ammo testing

[guidolastra]

I am trying to start testing my ammo, and I would like to know if anyone has recommendations about a good and affordable rest to do so (22.LR, 50 meters). I have seen many, and the Kurt Thune test bench looks nice, but it is almost 210 EURO!
Thanks in advance

[Muffo as guest]

If i could I would use a great big vice mounted on a guge chunk of wood. A copy of a ransom is normally a safe bet if you dont want to pay the earth

[muffo as guest]

Sorry just realised you are refering to rifles

[Steve Swartz as Guest]

The best way is to shoot a ton of it under match conditions in a designed experiment.

The down side is you will have to shoot a lot of ammo to get statistically reliable results.

The up side is you will have actually answered the question you are asking . . .

Steve

[visitor]

The down side is you will have to shoot a lot of ammo to get statistically reliable results.

Steve,
I don't think the question was intended to be a math exercise leading to statistical reliability.

I'd venture to say that a test bed that leads to good shot-to-shot repeatability - consistent barrel positioning and trigger release - will give useful results, if not to a statistical certainty, with no more than 20 and likely as few as 10 rounds from any particular batch.

Exactly how many shots might you require to tell the difference between a ragged hole and something that looks like the Pleiades? How many flyers do you think quality ammo manufacturers pack in every box?

[Jordan F.]

Before I became interested in 3p type shooting I was mainly interested in benchrest. I used a Cowan rest. There are made by Joe Cowan and a group of students he teaches. Funds go to a good cause (forget exactly what it is!) and it is very nice for the money. I think they are around $210 US and are full adjustable for windage and elevation. Just make sure you get a good set of bags. i like protektor myself.

[Steve Swartz as Guest]

I was assuming the question he wanted answered was

"What ammo performs well in my gun when I shoot matches."

The only way to answer *that* question is to shoot under the same conditions you are interested in.

The "best" ammo from a vice is not the same as the best ammo from a match-legal configuration.

And

The math is the same either way; so that's irrelevant.

The point is simply that you will have more "random" variation (well, more variation due to things other than the ammo) under "real" conditions. So you will have to shoot more ammo to detect differences.

If all you are doing is shooting a bunch of five (worse yet, 3) shot groups and picking the smallest (or smallest average) group sizes . . . like a lot of shooting magazines do . . . you won't really be generating any useful information.

I'm just (humbly) trying to prevent another shooter from wasting a lot of time and money to end up with no better information tha they had in the first place.

And the "statistics" involved really aren't that difficult; yoiu just have to know what to measure and why.

Steve

[guidolastra]

So, Steve what would be your recommendation regarding this? Recently. In "the ways of the rifle" book I am reading, it is somehow suggested that highest scores and medals are may be more dependent on being able to have access to the best ammo batches, and not so much shooting performance per se. Basically it is suggested that only a minority of shooters have access to good-performing ammo, while the rest of us can only get lower quality ammunition despite paying VERY high prices for Eley Tenex, Match, etc.... In this regard, why shoud we even bother testing?
At some point, it is frustrating that despite serious training and pricey investments in equipment, etc... your scores remain poor, and that this might be due to something out of your control, such as not having access to good ammunition. I am sure lots of people might even think of just quitting if this situation is hopeless.

[TWP]

Angie rest (iirc Newt Engle sells them) or one of Bill Earnest's rifle rests are what I use for ammo testing.

[Philadelphia]

So, Steve what would be your recommendation regarding this? Recently. In "the ways of the rifle" book I am reading, it is somehow suggested that highest scores and medals are may be more dependent on being able to have access to the best ammo batches, and not so much shooting performance per se. Basically it is suggested that only a minority of shooters have access to good-performing ammo, while the rest of us can only get lower quality ammunition despite paying VERY high prices for Eley Tenex, Match, etc.... In this regard, why shoud we even bother testing?
At some point, it is frustrating that despite serious training and pricey investments in equipment, etc... your scores remain poor, and that this might be due to something out of your control, such as not having access to good ammunition. I am sure lots of people might even think of just quitting if this situation is hopeless.

Whatever it's worth, here are some observations of the clueless (me ;) ).

On the one hand, ammo testing from a rest is irrelevant. The test is when the shooter can measure ammo performance in his or her performance, then it's time to pay up for better ammo, even in practice. It can be most self-satisfying when better quality (thus almost always pricier) ammo gives markedly better performance. Getting better at it unfortunately means some ammo snobbery out of necessity. :)

On the other hand, in terms of maybe not having access to the very best ammo, that's also irrelevant (and I'll now contradict what I said above). Test the system of gun/ammo from a rest. The shooter's goal is to outshoot or at least match rested performance offhand. If you truely compete against yourself, that goal is sufficient and like I've heard golf described, can provide a lifelong challenge where those few good days when you make it are the tease that keeps you at it.

None of this answers your question as far as what is a good rest but represents my .02 -- (I don't know which rest is best -- the rest I have cost me about $20 and works well enough to effortlessly separate which ammo is a brass wrapped turd and which shoots well enough to work with -- and also gave me confirmation that I heartily agree with the folks who tell you that shooting off a rest doesn't tell you much useful info.). ;)

[Misny]

I too would be interested in a straight answer to your question. Also, if someone is going to suggest a rifle rest, then contact information as to where one can be obtained would be beneficial.

I have never used one of these, but maybe this Caldwell Lead Sled would be a possibility. The price seems good.
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?p ... ber=152664

[TWP]

Also, if someone is going to suggest a rifle rest, then contact information as to where one can be obtained would be beneficial.

I don't have any contact info for Newt. He is a college coach in Ohio and is usually at the major matches like the JO's. Not sure if he is still selling the Angie Rest or not.

Bill Earnest can be contacted at 570-797-4872. He doesn't have a web site, but will mail you a small catalog of the stuff he makes, it is very high quality at about 1/2 the price of European stuff.

I don't think ammo shooting from a rest is irrelevant, it will give you an idea which ammo performs well in a given rifle and a proper rest will remove the shooter error.

[Steve Swartz as Guest]

. . . But the point is the "best" ammo from a rest will *not* be the best ammo from a sling . . .

(Ps put your effort into training, unless we are talking about BR events)

[rcmillerjr]

I see a lot of talk about rests, lead sleds, etc. Take a look at this one. I used to build these when I was serious into rimfire benchrest matches. I no longer build them but an excellent machinist friend of mine is still producing them. I stopped building them so that I could have some time to enoy my retirement and pursue other things.

http://www.benchrest.com/uni-rest/

Expensive, but they are top of the line and state of the art. It's like turning your rifle into a "rail gun".

The person building them now is James Verschelden and he can be contacted at dmv1220@royell.org

[wbthomas]

I've tested small bore ammo over the years both in machine rests and just shooting off sandbags. I never owned a rest myself, but found that using sandbags a certain way gave me great results and didn't cost a dime.

Turn a target backwards and draw circles from a quarter with a Sharpie. Then draw a cross hair in the circle that looks like what you see through a target scope. You should use a high power target scope to test with. Mine was a 24X Leupold. Testing was done at 100 yards early in the morning with no wind and firing 20 shot groups. I used a windmill to make sure that if the wind picked up I did not fire. 100 yards is a much better distance to test at than 50 yards, as you can really see more difference in groups and pick the best lots.

Shooting was done in prone with a sling and sandbags under the wrist as a rest. If you are confident in your ability to shoot good prone and squeeze the trigger very slowly, you can find some great ammo. One group had 19 shots in one hole and the 20th just outside. This particular lot of Eley shot many national records for me and all it took to find was a little bit of time and getting lucky with calm conditions.

For the folks who say that machine rests are not good enough and that the only way to test is with actual match conditions, I would disagree. The machine rest takes out the variables such as sloppy trigger pull and not having exactly a rock solid position. If I was on the National Shooting Team and concerned about splitting hairs downrange, I absolutely would find the tightest ammo I could using a mechanical rest.

[william]

As a pistol shooter, may I put in my $0.02? On the subject of ammo quality vs. cost: I've watched and spoken with several local smallbore rifle shooters, and to a man they all claim that really expensive ammo is just not worth the extra price. They shop for bargains in mid range Eley, RWS Target, Federal & CCI, Aguila and PMC. And every one of them has told me that they are perfectly capable of shooting a personal best with any of the above.

I can't say for sure, but I'd bet the ranch that they would only batch test from some sort of rest to eliminate as much as possible the human factor.

[Eric U]

Guido,

Ammo lot testing is very important. There are many ways of doing it. Anschutz tests their rifles by clamping the barrel in a lead-jaw vise. Eley tests by putting your barreled action in a chopped off Gemeni rifle stock and putting that in a vise. Benchrest guys test by shooting off of sandbags, although they are "fancy" sandbags. Some shooters test by shooting 100yd prone with a scope. I test by clamping my rifle in a fixture and shooting a lot of different lots. After narrowing my selection down to a few "best" lots, I shoot them from the shoulder. That is where I choose my match lots and decide which ones are practice lots.

As to your comments from the Ways of the Rifle...I disagree. It is my firm belief that there are very few rifles out there that will shoot a 600 prone in ISSF style competition, no matter what ammo you put in them. Maybe the difference is that there are a certain few people in the world that really work hard and spend the money necessary getting the optimum rifle-ammo combination. These are going to be the guys (and gals) bringing home the medals. Everyone has ACCESS to the best ammo batches. You just have to be willing to do what it takes ($) to get those batches. Fly over to Eley, Lapua, or RWS and test on their ranges. Saying not everyone has access is BS. In prone, you cannot win at the world level without the best ammo. But, saying it is more about ammo than skill is pretty stupid. I know A LOT of shooters who have great shooting rifle/ammo and can't hit the side of a barn. They just aren't that good. You need both skill and good equipment and ammo.

The best rimfire benchrest shooters have rifle-ammo combo's that shoot circle's around my rifle...and I'd hazard a guess that few if any of them have ever tested at a factory test range. They just know how to tweak the most accuracy out of what they have available.

As to your question of "why bother even testing"...if you have two lots/brands of ammo, one of them will be better than the other. If you leave it to chance, then that is a chance you take. Also, just because my rifle shoots 12mm (on occasion), doesn't mean you should quit if yours doesn't. It depends on what you are trying to accomplish-I'm trying to be the best prone shooter on the planet. Many rifles/ammo are "good enough" for certain kinds or levels of shooting. 50 foot is a good example. Most good quality match rifles can shoot very well at 50 foot or on American "bucket bull" type targets. It is when shooters move from 50 foot indoor to 50m outdoor that they start seeing problems. Some of these problems might be the rifle, or it could be the ammo, or the wind or...

Sorry about the ramble here. The short story is yes, you should test your rifle/ammo.

Eric U

[guidolastra]

Eric
I do appreciate a lot the thorough discussion you wrote about ammo testing. I think you are exactly right and the real question is: how far is everyone willing to push in order to improve his or her shooting?. I think when we adopt the prone position we all want to shoot 600, and we all work to some extent towards that. Of course, most of us probably have to take of jobs, family and tight budgets, so most of us cannot buy lots of different types of ammo, different batches, or travel to the Anschutz, Eley and etc facilities do test our ammo/barrel combos.
The end result is that we have to rely on what is already there and is supposed to be good. That is the reason we try to buy the best rifle we can, equioment, training material and of course the best ammo we can. Personnaly I decided to only shoot with Eley (Tenex if I can or match is there is not that much money in the pocket) for both training and competing. I was assuming until now that this would eliminate the "substandart ammo" factor as a cause of poor performance, so to be able to move to other ways of improving shooting. It is only now (late and athat is all my fault) that I am starting with the ammo testing process...
With all you explained to us, it looks extremely unlikely to think that most shooters will be able to grab a combination rifle/ammo that will be competitive at a high level, even after developping good technical skills. In that sense, the comments made in "the ways of the rifle" seem to make sense to me. Lat question: if we cannot fly to Eley, etc.. facilities, what can we do instead to start looking for the best combination?

[Eric U]

Guido,

I feel your pain. Ammo testing is the single most frustrating thing I do in shooting. You are on the right track though by starting to test your ammo. While I'm one of the fortunate ones who gets to run through a lot of Tenex, there can be a BIG difference between lots of the same grade of ammo. I've had test groups as different as 10mm to greater than 25mm with the same rifle and different lots. It is about what your rifle likes to shoot. The trick is to try enough different lots/brands/grades to see what works for your rifle. My Anschutz shot one lot of 1993 vintage Tenex great while it grouped like a shotgun with the original lots of Tenex EPS. This new EPS was ammo that shot great in everyone's rifle except mine. The latest EPS (2006 and newer) seems to shoot fine in it now, though. I stretched six bricks of that older lot for seven years. Some shooters can't get one brand of ammo to shoot in their rifle, but another one works fantastic.

Ammo aside, are you sure that your rifle is shooting well? There can be a myriad of things going on with a rifle that will kill accuracy. There is nothing more frustrating than trying to test ammo with a substandard rifle. A ding on your crown or in your chamber, barrel not cleaned enough, poor bedding, etc. Or it could be that your rifle just isn't in tune.

Rimfire benchresters shoot a lot of Eley EPS Black and get great results. They spend a lot of time tuning their rifles. They use adjustable tuners on the muzzle of their rifles. I feel that this is something that international style shooters could learn from. If you test your rifle and get good results, be careful about changing anything. Taking off the front sight and putting it back on slightly different could change the tune of your rifle, and thus the accuracy potential. Adding a riser block (or two or three) for standing/kneeling can change the tune. You spend a ton of time and money testing ammo in the prone configuration, and then change everything for another position. Can you even get your front sight back in the EXACT same place after removing it? Do you loosen and retorque your bedding screws? I think that is something that is done WAAAAYYYYY too much by international rifle shooters. Get them where they work and leave them alone unless there is a good reason to take the action out of the stock.

Sorry, just rambling at this point. What I'm hoping most of all is to get you to think and make your own decisions and plan of attack. Don't give up! It is worth it when you finally get where you set your goals for.

Eric

[Barney]

Another solution is to get your local gun shop/dealer to sent your barrel and action to one of the ammo factory's such as Eley, Lapua, RWS etc and have them test it in there machine rest/vice, work out the best batch or batches and buy as much as you can afford then have it shipped right to your door.

Keep this ammo just for comps.

Much cheaper than going to the factory in person and takes all the guess work out of it.

Barney