So I'm ready to lot test ammo for my Gen 2 Vudoo. My dilemma is that I've got some Tenex that the gun loves and I have some Midas and Center X that shoots so-so. Killough's will only test Eley to 50m and of course Lapua tests out to 100. Obviously, I want the best bang for my buck at distance. Can the magic lot of Lapua be found that can shoot as well as the Eley? The few dollars difference between Midas and Tenex isn't a deterrent.
- Thread starter SourMash
- Start date
Of course the answer is maybe ... maybe not.
I'm not being smart. This is the obvious truth and if this thread runs three pages I don't think my opinion will be changed.
I'm not being smart. This is the obvious truth and if this thread runs three pages I don't think my opinion will be changed.
Isn't Tenex supposed to "optimized" for 50 y/m? Maybe that's why they only test it to 50? I've only run SK through my Three 60, if/when prices for Lapua come back down that may change, but SK has been doing well.
I've tested a lot of Eley Tenex/Match a lot of Lapua Center-X/Midas. The right lot of Tenex/Match always outperforms Lapua at distance. I find actually my Lapua ammo groups the best at 50. And my Eley ammo groups the best at everything else.
My lot tested Lapua ammo, which will do < 1/4" at 50y, put up consistent 3-3.5" groups at 200y.
Some of my tested Eley is putting up groups at the 1.5-2" at 200y.
All these are 10shot groups. I think 5 shots leave too much chance to "a good string".
My lot tested Lapua ammo, which will do < 1/4" at 50y, put up consistent 3-3.5" groups at 200y.
Some of my tested Eley is putting up groups at the 1.5-2" at 200y.
All these are 10shot groups. I think 5 shots leave too much chance to "a good string".
I've used all 4 of the high end 22lr brands.
The benchrest grades of Eley, Laupua/SK, RWS and Fiocchi Italia.
All produced similar accuracy at 200 yards.
Variations in results were not due to brand,
but because of variations in production on the assembly lines.
Differences in lot quality are to blame for changes in results, not brand preference.
The benchrest grades of Eley, Laupua/SK, RWS and Fiocchi Italia.
All produced similar accuracy at 200 yards.
Variations in results were not due to brand,
but because of variations in production on the assembly lines.
Differences in lot quality are to blame for changes in results, not brand preference.
I have really wanted to get some Lapua to shoot good at distance because I feel the wax on the Eley hurts it in the cold weather. So far nothing I have tested is even close to Match/Tenex. Kinda along with what littlepod stated above 
even if the Tenex doesn’t shoot as small at 50 it seems to shine at distance. What I have found is basically anything Match/Tenex can be shot with the same dope for practice and save the really good stuff for matches.
even if the Tenex doesn’t shoot as small at 50 it seems to shine at distance. What I have found is basically anything Match/Tenex can be shot with the same dope for practice and save the really good stuff for matches. I can't stand the wax in the cold either. Since we aren't shooting benchrest I have been okay with the target sizes at distance with Lapua. I've also noticed that my Lapua ammo is affected less by the wind too.I have really wanted to get some Lapua to shoot good at distance because I feel the wax on the Eley hurts it in the cold weather. So far nothing I have tested is even close to Match/Tenex. Kinda along with what littlepod stated above
No one is putting 2" steel at 200 in a match so I don't feel like I'm missing anything shooting Lapua.
I haven't had any failures with Lapua yet but I've had some with Eley. Just need to pay attention and clean more with the wax build up.
We definitely shoot some targets that I don’t feel comfortable with at distance with any Lapua I have tested so far. I plan on sending one of the rifles to the test center soon and maybe that will change. Planning on testing RWS soon too. Headed to Killoughs in the morning
Last edited:
I think you'll find that no one can answer your OP but yourself. Ammo that works for me or anyone else may or may not work for you! One thing I will say is this. Don't listen to anyone that says flat nose Eley won't shoot past 50yds. I can't speak for distances past 200 as that's the limit of my remfire shooting but out to 200 the right lot of 10x or Black box will outshoot or at least shoot with any other brand. The last golf ball match I won with 8 hits out of 10 shots at 200yds. Black box Eley. A golf ball is considerably smaller than the 6 and 8 inch plates most shoot at that range,
I’m a Lapua man, but if I were shooting past 100 I’d choose Eley. I shoot ARA where Lapua dominates, but when I stretch it out to 200-300 yards the same Eley that sucks at 50 yards shoots better.
Are there lots of Lapua that will shoot as well as the Eley? Of course there are such lots. The real question is: can they be found? This can only be answered by testing to find out first hand.
Any shooter testing for long distance would be well advised to test at those distances. Why? Different lots will experience varying rates of dispersion as distance increases. More specifically, different lots of the same variety of ammo -- whether it's Eley Tenex or Lapua Midas+, for example -- will experience less dispersion with distance than others.
In other words, it's not a question of brand of ammo, but of lot.
So cold here I was plugging in the heaters on the snowmobiles so they would start.Also meant to mention that I don’t have to deal with the cold that y’all have. Our “cold” is like “mild” to most of you.
Now that my irrelevant trivia is out of the way ... Good luck and enjoy. You are buying quality ammo that will likely, at the minimum, be adequate for your purposes. And maybe, every once in a while you'll get lucky.
Provide a response worth reading...or you're just a troll.
Can an ammo be "optimized" for a certain distance?
If the relatively close distances where every ammo will perform well are disregarded, will ammo that performs well at, say, 50 yards/meters continue to perform well as distance increases? Is there something that can affect the way a bullet travels downrange that will cause it to loose accuracy or have a degradation in it's projected flight path?
Good performance at closer distances is the first criteria for good performance at further distances. In other words, if an ammo shoots poorly at 50, it can hardly be expected to get better or improve with distance. To illustrate, an ammo that shoots over 1 MOA at 50 shouldn't be expected to shoot better further out.
To experience better performance further out than closer in would require a consistent convergence or a coming together of trajectories rather than the expected continuing dispersion. On those rare occasions when an ammo performs better MOA-wise at 100 than at 50, it's rare and not predictable. Of course valid comparisons between the two distances must be made with the very same rounds of ammo, something possible only at testing facilities where the results are recorded at 50 and 100 for the same rounds.
The second criteria for good performance at longer distances, is stability and predictability of bullet flight. Not all bullets of the same variety of ammo -- whether it's Eley Tenex or Match or Team or Lapua X-Act or Midas + or Center X -- are exactly identical. When it comes to accuracy performance, a key area of difference is in bullet center of gravity variation between lots and individual rounds. The problem is that it's very difficult to produce lead .22LR bullets that are perfectly ballanced. Offsets in bullet center of gravity result in varying rates of dispersion between lots. In other words, some lots have more perfect or identically uniform bullets than others with the result that these lots have smaller rates of dispersion as distance grows.
Unfortunately offsets in bullet center of gravity are not easily measured. The simplest way to identify them is to test. And to further complicate the problem, an ammo lot that shoots well at distance (and closer) in one particular rifle may not perform similarly in another. The reason for this is that each rifle may contribute to center of gravity offset differences by the potentially unique way its chamber/lead/bore contributes to bullet obturation.
If the relatively close distances where every ammo will perform well are disregarded, will ammo that performs well at, say, 50 yards/meters continue to perform well as distance increases? Is there something that can affect the way a bullet travels downrange that will cause it to loose accuracy or have a degradation in it's projected flight path?
Good performance at closer distances is the first criteria for good performance at further distances. In other words, if an ammo shoots poorly at 50, it can hardly be expected to get better or improve with distance. To illustrate, an ammo that shoots over 1 MOA at 50 shouldn't be expected to shoot better further out.
To experience better performance further out than closer in would require a consistent convergence or a coming together of trajectories rather than the expected continuing dispersion. On those rare occasions when an ammo performs better MOA-wise at 100 than at 50, it's rare and not predictable. Of course valid comparisons between the two distances must be made with the very same rounds of ammo, something possible only at testing facilities where the results are recorded at 50 and 100 for the same rounds.
The second criteria for good performance at longer distances, is stability and predictability of bullet flight. Not all bullets of the same variety of ammo -- whether it's Eley Tenex or Match or Team or Lapua X-Act or Midas + or Center X -- are exactly identical. When it comes to accuracy performance, a key area of difference is in bullet center of gravity variation between lots and individual rounds. The problem is that it's very difficult to produce lead .22LR bullets that are perfectly ballanced. Offsets in bullet center of gravity result in varying rates of dispersion between lots. In other words, some lots have more perfect or identically uniform bullets than others with the result that these lots have smaller rates of dispersion as distance grows.
Unfortunately offsets in bullet center of gravity are not easily measured. The simplest way to identify them is to test. And to further complicate the problem, an ammo lot that shoots well at distance (and closer) in one particular rifle may not perform similarly in another. The reason for this is that each rifle may contribute to center of gravity offset differences by the potentially unique way its chamber/lead/bore contributes to bullet obturation.
What distance does the vast majority of Eley Tenex get used for in competition? Care to take a guess?
Are you TurboTrout 2.0?
You're right, and the same can be said for Lapua Midas. These Two companies along with RWS care very little as to what happens with their ammo past 50yds/meters, and don't care at all past 100!
I never said it couldn't be used at distances other than 50y/m, but @Turbo2 decided come in gums a flappin' and try to be smart ass, with nothing to offer.
Maybe they'll start caring how it does beyond 100 someday, but it wouldn't be wise to hold ones' breath. LOL.
What distance? The very same distance the vast majority of Lapua Midas + and X-Act are used -- 50 yards. Both .22LR BR shooters and 3P shooters shoot 50 yards or meters and they use more of these ammos than shooters in other disciplines.
It's hardly the case that ammo manufacturers don't care how their products do beyond 50 or 100. It's not that they don't want to, or are, indifferent about ammo performance as distance increases.
The majority of lots of Eley Tenex and Match and Lapua X-Act and Midas + have the small ES required for good results at distance. But that's not all that's required for good long distance results.
The thing that's important to remember is that it's difficult to manufacture great numbers of lots of ammo having well balanced bullets that will be able to perform well as distance increases. Such lots do get made, but not each lot of top tier match ammo will have bullets with as small a center of gravity offset as possible. Simply put, some lots of each variety of top tier match ammo have bullets that are better than others as distance increases.
There are lots that have both characteristics -- small ES and bullets that are more perfectly balanced. But these are usually among the first lots to be selected by discriminating BR and 3P shooters, the very people who shoot regularly at 50 yards/meters.
Those shooters who are focused on 100 yards and beyond must be just as discriminating and recognize that competition for limited supplies of ammo is considerable. No matter what make or variety of match ammo, they can't expect to find random lots of any kind that are a good bet to perform well at distance.
Good lots of match ammo will shoot well at 50. But not all lots that shoot well at 50 will shoot well as distance increases. Only some of them will shoot well at 100 and beyond.
I just saw your question as I was posting. I don't know the answer as it's above my pay grade.
Someone who may know is Landy (poster HuskerP7M8). His posts over the years have informed and illuminated the issue of center of balance problem of .22LR ammo.
From my experience, Lapua ammo has had higher ES and SD than my Eley ammo on average. This is with Center-X and Midas. I am generally getting an SD of 8 and an ES of 28. With Eley ammo, it has been an SD of 6 and an ES of 20. The ES translates very much to 3" groups at 200yd, and 2" groups at 200y for Eley.
But at 50y, my Lapua ammo always groups more consistently smaller. I don't know why. But it does. Even though ES/SD are larger.
But at 50y, my Lapua ammo always groups more consistently smaller. I don't know why. But it does. Even though ES/SD are larger.
At 50 the SD/ES isn't going to show up as much when they are that close to begin with*. But when you stretch it out more it has a greater effect. I don't know if I'm right or wrong on that, just my opinion. I have seen a lot of posts on various forums with people claiming they have ammo that's consistently poor at 50, and greatly improves at longer distances...I find that very hard to believe, but I wasn't there.
As far as EPS (flat nose with a nipple) vs LRN, maybe Eley does a better job sorting their ammo, or because of the shape of the nose it doesn't get "beat up" as much going through the manufacturing line? Maybe the nipple disrupts the air to go around the nose? Again, I don't know.
*Much like folks (myself included) that post a 10 round ragged hole at 25 yards...the ammo really doesn't matter as much punching paper that close. Is "bulk" ammo going to do as well at that as true "match grade" ammo, probably not, but the difference(s) is too little for the nekid eye to determine, you'd need a micrometer to really measure the spread, as long as it wasn't a shooter making an error...I know exactly when it's me not the equipment/ammo when that happens, but some folks will still blame it on the ammo when they have a bias.
If you think about it logically, any aerodynamic forces that cause a projectile to fly to the target with excess longitudinal and lateral movement around its axes will cause an increase in drag coefficients and change both G1/G7 ballistic coefficients for the worse.
Think yawing, coning, precession, epicyclic curve, etc.
Cg Offset is one factor that will change those aerodynamic forces and cause harm, but there are many other variables that will do the same.
The last time I calculated drag coefficients for RF ammo in my ballistic tunnel maybe 10 years ago, I included a fairly large sample of RF where I intentionally induced Cg Offset and observed the calculated G1 BC degraded significantly.
Intuitively, I’m fairly certain what will happen at distances beyond 50yds/meters with RF, and anyone should know exactly what happens with CF jacketed projectiles with very little research, but I don’t like to hypothesize/theorize about RF because I haven’t actually tested it and proved it to at least a 2 sigma level.
Landy
In my experience, G1/G7 don't translate well to .22lr. It's better to use a chrono and get DOPE at known distances, then plug that into your calculations/computer. Calculators suggest 0.125 BC for .22lr, that never lines up with what I get on the range, I'm at 0.156-0.159 BC out of my Vudoo, in order for the Kestrel 5700 Elite to predict what I need to dial out to 400.
I have seen ammo that groups great at 50, fall apart at 100 and 200..I have also seen the groups that shot “well” at 50 but not the best, shoot best at 100 and 200..The only way I could explain what I was seeing was the bullets that shot “well” lost less accuracy for some reason than the “best” bullets did at long distances.. The center of gravity issue would explain this. Usually the best is the best no matter the distance for me but, there are times when that is not true..
I should post the nasty message you sent me. Once again, you've contributed exactly ZERO to this thread...probably to the forum in general. I stick by my assessment of your character. Are you a teenager, trying to type tough behind the keyboard?
Last edited:
For any one who can't get enough of this check out Eric Cortina/Believe the Target w/Caylen8541. At about 1;20.
I would find it very interesting if some one tried a longer and therefore heavier round nose lead projectile with a little more powder since there is room in the case for both. Might need a beefed up receiver.
Just because I have to tell someone ... I kicked ass in the wind this afternoon. Three days ago I was the kickee.
I would find it very interesting if some one tried a longer and therefore heavier round nose lead projectile with a little more powder since there is room in the case for both. Might need a beefed up receiver.
Just because I have to tell someone ... I kicked ass in the wind this afternoon. Three days ago I was the kickee.
The last 22 match I shot went out to 400 yards. I tied for first on that stage with 8 hits out of 10 shots. I was pretty proud. Eley Tenex.
nice work, I'd be pleased with half of that.
Can I ask how you came up with a 0.125 BC?
In my live fire testing in my ballistic tunnel, nearly all of my data was acquired with true match ammo (Center-X/Midas/X-Act, as well as Eley Match/Tenex). My calculated G1 BC was almost equal to what you said had to be input into the Kestral to true your DOPE, thus my question concerning your 0.125 BC.
Just curious,
Landy
BC is a factor of velocity so it's not just one number. As the round travels further it is going slower and the BC gets lower.
The published BC of .172 is for 50m. At 350 yards I think the Doppler showed the BC as .11.
For local range matches I generally tell people .137 for 200 and in and it will work well enough.
For long distance then I look to doing DSF with a Kestrel Elite or using a Doppler curve.
The published BC of .172 is for 50m. At 350 yards I think the Doppler showed the BC as .11.
For local range matches I generally tell people .137 for 200 and in and it will work well enough.
For long distance then I look to doing DSF with a Kestrel Elite or using a Doppler curve.
The 0.125 BC isn't "my" number. Ballistic calculators use that as the default for G1/G7. CCI-SV is has a "published" BC of 0.120. I could search more manufactures' "published" BC, but anyone can do that, and I don't feel like doing the leg work for a simple question. For the 0.156-0.159 BC that I use, that's using known DOPE out of my Vudoo (with SK Rifle Match and Pistol Match), and making the BC line up with what I have to dial at known distances for my Kestrel 5700 Elite. It's not a perfect science, as @littlepod laid out. Hope that helps.
Similar threads
