22LR My Love Hate Relationship-To Sort or Not

[Mr.Revolverguy]

I have this love hate relationship with 22LR. Getting a 22 rifle to shoot small tiny groups is such a rewarding experience for me. I did a lot of reading on many forums discussing the benefits of sorting 22LR ammunition for better results. I think mostly what I have come across is that this is a big waste of time and money. As we all know with 22LR -- IT DEPENDS LOL---.

The intent of this test outside of a fun little experiment is to take widely available medium grade ammunition and see if we can turn it into match grade ammunition. Many will argue this is not worth their time and you should just buy match grade ammunition like high end Lapua Midas+ or Eley Tenex and that's ok. Even then after spending much more you still must find the lot of ammo your rifle will shoot. With this sorting device I have put together I can sort a 50 round box of ammo precisely in minutes.

So I decided to embark on yet another experiment with what I know to me two good shooting rifles, CZ455



and CZ452.



I borrowed a rim thickness gauge from a friend but felt the precision was not there to differentiate rim thickness that I was looking for. I set out looking for what I believe would provide me with the best precision and think I found it. I will leave out the manufacturers name because I do not want anyone thinking I am doing a info-mercial for them. This was truly about finding out if sorting would make any difference for me I search high and low and found what I thought would be adequate, but it was from two different companies the setup was $47.




Yes that is an old harddrive that the magnetized base is sitting on .

Ammunition
CCI Standard Velocity

Pre-Test
I deep cleaned both rifles with my otis pull through set. In both rifles
3 Wet patches -- sit 10min
10 Passes 22 bore brush
3 Wet patches -- sit 5min
8 Dry patches.

Sorted 100 rounds by rim thickness this batch was a little all over the place the majority were .041 and .042 thickness. The variance was from .040 - .048.

Sorted the 0.42 rounds by weight also variances in weight 50grains - 55.7grains most came out as 51.1grains. I performed the same sort of weighing and sorting on the .041 rim thickness rounds also.

This would leave me with 69 rounds of .042 thickness and 51.1grains weight as the major lot.

Test At The Range
Fired 25 rounds out of the box through each rifle to foul the bore. Then fired 10 rounds of each --Sorted, Sorted and Weighed and Unsorted at 3 different targets. Test performed at 50 yards outdoor range fairly calm wind. Temperature 83 degrees.

Up First the CZ452
CZ452 Unsorted Not Weighed MOA 1.629


CZ452 Sorted Not Weighed MOA 1.574


CZ452 Sorted and Weighed MOA 1.351


In the CZ 452 you can see there is not much difference by looking at the MOA but just examining the group with the naked eye there was a major difference.

Now moving on the CZ455
CZ455 Unsorted Not Weighed MOA 3.041


CZ455 Sorted Not Weighed MOA 2.981


CZ455 Sorted and Weighed MOA 2.082


Sorting played a much more noticeable difference in the CZ 455.

With a few minutes of daylight left I took CCI SV ammunition and loaded the magazine with 10 rounds of big variance from a rim thickness perspective.

0.41, 0.43, 0.43, 0.42, 0.44, 0.44, 0.45, 0.48, 0.48, 0.48
Because I shot better today with the CZ 452, on this day I decided to run this test with it.


On this day with these rifles sorting the ammunition surely made a difference. Sorting is not for everyone and like anything with 22LR "IT DEPENDS"

Your results could very well be different. Having shot Eley Tenex in both of these rifles I would say sorting CCI SV is on par or just as good in comparing the groups from both. I did not display any Eley groups as they were fired on a different day with a big temperature difference. Eley was fired last winter 45 degrees, these groups were fired in 83 degree temps so a little bit of an unfair comparison.

Hey maybe that is the next experiment CCI SV sorted and weighed against Eley Tenex.

 

[berettaprofessor]

Nice test. Repeat the first three tests in the CZ452 three times and then we'll have some real data.

I'd just like to know what it is about a CZ452 that all of them are so darned accurate. I realize yours isn't even stock (different stock and a bull barrel compared to most I see), so it must be the receiver that makes the difference. Whatever it is, it needs to be bottled.

 

[Mr.Revolverguy]

The barrel is stock -- It is a CZ Varmint The stock is a Boyd for the cheek riser

 

[berettaprofessor]

Mine is the CZ452 Lux and it still is the most accurate 22 I've ever owned, besting several 10/22's modified with Volquartsen triggers and bull barrels, a Savage Mark II, Marlin 60's and 795s etc. Only thing I ever did to it was install a Yo Dave trigger pack. I think they made a mistake dropping the 452 line and starting the 455. I don't know if it was the threaded barrels of the 452's, or something about the bolt or receiver, but they should have left good enough alone.

 

[Picher]

You won't get to know real accuracy until you use some of the best ammo available, like ELEY, R-50, or the better Wolfs. It's expensive and they still vary by lots, but still shoot well enough to take ammo out of the question as to the accuracy of a .22 LR rifle. Benchresters order samples of various lots of each and buy as much of what shoots best in each particular rifle. It's a frustrating endeavor and often what shoots best in your rifle is already sold out from under you.

 

[Picher]

If you think accurate .22LR ammo is difficult to find, try finding accurate .22 WMR and .17 HMR. WMR is the worst rimfire ammo, but extremely expensive for what it does. I just got a .17 HMR barrel for my CZ 455 and with the very limited experience with the ammo I could find, it's not more accurate than the best .22 WMR. The barrel is not "broken in", but first groups with the ammo I could find (Winchester) doesn't seem to be as accurate as I'd been expecting. Truthfully, wind was a bit of a problem today, but I'm hoping the vertical dispersion will be better than what I"ve seen today. Best groups had 3 shots in 3/8" and two out by an inch or so. I'm willing to wait for better conditions and installed a more powerful scope, so we'll see. Maybe tomorrow will be a better day at the range.

 

[Mr.Revolverguy]

Good luck on the range tomorrow and let us know how it goes. My shooting buddy has a 17HMR barrel and it likes the heavier bullets but it took some constant shooting. We shot a small fortune through it before it got accurate. We just shot it for the sake of shooting never cleaned it, then after about 500 rounds he cleaned it thoroughly about an hours worth of cleaning and the next outing the groups were all 1/2inch or less at 100 yards.

 

[cougar1717]

Rim thickness and weight are parameters that can be sorted. It seems that the OP has found a way to create "CCI Select." Maybe that should be the next test - sorted CCI SV vs CCI Select.
However, the amount of priming compound,the amount of powder, and the quality of the bullet are important parameters that cannot be sorted externally.

This isn't a secret that small groups are attained by consistent components and consistent exit velocity. This is where chrono data is very helpful. We may have been able to quantify that those 3 flyers on the 455 targets were 50 to 75+fps faster than the mean and not due to the rim thickness or weight. The 455 groups of 1.592", 1.560", and 1.090" would be almost the same if it weren't for 3 flyers on the first two targets. The 452 groups did not appear to have any bad flyers and are relatively close at .853", .824", and .707". All seven groups are representative of what may be in a box of CCI-SV IMHO. When I tested a recent lot this year, it had SD 18 and ES 80 on 30+ data points.

You may be slightly more sane to just buy better ammo instead of sorting CCI-SV, but I agree with Pitcher - trying to chase the most accurate lots of 22LR will drive a person insane.