RimfireCentral.com Forums - View Single Post - Anyone famliar with Winchester M-22 ammo?
View Single Post
  #42  
Old 11-19-2019, 11:04 AM
zukiphile is online now
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jun 2002
Location: 
ohio
Posts: 
1,109
TPC Rating: 
100% (6)
The TL;DR version of my post below is that the ammunition variables you note do exist and are consequential, but not exclusively so because every shot is fired from a specific rifle which is also a variable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaia View Post
aren't determinative of relative accuracy with a specific rifle


Zuk, that bit of verbage I'll disagree with.

No rifle can make cr*p ammo produce consistent trajectories.
If it has inconsistent primer/powder amounts, asymmetric bullets, variations in seating,
you end up with differences in mv and aerodynamic interactions which are external ballistics.
Well made ammunition will always produce more consistent results than poorly made.
Claims that a rifle did better with a specific brand are usually based on a minimum of shots sent.
I like to call them random acts of accuracy. Runs of cartridges that are better than the norm.
I've had sub-moa groups at 100 yards with bulk Fed 36 gr cphp, that's not going to mean the rifle
"liked" Fed 36 gr cphp, but that those particular cartridges were of better quality than the rest.

Did that make sense?
Emphasis added for reference below. I understand the logic of your explanation, but I believe it omits a variable.

Quote:
No rifle can make cr*p ammo produce consistent trajectories.
If you don't mind me re-stating that non-idiomatically, ammunition of inconsistent weight and velocity, the kinds of inconsistency one expects in carelessly made ammunition, will result in inconsistent trajectories. The 40gr bullet leaving the muzzle at 1200fps is going to land higher on the target at 100 yards than the next bullet leaving at 1120fps.

That's math and geometry that no experience can escape.

That doesn't account for how the bullet fits in the chamber and barrel. My reloading exposure is modest, but I can say that the overall length of the loaded cartridge, even with precisely the same powder load, can yield substantial differences in accuracy. That isn't a matter of the cartridge being assembled well or poorly, but a matter of fit. Less subtle examples of fit abound. Better shoes are more comfortable than worse shoes, but a pair of Allen Edmunds in size 11 will injure my feet, whereas a pair of army oxfords in 13 will be much better. In a 22magnum rifle, the cheapest 22mag will give better accuracy than Lapua Midas in 22lr not because the Lapua is poorly made (in fact it is made to a high standard), but because it is a poor fit.

That's why,

Quote:
Well made ammunition will always produce more consistent results than poorly made.
...isn't correct if "well made" just means more consistent. Consistency in manufacture doesn't explain why 10 kinds of ammunition shot in three different rifles can rank in different orders for accuracy.

Of course, the problem with fit is that we don't make our own, but buy it boxed however the manufacturer makes it.


Quote:
I've had sub-moa groups at 100 yards with bulk Fed 36 gr cphp, that's not going to mean the rifle
"liked" Fed 36 gr cphp, but that those particular cartridges were of better quality than the rest.
You will recognize the circularity of your conclusion. Your premise is that better "quality" ammunition of a type shot better in a rifle, but haven't identified what that quality is. Then, when it shoots well in a rifle, you assign the ammunition a "higher quality" to explain the result.

If a specific rifle shot moa groups with Fed 36 gr cphp with some consistency ("some"=/= 50 rounds with no flyers), but couldn't do that with other cheap stuff, why wouldn't the rifle be a variable?

Last edited by zukiphile; 11-19-2019 at 11:24 AM.
Reply With Quote