Aguila interceptor vs Norma Tac 22 in the wind

[zukiphile]

The reason for different levels of hardness in various bullets makes sense, but I hadn't heard it before that video.

The metallurgy involved must be more difficult than I imagined if lot to lot variation in the lead wire used to make the bullets is something that Eley has problems nailing down.

 

[stagpanther]

speaking of eley...

Today I went out for some longer range 22lr shooting, the winds looked almost calm when I left my house but by the time I got to the range clouds started building and the winds picked up--I had a quartering headwind of 7 to 9 mph, which by our standards is very light so I decided to chance it at 212 yds anyway. I didn't have any tenax left, but still have quite a bit of eley's 38 gr high velocity hollow point which I've shot before but generally didn't do as well as tenax so I didn't use it much. It's what I would call a true supersonic but not as fast as the interceptor on up cartridges. All things considered it did extremely well IMO, just barely being edged out by the R-100 which is my go-to (but unfortunately I'm down to my last box and I have to brow-beat myself a bit before springing again for a brick of 22lr that costs as much per cartridge as 5.56 Nato).

As for the hardness thing--I always thought it was "common knowledge" (can't say I knew it as fact) that generally match grade stuff you buy by the 500 round brick hoping that you score the good stuff and have enough to last through a meaningful period of time.

 

[FrankenMauser]

Interesting video. Sounds like it might be the same guy.


I hate seeing vertical dispersion in rimfire groups now. It used to not bother me much when I shot mostly bulk pack and Thunderbolts.
But now that every shot needs to count, it is like a shot to the heart when I see a vertically stretched group that cannot be attributed to variable head or tail winds.

My son was trying to convince me that he should shoot S&B ammo in his next match, because it "sounds faster". And it is.
But I told him it was too inconsistent - especially for a semi-auto - and suggested he test for himself.

"Why are they hitting so high and low?"
Exactly.

(Wasn't a huge group. At 50 yards, it was 2.5" or a bit smaller. But when you're used to stacking Wolf or CCI Std with 3/8" vertical deviation, it seems huge.)

Then we moved out to 135 and 205 yards and he wanted to shoot Aguila bulk. "[chuckle] Go for it. Good luck."
He went back to the CCI Std really quickly.

 

[FrankenMauser]

All of this reminds me that I last tested premium ammo in the Marlin 880 with a different scope - a scope that I did not like, could not use well, and could never go back to.

I should probably retest all of the Eley and SK, and maybe consider getting some Lapua again.

 

[stagpanther]

Good shooting with 22lr of course can be accomplished with a low power scope or good iron sights--but I prefer to use a top-tier high power scope when I can, it makes noticeable difference for me.

 

[zukiphile]

Here is a superb video that delves into many of the "mysteries" discussed here. Primer composition and bullet hardness do come during the discussion--but I think the whole video has lots of good "food for thought."

I had watched one of his videos earlier in the year on whether tighter twist barrels for 22lr produced better accuracy. I perused a couple of his other videos again and noticed one of those food for thought points.

In rimfire world, a lot of e-ink is spilled arguing about barrel length. He thinks 22 inch and longer barrels allow the pressure in the barrel enough that the bullet comes back to its normal shape a bit after having been pushed a bit wide at the base during earlier acceleration.

 

[stagpanther]

Just curious--when you say tighter twist do you mean faster twist or a bore/groove that is resulting in more engraving bearing surface on the bullet (which is what I understood him to be talking about)?

 

[zukiphile]

Just curious--when you say tighter twist do you mean faster twist or a bore/groove that is resulting in more engraving bearing surface on the bullet (which is what I understood him to be talking about)?

I'm referring to a different video of his I watched a couple of months ago about a 1:14 or 1:12 twist 22lr barrel. During my brief search, his was the only testing of any sort I found on the topic.

Clearly presented online resources that examine niche questions in some detail are relatively uncommon and interesting. Even though it doesn't really apply to my shooting, his explanation of a smaller CIP bore and groove or lead hardness to fliers was interesting because he lays out his reasoning and experience.

 

[stagpanther]

I'm referring to a different video of his I watched a couple of months ago about a 1:14 or 1:12 twist 22lr barrel. During my brief search, his was the only testing of any sort I found on the topic.

I have a 1:9 twist Lilja barrel that I originally bought for supersonic load use--including hand-loads. What I found was you can only go so far with match grade 22lr barrels and higher pressure ammo before they start getting stuck cases and/or blown up cases due in part to tighter tolerances.

 

[FrankenMauser]

A friend of mine wanted to see how far he could go with .308 Win - figuratively and physically. He had several barrels made with twist rates as tight as 1:3.5".
But he never got there. He found 1:5" to be unnecessarily fast and overall detrimental - to the point that even gain twist barrels were peeling jackets and ruining bullets.

In rimfire world, a lot of e-ink is spilled arguing about barrel length. He thinks 22 inch and longer barrels allow the pressure in the barrel enough that the bullet comes back to its normal shape a bit after having been pushed a bit wide at the base during earlier acceleration.

I noticed that as well, and quietly shook my head.

We have decades of .22 LR testing that clearly shows longer barrels reducing ES and SD, often theorized to be from pressure normalization and pressure curve 'smoothing'.
Regardless of one's thoughts on why ES and SD improve, it is bewildering that someone can jump to, "it lets a deformed bullet get back into shape."

--

It isn't really the same topic, but one thing that I do know about our barrels is that I have to watch muzzle velocity. My 22" barrel pushes a few 'subsonic' and 'standard velocity' loads into supersonic territory - including TAC22 (that might be part of its issue). However, my son's 16.5" barrel produces velocities that are typically just shy of advertised numbers.

He can shoot anything subsonic (so far) and it will stay subsonic.
But I have to be careful, especially in cooler weather.

He has to deal with lower velocity and more drop, across the board. But I have to worry about trans-sonic destabilization, right out of the gate. Which is, arguably, the worst place for a bullet to go trans-sonic. (Destabilizing something that is already in the zone of initial stabilization.)

Last time I was testing, CCI Standard Velocity was not shooting as well as it normally does for me. I shot some across the chronograph and found it to be 'perfectly' straddling the trans-sonic zone at 5 feet. Speed of sound at that time was 1104 fps, which was exactly my average.
But, as we get warmer weather, I expect temperature-driven velocity increase to be lower than the rate of increase for the speed of sound. So, it should be safe until Sept/Oct.

The rifle shoots some other loads as well, or better, but nearly all of them are 5-10 times the price; or they are 'high velocity' loads and put the transition zone between 50 and 80 yards. I don't have deep enough pockets for the expensive ammo, or a desire to go trans-sonic at a range that creates potential issues for 50% of my targets.


Sorry, that turned into a bit of rambling. I got thinking and some of it leaked out of my fingertips.

 

[zukiphile]

These things happen. I'm not a CCI SV fanatic at all, but some of it I've gotten in the last year haven't just been inaccurate; I'm getting a 2% dud rate with good strikes. That has never happened before with any CCI I've had.

We have decades of .22 LR testing that clearly shows longer barrels reducing ES and SD, often theorized to be from pressure normalization and pressure curve 'smoothing'.
Regardless of one's thoughts on why ES and SD improve, it is bewildering that someone can jump to, "it lets a deformed bullet get back into shape."

I subscribe to the smoothing school of thought: I can illustrate it in the difference a 28" barrel and a 10.5" barrel work. The 10.5" gets crazy velocity differences from ammunition that's reasonably consistent from even a 16" barrel. The 28" seems to barely pop when any subsonic round leaves (indicating to my ear based chronograph that each leaves with about the same pressure just behind it) and it's a lot better on paper.

I give him credit for laying his idea out with plenty of qualification.

He may be harder for you to watch if you are a dedicated benchrest shooter. I saw his video about a CZ he would later modify because he found cracking in the barrel. His first ammunition tested, Norma I think, came in at less than an inch at 100, and he commented how that was disappointingly mediocre.

I'd have a group like that framed on my wall so I could discuss it with guests.

 

[stagpanther]

I went out again today--our winds were once again under 20 mph but still around 8 mph. I shot at a different venue because construction equipment was in the way. Shooting at 180 yds R-100 again did the best, Tac 22 did noticeably better but was still around an MOA larger than the R-100 group and the eley HV came in last--which kind of surprised me. I suspect the order the stuff is shot at and what degree of fouling the bore had might have had some influence--though the R-100 has always come out on top in my cz's. That said--even it grouped 1.2 MOA, and I have done significantly better in the past with it at distances 225 yds on in. I think accuracy grouping is best with 22lr when shooting sometime around dawn or dusk when air movement is at a minimum.

 

[tangolima]

My cheap marlin 81 shoots about 2moa at 150yd with Aguilar super extra hv. Good enough to hit soda can. Wind does way more damage to the accuracy than anything else. One time I had to put in as much as 8moa to deal with the strong cross wind, shooting at 200yd target.

BTW I like holding with reticle more than dialing the turret. It is faster, more intuitive, and less prone to mistakes.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[stagpanther]

Your results are excellent--that appears to have a velocity that is very near the eley HV. I went again yesterday but the winds cranked back up to around 15 mph--even by Maine standards it's been blowing unusually hard and long, 3 weeks of non-stop gusty winds. I've found the only hope I have in shooting 22lr in the wind is if I get the wind as close to my 6 as possible--then I can get reasonably close to groups that are around double in size to what I would get in calm conditions.

I found a leftover box of R-50 which had a dozen cartridges left (I thought I was all out) and at 117 yds in the wind it beat tac 22, eley HV and even R-100. The R-50 was part of a brick I bought a while ago that was a batch of proverbial "good stuff."

 

[tangolima]

Well it is actually more close to 2.5moa. It goes downhill really fast after 175yd. The hit rate at 200yd is about 1 in 10. It is a good simulator for shooting center fired beyond 800yd, I think. To make it more realistic, the scope has fixed 4x magnification.

I am consuming 100 rounds per week, versus only 40 rounds of center fired with reduced targets at 150yd to 300yd. Not for groups, but for hits.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[stagpanther]

Went out again today and shot at 254 yds; I was suckered into it by fogged-in cool temps and very light but laminar wind of around 5 mph from the left. This time I used my CZ scout which has a 16" barrel. As an interesting phenomenon--bullet impacts were definitely much higher than they are with my 26" jaguar; and I could hear a supersonic "crack" with both the eley HV and the R-100. I usually do not hear R-100 go supersonic "crack" through my longer jaguar barrel. First up was Tac 22 which did a pretty credible job considering the slight cross. Next up was eley HV which did worse than the Tac 22--but after starting in the group the sun burned through the fog and the winds ramped up significantly to 9 mph--and became gusty due to thermal heating; so I think the eley deserves a bit of a handicap. However, R-100 was also shot in the same conditions as the eley, maybe even a bit stronger, and it won the day yet again.