Anyone famliar with Winchester M-22 ammo? - Page 3 - RimfireCentral.com Forums

Go Back   RimfireCentral.com Forums > >

Join Team RFC to remove these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 08-09-2019, 03:34 PM
varmit hunter67's Avatar
varmit hunter67
US Army Veteran Law Enforcement Officer NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Feb 2008
Location: 
Lilburn, GA, near Stone Mtn.
Posts: 
4,393
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)


Log in to see fewer ads
I shoot it in my BM for pins. No problems. I have probably bought 3 of the 1000 round double boxes over the past year and a half.

VH
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-10-2019, 11:12 AM
BadgerJack's Avatar
BadgerJack
US Army Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Feb 2018
Location: 
Nawthern Virginia
Posts: 
180
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by redseal View Post
Just picked up a box of Winchester M 22 ammo. The prices was too good to turn down. Is anyone here familiar with these? Pros/Cons? Thanks!
Having worked retail in the firearms industry for MANY years, my advice to all is to avoid any and all bulk packed rimfire ammo, unless all you want to do is make noise and pump rounds down range without care as to reliability and accuracy, or lack thereof.

From complaints received from literally dozens of customers, the bulk packed ammo is absolutely of lower quality, and you have to wonder how much additional "quality" is lost with 500 rounds bouncing around and beating upon one another during shipping!

I once looked through EVERY rounds in a box that broke open during shipping, and easily 30% had bent bullets, and maybe 5% had dented casings.

And those were the ones I could identify by eyeball, not magnifier or caliper...

Stick to stuff in 50 round boxes, and buy those by the brick, or case lot if you can find it, and you will be MUCH happier. And if saving that small amount of money is so important, just resign yourself to what will amount to a massive loos and waste of time in the long run.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-19-2019, 01:49 AM
woodchuckssuck
NRA Member - Click Here To Join! GOA Member

Join Date: 
Nov 2003
Location: 
western/central NY
Posts: 
3,469
TPC Rating: 
100% (7)
Send a message via AIM to woodchuckssuck
I've shot up nearly a brick of M22, almost all of it through my 22/45.

I honestly don't recall many issues, if any. It's usually the ammo I grab when going to the range with my friend/co-worker and I let him shoot the 22/45 as well.

The 22/45 just seems to LOVE them. Somewhat dirty, but Hoppes #9 dissolves all of that

There are better choices for accuracy. But plinking/blasting... M22 works fine for me.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-19-2019, 07:57 AM
sandog's Avatar
sandog
US Army Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Nov 2011
Location: 
Arizona
Posts: 
436
TPC Rating: 
100% (5)
My experiences with M22 were a bit different. I didn't find it particularly dirty and it was above average in the accuracy department.
My issues were severely dented cases, bullets in some cases bent off at a 30 degree angle, loose bullets in the box, and failures to fire.
I'd say 20% of the ones in the carton were like this. I took a pic but seems I must have deleted it.
Many others had smaller dents in the brass but they would chamber.

It looked as though, before the ammo was packaged, an employee hit them with a hammer or jumped up and down on them.
I won't be buying any more of them.

The bulk ammo I've been shooting most of is Remington Golden.
Some guys gripe constantly about how terrible Remington Golden Bullets are, but I'd have to say those were from past experiences and not recent lots.
I've shot close to 5,000 rounds of GB in the last year, and not one issue.
For bulk packed ammo, none are damaged, all go off, and not filthy at all like some say. Accuracy, while not as good as Mini-mags, is right up there with other brands.

I've been wanting to try some Federal lately, and bought a brick of American Eagle.
A bit more expensive as a brick is only 400 rounds for the usual price of $24-$26.
Nicely packaged as the rounds are held in plastic trays so they don't touch.
But shot against 4 other brands in 3 of my rifles, the Federal came in dead last in all 3 rifles. It might be good in other guy's guns, but not in mine.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-19-2019, 08:22 AM
jaia
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Apr 2014
Posts: 
6,804
TPC Rating: 
100% (2)
Rifles don't have opinions. No likes or dislikes. Inanimate objects, eh?

Seriously, well, as serious as I'm capable of, disappointing results have to do with ammo quality.
Well made rimfire cartridges will produce decent results from most any rifle.
All bets are off when the cartridges are visibly beat to snot and poorly made.
In which case it doesn't matter how great y'er rifle is, cr*ppy ammo produces cr*ppy results.
Results aren't dependent on brand, only cartridge quality.
No rifle "likes" poorly made ammunition.

Do you really expect consistent trajectories from cartridges that look like this?


Last edited by jaia; 11-19-2019 at 08:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-19-2019, 09:01 AM
zukiphile
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jun 2002
Location: 
ohio
Posts: 
1,296
TPC Rating: 
100% (6)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaia View Post
Rifles don't have opinions. No likes or dislikes. Inanimate objects, eh?

Seriously, well, as serious as I'm capable of, disappointing results have to do with ammo quality.
Well made rimfire cartridges will produce decent results from most any rifle.
All bets are off when the cartridges are visibly beat to snot and poorly made.
In which case it doesn't matter how great y'er rifle is, cr*ppy ammo produces cr*ppy results.
Results aren't dependent on brand, only cartridge quality.
No rifle "likes" poorly made ammunition.

Do you really expect consistent trajectories from cartridges that look like this?

Idiomatically a rifle can like an ammunition just as a race horse can like a muddy track. Of course, no horse runs better in mud, but some horses aren't as hindered by it as others. A driver may be a Regenmeister though no driver actually posts a better time at a wet track.

Since the care with which an ammunition is assembled, or which sort of box it is in, or how much it costs aren't determinative of relative accuracy with a specific rifle, it is idiomatically correct to note that a rifle may like an ammunition choice. Otherwise, people who test ammunition in a rifle would always rank them all in the same order.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-19-2019, 09:07 AM
jaia
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Apr 2014
Posts: 
6,804
TPC Rating: 
100% (2)
Zuk! Y'er killing me here! Way too much polysyllabic verbage!

Not that there's anything wrong with it, seriously.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-19-2019, 09:27 AM
jaia
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Apr 2014
Posts: 
6,804
TPC Rating: 
100% (2)
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?
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-19-2019, 09:34 AM
zukiphile
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jun 2002
Location: 
ohio
Posts: 
1,296
TPC Rating: 
100% (6)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaia View Post
Not that there's anything wrong with it...


The syllables only need to be made well enough to hit the target.

Admission: I've refrained from buying ammunition recently based on marketing photographs. They may have been Winchester, but they did have an enormous hollowpoint and a bullet that looked asymmetrical. If I can see an asymmetry, how bad is it?

When I shot a lot of Remington Thunderbolt and Subsonic I don't remember the bullets looking terrible and flyers were rare. The same rifle made groups literally 5 times bigger with CCI Blazer. that was thirty years ago.

My story of Winchester disappointment is more recent. I ordered a bunch of 45gr subsonic. The bullet lead flowed out and down over the brass and tight chambers wouldn't accept it. Tight ammunition should print tight groups, right? Apparently not.

Last edited by zukiphile; 11-19-2019 at 04:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-19-2019, 09:36 AM
SailDesign's Avatar
SailDesign

Join Date: 
Mar 2015
Location: 
RI
Posts: 
2,056
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stargazer View Post
I bought 2 bricks of M22 at Cabela's. Most of the bullets would not even load in my Ruger Single Six revolver. They were too large to fit in the cylinder. I called Winchester and was told that they would like to see them and they sent me a return label to return them. After two weeks they said they were sending me a check for the two bricks. They would not say what they determined to be the problem.
Exactly the issue I had with it, only I "donated" mine to a guy who loved it...
__________________
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." - Pogo

Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 11-19-2019, 09:43 AM
TripleC

Join Date: 
Jun 2016
Location: 
Lovers Lane, NM
Posts: 
206
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
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?
jaia - that makes perfect sense to me. I've experienced the same thing.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 11-19-2019, 10:04 AM
zukiphile
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jun 2002
Location: 
ohio
Posts: 
1,296
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 10:24 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-19-2019, 10:21 AM
jaia
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Apr 2014
Posts: 
6,804
TPC Rating: 
100% (2)
Consistency in manufacture doesn't explain why 10 kinds of ammunition shot in three different rifles can rank in different orders for accuracy.


Eggs Zachary! You nailed it with that statement.

10 kinds of ammunition shot in 3 different rifles....it's rimfire.
Quality varies bullet by bullet, box by box, brick by brick.
No two cartridges are exactly alike. Same brand, same production line,
but the components differ as do the tolerances during assembly.
I've had 3 different boxes of brand X, from the same lot,
produce 3 different sets of results, chrony numbers, from the same rifle.
Same conditions, same distance, same set up. Yet each box shot different.
Apply that to multiple boxes of ammo sent through multiple rifles,
it's no wonder there is no consensus. That's why lot testing is so important.
It's an attempt to find the most consistent production quality that produces the most predictable trajectories.

That's my theory and I'm sticking to it. At least until I find a better one.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 11-19-2019, 12:10 PM
jaia
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Apr 2014
Posts: 
6,804
TPC Rating: 
100% (2)
but haven't identified what that quality is


Good point....very applicable to the discussion.

Define quality rimfire cartridges.


1) Tight muzzle velocities for the entire brick.

By tight I expect less than 40 fps ES for 50 shots
At 50 yards 40 fps ES with 40 grain SV 22lr means 1/4 inch of vertical spread.
At 100 yards that means 1 inch, at 200 yards that's 4 inches of vertical.

2) No visible defects on the bullets or the brass.

Bullet symmetry is critical due to rotation and aerodynamics.
Any visible dent or ding on the bullet surface or irregularities in the drive bands
changes the external ballistics and causes trajectory dispersion.
Magnus effect and projectile pitch/yaw/spin moves the bullet off and around the line of flight.
Variations in the bullet shape means unpredictable movement in flight.
The longer the time of flight the worse the results.

3) Similar cartridge/component dimensions/weights and proper bullet seating.

Without the same cartridge/component dimensions and weights, square bullet seating,
you end up with variations in mv, angle of engagement to the rifling/lands,
and tilted exit angle of the bullet relative to center line of bore.
All of which means trajectory dispersion.


In hand loading center fire, I am attempting to build cartridges
as close to exactly alike as I possibly can. Every possible thing I can control
I attempt to do the same way to the same specifications for every cartridge.
Bullet weight/shape/length/seating depth/seating angle/powder weight
primer type/brass hardness/dimensions and volume/crimp location and tension.
I'm trying to get the ES to less than 15 fps for 50 shots.

It helps that I'm a bit OCD.

Last edited by jaia; 11-19-2019 at 12:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 11-19-2019, 10:51 PM
NIB's Avatar
NIB
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Mar 2009
Posts: 
3,732
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaia View Post
Do you really expect consistent trajectories from cartridges that look like this?

While I certainly wouldn't want to purchase bullets that are dinged up and misshapen.
The cartridges in your picture look ragged due to missing lubricant which is mostly superficial and likely not detrimental to accuracy.
Exception: appears to be a possible small ding, standing cartridges bullet at 7 O"Clock other than that mostly missing lubricant making them look ragged.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Australian here, is Winchester 22lr ammo any good Ben78 .22 Ammunition (S-L-LR) 36 08-09-2019 09:19 AM
Winchester MKIII ammo jpretle .22 Ammunition (S-L-LR) 1 12-07-2018 08:22 PM
22 mag ammo on sale thread shooter65 .22WMR Ammunition 6 01-01-2018 06:41 PM
S/S Cheap Ammo Challenge Clem-E SuperStock 33 04-28-2017 08:01 PM
Ammo recomendation for the Colt/Walther 1911's ptf18 .22 Ammunition (S-L-LR) 2 12-31-2016 10:35 AM



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:39 PM.

Privacy Policy

DMCA Notice

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2000-2018 RimfireCentral.com
x