This argument has been going on for a very long time.

So I thought I might try an experiment.

I have several 22 rifles.

Some are match rifles and some are normal hunting rifles.

Non has been cleaned for a long time.

I thought I will fire 10, 10-shot groups with match ammo, and the same with HV hunting ammo.

I will then thoroughly clean the barrel and repeat.

Any one likes to bet what the results will be??

Here are our results, any questions please feel free to ask.

I'd take the dirty barrel anytime, but let's wait and see. I have never cleaned the barrel of my competition .22 and I don't intend to, since I believe the "juju" will be gone. So big thanks Saeed - I am looking forward to it.

A clean bore will always shoot more accurate.One must fire one or more fouler shots in case any oil or solvent was left in the bore.One needs to condition the bore with a few foulers also.

I too look forward for the results. I don't think it will change my cleaning the bores of my rim fires once a year, needed or not.

Dave

Back in the day, the conventional wisdom was to clean, then shoot 5 rounds to 'condition" the barrel, and then shoot for groups. The idea seemed to be that the barrel had to get some of the new lubricant down it, before it settled down. This was in the days of BR50.
There is also cleaning (ie. with a brush) and cleaning with a piece of cloth soaked in cleaner, on a jag, pushed down the barrel, repeat till clean. Which method (s) will you be using? I know you know more about 22lr match rifles than I do!
Peter.

Following

I should finish my test on different primers in the 300 Winchester Magnum this week.

Once that is done, I will try several of our 22 rim fire rifles in a test as follows.

They all have been shot extensively, without cleaning.

I will fire 10 rounds of each type of ammo being tested, then shoot 10, 10-shot groups.

Next I will fire 10 rounds of a different type of ammo, then repeat the 10 groups of 10 shots each.

After that is done, I will clean the barrel thoroughly, and do the test all over again with the ammo shot before.

If any of you has any suggestions, please let me know.

Some guys here tend to shoot 2 shots prior the match, in order to "warm up" the barrel, so it would be interesting to see if first or first two shots deviate more than the rest of the group.

I'm definitely interested in seeing the results of your test.

quote:

Originally posted by mouse93:
Some guys here tend to shoot 2 shots prior the match, in order to "warm up" the barrel, so it would be interesting to see if first or first two shots deviate more than the rest of the group.

I've noticed small deviations among the first couple of rounds, at benchrest shoots. I also suspect that the distribution of lubricant matters after cleaning.

A slight modification to the test.

I cannot print 5 targets on one page - it is either 4 or 6.

So it is going to be 12, 10-shot groups.

I have already selected the first rifle.

It is a BRNO CZ 152-2E-ZKM heavy barrel, and it has a Bushnell 24X variable scope.

For each rifle I am planning to shoot 3 types of ammo.

A HV hunting, target, and normal plinking rounds.

In the past, I have noticed that sometimes the first round out of a cold barrel will land somewhere else from the rest of the group.

But, I have also noticed that a round in the middle of a string will do the same too.

So I think at least for this test, we can ignore that fact.

Another thought, in Calfee's book he discusses the carbon ring that forms in the chamber just ahead of the case, and the fact that a lead bullet doesn't spring back after an obstruction shaves a little off it. It would be really interesting to get bore scope pictures after a box or two, to get an idea of how fast that builds up and whether there is something to see there after a flier.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
A slight modification to the test.

I cannot print 5 targets on one page - it is either 4 or 6.

So it is going to be 12, 10-shot groups.

I have already selected the first rifle.

It is a BRNO CZ 152-2E-ZKM heavy barrel, and it has a Bushnell 24X variable scope.

For each rifle I am planning to shoot 3 types of ammo.

A HV hunting, target, and normal plinking rounds.

In the past, I have noticed that sometimes the first round out of a cold barrel will land somewhere else from the rest of the group.

But, I have also noticed that a round in the middle of a string will do the same too.

So I think at least for this test, we can ignore that fact.

Not to point out the obvious but if you only want to shoot 10 targets, shoot 6 of 6 on one and leave 2 blank on the second 6 target printout. Either way, sounds like a great fun test. Looking forward to it.

I have started on the first rifle as mentioned above.

Ammo shot:

High velocity - FIOCCHI UNLTRASONI
Standard - CCI Standard velocity
Target - ELEY TENEX

I have cleaned the barrel completely, and checked it with a bore scope.

It is spotless.

I will repeat all the above again, and let you all know what happens.

Gato,

I did not think of your idea until I have already started shooting.

But, I think I have found a way to display both sets of targets on the same page so one can see the results.

So it was 12 groups of 10-shots each.

Sadly, the usual 22 rimfire ugly face of a flyer has reared its ugly head again.

Results so far in a rifle which has been shot extensively, and never cleaned.

FIOCCHI ULTRASONIC.

Smallest group 0.472
Largest group 1,042
Average 0.7513

CCI STANDARD 0.395
Largest 0.857
Average 0.6159

ELEY TENEX

Smallest 0.357
Largest 0.879
Average 0.4887

The rifle has been cleaned thoroughly, and I am repeating the test above, cleaning between each type of ammo, and firing 10 shots of the ammo to be tested next.

Saeed, Re. proximal carbon rings - interesting to document importance of the proximal carbon ring as determinant of need to clean. But you'd want to document the borescope before cleaning appearance and results along with the post-clean appearance (showing no carbon ring) and accuracy results.

If the theory is correct, you won't notice much difference after cleaning rifles that did not have carbon buildup in the proximal rifling. Would explain why some folks get by with not cleaning .22s.

I only checked the barrel with the bore scope after I had cleaned it.

It was spotless.

P.S. What was the range?

Sorry.

I should have mentioned it was 50 yards.

The rifle has been fired literally thousands of rounds, never cleaned.

I fired 10 rounds of each type of ammo before shooting at the target.

Once one type is done, I fired 10 rounds of the new ammo to be tested.

After the three types have been shot before the rifle was cleaned.

I cleaned the barrel completely between each type of ammo.

Then fire 10 rounds as foulers before shooting the targets.

I have not decided which rifle is next.

Terrible situation to be in, too many rifles to choose from

Anschutz with SK ammo (if you have any of those by chance) would be a good start

Great test so far! Thanks.

So, what I can determine from the above is that cleaning is basically a waste of time and, in many cases, with many shooters, will likely damage the bore much more than it helps.

Perhaps further results will prove my thoughts wrong.

As requested, I will shoot one of our Anschutz rifles.

Ammo is going to Winchester Super X Super Speed, RWS R50, and SK STANDARD PLUS.

I got an Anscutz 1451 rifle with an 18X Weaver scope on it.

It definitely does not lie the Winchester 37 grain Super X Super Speed hollow points at all.

But it seems to love the SK Standard Plus.

I thought this being the weekend, I might be able to do a bit more shooting.

But, apparently my plans are off, as the kids are coming to shoot, so I will have to continue the test next week.

Next rifle is going to be the KIMBER PRO VARMINT.

Alright. Thank you Saeed for choosing Anschutz and SK standard. It is the same combo I shoot and it works great. Knowing more based on your findings makes one even more confident and that counts in the end. - it is hard to imagine what thoughts go trough ones mind during the Match

I have had very mixed results with SK ammo in the past.

They were not very consistent at all, and sometime they game me terrible accuracy.

I shot some SK Rifle Match thru a rebarreled 1700 series Anschutz this morning--the ammo was very consistent (wish the same could be said of the shooter!).

I understand that SK is made by Lapua as a cheaper brand.

So I would assume their match ammo should be very good.

I have also noticed that practically all 22 ammo, regardless of make or model, has the odd fliers.

The cheaper ones tend to have a lot more than the match grade ammo.

SK was bought by Lapua back in 1992 - they are based in Schönebeck (Germany) and are producing ammo for Lapua - if you look at the base of their ammo you can see Lapua stamp there, so once you take a round out of the box you can't tell it apart from other Lapua ammo - it could be Midas + etc.



SK Standard + shoots better in my rifle than others I have tried and it is quite cheap according to top products like Tenex, Midas...I can't even tell the difference in performance between Standard + and Match.

I have finished shooting both the Anschutz 1451 and Kimber PRO VARMINT.

I have not labeled the targets yet, but will post them when I have done that.

Ammo used in the Kimber is CCI BLAZER, ELEY PRACTICE AND RWS RIFLE MATCH.

Next I am going to try the Remington 40X.

Ammo is going to be REMINGTON HV, ELEY SPORT AND ELEY BIOTHLON MATCH.

Any excuse to shoot 22s

Alright thank you Saeed. Looking at the SK groups, in theory I should clean the barrel, in praxis I shouldn't bother.
Pity about those flyers, still looks like SK goups moved to the right and up after cleaning?

The point of impact seems to move after cleaning with some rifles, but not others.

And this is not just with one ammo either.

Else PRACTICE refused to feed in the Kimber, so I had to load it singly.

The pattern emerging is that it makes no difference.

I do not know that we would have had different results if all the shooting was done either cleaned or uncleaned, as they are relatively close.

It would be interesting to see what kind of groups these rifles and ammo are shooting at 100yds.I think 100yds will really put things to the test.It could be that the effects of cleaning/uncleaning are not showing up at 50yds.
Perhaps one rifle can be tested at 100yds first to see if there is a noticeable difference.

Ok.

I am shooting the Remington 40X next.

I will shoot it at both 50 and 100 yards.

Thank you so very much for all this, Saeed.

In my .22 Short tests of 2 years ago, I chronographed 76 sequential shots from a clean barrel, all shot from a rest. Targets were changed every 2 shots. Strike of each individual shot was noted. All higher velocity shots struck higher, all lower velocity shots struck lower (gravity works!). But all extreme highs occurred in the first 28 shots. After that, the lube was apparently uniformly distributed in the barrel (28" long). The old time shooters always said that it takes one shot per inch of barrel to get things stable enough to shoot for scores.

It is easy to dream up work for others to do. So I would ask Saeed to indicate the order in which the targets were shot, and, if not too much work, to chronograph each shot. At least for some of the ammo types.

Sadly,

my own experience with shooting thousands of different 22 Long Rifle ammo has not been like yours.

If there is anything certain in shooting tons of 22 ammo in many rifles, it is the absolute inconsistency one finds, which defies anything taken for granted.

I have chronographed ammo where some higher velocity rounds hit higher, others hit right in the middle, and some below the group???

I have noticed this with center fire too.

I remember shooting one of our 22-243 Winchester, where velocity variations were over 150 fps between rounds.

All go into the same hole??!!

I have no idea why this happens.

My velocity experiment with Shorts was only with one make, Lapua Rapid Fire, made for the former Olympic-type competition. Shooting was at 25 yards. Smaller mass & weight of components (but still a lot of variables) and distance was only 25 yards.

The previous tests were with a Stevens 44 1/2 rifle fitted with a Stevens-Pope choke-bored, gain-twist barrel, chambered & rifled only for the Short cartridge. I cleaned between types or makes. That rifle has been returned to owner.

I have now a second dedicated Short target rifle; a Winchester 52B fitted with a Jersey City Pope barrel dated 1910. At present, too many mosquitoes to make careful work fun.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
A clean bore will always shoot more accurate.One must fire one or more fouler shots in case any oil or solvent was left in the bore.One needs to condition the bore with a few foulers also.

"always shoot more accurate".........

so much for always.

Well, this has become a bit intriguing.

So I am going to go a bit further into this test, and at least satisfy my own curiosity of what is better.

I have selected 10 types of ammo, and I am going to shoot them in the Remington 40X.

I will follow the same procedure I had done before, with the addition of shooting at 100 yards as well.

I bedded it and changed the trigger for a Jewel trigger.

It shoots extremely well.

We should be able to see any describable difference.

Saeed how about deducting the obvious flyers from the groups - I guess a flyer is an abnormality that isn't bound to the state of the barrel (unless it is the very first round from the clean/cold barrel?) - would it make any difference?