far more understanding of tuning and harmonics.
The weakest link in the chain is the ammunition - yes, it good, but why isn't it better?
Why isn't it consistent from lot to lot. If it was consistent and you found, after extensive testing that your particular rifle shot very well with, say Midas + that should be the job done, unfortunately, when you buy the next brick of Midas + it may not perform nearly so well and the testing starts again.
I can't deny that there has been progress, especially in the last few years. This, I believe has been driven by the popularity of rimfire BR.
On the other hand, if we try and take the skill of the shooter out of the equation, fixed action, tunnel range type scenario. With a high quality centrefire BR rifle with suitable ammunition, the groups would be tiny - measuring little more than the calibre.
The reason for this almost unbelievable accuracy is that the ammunition has continued to evolve because individuals, such as Palmisano/Pindell and many others were never satisfied and search for better. They could do this because the centrefire cartridge is easy to modify in almost any way your imagination takes you.
Very few of these step changes are lead by the manufacturer, they are usually one step behind but are eventually forced to produce the "new hot calibre"
If the .22lr ammo/rifle was consistently producing, say .7 moa at 100yds fifty years ago with a factory target rifle, why are we not approaching any where near centrefire accuracy now with our superior barrels, actions and far more understanding of tuning and harmonics.
The weakest link in the chain is the ammunition - yes, it good, but why isn't it better?
Why isn't it consistent from lot to lot. If it was consistent and you found, after extensive testing that your particular rifle shot very well with, say Midas + that should be the job done, unfortunately, when you buy the next brick of Midas + it may not perform nearly so well and the testing starts again.
Quite simply, apples and oranges. A modern PPC is just that.....modern in every way.
Everything about .22 shooting revolves around that the round is essentially that which is fundementally entrenched in the late 19th century. It is amazing that we do as good as we do at the mercy of a lead slug dipped in mutton tallow, more or less.
Could we do better....of course, my good friend Billy Brawand was the guy rapidly developing handloaded 22 rimfire utilizing handmade jacketed benchrest bullets before all BR sanctionng organizations mandated mass produced lubed lead bullets. That, my friend, is the beauty of the challange IMHO.
Everything about .22 shooting revolves around that the round is essentially that which is fundementally entrenched in the late 19th century. It is amazing that we do as good as we do at the mercy of a lead slug dipped in mutton tallow, more or less.
Could we do better....of course, my good friend Billy Brawand was the guy rapidly developing handloaded 22 rimfire utilizing handmade jacketed benchrest bullets before all BR sanctionng organizations mandated mass produced lubed lead bullets. That, my friend, is the beauty of the challange IMHO.
Then there needs to be encouragement to guys like Billy - let primed cases be freely available - I've not seen them around for some time - Have an "open" class and see if there just a little more to be tweaked from the humble .22lr - A sabot to get round the heeled bullet problem?
Well I know they say 10/22's can't do what a good bolt gun does. But I smiled Sunday when I shot these 2 5 shot groups back-to-back with $4 a box CCI standard velocity. 
I'd be pleased with those with my Lilja barreled Sako Finnfire.Nice shooting. Just out of curiosity, how many dollars are invested in your 10 22?
I got about $1200 in it with bipod.
I shot a few more pretty good ones this weekend. I actually shot Fri, Sat, and Sun. Had a blast. This ammo does have fliers. But it does pretty good for the price.
Now all you have to do is invest in measuring lessons.
Not a single one of those is under .200".
Hang in there though, somewhere down the line you gotta get one right.
Close enough for me Tim. I see you haven't changed in trying to tick people off. But not gonna give you the satisfaction. Love ya man!
How close am I on this one Tim?
Tick people of??? Can't help it if you can't measure groups. I mean if they were close it would be one thing but you're good for about a 50% margin of error.
Oh.....the last one.....it's a mid .100".
Seems lot a lot of work to do all the math, make little notes so you can put up posts that are so painfully incorrect. Hey, knock yourself out.
Also, just curious, 25-30 yards?
Oh.....the last one.....it's a mid .100".
Seems lot a lot of work to do all the math, make little notes so you can put up posts that are so painfully incorrect. Hey, knock yourself out.
Also, just curious, 25-30 yards?
Last edited:
50yds sweetheart.
And just for your info Tim the 9 ring is .300 on a USBR target. So I would say you are the one who needs to learn about measuring.
That last group was 1/8th the area of a dime. But I know you have done better.
True, but you can't get this on television!
You got me there.
That's why, probably, we have the other two blacked out measurements, the first one, coincidently, much closer to what
I told you, go figure.
Kindly, explain to the class, how it's possible for two holes side by side to measure less than .100", or as we say in the real benchrest world....DUH.
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.