I disagree but that's no offense to your opinion. I think the scope is the limiting factor for me. These Vmax rounds seem to be exceptionally accurate versus some of the lower speed HP rounds I've tried.
I actually shot as good as my buddy with his RPR .17 with a 4-12 scope.
In all honesty I wish I had brought my sled with me so I could take my inaccuracy out of the equation. I feel this gun is capable of 1 MOA at 100.
BTW I didnt have to make any adjustments from sighting in at 50 to shooting at 100 and 150. I think that speaks volumes as to how flat shooting the 22mag can be.
I sincerely hope your rifle can do much better than the barrel that came on my CZ455. I found that the rifle wanted to shoot MOA, but the ammo that I experimented with and the barrel may have been problematic.
Having been heavily involved with .22LR rimfire benchrest for several years, it was discouraging finding great lots and the match ammo cost was very high, but how it worked in your rifle was like finding the right woman to marry. Not only do you want to find the right ammo that grouped well, but flyers must also be few and far between...or hopefully, nonexistent.
The trajectory table I'm using for .17 HMR puts the bullet at +.53" at 50 yards, +.75" at 100 yds, 0.0" at 125 yds, and -1.45" at 150. That trajectory can result in many dead critters with little or no hold-off within that entire range. Bullet weight, shape, and MV will obviously change trajectory.
Both .22 WMR and .17 HMR are not match cartridges, and being rimfires, fit and quality of construction is of less concern than with match .22LR ammo, but what I've found is that .17 HMR ammo of various MFGs seems to be a bit more accurate...not as accurate as good centerfire ammo, though. I think that it could be better, but until customers demand better accuracy, we're probably stuck with what we have and paying outlandish sums of money to get custom match-quality rifles will not be a fruitful endeavor until ammo becomes more consistent.