• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

22LR twist rate

Raufoss

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Nov 23, 2010
547
237
37
Missouri
Hey Guys , I need the help of the 22LR specialists.

I am building a custom setup specially for long range 22LR 350 M+ and some NRL22.

What twist should I use?

Ive read a lot and from what I understand, all was created over short distance application so twist have never been geared to longer range application.
Benchrest shooter use 1-17 to 1-19 twist as they tend to see better performance at 25/50 M in calm weather. On the other hand many say that "x" twist is not ideal for high wind and "Y" twist is not good for 100M+ shoots.

can anyone explain me and direct me on the good way, or am I trying to overthink the subject?
 
The classic .22lr twist is 1-16. Most are this twist. However, recently I have known a couple of folks independently experimenting with faster twists with an eye to better long range performance. Those folks report improvement (less dispersion) with faster twists. I expect that you will see more of this in the next couple of years and that some consensus may be reached about how fast it takes to get improvement and how much improvement you will get.

For now, I would classify the use of fast twist rate .22lr's for long range .22 shooting as experimental with some promise. That is all the information I have on that.
 
This is a cool topic and BigJimFish is touching on a few things of importance as it relates to Rimfire ELR (used to be an oxymoron). I've been testing faster twists for nearly two years and the results have been pretty awesome. The cool thing is, I'm getting the same performance relative to group size at 50 yards as my 16 twist guns are producing, but I see much tighter groups beyond 100 yards.

MB
 
This is a cool topic and BigJimFish is touching on a few things of importance as it relates to Rimfire ELR (used to be an oxymoron). I've been testing faster twists for nearly two years and the results have been pretty awesome. The cool thing is, I'm getting the same performance relative to group size at 50 yards as my 16 twist guns are producing, but I see much tighter groups beyond 100 yards.

MB

What kind of twist did you test and what was your tough process behind the twist selection?
 
Interesting topic. In short, you want the slowest twist that will stabilize the bullet you want to shoot at the speed and distance you want to shoot it.
You can less than stabilize a bullet, too slow a twist for the bullet, but can't over stabilize a bullet too fast of a twist, within reason. The speed in which the bullet is traveling also is a consideration. You can shoot a heaver bullet is a slower twist at a higher speed and stabilize it, where if it was going slower it would need a faster twist.
The 1-16 twist which is standard for the 22LR rifles of today was instituted a long time ago. Back then they were building rifles that shot 22 short, longs and long rifle all at different bullet weights and speeds. Call the maker of your choice and ask them what they recommend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AllAheadFull
Interesting topic. In short, you want the slowest twist that will stabilize the bullet you want to shoot at the speed and distance you want to shoot it.
You can less than stabilize a bullet, too slow a twist for the bullet, but can't over stabilize a bullet too fast of a twist, within reason. The speed in which the bullet is traveling also is a consideration. You can shoot a heaver bullet is a slower twist at a higher speed and stabilize it, where if it was going slower it would need a faster twist.
The 1-16 twist which is standard for the 22LR rifles of today was instituted a long time ago. Back then they were building rifles that shot 22 short, longs and long rifle all at different bullet weights and speeds. Call the maker of your choice and ask them what they recommend.

What I found is faster twist rates for 22LR required longer barrel lengths due to higher angular velocities. The muzzle velocities will be slower than a 16 twist, but more consistent over distance. The key to the faster twist rates is the ability to tap into more of the available BC which coincides with the performance I noted beyond 100 yards. An 18" barrel with the faster twist rate was terrible, but 22" was awesome.

MB
 
What I found is faster twist rates for 22LR required longer barrel lengths due to higher angular velocities. The muzzle velocities will be slower than a 16 twist, but more consistent over distance. The key to the faster twist rates is the ability to tap into more of the available BC which coincides with the performance I noted beyond 100 yards. An 18" barrel with the faster twist rate was terrible, but 22" was awesome.

MB

Now that’s really interesting and I’d like to know more.

is there material I can read on rimfire angular velocities relation with Twist and chamber geometry ?

or every is still experimental and no one shares real world data?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BP Green
My calls to makers revealed interest but not a lot of experience.
I agree, manufacturers are fine with complacency. Although the lowly 22 RF has been around for a long time not much R&D has been done to promote accuracy other than in the ammunition industry. There are some damn fine rifles available with the standard barrel configurations.
(day dreaming) Lets think about land and grove design, we know that the 45-70, 400 and up grain bullet likes more pronounced lands, and these are not usually pure lead bullets being used, but does make us think about bullet slippage caused by using pure lead and the resistance of a helix style rifling. I think more innovation will come in the barrel configuration in the near future.
 
Now that’s really interesting and I’d like to know more.

is there material I can read on rimfire angular velocities relation with Twist and chamber geometry ?

or every is still experimental and no one shares real world data?

I'll certainly share data once I have the project in a place that makes sense. I handed the rifle off to Daniel Horner in September for third party testing, so when that's complete, I'll compare data and compile against controls and should be ready to go at that point.

ALERT: I'm turning the filter off for this next paragraph.

I'm not sure if there's material on that or not. I always develop my own mostly because there's so much anecdotal bs floating around. If one mentions what he's discovered, especially in the rimfire world, the ones subscribing to "construed conventional wisdom" are quick to unleash the arrogance but then can't speak intelligently from their own experience or qualified data when they're questioned. When I've mentioned to some in certain circles the twist rate I'm testing the immediate reaction has been to tell me all the reasons it won't work. I ask them why it won't work but they can't tell me....then I show them the targets.

Filter back on....

So, as I continue down this path, I'll share info here because SH Rimfire Section has proven to be the most genuinely interested group I've run across and I certainly do appreciate that.

MB
 
14-10 would very likely be far to great a change. In my thread asking about twist here someone replied that going faster than 13 resulted in very poor accuracy. I have no idea if this is true but will be sending a 14 twist Bartlien to Chad at LRI nest week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: D_TROS
Thanks for the detailed answer RAVAG

I might do some experiment myself even tho I don’t have much budget for multiple barrels.

I had in mind a 20 to 24 inch 1-14 twist 3 grooves but I might try to find something more aggressive and play with it and see what happens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 629-4 and RAVAGE88
14-10 would very likely be far to great a change. In my thread asking about twist here someone replied that going faster than 13 resulted in very poor accuracy. I have no idea if this is true but will be sending a 14 twist Bartlien to Chad at LRI nest week.

I have a fixed twist faster than 10, below 22" in length, accuracy is terrible. At 22" it's incredible. Haven't tested longer than 22"....

MB
 
Thanks for the detailed answer RAVAG

I might do some experiment myself even tho I don’t have much budget for multiple barrels.

I had in mind a 20 to 24 inch 1-14 twist 3 grooves but I might try to find something more aggressive and play with it and see what happens.

Sounds good and you'll enjoy the project, Run them longer and you'll generally be in a good place; you can always cut them back later if you want to play with/compare results.

MB
 
Winchester and Remington figured out 90 years ago that longer RF barrels were more consistent at distance. Thus the 28” ‘52’s and ‘37’s. They even out velocity and give lower SD’s
200 yard rimfire Palma Matches were common from 1930-1960.
 
Over several builds I have found that longer barrels and faster twist equal a more stable muzzle velocity with 22lr‘s. I have always found that 24”-27” are more consistent than shorter barrels and the last few years faster twist than the standard 16t aid in consistency at longer ranges with no ill effects at the short range line. Basically my experience has mirrored Mike’s but I have not gone into the single digits for twist rate yet, only because I don’t have the money to “experiment” but it would sure be interesting!
 
I’ve been shooting a 15in Match Grade Machine .22lr match chamber 1:10 on a TC Encore for a few years. I had it made specifically to shoot suppressed Aguila SSS subsonics. It does well out to 100y. I haven’t done much with any other ammo or anything past 100y. Its on to-do my list.
 
After saying what I said about longer barrels and faster twist seeming to have an edge over a more “conventional setup“ I do have to admit that these Vudoo’s with the 18”-20” barrels in 16 twist have me scratching my head a little on my own theories about rimfire accuracy. Before I would have never stepped up to the line with a short 1-16 twist cut rifled rimfire that has a chamber that doesn’t engrave at least some of the first driving band on the chosen bullet. But now after personally shooting 2 VGW 20” Ace barrels and 1 22” Bartlein all with the ravage chamber (which from what I have seen is setup with minimal to no bullet contact), and maintaining the 6X5 thread where the best groups and average groups has drastically improved (which is in my opinion directly linked to the VGW rifles) I have been doing that thread for almost 7 years now so I have seen a pretty large sample rate of rimfire shooters.

So as we all know (but sometimes it’s hard to admit) there is more than one way to skin this cat. This brings me to what I am most intrigued about in the rimfire barrel accuracy thing:
-fast twist barrels (which has been discussed here)
-barrel length (also talked about)
-button vs cut rifled barrels, it seems to be that the general consensus is for 22lr match style ammo a button rifled barrel does on average better than a cut barrel (maybe it has a slight edge) from what I have seen up until the VGW rifles this seemed to be true, but now I don’t know. I also don’t know what properties a button barrel has over a cut barrel that would be beneficial for 22lr
-taper lapped or choked bore vs a straight bore, again its the same as the button vs cut question until the VGW rifles came out all my barrels that were shooters had a distinct choke at the muzzle. Are the VGW barrels choked or taper lapped if so it must be very little as I really can’t feel it (but I never slugged one, I can just feel it when cleaning)
-chambering for the bullet to engrave the lands, same as above

Maybe if you have time would you mind to share your thoughts on these things Mike?
 
I have a range of faster twist rates in the lab, all are Vudoo/Ace barrels.

MB
Would love to try a 24-26" V22 with a faster twist rate for LR shooting. I own/have owned several Winchester 52's, a 40x and other target rifle 22's. There's something to the long barrel. I'm up for trying a long barreled V22, so sign me up, take my money!
 
After saying what I said about longer barrels and faster twist seeming to have an edge over a more “conventional setup“ I do have to admit that these Vudoo’s with the 18”-20” barrels in 16 twist have me scratching my head a little on my own theories about rimfire accuracy. Before I would have never stepped up to the line with a short 1-16 twist cut rifled rimfire that has a chamber that doesn’t engrave at least some of the first driving band on the chosen bullet. But now after personally shooting 2 VGW 20” Ace barrels and 1 22” Bartlein all with the ravage chamber (which from what I have seen is setup with minimal to no bullet contact), and maintaining the 6X5 thread where the best groups and average groups has drastically improved (which is in my opinion directly linked to the VGW rifles) I have been doing that thread for almost 7 years now so I have seen a pretty large sample rate of rimfire shooters.

So as we all know (but sometimes it’s hard to admit) there is more than one way to skin this cat. This brings me to what I am most intrigued about in the rimfire barrel accuracy thing:
-fast twist barrels (which has been discussed here)
-barrel length (also talked about)
-button vs cut rifled barrels, it seems to be that the general consensus is for 22lr match style ammo a button rifled barrel does on average better than a cut barrel (maybe it has a slight edge) from what I have seen up until the VGW rifles this seemed to be true, but now I don’t know. I also don’t know what properties a button barrel has over a cut barrel that would be beneficial for 22lr
-taper lapped or choked bore vs a straight bore, again its the same as the button vs cut question until the VGW rifles came out all my barrels that were shooters had a distinct choke at the muzzle. Are the VGW barrels choked or taper lapped if so it must be very little as I really can’t feel it (but I never slugged one, I can just feel it when cleaning)
-chambering for the bullet to engrave the lands, same as above

Maybe if you have time would you mind to share your thoughts on these things Mike?

JB, I've always appreciated how you go about dissecting things in an effort to sift through what's real vs what's thought to be real. And again, it speaks to my greater appreciation for SH Rimfire Section because you just can't bring these topics up on other forums without a lot of clickety-clack on the keyboards of those subscribing to things they've never questioned. However, it was rather cool to see a very well known Small Bore Champion go against the grain on another forum about the benefits of slugging, taper lapped button barrels, etc. So, the more we shoot and question the anecdotal information by being curious enough to test the boundaries laid in place and subscribed to for reasons no one can demonstrate through qualified data, the more we advance and overall, benefit the shooting community. It wasn't long ago that you'd get laughed at for shooting at something beyond 50 yards with a 22LR, but now, things are different and the gear has evolved.

I'll paste in your list and offer what I've experienced over the years, mostly with filter off, but to some, what I'm going to say will go against the grain as it pertains to rimfire. All of what I'll say has culminated in what are the rifles we ship everyday, but having said this, I'm still learning, so the Vudoo's will continue to push the envelope. What's most interesting about this are the number of those that told me years ago that I'd never get a 22LR to do what it's doing and no one would pay that much for a 22 rifle because, "it's just a 22!" So, again, thanks JB for being genuine and for supporting the 6X5 thread that has served as a huge data collection point that tracks the evolution of what's happening in rimfire performance.

-fast twist barrels: It wasn't long ago that no one really cared about the BC of the 40 grain projectile used by Lapua, Eley, etc., but now, Lapua publishes their BC (not sure if Eley does). This is because the community started stretching the legs of the 22LR and Lapua was the first to respond by teaming up with us prior to intro'ing the V-22 to market. They developed two custom drag curves and made it available in the Lapua and Applied Ballistics apps so we could calculate firing solutions the same way we do for centerfire. Looking at the BC and doing the math to determine how much of it we're using by way of the twist rate, it became clear that out of the available .172, only .120-ish was being used with a 16 twist barrel. Working the math backwards, the solution for using all the available BC in the 40 grain bullet was considerably faster, I was astounded and questioned whether I did it correctly....so, I did it again and came up with the same answer. So, we made a few barrels. Two barrels were fit to two different actions but not at the same time. The first barrel was 18" and ultimately, it shot like crap, which was discouraging. Digging a little deeper and creating a few models to look at angular velocity vs muzzle velocity, etc., the conclusion was the barrel needed to be longer at this particular twist rate. I chambered up a barrel finished at 22" and tested initially at 50 yards. The improvement over the 18" barrel was vast....I remember looking at the first five shot group and saying out loud, "son-of-a-bitch!" After a few more groups, I handed the rifle off to Bob (whom is a sponsored shooter and does the testing based on our specific protocol) to shoot the strings of 500 round tests. The first 500 rounds is broken down into 100, five shot groups at 50 yards. Just over 90% of the groups were beautifully round and measured just over the diameter of the bullet. Amazing....but it got better. The groups at 100 were easily half the size of average groups from a 16 twist barrel (16 twist barrel was 18"). I continued to shoot this rifle for over a year and performed a silent test in September at the NRA World Championships (teamed with Lapua for the third consecutive year). We had numerous targets, all steel plates at varying distances. I took numerous prototype rifles for the masses to shoot so I could observe third party testing without the shooters knowing what was new/different and I called wind on every target for three days in a row. The groups from the fast twist barrel at distance were amazingly small and I had to call wind differently compared to the slower twist barrels. A week later, I handed the rifle off to Daniel Horner for a longer term test, but I had enough data to make more barrels ranging from my single digit favorite up to 15 twist. Bottom line is, the fast twist barrel is an absolute superstar at 22".

-barrel length: For the most part, barrel length is aesthetic when it comes to most rifle builds these days. Chassis systems with longer forends/foretubes typically need longer barrels to look right, etc. The saving grace is, in Rimfire PRS and NRL22, this really doesn't matter with a 16 twist barrel at the distances targets are engaged. A hit is a hit and the 16 twist barrels have done an excellent job and I consider these barrels to be the de-facto standard across all shooting disciplines. Generally, I've advised many ordering Vudoo's that desire to compete in these games not go longer than 20". This is because they need to move with the rifle and get into and out of position quickly and there's a slight velocity advantage for the "hit-is-a-hit" approach to the COF. Now, when I say what I'm about to say, please don't blow our phones up to change orders because I assure you with rifles in the build que, the barrel on your build sheet is exactly what you should go with. In all the test rifles I build I use a 22" barrel that's cut and crowned without muzzle threads. The reason I do this is for consistency of data and to impose controls when comparing different barrel brands when we're asked if we'll consider using so and so barrel. If/when I tell so and so barrel maker their barrel didn't pass protocols, it's not ambiguous or contaminated with "construed conventional wisdom" that's lurked around the rimfire world for years. I also don't go longer than 22" because I see velocities fall off and I need to have clear indications of lot differences in the ammo I test. The only time I'll go longer than 22" is for very specific performance criteria dictated by Benchrest, but that's not always a given. Some barrels won't perform at the longer lengths but I've not seen the presence or lack of a choke point change that at all. Barrels are barrels, they're all different and they always will be regardless of who makes them and how they're rifled. There's more to share here, but I'll hold up here for now....


-button vs cut rifled barrels: So, this is where I've seen the most popcorn-worthy internet discussions and those believing a cut rifled barrel works for 22LR get blackballed in certain circles. "Hi, my name is Mike and I've been blackballed for believing a cut rifled barrel performs at a high level of consistency and accuracy when chambered in 22LR." And guess what....I don't care, because results are results and bs is bs. Of course, this is where I'd hear (not on SH mind you), "if you look at the national results of who's winning what in the BR world, it's always a button barrel!" And I typically hear this in all capital letters on the internet or some old guy that smells like ginger snaps spraying spittle as he speaks very loudly. I generally respond with the question, "do you ever wonder why more red cars get speeding tickets?" Very simple, there are more red cars on the road, so statistically speaking, it stands to reason that more would get pulled over. Simple math will dictate, if you have 100 shooters in a BR match and 85 of them are using button barrels, how many of each will end up in the top 10? Couple this with the belief amongst various disciplines that it's just not possible for a cut rifled barrel to perform with rimfire and you'll quickly understand why there's 85 shooters in a 100 shooter match using button rifled barrels. It really does boil down to what has been construed as conventional wisdom for a very long time.

So, let's dig into this button vs cut thing a little further but I'll do it in the form of questions....What tenon diameter do you typically see in receivers used for Benchrest? Given the starting diameter of the barrel blank, how much does the bore change while turning the tenon down to .750" with a button blank? How much does it change in a cut blank? Given what happens at the front of the chamber based on this change in bore, how many rounds does it take to clean up the anomaly in front of the chamber? Are you ever really able to clean up the anomaly? Does this condition change between cut rifled and button rifled barreling processes? What material do you see this happen most (provided it actually happens), chromoly or stainless steel? Now, taking all this into account, do you see this anomaly with a larger tenon diameter, say, 1.062? Last question: How many BR actions use a tenon diameter of 1.062? Answer these questions and you're pretty far down the road to understanding one of the reasons that it really doesn't matter when you compare apples to apples.

Taper Lapped Bore vs Non-Taper Lapped Bore: What a joke....when I've asked a few "big names" (one of whom wrote a book) why one would do this, I either never get an answer or I get the same regurgitated info commonly referred to in various circles. One of whom I've come to respect was the only one to offer an honest, arrogant free answer and it was, "I don't know." From all the testing I've done, I can't come up with a single good reason that lapping a flaw into your bore is a good idea. First, how do you control the outcome barrel to barrel? What do you do when you lap too much? How do you know you lapped too much? How do you know the lapping is concentric or some esophageal feature wasn't lapped into the bore? Post lapping, what size bore are you starting with at the breech and how does this affect chambering? If there's anyone that gives an answer to any of these questions without using very expensive equipment they're not being honest with you. Basically, taper lapping a bore is always a guess. And guess what else, I've seen terrible barrels from companies that are focused on quantities; their end result only needing to resemble a barrel, shoot really well. Not for successive shots, but surprisingly well for some number of shots before having to sit for a while before they'll do something close to the same thing again. So, how does one tightly control the outcome from one barrel to the next, one rifle to the next, etc? One simple answer that's not so simple....process control. Do the same thing the same way every time and the end result will be the same. Sounds simple enough, right? Well, it's not, hence the reason the belief that taper lapped bores make a big difference. I'll stop there....

Chambers: chambers are cool, love working on them, designing them, etc., and one of my favorite rimfire chambers is the Winchester 52D. The reason I'm not using it at Vudoo is because it was designed strictly for single shot use and while I'm ok with using it in my personal repeaters, it ain't cool if we ship a rifle that won't extract a loaded round. So, I used the 52D as the basis of the 22LR RAVAGE chamber used at Vudoo. The RAVAGE chamber is a match chamber by it's very dimensions, being only slightly longer than the 52D chamber (the 52D is the shortest/tightest of all match chambers), but where it differs is the length and angle of the lead, which is how we're able to extract and eject a loaded round but still have the bullet where it needs to be for superior accuracy. Based on a few recent discoveries, I'm working on a couple new chambers but this will take a while before I'm ready to share specific details. For the BR builds I'll be doing in the lab, I'll be using the 52D chamber while I test various barrels (Vudoo, Shilen and Muller). This is where I'll be calling on JBell for a bit of third party testing....

I appreciate the opportunity to speak without a filter about things a lot of people are passionate about. Hopefully this has helped and hopefully the responses in all caps and ginger snap laden breathe will be kept to a minimum. Although, on SH, I say this in jest, it is real elsewhere :).


MB
 
Last edited:
Mike,

First off thank you for taking the time to reply, I very much appreciate it!

I agree with you on all the points about button vs cut barrels. I have never seen how button rifling can provide any benefit over a cut rifled barrel for these 22lr bullets but not provide any for a centerfire (and usually not preform as well with centerfires). I have always preferred cut barrels as IMO the process is more precisely controlled and less “damage” or stress is done to the steel. So why wouldn’t a cut barrel be every bit and even better for the 22lr.

I see your point on the choking the bore. That is an excellent way of wording it “lapping a flaw into the bore”. I think you nailed it right there, if done well then it will shoot great but the chances of it are slim or the margin for error is higher. Like I said I was a believer until I got to test some of these Vudoo’s with the Ace and Bartlein barrels, the proof is truly on the paper...

I think what we are deal with here is people trying to set themselves apart by offering a “feature“ that really isn’t. Which is supported by habit, after all we as humans are creatures of habit and change is hard especially if we have had good results doing things one way for a long time. I am with you and look forward to seeing and shooting what you and VGW has in store for us in the future. If we are not changing we are not improving we are only maintaining at best...
 
^^^^ ....and once again, THIS is why Vudoo has turned the .22 rimfire world upside down and shaken it by the ankles until all the "that's the way it's always been" falls on the floor to be swept into the dustbin of history.

Thanks Downhill, very much appreciated....we're definitely not standing still.

MB
 
Mike,

First off thank you for taking the time to reply, I very much appreciate it!

I agree with you on all the points about button vs cut barrels. I have never seen how button rifling can provide any benefit over a cut rifled barrel for these 22lr bullets but not provide any for a centerfire (and usually not preform as well with centerfires). I have always preferred cut barrels as IMO the process is more precisely controlled and less “damage” or stress is done to the steel. So why wouldn’t a cut barrel be every bit and even better for the 22lr.

I see your point on the choking the bore. That is an excellent way of wording it “lapping a flaw into the bore”. I think you nailed it right there, if done well then it will shoot great but the chances of it are slim or the margin for error is higher. Like I said I was a believer until I got to test some of these Vudoo’s with the Ace and Bartlein barrels, the proof is truly on the paper...

I think what we are deal with here is people trying to set themselves apart by offering a “feature“ that really isn’t. Which is supported by habit, after all we as humans are creatures of habit and change is hard especially if we have had good results doing things one way for a long time. I am with you and look forward to seeing and shooting what you and VGW has in store for us in the future. If we are not changing we are not improving we are only maintaining at best...

Thanks JB, much appreciated. I'll be in touch after SHOT to get you down to the lab to build up a few cool things.

MB
 
  • Like
Reactions: camocorvette
JB, I've always appreciated how you go about dissecting things in an effort to sift through what's real vs what's thought to be real. And again, it speaks to my greater appreciation for SH Rimfire Section because you just can't bring these topics up on other forums without a lot of clickety-clack on the keyboards of those subscribing to things they've never questioned. However, it was rather cool to see a very well known Small Bore Champion go against the grain on another forum about the benefits of slugging, taper lapped button barrels, etc. So, the more we shoot and question the anecdotal information by being curious enough to test the boundaries laid in place and subscribed to for reasons no one can demonstrate through qualified data, the more we advance and overall, benefit the shooting community. It wasn't long ago that you'd get laughed at for shooting at something beyond 50 yards with a 22LR, but now, things are different and the gear has evolved.

I'll paste in your list and offer what I've experienced over the years, mostly with filter off, but to some, what I'm going to say will go against the grain as it pertains to rimfire. All of what I'll say has culminated in what are the rifles we ship everyday, but having said this, I'm still learning, so the Vudoo's will continue to push the envelope. What's most interesting about this are the number of those that told me years ago that I'd never get a 22LR to do what it's doing and no one would pay that much for a 22 rifle because, "it's just a 22!" So, again, thanks JB for being genuine and for supporting the 6X5 thread that has served as a huge data collection point that tracks the evolution of what's happening in rimfire performance.

-fast twist barrels: It wasn't long ago that no one really cared about the BC of the 40 grain projectile used by Lapua, Eley, etc., but now, Lapua publishes their BC (not sure if Eley does). This is because the community started stretching the legs of the 22LR and Lapua was the first to respond by teaming up with us prior to intro'ing the V-22 to market. They developed two custom drag curves and made it available in the Lapua and Applied Ballistics apps so we could calculate firing solutions the same way we do for centerfire. Looking at the BC and doing the math to determine how much of it we're using by way of the twist rate, it became clear that out of the available .172, only .120-ish was being used with a 16 twist barrel. Working the math backwards, the solution for using all the available BC in the 40 grain bullet was considerably faster, I was astounded and questioned whether I did it correctly....so, I did it again and came up with the same answer. So, we made a few barrels. Two barrels were fit to two different actions but not at the same time. The first barrel was 18" and ultimately, it shot like crap, which was discouraging. Digging a little deeper and creating a few models to look at angular velocity vs muzzle velocity, etc., the conclusion was the barrel needed to be longer at this particular twist rate. I chambered up a barrel finished at 22" and tested initially at 50 yards. The improvement over the 18" barrel was vast....I remember looking at the first five shot group and saying out loud, "son-of-a-bitch!" After a few more groups, I handed the rifle off to Bob (whom is a sponsored shooter and does the testing based on our specific protocol) to shoot the strings of 500 round tests. The first 500 rounds is broken down into 100, five shot groups at 50 yards. Just over 90% of the groups were beautifully round and measured just over the diameter of the bullet. Amazing....but it got better. The groups at 100 were easily half the size of average groups from a 16 twist barrel (16 twist barrel was 18"). I continued to shoot this rifle for over a year and performed a silent test in September at the NRA World Championships (teamed with Lapua for the third consecutive year). We had numerous targets, all steel plates at varying distances. I took numerous prototype rifles for the masses to shoot so I could observe third party testing without the shooters knowing what was new/different and I called wind on every target for three days in a row. The groups from the fast twist barrel at distance were amazingly small and I had to call wind differently compared to the slower twist barrels. A week later, I handed the rifle off to Daniel Horner for a longer term test, but I had enough data to make more barrels ranging from my single digit favorite up to 15 twist. Bottom line is, the fast twist barrel is an absolute superstar at 22".

-barrel length: For the most part, barrel length is aesthetic when it comes to most rifle builds these days. Chassis systems with longer forends/foretubes typically need longer barrels to look right, etc. The saving grace is, in Rimfire PRS and NRL22, this really doesn't matter with a 16 twist barrel at the distances targets are engaged. A hit is a hit and the 16 twist barrels have done an excellent job and I consider these barrels to be the de-facto standard across all shooting disciplines. Generally, I've advised many ordering Vudoo's that desire to compete in these games not go longer than 20". This is because they need to move with the rifle and get into and out of position quickly and there's a slight velocity advantage for the "hit-is-a-hit" approach to the COF. Now, when I say what I'm about to say, please don't blow our phones up to change orders because I assure you with rifles in the build que, the barrel on your build sheet is exactly what you should go with. In all the test rifles I build I use a 22" barrel that's cut and crowned without muzzle threads. The reason I do this is for consistency of data and to impose controls when comparing different barrel brands when we're asked if we'll consider using so and so barrel. If/when I tell so and so barrel maker their barrel didn't pass protocols, it's not ambiguous or contaminated with "construed conventional wisdom" that's lurked around the rimfire world for years. I also don't go longer than 22" because I see velocities fall off and I need to have clear indications of lot differences in the ammo I test. The only time I'll go longer than 22" is for very specific performance criteria dictated by Benchrest, but that's not always a given. Some barrels won't perform at the longer lengths but I've not seen the presence or lack of a choke point change that at all. Barrels are barrels, they're all different and they always will be regardless of who makes them and how they're rifled. There's more to share here, but I'll hold up here for now....


-button vs cut rifled barrels: So, this is where I've seen the most popcorn-worthy internet discussions and those believing a cut rifled barrel works for 22LR get blackballed in certain circles. "Hi, my name is Mike and I've been blackballed for believing a cut rifled barrel performs at a high level of consistency and accuracy when chambered in 22LR." And guess what....I don't care, because results are results and bs is bs. Of course, this is where I'd hear (not on SH mind you), "if you look at the national results of who's winning what in the BR world, it's always a button barrel!" And I typically hear this in all capital letters on the internet or some old guy that smells like ginger snaps spraying spittle as he speaks very loudly. I generally respond with the question, "do you ever wonder why more red cars get speeding tickets?" Very simple, there are more red cars on the road, so statistically speaking, it stands to reason that more would get pulled over. Simple math will dictate, if you have 100 shooters in a BR match and 85 of them are using button barrels, how many of each will end up in the top 10? Couple this with the belief amongst various disciplines that it's just not possible for a cut rifled barrel to perform with rimfire and you'll quickly understand why there's 85 shooters in a 100 shooter match using button rifled barrels. It really does boil down to what has been construed as conventional wisdom for a very long time.

So, let's dig into this button vs cut thing a little further but I'll do it in the form of questions....What tenon diameter do you typically see in receivers used for Benchrest? Given the starting diameter of the barrel blank, how much does the bore change while turning the tenon down to .750" with a button blank? How much does it change in a cut blank? Given what happens at the front of the chamber based on this change in bore, how many rounds does it take to clean up the anomaly in front of the chamber? Are you ever really able to clean up the anomaly? Does this condition change between cut rifled and button rifled barreling processes? What material do you see this happen most (provided it actually happens), chromoly or stainless steel? Now, taking all this into account, do you see this anomaly with a larger tenon diameter, say, 1.062? Last question: How many BR actions use a tenon diameter of 1.062? Answer these questions and you're pretty far down the road to understanding one of the reasons that it really doesn't matter when you compare apples to apples.

Taper Lapped Bore vs Non-Taper Lapped Bore: What a joke....when I've asked a few "big names" (one of whom wrote a book) why one would do this, I either never get an answer or I get the same regurgitated info commonly referred to in various circles. One of whom I've come to respect was the only one to offer an honest, arrogant free answer and it was, "I don't know." From all the testing I've done, I can't come up with a single good reason that lapping a flaw into your bore is a good idea. First, how do you control the outcome barrel to barrel? What do you do when you lap too much? How do you know you lapped too much? How do you know the lapping is concentric or some esophageal feature wasn't lapped into the bore? Post lapping, what size bore are you starting with at the breech and how does this affect chambering? If there's anyone that gives an answer to any of these questions without using very expensive equipment they're not being honest with you. Basically, taper lapping a bore is always a guess. And guess what else, I've seen terrible barrels from companies that are focused on quantities; their end result only needing to resemble a barrel, shoot really well. Not for successive shots, but surprisingly well for some number of shots before having to sit for a while before they'll do something close to the same thing again. So, how does one tightly control the outcome from one barrel to the next, one rifle to the next, etc? One simple answer that's not so simple....process control. Do the same thing the same way every time and the end result will be the same. Sounds simple enough, right? Well, it's not, hence the reason the belief that taper lapped bores make a big difference. I'll stop there....

Chambers: chambers are cool, love working on them, designing them, etc., and one of my favorite rimfire chambers is the Winchester 52D. The reason I'm not using it at Vudoo is because it was designed strictly for single shot use and while I'm ok with using it in my personal repeaters, it ain't cool if we ship a rifle that won't extract a loaded round. So, I used the 52D as the basis of the 22LR RAVAGE chamber used at Vudoo. The RAVAGE chamber is a match chamber by it's very dimensions, being only slightly longer than the 52D chamber (the 52D is the shortest/tightest of all match chambers), but where it differs is the length and angle of the lead, which is how we're able to extract and eject a loaded round but still have the bullet where it needs to be for superior accuracy. Based on a few recent discoveries, I'm working on a couple new chambers but this will take a while before I'm ready to share specific details. For the BR builds I'll be doing in the lab, I'll be using the 52D chamber while I test various barrels (Vudoo, Shilen and Muller). This is where I'll be calling on JBell for a bit of third party testing....

I appreciate the opportunity to speak without a filter about things a lot of people are passionate about. Hopefully this has helped and hopefully the responses in all caps and ginger snap laden breathe will be kept to a minimum. Although, on SH, I say this in jest, it is real elsewhere :).


MB
This is a fantastic response to the science and art behind what it takes to build a rifle and even more the "lowly" 22. MB thanks for speaking candidly about what it takes to make it work, and the work you're doing with regard to twist rate. I am looking forward to what may come.
 
This is a fantastic response to the science and art behind what it takes to build a rifle and even more the "lowly" 22. MB thanks for speaking candidly about what it takes to make it work, and the work you're doing with regard to twist rate. I am looking forward to what may come.

Thanks Dude, much appreciated.

MB
 
I think I remember JD Jones of SSK fame talking about playing with faster twist barrels for a 22 rimfire way back. Have to get ahold of him and see what he found. Nice that the rimfire world has awakened again and is pursuing it's real potential. I've always felt it was one of the most underrated rounds ever.

Topstrap
 
  • Like
Reactions: camocorvette
Back in the olden days, that would be before 2000. Colt and others made conversion kits for AR 15 to shoot 22LR. The twist on those old rifles was 1-12, then it went to 1-8 comerical and 1-7 Nato.
 
Probably far from it Rick but very much appreciated. Reach out anytime if you need anything....

MB
MB:

I do not know about need but definitely want a VLR-22, Vudoo Long Range in 22LR. After you have completed your testing to determine the optimal action, barrel, trigger, stock/chassis I want to order one. You have said naught about the optimal barrel contour, perhaps does not matter so MTU-V for me. In addition perhaps a Vudoo/Flavio trigger with pull force from 100 gr to 1000 gr? Perhaps in time for Christmas 2020?

Rick
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rate_of_Twist
MB:

I do not know about need but definitely want a VLR-22, Vudoo Long Range in 22LR. After you have completed your testing to determine the optimal action, barrel, trigger, stock/chassis I want to order one. You have said naught about the optimal barrel contour, perhaps does not matter so MTU-V for me. In addition perhaps a Vudoo/Flavio trigger with pull force from 100 gr to 1000 gr? Perhaps in time for Christmas 2020?

Rick

Thanks Rick, I truly believe we'll be going down this path in 2020 and using the V/F trigger is a no brainer. I'll keep everyone posted as I'll definitely be back on the fast twist project right after SHOT.

MB
 
  • Like
Reactions: deltawiskey
Thanks Rick, I truly believe we'll be going down this path in 2020 and using the V/F trigger is a no brainer. I'll keep everyone posted as I'll definitely be back on the fast twist project right after SHOT.

MB
Forgot to add, presume Center-X will be the ammo.

In order to make a contribution to SH other than words, I have ordered a mechanical rest and a competition rear bag, competition as opposed to tactical rear bags. Have also ordered a NF 7-35 scope so should have reasonable gear to do accuracy determination at 50, 100, and 200 yd for my current Vudoos. Also mornings in late Spring, Summer and Early Fall the air is cool to warm, dry, clear and dead calm so no to minimal environmental effects on accuracy. Weak link will be my Benchrest Marksmanship since have not done it. However, if you want an "Average Joe" to do beta testing on the VLR-22 I am volunteering.:)

Rick
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RAVAGE88
Forgot to add, presume Center-X will be the ammo.

In order to make a contribution to SH other than words, I have ordered a mechanical rest and a competition rear bag, competition as opposed to tactical rear bags. Have also ordered a NF 7-35 scope so should have reasonable gear to do accuracy determination at 50, 100, and 200 yd for my current Vudoos. Also mornings in late Spring, Summer and Early Fall the air is cool to warm, dry, clear and dead calm so no to minimal environmental effects on accuracy. Weak link will be my Benchrest Marksmanship since have not done it. However, if you want an "Average Joe" to do beta testing on the VLR-22 I am volunteering.:)

Rick

That's good news. The first few Vudoo/Flavio triggers shipped from Italy a couple days ago. Anxious to get them up and running....

MB
 
  • Like
Reactions: littlepod
I think I remember JD Jones of SSK fame talking about playing with faster twist barrels for a 22 rimfire way back. Have to get ahold of him and see what he found. Nice that the rimfire world has awakened again and is pursuing it's real potential. I've always felt it was one of the most underrated rounds ever.

Topstrap
I do not believe you will be able to contact JD any longer. He has passed.
 
JD got back to ma a bit ago, he said contrary to his many reported deaths he is still alive and kicking. Good news, lots of knowledge he can still share.

He also said that TC, Freedom Arms and SSK we're testing best twist rate and independently found 1 - 14 to be the best. Was playing with different Chambers but didn't pursue that alot other than to say some were good and some weren't, depended on bullet used but no magic one fits all.

Topstrap
 
Last edited:
just spoke to Bartlein and they said they don’t do faster than 1-15 and don’t recommend it and do on.

they could do a 1-10 but they need to grind a tool for 250$

So where do you guys get faster twist?
 
I was just looking around and saw McGowen offers a 1 in 9 twist 10/22 barrel. Looks like this isn't anything new. There are threads on other forums talking about them 10 years ago, but the barrels are intended for the 60gr Aguila projectiles, and no one talks about shooting farther than 50 yards.

Looks like I may have to swap out my Kidd barrel to try one of these out!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: RAVAGE88
just spoke to Bartlein and they........

So where do you guys get faster twist?


Hart barrels offers a 14tw...I've been contemplating trying one out in a longer length of about 24".....it's only money right?
 
I was just looking around and saw McGowen offers a 1 in 9 twist 10/22 barrel. Looks like this isn't anything new. There are threads on other forums talking about them 10 years ago, but the barrels are intended for the 60gr Aguila projectiles, and no one talks about shooting farther than 50 yards.

Looks like I may have to swap out my Kidd barrel to try one of these out!!
From what I have “read” fast twist rates need 22” or longer for non-sub ammo. I don’t think the McGowen comes longer than 20”

Just sharing what I have “read” might not be true As I have not been able to test yet.
 
From what I have “read” fast twist rates need 22” or longer for non-sub ammo. I don’t think the McGowen comes longer than 20”

Just sharing what I have “read” might not be true As I have not been able to test yet.


They make them up to 22"