I had an old timer, who did very well in his day at Camp Perry, tell me that for the ultimate in repeat ability (read accuracy) he would sort his match ammunition into lots by weight and rim thickness. This sounds excessive but logical. But I can't remember which was sorted first: rim thickness or weight of the round. Anyone?

There has been a lot of discussion on this in the past. I tried this myself. As I recollect, the aim was to to sort "regular" target ammo and by sorting by rim thickness, it would shoot as good as the best target ammo (read Eley)! In my experience it did not work! I think that Saeed tried it as well. This was tried by the BR50 folks.
Peter.

We have tried every trick there is.

We tried sorting by thickness, by weight and the differences were very small.

Small enough not for me to classify them as due to sorting.

22 ammo is very good, especially the expensive target sort from either Eley and Lapua.

But, they do not have the accuracy potential of accurate center fire ammo loaded by the shooter.

I think it's a waste of time. You're much better off just shooting different lots of good match ammo in your rifle to see which does best, like Eley and Lapua as Saeed said.

I don't know of any top rimfire benchrest shooters today that sort ammo (and I may be wrong), but I do know many that do extensive lot testing.

Thanks guys. I thought as much but it's cold and snowy here in Michigan which keeps me in the gun room instead of the range.

I am the author of the series of articles published in the Single Shot Rifle Journal on the history of 22 Shorts in target rifles and on the accuracy potential of post-WW2 and modern Shorts. In the current issue, I compared CCI Target Shorts (2 Lots) and Lapua Rapid Fire Shorts with previous performance (1898-1910), same range (75 feet), same type of rifle, firing Peters Semi-Smokeless. One of the tests included comparing the same lot of CCI Shorts, out of the box and sorted by weight. Result was that sorting by weight was not worth the effort. Out of the box, that lot of CCI Shorts were 97.0 % as accurate as the Peters standard. Sorting by weight increased the score to 97.1 %, adding only 1 point in 100 shots.

However, sorting by weight did show markedly improved results when the Shorts were fired at 200 yards.

I used a Stevens-Pope "Pope Special" rifle that was very close to NIB when I began these tests.

We are actually doing a "real world" ammo test right now.

We have something like 70 different types of ammo, from all over the world.

They include the best Eley and Lapua have to offer, as well as some really nasty stuff from Eastern Europe.

I am shooting them at 50, 75 and 100 yards, in different rifles.

Also, I have been asking some of the people who come shooting here to shoot some groups.

These will be added as SHOOTER A, SHOOTER B results.

I have also got some SPL lube from my friend Todd Kindler of the Woodchuck Den.

He said he had good results with it.

It is a wax based lube, light green in color.

He suggested that I do a mix of 50/50 with water, and heat it in a microwave.

Then dip the bullets in up to the case mouth.

Then leave them to dry.

We have already lubed 60 different types of ammo with SPL.

I was planning to start shooting last week, but something else came up and that will have to wait.

Our CNC machine uses a control unit that runs an early version of Windows.

It has been running for ten years, and last year it had given up the ghost.

WE just got a new control unit for it that runs Windows 7, have installed it and we have a running machine again.

We are out of several calibers of Walterhog bullets, so I am spending all my free time making bullets.

Right now I am in the workshop making 338 caliber, 266 grain bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
We are actually doing a "real world" ammo test right now.

What in particular do you think makes it a "real world" test in comparison to others?

Curious to see how it goes with the lube.

Evan,

Although the main test is done by myself, I am adding many other results from other shooters.

These shooters range in age from 12 to 70 years.
Some have a lot of shooting experience, some not so much.

Although it is not possible to have all of them shoot all the rifles and ammo combination, I am trying to see that a good cross section of both rifles and ammo is shot by them.

Hopefully this will give us some idea of what one would expect from these tests.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Evan,

Although the main test is done by myself, I am adding many other results from other shooters.

These shooters range in age from 12 to 70 years.
Some have a lot of shooting experience, some not so much.

Although it is not possible to have all of them shoot all the rifles and ammo combination, I am trying to see that a good cross section of both rifles and ammo is shot by them.

Hopefully this will give us some idea of what one would expect from these tests.

Sounds good... looking forward to seeing the results.

PS, I received the safari videos from this past year... They are fantastic! Thanks again!

Glad you have enjoyed our safari Evan.

All the best.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Michalski:
I had an old timer, who did very well in his day at Camp Perry, tell me that for the ultimate in repeat ability (read accuracy) he would sort his match ammunition into lots by weight and rim thickness. This sounds excessive but logical. But I can't remember which was sorted first: rim thickness or weight of the round. Anyone?

I tried some of this, awhile back. If there was an advantage to be had, my skills were too poor to reveal it. I should work on mirage shooting instead...

Hi Saeed

I see by our newspaper that the Los Angeles Art Show had an exhibition of Bedouin art.
Are these artists maybe people you know (specific mentions of Khalid Mezaina and Zeinab Al Hashemi)?

I spent quite some time sorting Wolf Match Extra by weight, and found it did not make any measurable difference. (This in a gun that has shot groups as small as .091 with quarter inch groups pretty common.) That gun likes Wolf Match Extra better than Eley black box for some reason.

quote:

Originally posted by TomP:
Hi Saeed

I see by our newspaper that the Los Angeles Art Show had an exhibition of Bedouin art.
Are these artists maybe people you know (specific mentions of Khalid Mezaina and Zeinab Al Hashemi)?

Tom,

I do not know the individuals you mention, but I know their families.

Just go and buy the best .22ammo you can afford and have fun. I have over $300.00 dollars in all kind of rim fire measuring tools, I've measured rim thickness, weight, length. In the end it was for naught. If you worry about your ammo and are shooting in match B/R it will play with your mind.

The 22BR people test shoot with a humidity and temperature gauge. They sort by testing, until a specific brand and lot number is found for each condition. You have got to go to their website to see the amazing depth to which they go. Five degrees or that amount of humidity and they will change ammunition during a match.

Some years back, Alan Hall built me a 22BR rifle on one of his actions. All the fussing finally sent me to the edge. A friend bought it from me, and just loves the endless tinkering/testing.

The match winners tell me it is a waste of time and money to go to a match without gauged ammunition.

Well thanks guys. That settles it for me. I can hardly read the wind so going through that fuss seems pointless. I'll stick to testing which ammo shoots best for the price. Thanks again.

Usta bee Mike Michalski

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
. . . All the fussing finally sent me to the edge. . . .

Boy . . . it sure would me.

And Michael, wrt reading wind, I'm right with you.