RWS rimfire ammunition

[Tim s]

That’s because it is primarily a shooters game.
As for various BR data.....do your own homework, it's all public.
IR50, for instance, has a 1/4” 10 ring and an X that’s 1/32”.
Call the ELEY or Lapua test facility’s and ask about the relative test results.
I am very familiar withtop flight prone gear and a few smiths that build top flight equipment for both.
As far as the initial question regarding ammo, I can put you in touch with a mulltiple national champ prone shooter that will tell you same, ammo todayis better, more consistant than ever before.

And in point of fact, I’ve been shooting Tennex from the 80’s and then Lapua Midas gold box, and the stuff today is better in every way.

 

[Bart B.]

As far as the initial question regarding ammo, I can put you in touch with a mulltiple national champ prone shooter that will tell you same, ammo todayis better, more consistant than ever before.

Well, it's not broken any of the pre 1980 50 and 100 yard open records that still stand. Perhaps the competitors are not up to it.

Thanks for the IR50 information that I'll check. Cannot find IR50 records.

NRA: https://competitions.nra.org/results-and-records/national-records/

 

[HuskerP7M8]

If ammo made today is head and shoulders better than anything ever done, why doesn't the NRA outdoor prone records show that?

Any 22 rimfire BR folks shot good lots of pre-1980 ammo to compare?

Please provide a link to rimfire BR aggregate group records or diameter of their 100 point ring. The ARA Rules don't mention it but looks like about half an inch. And 25 shots touching or inside it would score 2500?

Stool shooters are not the only ones qualified to assess 22 rimfire accuracy. The NRA 50 yard target X ring diameter is .391 inch. Records with over 150 shots touching or inside that from prone still stand. That's with a 1/4 MOA hold area; not near zero benched.

Hi Bart,

I've been involved in discussions similar to this numerous times in the past when I used to hang out on Mike Ross's forum where 99% of the participants were conventional prone shooters.

The Stidworthy records always seemed to get mentioned in those discussions and Mike had a standing bet for a couple of years challenging the 3 or 4 of us on the forum who shot RFBR to match it.

It was always great fun because Mike wouldn't allow things to get out of hand and he required that everyone had to post using their real name.

A few numbers:

The ARA 100-ring is exactly 0.500" in diameter, but it's scored worst edge and not best edge. With a regulation scoring plug of 0.224", the CTC group ES for all shots fired can't exceed 0.276".

With the IR50 target (best edge scoring and a 0.250" 10-ring), it requires all shots fired can't exceed 0.474" for CTC measurements and an X requires a 0.256" CTC ES.

The maximum CTC group ES for all shots fired on the NRA A-23 target to obtain an X (best edge scoring) is 0.614".

To say the least there's a huge difference in precision when attempting to compare most BR vs NRA targets, and they don't really lend themselves to a direct comparison for scores, records, or ammo quality.

It's also important to remember that the Stidworthy records were somewhat a product of the number of active competitors in those days and those numbers have declined dramatically since then.

Less participants means the chances of matching or setting new records in prone becomes much harder regardless of ammo quality being better or worse over the years.

Maybe you or someone else knows, but I'm not even sure if they follow, or even allow, the same procedure used to set that record now days?

I've been testing RF ammo since about the late 70's, and except for an odd year every once in a while, I've seen ammo improve in general.

I've also had the opportunity to test limited quantities of the old "paper box", Russian Olymp-R, and old Ultra-Match. I wasn't all that impressed, but as I said, the testing was limited.

Landy

 

[Bart B.]

Maybe you or someone else knows, but I'm not even sure if they follow, or even allow, the same procedure used to set that record now days?

I've discussed this often with Lones Wigger and he agreed with me on it. He also thought barrels these days were often not as good compared to those back then.

The man who finally was able to get Russian Olimp and Temp imported to the USA in the early '90's as it was prohibited since its inception was a friend. It was popular with Soviet Bloc gold medalists. The plant making it was taken over by government people to make AK47 ammo a few years later. No more Olimp nor Temp.

NRA smallbore is still the same today, same targets, scoring and course of fire.

Don't forget the prone rifles point in an area on target many times bigger than bench ones; no artificial support allowed. Point of aim bounces with heartbeat.

Those Stidworthy records are the product of the good stuff used then. Number of other competitors doesn't matter. I've discussed this at length with her Dad, George.

 

[Bart B.]

The maximum CTC group ES for all shots fired on the NRA A-23 target to obtain an X (best edge scoring) is 0.614".

Mary Stidworthy's record has 205 consecutive record shots inside that. 400-40X +165X. They looked like this:

 

[Tim s]

I've discussed this often with Lones Wigger and he agreed with me on it. He also thought barrels these days were often not as good compared to those back then.

The man who finally was able to get Russian Olimp and Temp imported to the USA in the early '90's as it was prohibited since its inception was a friend. It was popular with Soviet Bloc gold medalists. The plant making it was taken over by government people to make AK47 ammo a few years later. No more Olimp nor Temp.

NRA smallbore is still the same today, same targets, scoring and course of fire.

Don't forget the prone rifles point in an area on target many times bigger than bench ones; no artificial support allowed. Point of aim bounces with heartbeat.

Those Stidworthy records are the product of the good stuff used then. Number of other competitors doesn't matter. I've discussed this at length with her Dad, George.

I would tell you as well, you can throw the Olimp as well. I shot some in matches and still have some.
I suspect Lones may have been right when it came to “ factory “ barrels, not custom match barrels which it is generally accepted have advanced substantially.....particularly in the last 5-10 years.
Funny you mention Wigger, although the guy was an absolute giant in his primary discipline,he did shoot some limited ARA matches butwas pretty much a mid pack shooter. He was getting on in years so you never know.
FWIW when Landy, above, tells you about relative ammo quality, you can take that to the bank since his published testing data indicate few, if any, have exhausted more time and energy testing rimfire ammo in a controlled environment.........this is a non paid endorsement.

P.S. it might be worth a mention, some of the very rare stuff available to, maybe, very very few may have really been head and shoulders above, but quality ammo that mere mortals can actually buy and shoot.....again, never better.

 

[Bart B.]

FWIW when Landy, above, tells you about relative ammo quality, you can take that to the bank since his published testing data indicate few, if any, have exhausted more time and energy testing rimfire ammo in a controlled environment.......

Maybe he can explain why those old records still stand.

 

[Tim s]

Maybe he can explain why those old records still stand.

The entire world of benchrest rimfire developed since then. If you believe this is the single reason those records still stand, perhaps you know a bit less about rimfire than you believe.
You have literally hundereds of records world wide in far far more ammunition dependent disciplines to ignore. Good luck with that.

 

[Bart B.]

If you believe this is the single reason those records still stand, perhaps you know a bit less about rimfire than you believe.

I'm open to any reason those prone records still stand. Something prevents them from being bettered. I don't think that's too hard to understand.

I don't pretend to know all about rimfire, but there is a reason those prone records still stand; that's my point, my question. Even if all the benchrest rimfire records are 10 times better than what they are now. Don't need to keep reading how great todays ammo is at 50 yards

Would like to see some qroups at 100 yards from 50 yard rimfire bench rifles with the best rimfire stuff. Maybe its now lousy beyond 58 yards.

 

[wvlapua]

Lapua Midas + is the best performer in my 40xb, cz455 lilja and Annie 54. Haven't tried it in the 52D yet, but fed ultramatch shoots great in it.

 

[1813benny]

I guess from reading the posts, it is evident that there is no logical or factual reason, nor a combination of both that will in any way change Bart B's mind that the only reason some of the prone records have stood for so long is only due to the ammunition of old.

Bill's post pretty much outlined the reality of the challenges associated with setting a record, let along duplicating one such as those set by the Stidworthys. Those records are an incredible combination of everything going right.

As I am in favor of equal opportunity and have an open mind on this topic, I ask this question: Can you provide data - not national records - that the old ammunition was better? Not discussions. Not rumors. Not pointing to national records. Actual test data.

For the record, I have 37 years of competitive smallbore prone and 3-position experience. I have had good ammo, great ammo and even a lot that Wigger asked if he could purchase from me, so I have personally experienced the good, bad and ugly of rimfire ammo. I have also read, reread and digested Landy's data and writing on this topic and his efforts are impressive.

Looking forward to the data and a continuance of this discussion.
Ken

PS - The SmallboreAccureacy site on Delphi forums is alive and well and has all of those past threads if anyone is interested. As Landy mentioned, for the record you must have your real name in either your logon credentials or in your signature with each post. As Mike started the real name rule with the forum, it is to keep the discussions friendly. Don't care if they get lively - within reason - but mutual respect is important.

 

[Mike_Carter]

At Camp Perry in 2012 or '13 Eley was there and put on a presentation regarding their statistical process. During the Q&A that followed I asked two questions. 1. How was the ammo delivered to the individual plastic boxes. A. From a bowl feeder and it was totally random how they filled the plastic box. 2. Was the ammo currently produced better than the paper box Tenex that most all of established prone any sights records were set with, and do they still compare old lots of paper box Tenex when it is brought into the test centers. A. They maintained the current Tenex is superior to the old, and when a customer would bring some old paper box in it would never out perform the new.
Ok. They are in the business of selling new ammo, so the answer I received was expected. Then I had a side conversation with AMU armorer and he brought up a good point that has also been raised in this thread. Not only was the pool of prone shooters much larger in the 80's the skill level may also have been much higher. Why, I asked? He said back in those days the best of our international shooters on the Army teams and national teams all competed at Perry. These days, they don't. Aside from Eric Uptagrafft, you haven't seen the best of the army team and especially not the best of the USA shooting team. And if they were there they would probably not be shooting their best lot as it would be reserved for World Cup and World and Olympic Championship matches.
But then again, talking with Eric at the Black Hawk a few years back he recalled watching Martinov mixing brands of ammunition during record strings (not sighters) during international matches.
In regards to the 50 yard any sight record, I think it could be broken but no one wants to pursue it for many reasons. Mine would be wasting that many rounds of my best ammo and then losing the record with one or two shots to go.

 

[lion]

I have been following this thread with interest. I am too old and stiff to shoot anything except benchrest but I really admire the people who shoot prone. There were and still are some very good shooters both past and present. A few of the best are capable of out shooting a lot of good benchrest shooters. I don't know if the old ammo was better than the new but it is fun doing the best you can with what you have. I will be 78 in a few days and hope to be doing this for a few more years.

 

[HuskerP7M8]

At Camp Perry in 2012 or '13 Eley was there and put on a presentation regarding their statistical process. During the Q&A that followed I asked two questions. 1. How was the ammo delivered to the individual plastic boxes. A. From a bowl feeder and it was totally random how they filled the plastic box. 2. Was the ammo currently produced better than the paper box Tenex that most all of established prone any sights records were set with, and do they still compare old lots of paper box Tenex when it is brought into the test centers. A. They maintained the current Tenex is superior to the old, and when a customer would bring some old paper box in it would never out perform the new.
Ok. They are in the business of selling new ammo, so the answer I received was expected. Then I had a side conversation with AMU armorer and he brought up a good point that has also been raised in this thread. Not only was the pool of prone shooters much larger in the 80's the skill level may also have been much higher. Why, I asked? He said back in those days the best of our international shooters on the Army teams and national teams all competed at Perry. These days, they don't. Aside from Eric Uptagrafft, you haven't seen the best of the army team and especially not the best of the USA shooting team. And if they were there they would probably not be shooting their best lot as it would be reserved for World Cup and World and Olympic Championship matches.
But then again, talking with Eric at the Black Hawk a few years back he recalled watching Martinov mixing brands of ammunition during record strings (not sighters) during international matches.
In regards to the 50 yard any sight record, I think it could be broken but no one wants to pursue it for many reasons. Mine would be wasting that many rounds of my best ammo and then losing the record with one or two shots to go.

Hi Mike,

Did you get to visit with either of these guys? That's Andrew the CEO of Eley in the foreground and Phil their head technician just behind us.

This was taken in 2015 at the inaugural Triple Crown in Bristol, TN at the Kettlefoot Range. I just happened to remember this and copied the image off of Facebook.

It was kind of interesting that Dan Killough was one of the first to greet me after I arrived and he told me there were a couple of guys who wanted to meet me. I don't know how many forums they've monitored over the years, but SmallboreAccuracy was one of them and they said they felt like they already knew me from all the years of reading my babblings. LOL

I had several fascinating conversations with them over the next 4 days and it was one of the high lights of my trip.

I would note that they continually stressed to me they try to improve production as times goes on and briefly described how they go about it, but I struggled getting any specifics because proprietary issues limited some of the conversations. I still learned a lot of things that were helpful though.

Assuming there's enough competition between Eley/Lapua/RWS, then any good business plan would mandate you continue to improve or run the risk of being run over by your competitors.

I guess I take on faith that all the manufacturers follow that rule, but I suspect after this many years there aren't going to be any groundbreaking advancements in RF technology that makes all ammo magic and there will be years where improvements are either stagnant or too small to be statistically significant.

IHMO, that most probably means we're forced to look at RFBR records over the years with its higher demands for precision rather than Prone which is more heavily weighted towards marksmanship rather than precision.

Based on that assumption, both Eley and Lapua users have set a lot of records in the last couple of years in RFBR and that may tend to support the idea ammo continues to improve.

Landy

 

[riflewoman]

Certainly the talent pool is much smaller is one reason. But the old ammo could shoot up there with today’s ammo. Today we have better lot to lot consistency but the better lots of yesteryear are just as good as today’s.

Here is an example of a modern shooter electing to not pursue the national record.

http://pronematch.com/the-59th-western-wildcats-championship-day-2/

 

[Tim s]

I have been following this thread with interest. I am too old and stiff to shoot anything except benchrest but I really admire the people who shoot prone. There were and still are some very good shooters both past and present. A few of the best are capable of out shooting a lot of good benchrest shooters. I don't know if the old ammo was better than the new but it is fun doing the best you can with what you have. I will be 78 in a few days and hope to be doing this for a few more years.

Always find some comments more interesting.
A few of the best outshooting precisely what, might I inquire?

 

[Frankr]

I am no expert or big 22LR shooter BUT I did have a few boxes of the Federal Made Ultra Match UM1. Which I believe was the best 22LR ammo I have ever fired to date. Of course at the time I had it I really had no idea what I had or that they quit making it, All I knew was a old Marlin 25N would shoot .250's at 50 yards with it. I have a old Kimber 82 light weight sporter rifle that has put them into a hole that measures .190. I hear that it was so expensive to manufacture that Federal was not making any money at all on it. They would not tell the secrete behind its incredible accuracy other than what I seen was they had UM2 and I think it was 799 that was UM1 that did not meet the spec. So looks like a slow process to manufacture and a lot that did not meet UM1 spec's. I really dont know the whole story on it and if someone does and wants to tell it. I would read it. I dont buy big lots of ammo a brick hear and there and sometimes I order 3 boxes of this and 3 of that and so on and all the Tenex and Midas + I have had shoot great. My Anschutz 1416 classic will shoot High .100's to low .200's . same thing with the RWS Target Rifle and SK STD + I have several different lots due to I buy a few boxes hear and there at where ever has the best price and I have never had any of it shoot bad.
Don't quote me on the numbers as my memory fades as I get older.
I don't understand if you were capable of making such great ammo. make a few cases a year and watch people sang it up at extremely high prices. I think people would buy it. But I heard it took a few years to sell off what they made and most of it at a loss but most agree it was the best 22LR ammo made to date. One guy said nothing like it before it and nothing like it after it.

 

[Mike_Carter]

Hi Mike,

Did you get to visit with either of these guys? That's Andrew the CEO of Eley in the foreground and Phil their head technician just behind us.

Hello Landy,
I believe they were both at the presentation at Camp Perry. I don't recall speaking with either of them after that although they were around the firing line most of the day.