TargetTalk

You can struggle trying to get a decent score with the Ruger, with the nagging thought in the back of your head that the pistol maybe (and probably is) holding you back or you can go out and get a decent pistol and actually enjoy shooting it.

Before the flames start yes you can shoot decent scores with a Ruger (or just about anyhting else too) but that said with a good target pistol the better scores might be easier and require less work and become more frequent. You still have to do the work yourself but the better pistols let you do it more comfortably and repeatably.

Anonymous wrote:Should I learn the basics on the Ruger or something I can grow with? I know the basics I just have to execute them. I just want to make sure my gun is not going to hold me back.

Hi

It would be helpful to know where you're from. If you'll be shooting Bullseye, we have certain suggestions, if you'll be shooting international, we have others. For example, if you're shooting Bullseye, I wouldn't buy a .32. Reloading is a must in bullseye and most of us shoot a .45 at some point anyway.

No matter which sport(s) you shoot, I would buy all of my pistols with the same grip "cant". By cant, 1911/model 41 versus Ruger / Hammerli etc. Having one grip angle leaves you one less thing to learn.

Mike
Wichita KS

Instead of asking the question "what's the best gun", how about making a list of what you need in a target pistol to shoot well. Here's my list of requirements:

The basics:
1. Accuracy (2" or less groups at 50 yds)
2. Reliability (no less than 200 rounds between failures to cycle)
3. Trigger pull of appropriate weight and travel

The next level:
4. A comfortable grip that allows the gun to naturally point in the correct direction, with a trigger location suitable for the geometry of my hand
5. Weight and balance suitable to my taste

If you go down the list, you'll find that virtually any target .22 can meet 1, and 2, and for $100 or so, you can get the proper trigger action on an inexpensive gun.

The proper question after the basics have been answered is "Does my pistol fit me correctly?". If you can get a grip for the Ruger that fits correctly, and the weight and balance is to your liking, you're probably done. A Hammerli 208 won't shoot any better if it doesn't fit. That being said, you might need a gun with adjustable trigger position to get properly set up. My M41 fit's me perfectly, which is good because I can't move the trigger. My friend can't reach the trigger. Is it a bad gun? Not for me, but it is for him.

The bottom line is that fit is what is important, not pedigree. That being said, The expensive guns are more adaptable (with a screwdriver, not a file) and only you can determine the appropriate trade off. But recognize that if your gun fits you properly, you will shoot scores to your ability.

Steve.

If you go down the list, you'll find that virtually any target .22 can meet 1, and 2

I think that this is very optimistic - specifically whether most target 22s can hold 2" at 50yds. This has not been my experience.

Anonymous wrote:

If you go down the list, you'll find that virtually any target .22 can meet 1, and 2

I think that this is very optimistic - specifically whether most target 22s can hold 2" at 50yds. This has not been my experience.

At one point I was more ambitious about testing for accuracy than I am now, and I measured the following data:

Gun/Ammo/Group Size
(10 shot center to center, 50 yards)

Ruger KMK678GC -------- Federal Gold Medal ------- Avg. 1.5"
------------------------------RWS Target --------------- Avg. 1.25"

S&W M41 5.5" bbl -------- CCI StdVel ---------------- Avg. 3.5" to 4"
----------------------------- Federal Gold Medal ------- Avg. 2.5"
----------------------------- RWS Target --------------- Avg. 1.5"

S&W M41 7" bbl ---------- CCI StdVel ---------------- Avg. 1.75"

Pardini SP ----------------- RWS Target --------------- Avg. 2" +/-

By far, the most accurate of the bunch was the Ruger, it shoots great groups with everything. The short M41 barrel was a problem with CCI ammo (only one reliable) but the long barrel worked great. I never bothered to fool with the Pardini, since the RWS is so reliable I don't want to mess around.

I have a Marvel I've been fooling around with, and indications are that it will easily do 2" with the inexpensive Federal target ammo.

I haven't tried any of the expensive target ammo, but so far I've been able to get 2" with all the guns I've tested so far. My .45 is another story however...

Steve.

I have not seen any sound target 22s that fail to Ransom Rest test under 2" at 50yds using decent ammo like Eley. I have personally tested many guns and ammos. Eley, Wolf, and the better Federal like 900B were almost always the best. The poorer ammos would push the 2" limit but seldom were over except occasional flyers.

I had one original HS barrel that was near 2". A recrown reduced that to around 1.25" which is more the average of all the 22's I ever tested. The range of best groups was around 3/4"- 1". Not many would do that. Most guns were 1"-1.5". Under 3/4" was rare. In every case, a good 10 shot group of any size would increase half again as much with a shot count 25 or more. Tests were so consistent that I do not bother with the Ransom any more. I will sandbag to get my initial zero. That usually is well under 2". Then I confirm my zero offhand. (That is usually over 2" :)

Here is my conclusion
If you get lucky and find a 10 shot 1" group at 50. That same group will near double in size if you continue to 50 rounds.

Here is my conclusion
If you get lucky and find a 10 shot 1" group at 50. That same group will near double in size if you continue to 50 rounds.

That's an interesting observation. According to my statistical calculations (I really need to get out more) a 50 shot group should be about 1.36 times the size of a typical 10 shot group. the fair comparison would be to shoot 5 ten shot groups and compare the average center to center to a single 50 shot group. This would factor out that "lucky" ten shot group (try to shoot a lucky 50 shot group!).

I do all my testing with ten shot groups, it's a good compromise with a reasonable statistical sample with only one measurement.

Also an interesting observation on the crown. My mis-behaving M41 barrel has a terrible looking crown, all the other barrels have very nice looking crowns.

Steve.

P.S. I gave up on the ransom rest, very hard to get the gun to return to the same starting point (although I've only used it with the 45). I can do almost as good with a sandbag, with a lot less headaches.

I know two high masters that got to 2650 using low-end target pistols. John Zurek shot in the 890's with his Ruger, and Bob Fleming did the same with his Buckmark. Both moved on to high-end pistols, but their best .22 scores did not improve significantly.

jackh's comments are generally correct about .22 pistol accuracy.

Find a .22 pistol that feels good to you. If it's reliable, and has a decent trigger, it will probably take you as far as you are capable.

When I switched from a S&W M41 to the Pardini, my scores jumped dramatically. I think this was because the Pardini just felt good to me.

It's the indian, not the arrow.

Best Regards,
Slo cat

just picked up an OSP and shot with open sights and got a 282. That is 20 points higher then my best with a dot and the ruger. I can not wait to get the dot on the OSP.

I don't doubt that great scores can be acheived with lesser than great pistols. I beleive better pistols give you a more consistent performance, not necessarily better. It also makes the whole shooting process more comfortable thus more enjoyable.

Jack H as for the comment about good pistols not shooting greater than 2" at 50 yards with good ammo except for the flyers. Why would you have flyers in a clamped pistol? I suggest that you look at the tests done by the German shooting magazine Viser they are on the second page of this thread http://www.targettalk.org/viewtopic.php ... 3&start=20 and those results are at 25m, these are some of the top pistols with some of the worlds best ammo.

And just because something shoots good out of a rest doesn't mean it will shoot well out of someones hand personally for me the Ruger out of the box fits that bill, I don't like the grip, can not get a good consistent grip on that tiny plastic grip, the trigger out of the box is poor at best, and I don't like the sights. Yes all these things can be changed and by the time you change them to get a merely adequate pistol you're starting to edge near the coat of a good target pistol. I get no enjoyment shooting a Ruger so why would I suffer shooting one or for that matter tell others to shoot one.

Anonymous wrote:just picked up an OSP and shot with open sights and got a 282. That is 20 points higher then my best with a dot and the ruger. I can not wait to get the dot on the OSP.

An OSP is 22 short.

Just comments. A ruger is hard to keep clean , but can shoot very near national record scores if it happens to fit. I know of no gun that can compete with the 1911 properly accurized. [ The accu lock is my first choice ] and I prefer to shoot both center fire and 45 with the same pistol.
As do most BE shooters. The fellow who posted a comment about his OSP may be shooting indoors or the 25 yard short course, provided he is not a bull shooter. By the way, I'm glad we have done away with the 22 short option and settled on the 40 grain long rifle round as the standard. for ISSF. Also 880 is about the minimum score any master class shooter can tolerate on any range except the wind tunnel we call Camp Perry.Please pardon the rambling as many years of doing this causes many memories.Good Shooting Bill Horton