Six Ways Your Rifle is Hurting Your Scores

[Agrivere]

I suspect a lot of newer shooters may struggle with shooting the scores they want to shoot (whether at an Appleseed shoot or elsewhere), and I put together an article that talks about some of the things you can do to eliminate some of the equipment variable from that equation.

I'd love to know what you guys think, and hope you'll take a look at the article and share your thoughts!  You can find the article here Six Ways Your Rifle is Hurting Your Scores, Part 1.

Please share your thoughts!

[peterlandsiedel]

"If it comes in a bulk box, it's very unlikely to shoot very accurately.  Save the bulk box ammo for plinking at tin cans or for pistol shooting, don't ever try to shoot it for score.  Seriously, just don't."

I've seen shooters put up scores in the 230+ range with bulk federal. Every time I've qualified rifleman with a .22, it's been with bulk ammo (federal, remington, winchester).

"If it's supersonic, it's very unlikely to shoot very accurately.  The speed of sound is around 1100 feet per second.  Most every box of .22 LR ammunition lists a velocity on the box.  If it's more than 1100 FPS, save that ammo for varmint hunting or smashing watermelons.  It's not for shooting targets."

I watched a shooter put cloverleaf after cloverleaf on paper with remington gold bullets and a stock 10/22.

Everything you wrote about equipment fitting the shooter is spot on. I disagree with your assessment regarding ammunition.

[Agrivere]

And that is, of course, why I was hoping for feedback!  I've never shot decent groups with anything that came in a bulk box, and none of my rifles have ever shot well with any supersonic ammunition, but that's just me and my rifles.  It's good to know that at least some batches of bulk ammo will run well in at least some rifles.

Remember also that these are rules of thumb, not hard and fast laws of science.  For exactly the reasons you specified, if you want to get the most from your rifle, ammo testing is essential.  If you find that Remington Golden Bullets shoot really well, then that's awesome.  The "rules of thumb" are intended to be a good starting point for newer shooters, and it's not really very expensive at all to buy CCI Standard, GECO, or Norma over bulk box ammo, and those have consistently vastly better than bulk ammo in every rifle I've tested.

On the other hand, I've been to many firing lines and seen shooters get their groups down to 4-6 MOA on Saturday afternoon and never really see much improvement for the rest of the weekend.  I can't help but wonder how much of their lack of improvement is due to the Walmart bulk ammo they are shooting, which very well may not be capable of much better no matter what they do.

Thanks for your comments, though.  I'll certainly have to think about revising the "Rules of Thumb" if the collective experience here suggests it makes sense.  You guys and gals collectively see a whole lot more rifles on the firing line than I do, that's for sure!

[jmdavis]

These days, I can get Eley Target for the same price as CCI standard and sometimes for the same price as Remington Bulk Pack. In my target 22 rifles I shoot good subsonic ammo, period.

I have tested a variety of rimfire ammo at 50 and 100 yards and concluded that  bulk ammo is an issue when you get beyond 25m and sometimes it hurts you at 25m. When you are shooting 100 and 200 yards and need groups of  1.5moa or less, bulk is a non starter.  But I am willing to let the competition shoot any ammo that they want. :-)

For Appleseed and 10/22's my ammo choice was CCI blazer. It had enough impulse to be reliable and in a non match chamber fed just fine. When shot in a 10/22 race gun, it caused malf's and frustration. I think that it is over 1200, but that was fine.


I appreciate your ammo testing. I have been tempted by Norma and GECO, but never tried either. I know that my 540X bolt rifle really loves Remington White Box target for 100 yards and further. At 50 yards, Eley Target, CCI Standard, White Box, And Eley Club were all close to the same. At 100 with a 20x scope and shooting prone with a match sling the others always had a flyer and the white box didn't. The eley might but 4 in 1 moa but the 5th made the group 3 moa. The Remington kept the groups at 1.5 moa at 200.

[Guntuckian]

Every .22 rifle is an enigma unto itself.  Even within a model by the same manufacturer.  Some bulk ammo will shoot within 1-2 MOA in a particular rifle, yet will not even shoot better than about 4.5 MOA in another rifle that is the same model.

Likewise, some ammo will shoot well in ambient temperatures below 70 degrees, but go totally erratic in 95+ degree temperatures, such as at an Infernoseed.  The reason, I suspect, is that it goes transonic at the higher temperatures.

Federal Automatch, in the bulk pack, shoots better at colder temperatures.  In hot conditions, it has 2 flyers out of every 10 rounds.  They are about 3 MOA removed from the other 8 rounds, which are cloverleafed.

Personally, I find Norma Tac-22 to be consistently good, giving touching POI well  under 1 MOA for 10 shot groups.  The only issue is having to clean the 10-22 rotary mags about every 150 rounds.  The soft bullet lube prevents the rotary mag from rotating starting around 175 rounds!  It runs around $0.11 a round.

-gb

[draken]

Well... I like the article Scott, waiting for part II...

Last weekend I shot several 5 round groups averaging 1.5 MOA @ 25yrds (slow fire prone...when doing rapid fire, groups opened to 2MOA ) ... Out of a 10/22 with a free floated target barrel using CCI Blazer 40gr...

[peterlandsiedel]

If you have it on hand, I'd like to see a much more in-depth test of the ammo. One single 5 round group doesn't tell us a whole lot. The sample size is just too small. If you could do 10, 10 round groups or 20, 10 round groups, then we might be able to glean some more reliable information.

I applaud your efforts regardless.

[Agrivere]

An ammo testing exercise wasn't really the point of this article, but I think it's a great idea. I really only intended to post representative samples on this article, but I have tons more of that sort of data, and I think it would be a very interesting exercise.

The main thing I hope people will take away from this article is that if you want to shoot your best testing your ammo in your rifle is essential. There simply aren't any shortcuts. Just as an example, in almost every rifle I've ever tested eley club and eley target have been superb. However in the cmmg upper I tested recently, they were both quite blah. Had I assumed they would be fine without testing I would have been very disappointed. As it was I shot the SK rifle match at my last 25m appleseed and it shot very well, with a 244 and a 242 on my two Sunday AQTs. Had I been shooting Eley I would have lost points to my ammo and most likely I'd have been trying to correct shooting errors which were not really there.

The other main point of course is KNOWING what caused a shot to go off target. With tested ammo I can be absolutely certain that any points dropped were errors I made. The more certain you can be of your equipment the faster you will learn.

[Mudcat]

For Appleseed I don't think ammo matter much at all. I have shot many Rifleman scores with all different kinds of ammo, I really don't notice any one better than the other as long as it will operate the action. I have regularly picked up dud, and strays from the line over the course of the weekend and throw them in my range box. Then when I demo an AQT I reach in and get enough or have my mag prepper do it for me grabbing the rounds at random of wherever is in the box.  I usually score plenty good enough for a demo. I do this for a few reasons, 1 some of the rounds do not go off so it shows how to work through a malfunction and that it really doesn't matter. 2. that the equipment and ammo you bring to the line matters little but the practices that we teach matter greatly. Now does it matter to a benchrest shooter? Probably so, but we teach foundational skills to shoot 4moa. Would it push a few over the line to score a 210? Maybe, but if they aren't shooting a 210 with surplus rifles (off the shelf .22s) and surplus (bulk) ammo then we as Appleseed instructors aren't doing our job teaching rifle marksmanship. One of my favorite wise old shoot bosses always said that "you can't buy skill in a bubble pack on isle 9, you have to earn it."
I do agree with adding to the comb of the rifle it makes a huge difference as does adding a kisser button. I have worked around LOP issues by changing the angle which a shooter indexes him or herself to the target.

[jmdavis]

Four MOA is an achievable starting point for an infantryman. But there are few rifle matches (if any), that will be won shooting 4 MOA.and while there is no doubt that you can't buy skill, there is also no doubt that attention to detail and precision brings better results than inattention or carelessness.

We have an opportunity here to take work meant for multiple audiences and use it to improve our personal skills and by extension our ability to teach people to successfully use the fundamentals of marksmanship. The aqt comes from the time when soldiers were judged not on simply hitting a target but on a score earned by shooting the target accurately. Higher is better.

[Unbridled Liberty]

For Appleseed I don't think ammo matter much at all. I have shot many Rifleman scores with all different kinds of ammo, I really don't notice any one better than the other as long as it will operate the action. I have regularly picked up dud, and strays from the line over the course of the weekend and throw them in my range box. Then when I demo an AQT I reach in and get enough or have my mag prepper do it for me grabbing the rounds at random of wherever is in the box.  I usually score plenty good enough for a demo. I do this for a few reasons, 1 some of the rounds do not go off so it shows how to work through a malfunction and that it really doesn't matter. 2. that the equipment and ammo you bring to the line matters little but the practices that we teach matter greatly. Now does it matter to a benchrest shooter? Probably so, but we teach foundational skills to shoot 4moa. Would it push a few over the line to score a 210? Maybe, but if they aren't shooting a 210 with surplus rifles (off the shelf .22s) and surplus (bulk) ammo then we as Appleseed instructors aren't doing our job teaching rifle marksmanship. One of my favorite wise old shoot bosses always said that "you can't buy skill in a bubble pack on isle 9, you have to earn it."
I do agree with adding to the comb of the rifle it makes a huge difference as does adding a kisser button. I have worked around LOP issues by changing the angle which a shooter indexes him or herself to the target.

/\ THIS /\ 

And one of my favorite wise not-so-old shoot bosses always says that "It's ALWAYS the shooter." 

I don't want attendees to get too caught up in rifles, ammo, scores and patches.  I want them to walk away as better marksmen then when they arrived, and I want them to walk away with a greater appreciation of the value and cost of their liberty, and a new or renewed determination to hand it down intact to their posterity.

UL

[jmdavis]

The best shoot boss I have ever known was a competitive shooter. He shot high power, silhouette, air gun, international pistol, bullseye pistol and won titles in all of them. He was proud of any student that showed progress but didn't believe that shooting better was a bad thing. If you want to be  a4 MOA shooter, go for it. But to paraphrase Hawkeye in "Last of the Mohicans," "don't be tellin us what to do with our own marksmanship."

Who was it that I heard " Simplicity and Precision in all things" from? Oh yea, the founder of the program. The simplicity exits to keep us from overthinking, but the precision exists to keep us from being careless and imprecise.

Determining key factors in rim fire accuracy would seem to be both simplicity and precision.

[Guntuckian]

For Appleseed I don't think ammo matter much at all. I have shot many Rifleman scores with all different kinds of ammo, I really don't notice any one better than the other as long as it will operate the action. I have regularly picked up dud, and strays from the line over the course of the weekend and throw them in my range box. Then when I demo an AQT I reach in and get enough or have my mag prepper do it for me grabbing the rounds at random of wherever is in the box. 
...

I am assuming that it is all high velocity bulk pack ammo that you are scrounging.  However, I have tested the difference in POI at 25 meters between subsonic and high velocity ammo.  I find it is often around 6 MOA in POI.  Each group is small, but the centers of the groups are 6 MOA separated.  This would make it hard to hit a 4 MOA target, unless you separate by brand, and adjust zero for a particular brand. On the other hand, if it is all high velocity, the POI is usually separated by only around 2 MOA.  This is plenty good enough to keep within 4 MOA.  Usually, only the LRN 40 grain is subsonic.  The HP 36 gr. and HP 40 gr. are usually both high velocity.  It can pay to scrounge wisely, when desiring a good demo!

Doctrine is good, but it pays to know when doctrine (scrounging any old .22 bulk ammo rounds and immediately shooting score in a rack grade rifle) just won't happen.  After all, we do assume that a shooter be permitted to sight in their rifle for a given type of ammo.

--gb

[Charles McKinley]

http://www.accurateshooter.com/guns-of-week/22lr-rimfire-ammo-comparison-test/

Here are some ammo test for you to look at.

[jmdavis]

http://www.accurateshooter.com/guns-of-week/22lr-rimfire-ammo-comparison-test/

Here are some ammo test for you to look at.

fantastic resource!!

[Mudcat]

For Appleseed I don't think ammo matter much at all. I have shot many Rifleman scores with all different kinds of ammo, I really don't notice any one better than the other as long as it will operate the action. I have regularly picked up dud, and strays from the line over the course of the weekend and throw them in my range box. Then when I demo an AQT I reach in and get enough or have my mag prepper do it for me grabbing the rounds at random of wherever is in the box. 
...

I am assuming that it is all high velocity bulk pack ammo that you are scrounging.  However, I have tested the difference in POI at 25 meters between subsonic and high velocity ammo.  I find it is often around 6 MOA in POI.  Each group is small, but the centers of the groups are 6 MOA separated.  This would make it hard to hit a 4 MOA target, unless you separate by brand, and adjust zero for a particular brand. On the other hand, if it is all high velocity, the POI is usually separated by only around 2 MOA.  This is plenty good enough to keep within 4 MOA.  Usually, only the LRN 40 grain is subsonic.  The HP 36 gr. and HP 40 gr. are usually both high velocity.  It can pay to scrounge wisely, when desiring a good demo!

Doctrine is good, but it pays to know when doctrine (scrounging any old .22 bulk ammo rounds and immediately shooting score in a rack grade rifle) just won't happen.  After all, we do assume that a shooter be permitted to sight in their rifle for a given type of ammo.

--gb

You are assuming that I care about what I pick up. In reality it doesn't matter for the point I am trying to get across. The equipment matters very little if you cannot put the very principles that we teach to good use.
I guess if it really mattered every want to be competition shooter who showed up on our lines with a hopped up 1022 and some high dollar ammo would be a Rifleman. We all know that isn't the case. However those that come out, learns the basic principles that we teach, puts them to good practice and of course persists will become a Rifleman. I will also say that they will be better Rifleman because they have taken something away from the program. They are more likely to tell others what they have learned and be an advocate for the program. Many of the others will get frustrated, refuse to try things our way and usually not be as good of an advocate for the program.

I really could care less about competition. I've shot several matches with my mediocre equipment with the guys with huge egos and high dollar equipment. They tend to quit talking to me and being so friendly after a few rounds. I try to tell them where they can get a good hold on the foundational skills. But they seldom show on the line. When they do I generally put them on a stock rifle and bulk ammo so they can learn more without a fancy rifle masking their lack of skills.

Remember what our purpose is, we all may do well by going up to read Unbridled Liberty's post above. That is what is important.

[mac66]

Good article. In fact it is pretty much the basic stuff that everybody should know. I am looking forward to Part II and will refer new shooters to Part I. 

Having said that I too shoot mostly bulk ammo and have had pretty good success scoring rifleman with CCI Blazer ammo. On the other hand, the only difference between Blazer ammo and Mini Mags is that Mini Mags have closer i.e, more frequent QC checks and are individually packaged. Otherwise they come off the same line as do the Federal bulk ammo.  I do however think good ammo does make a difference, not sure if the difference is significant enough for Appleseed.  Certainly for past 25 meters and target shooting other than Appleseed it does.

[Guntuckian]

For Appleseed I don't think ammo matter much at all. I have shot many Rifleman scores with all different kinds of ammo, I really don't notice any one better than the other as long as it will operate the action. I have regularly picked up dud, and strays from the line over the course of the weekend and throw them in my range box. Then when I demo an AQT I reach in and get enough or have my mag prepper do it for me grabbing the rounds at random of wherever is in the box. 
...

I am assuming that it is all high velocity bulk pack ammo that you are scrounging.  However, I have tested the difference in POI at 25 meters between subsonic and high velocity ammo.  I find it is often around 6 MOA in POI.  Each group is small, but the centers of the groups are 6 MOA separated.  This would make it hard to hit a 4 MOA target, unless you separate by brand, and adjust zero for a particular brand. On the other hand, if it is all high velocity, the POI is usually separated by only around 2 MOA.  This is plenty good enough to keep within 4 MOA.  Usually, only the LRN 40 grain is subsonic.  The HP 36 gr. and HP 40 gr. are usually both high velocity.  It can pay to scrounge wisely, when desiring a good demo!

Doctrine is good, but it pays to know when doctrine (scrounging any old .22 bulk ammo rounds and immediately shooting score in a rack grade rifle) just won't happen.  After all, we do assume that a shooter be permitted to sight in their rifle for a given type of ammo.

--gb

You are assuming that I care about what I pick up. In reality it doesn't matter for the point I am trying to get across. The equipment matters very little if you cannot put the very principles that we teach to good use.
I guess if it really mattered every want to be competition shooter who showed up on our lines with a hopped up 1022 and some high dollar ammo would be a Rifleman. We all know that isn't the case. However those that come out, learns the basic principles that we teach, puts them to good practice and of course persists will become a Rifleman. I will also say that they will be better Rifleman because they have taken something away from the program. They are more likely to tell others what they have learned and be an advocate for the program. Many of the others will get frustrated, refuse to try things our way and usually not be as good of an advocate for the program.

I really could care less about competition. I've shot several matches with my mediocre equipment with the guys with huge egos and high dollar equipment. They tend to quit talking to me and being so friendly after a few rounds. I try to tell them where they can get a good hold on the foundational skills. But they seldom show on the line. When they do I generally put them on a stock rifle and bulk ammo so they can learn more without a fancy rifle masking their lack of skills.

Remember what our purpose is, we all may do well by going up to read Unbridled Liberty's post above. That is what is important.

I guess I just do not understand how skill has anything to do with shrinking a group of shots that are going to be spaced over about 8 MOA (two <= 2 MOA groups spaced 6 MOA apart, for the difference in Points of Impact between subsonic and high velocity ammo) into the stage 4 targets that are only 4 MOA in size, each.  The force is strong with this one

As for me, my rounds just do not shrink into one centered group that is smaller than bench rest results.  No matter how much I wish it were so.  Within all subsonic rounds, maybe;  within all high velocity rounds, maybe.  But, not when they are intermingled, some subsonic and some high velocity, they shoot to different locations on the target, spaced about 1.5 inches apart at 25 meters.  And, there is both a horizontal component as well as a vertical component, due to different barrel harmonics, too, that varies slightly by brand of ammo.  I have tested several different brands of subsonic ammo, and they have all shot to a different location than high velocity ammo.

--gb

[Rayne]

The best shoot boss I have ever known was a competitive shooter. He shot high power, silhouette, air gun, international pistol, bullseye pistol and won titles in all of them. He was proud of any student that showed progress but didn't believe that shooting better was a bad thing. If you want to be  a4 MOA shooter, go for it. But to paraphrase Hawkeye in "Last of the Mohicans," "don't be tellin us what to do with our own marksmanship."

Who was it that I heard " Simplicity and Precision in all things" from? Oh yea, the founder of the program. The simplicity exits to keep us from overthinking, but the precision exists to keep us from being careless and imprecise.

Determining key factors in rim fire accuracy would seem to be both simplicity and precision.

How come every time there is a discussion on the Appleseed Forum about accuracy, all of a sudden what we teach (4 MOA) isn't good enough and you start in on High Power and all kinds of shooting competition.  We are not a shooting competition, never claimed to be and hope we never go that way.  We teach the fundamentals of rifle marksmanship and our heritage.  4 MOA is what we teach.  If you become better than that, great. 

When you start compensating for the fundamentals with fancy equipment, parallax issues and no line bifocals, special ammo and all sorts of other gadgets, you are taking away from the fundamentals.  You have to build on a solid foundation or it will never withstand the test of time.  If you can't do what Mudcat and UL were talking about then you need to work on your fundamentals ands stop compensating for the lack of them.  4MOA is attainable with a surplus rifle and surplus mixed ammo. 

[Uncle Davey]

Rayne.....  ...spot on!

[Unbridled Liberty]

I will make every effort to improve my own marksmanship skills beyond Rifleman standards as soon as..
80% of all Americans have attended an Appleseed clinic or a Libertyseed, or both
Appleseed commercials are aired during the Superbowl
More Americans know who Isaac Davis was than who some wife-beater named Rice is
10% of Americans shoot to Rifleman standards
Informed voter turnout hits 80%
We have so many instructors competing to work the available shoots that we have to devise an "Appleseed Shingle" test to only pick the best of the best...and they all qualify anyhow

UL

[Guntuckian]

4 MOA is attainable with a rack grade rifle and surplus ammo. 

4 MOA is not always attainable with mixed types of surplus ammo, simultaneously, as they often will shoot to significantly different locations, depending on just how great the mix becomes.

If you sight in with one type of surplus ammo, and then shoot just that ammo, then 4 MOA is easily  attainable by the methods we teach.

But, if you sight in with, say, subsonic . 22 ammo, and then shoot, say, either high velocity or super high velocity .22s, say Stingers, there is no way to shoot within 4 MOA, as the centers of the groups will be significantly spaced differently wider than 4 MOA.

Likewise, if you are shooting 55 grain M193 vs. single-loaded 80 grain 5.56 ammo.  Your zeroes for the two are significantly different at, say, 500 yards!  Zeroes apply to one type of ammo at a time. Not to a wide mix of different ammo loads.  If we start to say otherwise, then advanced shooters will simply ignore those wacky Appleseed guys!

Now, some might say that using subsonic .22s is somehow gaming the system.  I disagree.  For the last 18 months, I have been able to buy subsonic .22s at around $0.10 to $0.11, each, through the Internet from established ammo dealers. $50 a brick.  Yet, locally, I haven't been able to buy even one brick of high velocity .22 ammo, short of paying gun show prices of $75 to $125 a brick, which equates to $0.15 to $0.25 a round.  I have refused to pay gun show prices.  So, I shoot subsonic .22 ammo.  It is far cheaper.

So, should one be a purist, saying they won't come to an Appleseed unless they can shoot only formerly garden variety high velocity .22 ammo, or, should they buy a brick of subsonic target ammo and come to an Appleseed, anyway?  Folks, I don't care what kind of ammo a shooter comes with, provided it's safe, just that they are off the sofa and at an Appleseed!

The problem is a lack of ammo, locally, not whether the "fundamentals" are somehow being diluted.  And, if someone wants to learn to shoot better than 4 MOA,  I say, "Great!".  I would love to have some shooters on my team that can shoot better than 4 MOA!  Not, say, "no one can shoot better than 4 MOA" until some non-sequiturs are first met. 

-gb

[jmdavis]

The best shoot boss I have ever known was a competitive shooter. He shot high power, silhouette, air gun, international pistol, bullseye pistol and won titles in all of them. He was proud of any student that showed progress but didn't believe that shooting better was a bad thing. If you want to be  a4 MOA shooter, go for it. But to paraphrase Hawkeye in "Last of the Mohicans," "don't be tellin us what to do with our own marksmanship."

Who was it that I heard " Simplicity and Precision in all things" from? Oh yea, the founder of the program. The simplicity exits to keep us from overthinking, but the precision exists to keep us from being careless and imprecise.

Determining key factors in rim fire accuracy would seem to be both simplicity and precision.

How come every time there is a discussion on the Appleseed Forum about accuracy, all of a sudden what we teach (4 MOA) isn't good enough and you start in on High Power and all kinds of shooting competition.  We are not a shooting competition, never claimed to be and hope we never go that way.  We teach the fundamentals of rifle marksmanship and our heritage.  4 MOA is what we teach.  If you become better than that, great. 

When you start compensating for the fundamentals with fancy equipment, parallax issues and no line bifocals, special ammo and all sorts of other gadgets, you are taking away from the fundamentals.  You have to build on a solid foundation or it will never withstand the test of time.  If you can't do what Mudcat and UL were talking about then you need to work on your fundamentals ands stop compensating for the lack of them.  4MOA is attainable with a surplus rifle and surplus mixed ammo.

You start with the fundamentals, that much is absolutely true. And if that is all that you want, I say great. But why would you be bothered if someone wants to shoot better and believes (as did Hathcock, Cooper, York and others) that competition is a way to help prepare one for "more serious work?" Remember Morgan's Riflemen, they competed to earn their place in the unit and their marksmanship and competition continued in their seige of Boston. The Marines at Bellieu Wood were competitors of the Division and all Marine matches, they were taught by some of the best Competitive Marksmen in the country. And they made the Germans think that they were facing an entire battalion of snipers. Or maybe we should talk about American HW Macbride of Indiana, a competitive marksman at the turn of the century who fought with the Canadians in WWI and pioneered much of the sniping doctrine still taught today.

As for the coats and shooting glasses, we do these things because they are legal and the glasses let old men shoot a rifle that was designed for scared 19 year olds with good eyes. A scope is not legal for service rifle competition. And yet those men with aperature sights and basically reading glasses still manage to shoot 90%+ on a 6moa target out to 600 yards.

No one is asking anyone to compete. You can do as you will. No one is criticizing you for not competing.

Were you to read Jim Owens books or the AMU Service rifle guide, you would see where much of Appleseeds doctrine originates. You would see it as original source, not the interpretation of the interpretation of the interpretation of someone who heard it from someone who learned it from Fred or Son of Martha or Dinky Dao or the Guy or Scout or VaShooter  or Longshot  or Boltgun71.

I've shot rifleman scores with airguns, standard ar15's, bolt rifles, M1's, M4's, 10/22's, as well as Service rifles and come close with a pistol. I've cleaned red coats and stage 4 targets with iron sights. I've travelled MO, OH, IN, WV, VA, MD, NJ, AL, GA, and NC teaching Appleseeds, KD shoots, and IBC's. Even now, I sponsor Appleseed at my range and stay onsite for the weekend as RSO so it can be held.

I've learned more about shooting from competing than I learned from all of that. And the reason is simple, I have shot with some of the best shooters in the country. They know things that the rest just don't know. I struggle to make master scores and these guys shoot 98%+ with what seems to be minimal effort. They are open, willing to help and friendly. I have trained and practiced the things that I learned. And I learn more at every match.

I take that information that I have learned and try to use it to help others shoot better. We tell people that one of the things that made the difference on April 19th 1775 was marksmanship. Well marksmanship is work and it is perishable. I will learn as much of it as I can and continue to teach it to anyone who is willing to listen.

[jmdavis]

By the way Midway has CCI standard for $39/brick plus shipping. That still makes it cheaper at $50 than the 525 pack of CCI BLAZER or Remington Golden Bullets locally.

[Rocket Man]

4 MOA is attainable with a rack grade rifle and surplus ammo. 

4 MOA is not always attainable with mixed types of surplus ammo, simultaneously, as they often will shoot to significantly different locations, depending on just how great the mix becomes.

Yeah.  So don't mix ammo.     If you do you'll need to sight in again.  Work out a baseline zero for different brands of ammo, and you're done.

There should be no great mystery about .22LR ammunition, seriously. Yes, every rifle has its own preferences, but there's only a couple of things going on, and most of them don't matter at 25 meters.

One, because .22LR headspaces on the rifling grooves -- not the rim, not the case mouth, no shoulder or taper -- different rifles may be sensitive to minor changes in COAL or ogive.  Mass-produced rifles like Marlin 795s and Ruger 10/22s are cut generously and rarely care, but competition rifles with tight throats can throw real stinkers if fed bulk ammo.

Two, blowback semi-autos are all timed to some "average" load, and small changes -- more or less powder, different primer type, different weight of brass, etc. -- can cause stoppages due to incompatibility with the bolt mass, the extractor tension, or the ejector timing.  Hence why some rifles like particular loads.  But this has little to do with accuracy.

It is also true that .22LR HV and SV will go sonic at roughly 60 meters and 10 meters respectively.  However, going sonic does not instantly destroy your group.  At 100 meters, HV is often throwing patterns 8 MOA and up; SV usually only opens up a little but it depends.  At 25 meters this is a non-issue.

Outside of match rifles with Bentz chambers being fed oversize, soft lead like Remington Thunderbolts, it is rare to find a rifle/ammo combination that will not hold 4 MOA.  That's my experience backed up with results from dozens of shoots.  If a student swaps ammo their POI may change, but they still should be holding tight groups.  If not, you may check to see if the barrel is getting clogged with soft lead, but odds are they've gotten sloppy with their fundamentals.

All of this stuff is suited for an advanced class.  No need to burden the students with it in a typical Appleseed.

FWIW, my CZ bolt-action shows virtually no POI shift for different brands, and holds sub-2 MOA with everything it's fed, from Armscor to mottled Blazer to Norma-Tac to Eley to  SK+.  It's so boringly consistent that I've settled on Remington Subsonic as a do-everything load, because it's available and cheap and reaches to 200m and beyond.     Try it with your rifle before blaming your ammo.

[Rocket Man]

The Other Reason Ammo Doesn't Matter at Appleseed:

Simply stated, MOA doesn't stack.  As long as it feeds, extracts, and goes BANG reliably, it's probably good enough.

Let's consider an example.  Suppose I have a shooter who is accurate to 4 MOA.  That's the inherent inaccuracy in her technique -- if I gave her an ideal laser blaster, she'd shoot 4 MOA groups.

She has two brands of ammo.  One of them, Wolf SuperExtra Tenex Hero at $99 a box, will print 1 MOA from her rifle if fired from an ideal mechanical rest.  The other, Remchester Tac-Catch22 at $19.99 a bucket, is only capable of 3 MOA.

We put her on the line to shoot a five-round group from each box of ammo.  Then we go down to check. The two groups are almost identical.

You may be thinking that her accuracy with the match ammo is 4 MOA + 1 MOA = 5 MOA, while the cheap stuff yields 4 MOA + 3 MOA = 7 MOA.  It's not true.  This is because shooter and mechanical accuracy are uncorrelated errors.  That is to say, sometimes the randomness stacks, and sometimes it cancels out.

To compute the real expected accuracy, we "add in quadrature."  This means we add the squares of the errors and then take the square root of the result.  So:

Match ammo:  SQRT[ (4 MOA)^2 + (1 MOA)^2 ] = SQRT[ 17 MOA^2 ] = 4.12 MOA
Cheap ammo:  SQRT[ (4 MOA)^2 + (3 MOA)^2 ] = SQRT[ 25 MOA^2 ] = 5.00 MOA

That's not enough to matter.  Indeed, not enough to even measure with anything less than a 25-shot group!

If you're a hard-core competitor and you shoot much better than the ammo/rifle is capable of, then it makes a significant difference.  But so long as the shooter remains the principal source of error, you can make that ammo as good as you want and all you'll have to show for it is an empty wallet.

The only exception is if you happen upon an unusual rifle/ammo combination that doesn't work at all.  It does happen, but it's just not that common.  I haven't seen one yet in person.

[Guntuckian]

The Other Reason Ammo Doesn't Matter at Appleseed:

Simply stated, MOA doesn't stack.  As long as it feeds, extracts, and goes BANG reliably, it's probably good enough.

Let's consider an example.  Suppose I have a shooter who is accurate to 4 MOA.  That's the inherent inaccuracy in her technique -- if I gave her an ideal laser blaster, she'd shoot 4 MOA groups.

She has two brands of ammo.  One of them, Wolf SuperExtra Tenex Hero at $99 a box, will print 1 MOA from her rifle if fired from an ideal mechanical rest.  The other, Remchester Tac-Catch22 at $19.99 a bucket, is only capable of 3 MOA.

We put her on the line to shoot a five-round group from each box of ammo.  Then we go down to check. The two groups are almost identical.

You may be thinking that her accuracy with the match ammo is 4 MOA + 1 MOA = 5 MOA, while the cheap stuff yields 4 MOA + 3 MOA = 7 MOA.  It's not true.  This is because shooter and mechanical accuracy are uncorrelated errors.  That is to say, sometimes the randomness stacks, and sometimes it cancels out.

To compute the real expected accuracy, we "add in quadrature."  This means we add the squares of the errors and then take the square root of the result.  So:

Match ammo:  SQRT[ (4 MOA)^2 + (1 MOA)^2 ] = SQRT[ 17 MOA^2 ] = 4.12 MOA
Cheap ammo:  SQRT[ (4 MOA)^2 + (3 MOA)^2 ] = SQRT[ 25 MOA^2 ] = 5.00 MOA

That's not enough to matter.  Indeed, not enough to even measure with anything less than a 25-shot group!

If you're a hard-core competitor and you shoot much better than the ammo/rifle is capable of, then it makes a significant difference.  But so long as the shooter remains the principal source of error, you can make that ammo as good as you want and all you'll have to show for it is an empty wallet.

The only exception is if you happen upon an unusual rifle/ammo combination that doesn't work at all.  It does happen, but it's just not that common.  I haven't seen one yet in person.

Totally in agreement, with only one minor exception. 

MOA does stack with a bi-modal distribution, when shooting both subsonic ammo and high velocity  ammo in the same loaded magazine.  That was the point of my prior post.  Within each of the two groups, MOA doesn't stack.  All the random contributors are uncorrelated.  But between the two groups, the statistics are inversely correlated.   And, they do stack.   Yet, Rayne had stated that "4 MOA is attainable with a surplus rifle and surplus mixed ammo."  My point was that it won't work , unless you sight in with one type of ammo, and then only shoot that one type of ammo. If you load one magazine with two distinctly different cartridge types that exhibit two distinctly different Points of Impact when fired, with the sights zeroed only for one of the two cartridge types, then, yes, there will be a bi-modal distribution of impacts.  And, under this set of conditions, the MOA of the separation of the barbell distributions will add.  The Generalized Pythagorean Theorem, that tacitly assumes uncorrelated contributions, breaks down.  It is no longer a Root-Mean-Square relationship. 

And, Mudcat's assertion that if your technique  is good enough, then you can load a magazine with a random mix of .22 subsonic and high velocity cartridges dropped on the line, that print to two different points that are 6 MOA separated for the two distributions, and yet still shoot score on only 4 MOA sized Stage 4 target silhouettes at 25 meters, strains incredulity.

I have repeatedly tested my 10-22 rifle.  And, subsonic ammo shoots to a different point of impact than high velocity ammo.  By about 1.5 inches (~6MOA).  Yet, each group is only 2 MOA in diameter (1/2 inch in diameter).

--gb

[Rocket Man]

Totally in agreement, with only one minor exception. 

MOA does stack with a bi-modal distribution, when shooting both subsonic ammo and high velocity  ammo in the same loaded magazine.  That was the point of my prior post.  Within each of the two groups, MOA doesn't stack.  All the random contributors are uncorrelated.  But between the two groups, the statistics are inversely correlated.   And, they do stack.   [...]

I have repeatedly tested my 10-22 rifle.  And, subsonic ammo shoots to a different point of impact than high velocity ammo.  By about 1.5 inches (~6MOA).  Yet, each group is only 2 MOA in diameter (1/2 inch in diameter).

Mixing ammo is a different story, I agree.  That's not random error anymore, that's systematic.  But even there you may get away with it.  The only 4 MOA targets on an AQT are Stage 4. 

My CZ 452 Varmint, between Remington Subsonic and CCI Blazer (HV), sees only 1.5 MOA shift in point of impact (Blazer being higher) at 25 meters.  If you gave me a mixed handful of HV and SV ammo with my rifle, I'd be sure to lose a couple of points, but I'd probably still make the cut.  Mudcat's rifle may behave similarly.  Yours obviously cares more for some reason.  That's why we try it.

[Unbridled Liberty]

Blah, blah, blah.  This is Appleseed and this is the Appleseed forum.  Competing is not the point.  Saving the country is the point.  Instead of spending your time and energy eliminating variable X so that you can add an extra freaking point to your score, how about you call your state coordinator this morning and commit to WORKING one or two dozen shoots next year?  And hey, I can name drop too; Revere, Davis, Morgan, Murphy, Prescott, Warren, Adams, Parker, Harrington, Whittemore, Lamson, Diamond, Hosmer, Salem, Washington... 

UL

[Uncle Davey]

Sounds like wisdom from an old Alarm lister....