Some 22 LR Trajectory Charts

Rob01

Super Mod/Team Blaster
Staff member
Jul 9, 2001
9,466
405
83
NC
www.teamblaster.net
#52
I guess the Ultra Match has gone through changes over the years and is now being made by RWS as UM-22 and is basically their R-50 ammo and comes in the red plastic holder. Just wondering if the old stuff was a different manufacturer and why the lower velocity and not as good accuracy.
 

SLG

Gunny Sergeant
Sep 2, 2009
932
321
63
#53
I guess the Ultra Match has gone through changes over the years and is now being made by RWS as UM-22 and is basically their R-50 ammo and comes in the red plastic holder. Just wondering if the old stuff was a different manufacturer and why the lower velocity and not as good accuracy.
I will check shortly and report back. I'll also get the DA when I chrono the new stuff, as I forgot to yesterday.
 

Rob01

Super Mod/Team Blaster
Staff member
Jul 9, 2001
9,466
405
83
NC
www.teamblaster.net
#55
That doesn't list the Federal Ultra Match UM22 load but the BC for it is .138 but the .139 on JBM works perfect. The BC is not the .092 listed on the Federal site.
 

SLG

Gunny Sergeant
Sep 2, 2009
932
321
63
#56
I just ran a .138 BC on my Ultra match, and with my old velocity figure of 1016, got 8 mils at 200, which allowed me to hit just fine. Heading back out and intend to chrono the new stuff. A buddy is visiting from out of town, so we are kinda shooting all over the map, instead of just focusing on one or two things. .22's, 308's, .38's, 9mm, more .22, more .308, etc... Good weekend.
 

SLG

Gunny Sergeant
Sep 2, 2009
932
321
63
#57
The new ultra match, in the red plastic trays, ran 1043 fps avg for the 10 shots I tested. SD was 10, DA was -850.
 

SLG

Gunny Sergeant
Sep 2, 2009
932
321
63
#59
How was accuracy?
Most people agree that .22's need some rds down the barrel when swapping ammo around, before they will shoot to their potential. In this case, the first 5 rds were .45, the next 5 were .41, and the final 5 that I shot for group were .35". All done at 50 yards. I wouldn't think reconditioning the barrel would matter much in going from 5 year old ultra match to current ultra match, but I shot the HV Match in between, as well as the Hunter Match. Neither grouped very well. Maybe all use the same lube, IDK. MAybe the groups have nothing to do with different ammo, IDK. I do know that I will be shooting the current stuff exclusively from now on. :)
 
Likes: Rob01

Nik H

Constantly Learning
Jan 22, 2014
3,655
1,442
113
Rhode Island
#60
Went out yesterday and tried out the Wolf MT Extra. Perfect day as winds were reasonably light and from the back. First time shooting it though the Annie other than a few shots at 50 yards to confirm zero.

CB gave me a predicted drop at 300 yards of 14.8 mils when using 1033 fps avg MV. This jived well with @lash charts for Fiocchi Match and Lapua club which are marginally faster @1,050 fps. Actual DOPE was 14.6 mil.

Happy to say that the ammo was consistent and produced very few flyers. At $75/brick, it is a good deal.
 

lash

Swamp Rat
Sep 28, 2012
3,200
880
113
59
Central Florida
#61
While searching for info I came across a large BC chart for Rimfire stuff and found it very helpful. I’m using applied ballistics and couldn’t find bullet length data anywhere .... I’m not sure if even needs that info but the drops seem close without it. Anyway here is the page I was referencing. http://krsmart8.wixsite.com/smarts-research/rimfire-ballistics-coefficient
Another very helpful chart. Thanks!

And thanks to @SLG and @Nik H for the data. I will definitely be able to provide an updated chart or charts soon with the extra information.

As of right now, it's beginning to look like the older Federal Ultra Match was faster than the newer product manufactured by RWS? If that is the case as it seems, then I can create a separate column for the new UM-22 next to the old for comparison and validation by those shooting them.
 

SLG

Gunny Sergeant
Sep 2, 2009
932
321
63
#62
lash,

Just in case I missed some data that you are referencing, I thought I'd make sure that my previous posts were more clear. In my one CZ 452, with a 21" barrel, the older Ultra Match was slower, at around 1016. I forgot to measure DA that day, but the conditions were very similar to the next day, which was around -850. I also did not record the SD, but it was high, around 24.

The newest Ultra Match, in my one gun, shot about 1043, with an SD of 10. DA was about -850. Groups were a fair bit tighter with the new stuff, as you might expect.

Other people may have different results, and I imagine that a shorter barrel than mine would be a drop faster. I'm going to check my 16" CZ 455 in the next day or so. Thanks again for putting this stuff together.
 

Nik H

Constantly Learning
Jan 22, 2014
3,655
1,442
113
Rhode Island
#63
While searching for info I came across a large BC chart for Rimfire stuff and found it very helpful. I’m using applied ballistics and couldn’t find bullet length data anywhere .... I’m not sure if even needs that info but the drops seem close without it. Anyway here is the page I was referencing. http://krsmart8.wixsite.com/smarts-research/rimfire-ballistics-coefficient
Yes, I have this one already and it is a great list that I use with Coldbore to develop drop charts. A more theoretical work on the aerodynamic characteristics of .22LR Match ammo was conducted in 1990 by the Ballistics Research Lab of the US Army. It is a real interesting read and it has some very good data for Match ammunition.

Enjoy
 

Attachments

Rob01

Super Mod/Team Blaster
Staff member
Jul 9, 2001
9,466
405
83
NC
www.teamblaster.net
#64
As of right now, it's beginning to look like the older Federal Ultra Match was faster than the newer product manufactured by RWS? If that is the case as it seems, then I can create a separate column for the new UM-22 next to the old for comparison and validation by those shooting them.
The RWS loaded UM22 in my 18" rifle is right at 1100fps.
 
Nov 23, 2017
221
96
28
52
Chandler, AZ
#65
Went out yesterday and tried out the Wolf MT Extra. Perfect day as winds were reasonably light and from the back. First time shooting it though the Annie other than a few shots at 50 yards to confirm zero.

CB gave me a predicted drop at 300 yards of 14.8 mils when using 1033 fps avg MV. This jived well with @lash charts for Fiocchi Match and Lapua club which are marginally faster @1,050 fps. Actual DOPE was 14.6 mil.

Happy to say that the ammo was consistent and produced very few flyers. At $75/brick, it is a good deal.
I use Wolf Match Target and found this chart and works for my set-up CZ455 VPT 16.5” barrel.

01DFEA37-4E23-446A-B49A-FA87BDDB0CCB.jpeg
 

Nik H

Constantly Learning
Jan 22, 2014
3,655
1,442
113
Rhode Island
#66
I use Wolf Match Target and found this chart and works for my set-up CZ455 VPT 16.5” barrel.

View attachment 6894690
Thanks. I tried the Target and it was good ammo. I find the Extra produces fewer fliers so I have been focusing on that. I am going to use this BC value and see if the come-ups are matching the field data I have collected.

Thanks again
 
Likes: DXT_Shooter
Nov 23, 2017
221
96
28
52
Chandler, AZ
#67
Thanks. I tried the Target and it was good ammo. I find the Extra produces fewer fliers so I have been focusing on that. I am going to use this BC value and see if the come-ups are matching the field data I have collected.

Thanks again
I have tried SK Standard Plus and Wolf Match Target I may try the Extra maybe even give Lapua a try just to see the differences.

Eventually I want to get a Lilja Barrel. Shooting 22lr is addicting 😀
 

lash

Swamp Rat
Sep 28, 2012
3,200
880
113
59
Central Florida
#68
FYI, I just ran the Wolf extra in my calculator trying to match Nik's results and backed right into the 0.130 BC that DXT's chart shows. So that seems to be a good BC. I'll add the Wolf to my charts. I should have an update of some sorts today.
 
Likes: DXT_Shooter

Nik H

Constantly Learning
Jan 22, 2014
3,655
1,442
113
Rhode Island
#69
FYI, I just ran the Wolf extra in my calculator trying to match Nik's results and backed right into the 0.130 BC that DXT's chart shows. So that seems to be a good BC. I'll add the Wolf to my charts. I should have an update of some sorts today.
That is awesome
 

SLG

Gunny Sergeant
Sep 2, 2009
932
321
63
#70
The RWS loaded UM22 in my 18" rifle is right at 1100fps.
Do you think my slightly longer barrel is slowing the bullet down enough to see the 50-60 fps difference that we are seeing? Could of course also be that your match grade barrel is just better as well.
 
Dec 5, 2017
143
46
28
AZ
#72
Do you think my slightly longer barrel is slowing the bullet down enough to see the 50-60 fps difference that we are seeing? Could of course also be that your match grade barrel is just better as well.
Apparently . . . it sure looks like that's what's happening. There's a substantial velocity difference between my 18" barrel and my 22" barrel as you can see here in the Average velocity column with 4 different cartridges that I recently fired (measurements taken with Magnetospeed V3):
 

Attachments

Likes: SLG

Nik H

Constantly Learning
Jan 22, 2014
3,655
1,442
113
Rhode Island
#73
There was an article about this topic. I thought I had it but it may be in Steve Boelter's book. There was definitely a decrease with longer barrels

I will see if I can find it
 
Likes: SLG

lash

Swamp Rat
Sep 28, 2012
3,200
880
113
59
Central Florida
#74
Okay, so finally here are some updated charts. I revised the first chart by removing Federal Match and Ultra Match, as they have their own chart. I added Wolf Extra MT, added the BC used for each and fixed a couple fumble fingered errors. Then I created a separate chart page just for 4 different versions of the Federal Match and Ultra Match just to capture some of the different options in velocity out there. At the very least it demonstartes how important it is to know how fast your bullet is going when it leaves the muzzle. See attached:
 

Attachments

Nik H

Constantly Learning
Jan 22, 2014
3,655
1,442
113
Rhode Island
#76
Okay, so finally here are some updated charts. I revised the first chart by removing Federal Match and Ultra Match, as they have their own chart. I added Wolf Extra MT, added the BC used for each and fixed a couple fumble fingered errors. Then I created a separate chart page just for 4 different versions of the Federal Match and Ultra Match just to capture some of the different options in velocity out there. At the very least it demonstartes how important it is to know how fast your bullet is going when it leaves the muzzle. See attached:
Thanks @lash
 
#80
Is there a schedule for these matches? Only about 2.5 hours from me.
@Rob01 , we have a Facebook site "Cvrpc Tsc" and we just finished our first match of the Year. I am actually getting ready to update Practiscore with the Match Dates for 2018.

April 14, 2018 (Greg Myrick - Winner)
June 9, 2018 (2nd Match)
August 11, 2018 (3rd Match)
October 13, 2018 (Finale)

Best 3 scores of 4 Matches count for the overall!

I will let you know when the PractiScore is updated!
 
Nov 23, 2017
221
96
28
52
Chandler, AZ
#81
Okay, so finally here are some updated charts. I revised the first chart by removing Federal Match and Ultra Match, as they have their own chart. I added Wolf Extra MT, added the BC used for each and fixed a couple fumble fingered errors. Then I created a separate chart page just for 4 different versions of the Federal Match and Ultra Match just to capture some of the different options in velocity out there. At the very least it demonstartes how important it is to know how fast your bullet is going when it leaves the muzzle. See attached:
Thanks for the charts 👍🏻
 

SLG

Gunny Sergeant
Sep 2, 2009
932
321
63
#82
Pretty cool stuff all around, thanks to all of you involved.

I would love to cut my barrel down to 16" and thread it, but I am afraid of messing with the accuracy. Usually not a concern, and many of my centerfires have been cut down with no ill effects. Often quite the opposite actually. Anyone have any .22 experience in this regard?

Also, I've been pondering the 50 yard zero deal. My gun has a 30 moa base, and my NF has plenty of adjustment, so I'm not concerned about running out of elevation with a 25 yards zero. When I ran the numbers in my Kestrel today, the difference was really minimal anyway. I started thinking that a 25 yard zero is possibly a better option, as it would limit environmental effects (much like a centerfire 100 yard zero). Any thoughts?
 

Rob01

Super Mod/Team Blaster
Staff member
Jul 9, 2001
9,466
405
83
NC
www.teamblaster.net
#83
@Rob01 , we have a Facebook site "Cvrpc Tsc" and we just finished our first match of the Year. I am actually getting ready to update Practiscore with the Match Dates for 2018.

April 14, 2018 (Greg Myrick - Winner)
June 9, 2018 (2nd Match)
August 11, 2018 (3rd Match)
October 13, 2018 (Finale)

Best 3 scores of 4 Matches count for the overall!

I will let you know when the PractiScore is updated!
Thanks. Sent a friend request to the page. Do you have to pre register or just show up?
 
#84
Thanks. Sent a friend request to the page. Do you have to pre register or just show up?
Cool brotha.. I will get you in there.

This is the first year of using Practiscore so Pre-Registering on Practiscore helps us get an idea of how many shooters we will have, but you can just show up as well. The Facebook will send out an event invite for each match as well...

We will only go to full Practiscore Registration if we start bumping up against our max shooters...
 

lash

Swamp Rat
Sep 28, 2012
3,200
880
113
59
Central Florida
#85
Pretty cool stuff all around, thanks to all of you involved.

I would love to cut my barrel down to 16" and thread it, but I am afraid of messing with the accuracy. Usually not a concern, and many of my centerfires have been cut down with no ill effects. Often quite the opposite actually. Anyone have any .22 experience in this regard?

Also, I've been pondering the 50 yard zero deal. My gun has a 30 moa base, and my NF has plenty of adjustment, so I'm not concerned about running out of elevation with a 25 yards zero. When I ran the numbers in my Kestrel today, the difference was really minimal anyway. I started thinking that a 25 yard zero is possibly a better option, as it would limit environmental effects (much like a centerfire 100 yard zero). Any thoughts?
I've heard arguments that support your choice including that it eliminates negative drop prior to your zero. I also agree that even at 50 yards, wind can affect the lowly .22, so you have a point. I, personally, do not have enough experience to either support or negate your argument.
 

Rob01

Super Mod/Team Blaster
Staff member
Jul 9, 2001
9,466
405
83
NC
www.teamblaster.net
#86
Cool brotha.. I will get you in there.

This is the first year of using Practiscore so Pre-Registering on Practiscore helps us get an idea of how many shooters we will have, but you can just show up as well. The Facebook will send out an event invite for each match as well...

We will only go to full Practiscore Registration if we start bumping up against our max shooters...
Great thanks. Will keep an eye out.
 
Jan 2, 2018
128
46
28
#87
Guess I'm going to have to re-do the DOPE chart. Lash's charts are a great resource to compare to and thanks again to all who supplied data in this thread. This chart works pretty well out to 165yds, but at 200 I need about .2 -.3 MILS more. Motivated now to get more chrono readings from both the bolt action and semi-auto actions and redraw the data DOPE chart in CAD. I am still amazed at how much velocity drop I get with the semi-auto vs the bolt.

 
Likes: DXT_Shooter
Jan 2, 2018
128
46
28
#89
Straightshooter, barrel lengths are the same at 16.5" for 2 Kidd 10/22's and a CZ455. I was skeptical at first as well, seriously how much FPS can the bolt operation on the semi rob? Must be just tighter barrel bores on the Kidds. So I locked the 10/22 bolt in place with a piece of aluminum, and sure enough, speed went up and was within 7 FPS average of the CZ bolt gun. I was surprised.

I use 1095 FPS for SK MAtch Rifle ammo in the bolt action CZ
I use 1040 FPS for SK MAtch Rifle ammo in the Kidds.
 
Nov 23, 2017
221
96
28
52
Chandler, AZ
#90
Guess I'm going to have to re-do the DOPE chart. Lash's charts are a great resource to compare to and thanks again to all who supplied data in this thread. This chart works pretty well out to 165yds, but at 200 I need about .2 -.3 MILS more. Motivated now to get more chrono readings from both the bolt action and semi-auto actions and redraw the data DOPE chart in CAD. I am still amazed at how much velocity drop I get with the semi-auto vs the bolt.

I like the way you printed this chart...I need one of these what did you use to make it?
 
Dec 5, 2017
143
46
28
AZ
#91
Straightshooter, barrel lengths are the same at 16.5" for 2 Kidd 10/22's and a CZ455. I was skeptical at first as well, seriously how much FPS can the bolt operation on the semi rob? Must be just tighter barrel bores on the Kidds. So I locked the 10/22 bolt in place with a piece of aluminum, and sure enough, speed went up and was within 7 FPS average of the CZ bolt gun. I was surprised.

I use 1095 FPS for SK MAtch Rifle ammo in the bolt action CZ
I use 1040 FPS for SK MAtch Rifle ammo in the Kidds.
Thanks for the informative info.

With all the data I've collected on 22LR ammo and various guns shooting them, I didn't have any semi vs. bolt rifle with the same barrel length. So, no way for me to extrapolate what such a difference might be. I know for center fire rifle, there's really no difference (maybe in unique cased depending on particular gas driven semi's). But with the low power of a 22LR cartridge to drive a bolt, I always thought there might be some effect on reduced velocity. When you said "I am still amazed at how much velocity drop I get with the semi-auto vs the bolt ", it sounded like you were referring to quite a large difference, which really peaked my interest. But, 7 fps isn't really all that much . . . is it? How much difference does an ES of 7 fps make? Again, I'm just curious as I'm not one who competes in shooting matches.
 
Jan 2, 2018
128
46
28
#93
At Straight, the bolt vs semi difference wasnt 7 FPS, It is more like 50-60 FPS. The 7 FPS difference was when I locked the 10/22 bolt closed in battery (single shot, have to remove the block to cycle action)
 
Dec 5, 2017
143
46
28
AZ
#94
At Straight, the bolt vs semi difference wasnt 7 FPS, It is more like 50-60 FPS. The 7 FPS difference was when I locked the 10/22 bolt closed in battery (single shot, have to remove the block to cycle action)
Whoa! 50-60 fps is huge.

Now, when I look at all my data I don't see that kind of difference between a semi vs. bolt with any of the types of 22LR ammo that is represented. For example, I recently fired some Winchester Subsonics 42gr with a listed velocity of 1065 fps out of a Ruger Precision RF with 18" barrel and a Ruger 10/22 with an 18.5" barrel. Using a Magnetospeed V3 to measure MV's the 10/22 averaged 1063 fps for 50 rounds and the Precision RF (a bolt rifle) averaged 1071 fps for 30 rounds. That's only 8 fps difference and not taking into account the small difference in barrel length.

I think you might be onto something here regarding a difference in the tightness of those bores. And I think that surely could explain it . . .??? But . . . it's still puzzling for that much change in velocity when you locked that semi bolt down.
 
Jan 2, 2018
128
46
28
#95
Yea I am still amazed by that too. I'm going to re-run that test again this summer and see if temp had an affect on it. When I shot the semi vs bolt test it was in November and in the 30's / 40's degrees farenheit. The kidd barrels are 1) stainless 16.5" threaded no flute 2) cromoly steel 16.5" fluted threaded. The CZ455 is factory stock varmint 16.5" threaded hammer forged. Chronos used are a caldwell std, and a Magnetospeed V3. Ammo was SK Match Target red box.

Got a stock ruger 10/22, I'll drag that along as well and see how it stacks up against the Kidds, both locked and semi-auto mode.

Problem is, the data supports what I see in the field. It takes a lot more elevation for the semi-autos at distance vs the bolt guns. Semi auto needs 8.1- 8.3 for 200 yards, the bolt needs only 6.9-7.2 MILS
 

SLG

Gunny Sergeant
Sep 2, 2009
932
321
63
#96
Chrono'ed my FGMM again today. Forgot to check DA, but temp was 87, where last time it was much colder. Velocity was 1109, and now my dope doesn't seem to come close to matching. I'll have to rerun it and see what's what.
 
Oct 17, 2013
343
32
28
Morehead, KY
#99
I don't use the HV ammo for matches but do hunt with them and would be interested in CCI Mini-Mag 40g and Mini-Mag 36g as well as Stingers. I have been using the Mini-Mag 40's for hunting lately with decent results. They print about 2" higher than the std vel ammo at 50y and seem to result in a cleaner kill on squirrels or other smaller varmints if a head shot is not available. A few years back I was trying to hunt with match ammo like Eley black or CX and I was experiencing a small number of squirrels which were getting shot in the body and falling from the tree only to crawl away and be lost. Not a good thing. I switched up to the Mini-Mag HP's and that problem was eliminated. The CCI HV hunting ammo is NOT match grade. It is lucky to group 1/2" at 50y and can even be worse than that. The Stingers are the worst. The have high vertical dispersion. As much as 1" at 50y. This really makes them almost useless for attempting head shots on squirrels if you are out past 50y. Even at that range I have trouble trusting them unless it is in a rifle which shoots them well. Save them for larger game such as PD's or even Cat's, Groundhogs, etc. The bigger tgt will tolerate the lack of precision and will appreciate the harder impact at the business end.

I prefer a head shot most of the time but the little devils often will not sit still and it forces one to take the shot that is given. I also hunt a good bit with the 17hmr and more recently the 17hm2. Those high vel 17's have never had a problem with wounded animals escaping. Even a poorly placed shot does enough damage to be terminal.

Irish
 
Likes: ZG47A

Tucker301

Groundskeeper
Staff member
Feb 13, 2015
6,994
3,410
113
Southern VA
Very good information in this thread thanks to some effort by a few of you.
I am somewhat surprised to see Geco sparsely mentioned or represented. I've found their ammo to have a very good cost to performance ratio in my bolts and the 10/22.
I've never bothered to weigh and sort them, but I imagine doing so could prove fruitful, given the RWS head stamp.

4-6 cents a pop depending on your timing and the quantity purchased.
 
Top Bottom