I've been wanting to try this test for some time now. Waited a few weeks for a relatively calm day with winds less than 5 mph to take my .22 WMR to the 330 yard berm of my local range for long distance shooting with two types of ammo. Up to this point I had not done anything longer than 200 yards with the magnum (~3" five shot groups). For comparison I brought along my .22LR.
Equipment
Anschutz 1720d (.22 WMR)
30 grain Hornady V-Max
33 grain Remington Premier Accutip
Remington 597 with Volquartsen Tension Barrel (.22LR)
40 grain CCI AR-Tactical
The Anschutz is an extremely fine shooting rifle with a glass crisp trigger and routinely shoots a single ragged hole at 50 yards. The two types of ammo are for their fast muzzle velocity. Hornady is at 2200 fps, Remington is rated for 2000 fps but with significantly higher BC (0.095 vs 0.137).
I setup a 12" steel plate on the berm 330 yards away. After shooting approximately 20 rounds from each ammo then switching to the .22LR I started realizing a sad fact. The .22LR was significantly more accurate at this distance!
I was shocked especially by how the Remington 33gr bullets with their similar BC to .22LR but nearly 800fps advantage was hitting fewer plates. Taking an average of 10 rounds of each, I estimate hitting the plate about 6 or 7 times with .22 LR but only 3 or 4 with the .22 WMR with either ammo. By the end of the day I had shot a full box of both types of magnum rounds and could not consistently hit the plate.
Three questions to the community:
1. Why such terrible performance from the Magnum? Compared to .22LR I would have expected at least comparable accuracy if not significantly better! The magnum turned into a 6+ moa gun at that distance, WTF?!?
2. Has anyone else had similar results shooting these calibers at 300 yards or longer? Maybe I should have tried some 40 grain types instead of these lighter polymer tipped bullets.
3. Finally has anyone tried shooting .17 HMR against either .22 WMR or .22LR at these distances?
Equipment
Anschutz 1720d (.22 WMR)
30 grain Hornady V-Max
33 grain Remington Premier Accutip
Remington 597 with Volquartsen Tension Barrel (.22LR)
40 grain CCI AR-Tactical
The Anschutz is an extremely fine shooting rifle with a glass crisp trigger and routinely shoots a single ragged hole at 50 yards. The two types of ammo are for their fast muzzle velocity. Hornady is at 2200 fps, Remington is rated for 2000 fps but with significantly higher BC (0.095 vs 0.137).
I setup a 12" steel plate on the berm 330 yards away. After shooting approximately 20 rounds from each ammo then switching to the .22LR I started realizing a sad fact. The .22LR was significantly more accurate at this distance!
I was shocked especially by how the Remington 33gr bullets with their similar BC to .22LR but nearly 800fps advantage was hitting fewer plates. Taking an average of 10 rounds of each, I estimate hitting the plate about 6 or 7 times with .22 LR but only 3 or 4 with the .22 WMR with either ammo. By the end of the day I had shot a full box of both types of magnum rounds and could not consistently hit the plate.
Three questions to the community:
1. Why such terrible performance from the Magnum? Compared to .22LR I would have expected at least comparable accuracy if not significantly better! The magnum turned into a 6+ moa gun at that distance, WTF?!?
2. Has anyone else had similar results shooting these calibers at 300 yards or longer? Maybe I should have tried some 40 grain types instead of these lighter polymer tipped bullets.
3. Finally has anyone tried shooting .17 HMR against either .22 WMR or .22LR at these distances?
Last edited: