TargetTalk

Rover wrote:Do you REALLY think the (maybe) difference in recoil between brands will at all affect your scores. Come ON!

Its only a little thing in the overall picture, but to a top shooter the feel of the recoil will effect the way you read the shot feedback.
Some ammo's give better feedback than others.
So,yes, it will affect your scores.

conradin wrote:

spektr wrote:I don't load CCI SV Paperbox in my Hamerli 106 because it doesn't easily close. The OAL is too long.

It was impossible to push it in harder with your finger to create short chambering? I thought bullet is supposed to reach where the rifling starts, or very close to it. Or was it impossible to eject it?

The issue is overall length (OAL). The round inserted into the gun with as much force as I am willing to use, will not allow the rim to get close enough to the chamber to allow the falling block to clear it as it moves up. It is not possible to seat the round into the gun about 2/3's of the time. WMT and anything Eley have no issues, in fact the ONLY round not closing in the gun is CCI SV.

conradin wrote: I understand those points. But I would expect all the pistol shooters would be from those area..(native born and live there, as opposed to moving there..hence for example identify themselves as manxmen).

Vince,

prior to '97 most forms of pistol shooting were legal in the UK mainland (that's England, Wales, and Scotland), and 90%+ of the population live there, so not surprisingly most UK pistol shooters lived there too. Northern Ireland has a small population (under 2 million), and the IOM and Channel Islands are tiny. Moving to Northern Ireland or the islands just to keep on shooting pistols would not really be a practical option for many shooters living on the mainland.

David M wrote:

Rover wrote:Do you REALLY think the (maybe) difference in recoil between brands will at all affect your scores. Come ON!

Its only a little thing in the overall picture, but to a top shooter the feel of the recoil will effect the way you read the shot feedback.
Some ammo's give better feedback than others.
So,yes, it will affect your scores.

I'm glad to hear that there are so many "top shooters" on TT that this matter concerns them. By all means procure "pooter" ammo.

I shot free pistol nationally for USAR & AMU International pistol teams. I was on US National Development Team and was invited to be a resident athlete at the OTC. I've shot a lot of free pistol. In my opinion recoil from .22 pistol means absolutely nothing from one brand to another. Some more, some less. Fundamentals are fundamentals. Same for free as for hardball pistol. Either you're watching your sights or you're not. So cheap ammo that recoils more won't affect your technique, but it will probably shift your group up from the extra velocity. Until your breaking into 550 ' s I wouldn't worry about ammunition. Shooter error is more of a detriment than ammunition in my opinion. When you can group your 10 shot strings into 9 ring sized groups consistently, than worry about buying the good stuff.
Jon

Jon Eulette wrote:Ed,
Wow, I'm amazed! What pistols were they shooting that catastrophically failed?
Jon

Hi Jon,

I'm not certain of the first one. I believe it was a Smith & Wesson 41. The left side of the slide folded back along the left rear. I don't know if the frame was damaged, or the full resolution. The second one was definitely a 41 and the forward part of the brass case welded itself into the chamber. S&W decided the frame wasn't repairable and replaced the gun. I believe SK paid for the replacement. The third was a Browning Buckmark. I believe that gun was also replaced. The fourth, IIRC, was a S&W 22A. It only suffered some broken plastic in the slide assembly and, although it was out of service at that point, replacing the plastic piece and maybe a couple of smaller parts put it back into working order.

You know when you compare cylinder wall thickness of revolvers with much higher chamber pressures than .22lr to wall thickness of a 41 barrel, it's mind boggling to think a .22lr could do that kind of damage. There obviously had to be a tremendous amount of extra powder involved.
Jon

Ed Hall wrote:

Jon Eulette wrote:Ed,
Wow, I'm amazed! What pistols were they shooting that catastrophically failed?
Jon

Hi Jon,

I'm not certain of the first one. I believe it was a Smith & Wesson 41. The left side of the slide folded back along the left rear. I don't know if the frame was damaged, or the full resolution. The second one was definitely a 41 and the forward part of the brass case welded itself into the chamber. S&W decided the frame wasn't repairable and replaced the gun. I believe SK paid for the replacement. The third was a Browning Buckmark. I believe that gun was also replaced. The fourth, IIRC, was a S&W 22A. It only suffered some broken plastic in the slide assembly and, although it was out of service at that point, replacing the plastic piece and maybe a couple of smaller parts put it back into working order.

I'm just guessing, but isn't it possible that these events were the result of the previous shot being a squib which lodged a bullet in the barrel? Note that all the listed KB's occurred in semiautos: They all could have been during a sustained fire string.

I can't imagine a free pistol shooter not noticing a light round and not being clever enough to examine the bore for obstruction - just to bring the thread a little back to the OP's query.

william wrote:I'm just guessing, but isn't it possible that these events were the result of the previous shot being a squib which lodged a bullet in the barrel? Note that all the listed KB's occurred in semiautos: They all could have been during a sustained fire string.

I can't imagine a free pistol shooter not noticing a light round and not being clever enough to examine the bore for obstruction - just to bring the thread a little back to the OP's query.

Interesting thought! Although I've been witness to such in 1911's and even was able to prevent a couple, I had not considered this for the .22s.

And, you are right. I moved a bit from the Free Pistol subject with this info. A Free Pistol shooter would indeed know whether the shot fired and the Free Pistol would not have the possibility of firing slightly out of battery as a semi-auto might.

spektr wrote:I don't load CCI SV Paperbox in my Hamerli 106 because it doesn't easily close. The OAL is too long.

With some 50-meter pistols:
If the round is difficult to seat into the chamber, bullet length or overall cartridge length are generally not the problem. It's usually the bullet's shoulder. If you round over the shoulder's rim on CCI SV with a blade, it will chamber just fine. Compare the shoulder height/shape of ammo that easily chambers to those brands which don't. The shoulder problem is also aggravated by the harder lead alloys that some 22lr manufacturer's use, and the kind of wax coating on the bullet. The hard, thick wax on CCI SV is not your friend.

Hard wax will also foul chambers making ejection a problem, especially with the smaller diameter chambers on some FPs.

Slofyr is right on with the above. At one time I had a short piece of dowel I would force the more than occasional round into my FP chamber. Worked fine. I still get an occasional tight one.

I have an "L" shaped bore brush that I hit the chamber(s) with once in a while.

I shoot a Hammerli FP60 with CCI SV ammo. The CCI has always been a tightish fit but not impossible and I initially had problems with extraction and ejection. I've put at least 2000 rounds through it now and the extraction/ejection problem has eased.

WRT what ammo to use, I believe that rifle ammo (e.g. CCI SV) will give a softer recoil than pistol ammo due to slower burn.

Bob

Rover wrote:Slofyr is right on with the above. At one time I had a short piece of dowel I would force the more than occasional round into my FP chamber. Worked fine. I still get an occasional tight one.

I have an "L" shaped bore brush that I hit the chamber(s) with once in a while.

Very cool idea. So is shaving better, or your method of using a small handy tool to force a round in?

slofyr wrote:
With some 50-meter pistols:
If the round is difficult to seat into the chamber, bullet length or overall cartridge length are generally not the problem. It's usually the bullet's shoulder. If you round over the shoulder's rim on CCI SV with a blade, it will chamber just fine.

Is there a consistent method of shaving you would recommend? Perhaps some form of home made tool so that the rounds will all be ready before hand?

Compare the shoulder height/shape of ammo that easily chambers to those brands which don't. The shoulder problem is also aggravated by the harder lead alloys that some 22lr manufacturer's use, and the kind of wax coating on the bullet. The hard, thick wax on CCI SV is not your friend.

Hard wax will also foul chambers making ejection a problem, especially with the smaller diameter chambers on some FPs.

Does hard wax means paraffin wax or chemical...while animal fat, bee wax, and gilt-copper are softer?

conradin wrote:

Rover wrote:Slofyr is right on with the above. At one time I had a short piece of dowel I would force the more than occasional round into my FP chamber. Worked fine. I still get an occasional tight one.

I have an "L" shaped bore brush that I hit the chamber(s) with once in a while.

Very cool idea. So is shaving better, or your method of using a small handy tool to force a round in?

I have to force only an occasional round in. Beats shaving every round you load. You can tell the round has been reformed by simply extracting and loading again. It goes right in.