Tested: ER Shaw Ruger Precision Rimfire Barrel

Subwrx300

Sergeant of the Hide
Jan 15, 2014
716
328
63
Cedar Springs, MI
#1
Just put on a new ER Shaw barrel for the RPR... Night and day difference over factory barrel. Have about 400 rounds through it today both breaking in and group testing.

Factory barrel shot okay (.6-1" 5 and 10 shot groups and depending on ammo) this is Ruger Factory Barrel after bedding: IMG_20180902_123138.jpg

Enter ER Shaw barrel....

Highlights:
  • Fits VERY tight into receiver.
  • Bolt is very stiff to close but relaxing a bit as surfaces get lapped together.
  • Fit and finish is great, especially for the cost ($250).
  • Side note: If you have a factory barrel, I would highly recommend removing it to clean up the shitty/nasty/gritty anti-seize they use from factory. My barrel and nut had a ton of sand/grit/dirt like stuff all over and probably didn't allow consistent contact with receiver.
Here are photos of new barrel:
IMG_20180906_182856.jpg IMG_20180906_194459.jpg

"Break in" was as follows: clean the crap out of it, then shot one and pull a bore snake for first 3 rounds...then shoot ~50 and pull snake three times. Repeated at ~100 rounds then shot ammo test. Here is setup and break-in target:
IMG_20180907_075110.jpg IMG_20180907_124733.jpg

Average for first 100 rounds @ 50 yds was .49" using Federal Gold Medal Target (mostly 5 shot groups). 10 shot group also measured .50" exactly.

Here is ammo test:
IMG_20180907_075055.jpg
IMG_20180907_124855.jpg
First three groups of each ammo are 5 shot groups and last is a 10 shot group. Shot at 50yds prone with rear bag and bipod. Super calm conditions until about halfway (Eley Target and lower groups) and wind began drifting left to right slightly. Quarter in middle for reference.
  • Fed AutoMatch .66" best/.72" avg/ .94" 10 shot
  • Fed GM Target .31" best/.64" avg/ *.30"* and .75" 10 shot groups*
  • Fed GM HV Match .29" best/.37" avg/ .51" 10 shot
  • ELEY Contact .8" best/.84" avg/ .73" 10 shot
  • Eley Edge .34" best/.61" avg/.49" 10-shot
  • Eley Force .74" best/.61" avg/1.09 10 shot
  • Eley Target .37" best/ .56" avg/ .47" 10 shot
  • Eley Tenex .35" best/.49" avg/ .53" 10 shot
  • SK Std Plus .44" best/ .69" avg/ .66" 10 shot
  • SK Rifle Match .27" best/ .44 avg / .36" 10 shot
I pulled one round out of each 10-shot group when measuring for a very specific reason. I've found a very high correlation between shooting (3) 5-shot group avg and measuring 9 of 10 shots in terms of predictability. Usually within .1" or better of avg 5 shot group. Have run this test twice (factory barrel and this barrel) and most groups bear this out. Also, only shooting 25 rounds of each ammo back to back doesn't seem to allow the barrel to acclimate to the new ammo as well as say 50 shots then measuring groups for next 25-50.

Also, I wasn't happy with the first 10 shot group with FGM Target so I reshot at the very end because something seemed off during first group. It fired a near perfect circle that measured .3" and 10th shot jumped out group by .25". Making it the best 10 shot of the day except for SK Rifle Match.

Bottom line, for $250, this barrel is a major upgrade over stock (at least for me) and for the cost, puts me well within precision needed for long range practice on the cheap.
I put rounds down range at 215yds on a 3" target, hitting 8 of 10 at that range. At 300yds hit 8 of 10 on 6" plate and even 3 of 5 on a 4" plate. If looking for upgrade to an RPR, this is a great starting point. Next it will be the trigger.... Hopefully an update on that subject very soon.

Cheers!
 
Last edited:
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#2
Should be getting my Shaw barrel Monday and will do some similar testing next week of various ammo and will report my experience to help mitigate anecdotal evidence. The more of us that do this here the better the conclusion(s) and what one might expect for this upgrade. :D
 
Mar 1, 2013
135
14
18
CA
#3
Should be getting my Shaw barrel Monday and will do some similar testing next week of various ammo and will report my experience to help mitigate anecdotal evidence. The more of us that do this here the better the conclusion(s) and what one might expect for this upgrade. :D
Same hope to take it out next weekend after I install the barrel next week!!
 
Mar 1, 2013
135
14
18
CA
#4
Just put on a new ER Shaw barrel for the RPR... Night and day difference over factory barrel. Have about 400 rounds through it today both breaking in and group testing.

Factory barrel shot okay (.6-1" 5 and 10 shot groups and depending on ammo) this is Ruger Factory Barrel after bedding: View attachment 6941632

Enter ER Shaw barrel....

Highlights:
  • Fits VERY tight into receiver.
  • Bolt is very stiff to close but relaxing a bit as surfaces get lapped together.
  • Fit and finish is great, especially for the cost ($250).
  • Side note: If you have a factory barrel, I would highly recommend removing it to clean up the shitty/nasty/gritty anti-seize they use from factory. My barrel and nut had a ton of sand/grit/dirt like stuff all over and probably didn't allow consistent contact with receiver.
Here are photos of new barrel:
View attachment 6941620 View attachment 6941621

"Break in" was as follows: clean the crap out of it, then shot one and pull a bore snake for first 3 rounds...then shoot ~50 and pull snake three times. Repeated at ~100 rounds then shot ammo test. Here is setup and break-in target:
View attachment 6941624 View attachment 6941625

Average for first 100 rounds @ 50 yds was .49" using Federal Gold Medal Target (mostly 5 shot groups). 10 shot group also measured .50" exactly.

Here is ammo test:
View attachment 6941626
View attachment 6941627
First three groups of each ammo are 5 shot groups and last is a 10 shot group. Shot at 50yds prone with rear bag and bipod. Super calm conditions until about halfway (Eley Target and lower groups) and wind began drifting left to right slightly. Quarter in middle for reference.
  • Fed AutoMatch .66" best/.72" avg/ .94" 10 shot
  • Fed GM Target .31" best/.64" avg/ *.30"* and .75" 10 shot groups*
  • Fed GM HV Match .29" best/.37" avg/ .51" 10 shot
  • ELEY Contact .8" best/.84" avg/ .73" 10 shot
  • Eley Edge .34" best/.61" avg/.49" 10-shot
  • Eley Force .74" best/.61" avg/1.09 10 shot
  • Eley Target .37" best/ .56" avg/ .47" 10 shot
  • Eley Tenex .35" best/.49" avg/ .53" 10 shot
  • SK Std Plus .44" best/ .69" avg/ .66" 10 shot
  • SK Rifle Match .27" best/ .44 avg / .36" 10 shot
I pulled one round out of each 10-shot group when measuring for a very specific reason. I've found a very high correlation between shooting (3) 5-shot group avg and measuring 9 of 10 shots in terms of predictability. Usually within .1" or better of avg 5 shot group. Have run this test twice (factory barrel and this barrel) and most groups bear this out. Also, only shooting 25 rounds of each ammo back to back doesn't seem to allow the barrel to acclimate to the new ammo as well as say 50 shots then measuring groups for next 25-50.

Also, I wasn't happy with the first 10 shot group with FGM Target so I reshot at the very end because something seemed off during first group. It fired a near perfect circle that measured .3" and 10th shot jumped out group by .25". Making it the best 10 shot of the day except for SK Rifle Match.

Bottom line, for $250, this barrel is a major upgrade over stock (at least for me) and for the cost, puts me well within precision needed for long range practice on the cheap.
I put rounds down range at 215yds on a 3" target, hitting 8 of 10 at that range. At 300yds hit 8 of 10 on 6" plate and even 3 of 5 on a 4" plate. If looking for upgrade to an RPR, this is a great starting point. Next it will be the trigger.... Hopefully an update on that subject very soon.

Cheers!
Just put on a new ER Shaw barrel for the RPR... Night and day difference over factory barrel. Have about 400 rounds through it today both breaking in and group testing.

Factory barrel shot okay (.6-1" 5 and 10 shot groups and depending on ammo) this is Ruger Factory Barrel after bedding: View attachment 6941632

Thanks for the review!! Can’t wait
Enter ER Shaw barrel....

Highlights:
  • Fits VERY tight into receiver.
  • Bolt is very stiff to close but relaxing a bit as surfaces get lapped together.
  • Fit and finish is great, especially for the cost ($250).
  • Side note: If you have a factory barrel, I would highly recommend removing it to clean up the shitty/nasty/gritty anti-seize they use from factory. My barrel and nut had a ton of sand/grit/dirt like stuff all over and probably didn't allow consistent contact with receiver.
Here are photos of new barrel:
View attachment 6941620 View attachment 6941621

"Break in" was as follows: clean the crap out of it, then shot one and pull a bore snake for first 3 rounds...then shoot ~50 and pull snake three times. Repeated at ~100 rounds then shot ammo test. Here is setup and break-in target:
View attachment 6941624 View attachment 6941625

Average for first 100 rounds @ 50 yds was .49" using Federal Gold Medal Target (mostly 5 shot groups). 10 shot group also measured .50" exactly.

Here is ammo test:
View attachment 6941626
View attachment 6941627
First three groups of each ammo are 5 shot groups and last is a 10 shot group. Shot at 50yds prone with rear bag and bipod. Super calm conditions until about halfway (Eley Target and lower groups) and wind began drifting left to right slightly. Quarter in middle for reference.
  • Fed AutoMatch .66" best/.72" avg/ .94" 10 shot
  • Fed GM Target .31" best/.64" avg/ *.30"* and .75" 10 shot groups*
  • Fed GM HV Match .29" best/.37" avg/ .51" 10 shot
  • ELEY Contact .8" best/.84" avg/ .73" 10 shot
  • Eley Edge .34" best/.61" avg/.49" 10-shot
  • Eley Force .74" best/.61" avg/1.09 10 shot
  • Eley Target .37" best/ .56" avg/ .47" 10 shot
  • Eley Tenex .35" best/.49" avg/ .53" 10 shot
  • SK Std Plus .44" best/ .69" avg/ .66" 10 shot
  • SK Rifle Match .27" best/ .44 avg / .36" 10 shot
I pulled one round out of each 10-shot group when measuring for a very specific reason. I've found a very high correlation between shooting (3) 5-shot group avg and measuring 9 of 10 shots in terms of predictability. Usually within .1" or better of avg 5 shot group. Have run this test twice (factory barrel and this barrel) and most groups bear this out. Also, only shooting 25 rounds of each ammo back to back doesn't seem to allow the barrel to acclimate to the new ammo as well as say 50 shots then measuring groups for next 25-50.

Also, I wasn't happy with the first 10 shot group with FGM Target so I reshot at the very end because something seemed off during first group. It fired a near perfect circle that measured .3" and 10th shot jumped out group by .25". Making it the best 10 shot of the day except for SK Rifle Match.

Bottom line, for $250, this barrel is a major upgrade over stock (at least for me) and for the cost, puts me well within precision needed for long range practice on the cheap.
I put rounds down range at 215yds on a 3" target, hitting 8 of 10 at that range. At 300yds hit 8 of 10 on 6" plate and even 3 of 5 on a 4" plate. If looking for upgrade to an RPR, this is a great starting point. Next it will be the trigger.... Hopefully an update on that subject very soon.

Cheers!
Thanks for the awesome review. I’ll get mine on Monday and can’t wait to install it next week and take it out. I’ve got a bunch of ammo to test and I’ll get chrono numbers as well to compare to the factory barrel
 

Subwrx300

Sergeant of the Hide
Jan 15, 2014
716
328
63
Cedar Springs, MI
#5
Thanks for the awesome review. I’ll get mine on Monday and can’t wait to install it next week and take it out. I’ve got a bunch of ammo to test and I’ll get chrono numbers as well to compare to the factory barrel
I wanted to wait to Chrono until I had more rounds down pipe. Will run same test with velocity at 100 after I get past 1000 rounds. So by Sunday 😁
 
Likes: Hardpan
Aug 16, 2010
26
16
3
44
#6
I wanted to wait to Chrono until I had more rounds down pipe. Will run same test with velocity at 100 after I get past 1000 rounds. So by Sunday 😁
I wanted to wait to Chrono until I had more rounds down pipe. Will run same test with velocity at 100 after I get past 1000 rounds. So by Sunday 😁
Mine shoots Eley match at 1120 although it is listed at 1085.
 

Subwrx300

Sergeant of the Hide
Jan 15, 2014
716
328
63
Cedar Springs, MI
#7
Mine shoots Eley match at 1120 although it is listed at 1085.
Funny, I got the impression it was shooting faster than listed. Most ammo has the district supersonic crack even though listed at slower.

Good to know. I'll be running Chrono over weekend; was time limited and didn't want to screw with one extra gadget. Just shoot.
 
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#8
While I have a ton of chrono data from my various guns (and a few other's), I went out today and fired some various ammo that I plan to fire when I switch out the barrel this next week with the Shaw and then shoot the same ammo and compare the data. The chrono I use is the Magnospeed V3, which provides pretty accurate results. So, the ammo I fired today is:

  • Winchester Subsonic / (not among the best, but can get some tight consistent groups . . . just can't depend on it)
  • CCI Green Tag / (was out of SV's, did the Green Tag that has been pretty disappointing for me out of my RPRF)
  • CCI SV / (in past, it performed well, better the GT, with tight groups from this barrel and SD's running from 7.8 to 13.2)
  • SK Pistol Match / (either not a good round for this barrel, or the lot is just a bad one; I get pretty disappointing performance)
  • Eley Club / (performed really well with tight groups and single digit SD's; first time I've fired these)
  • Lapua Center-X / (also performs very well with tight groups, though with my lot the 10 shot SD's are low with single digit about half the time)
  • Federal UltraMatch / (the best performer out of this factory barrel of mine with tight groups and lots of single digit SD's

So, since I'll be using the same lot of ammo, it'll be interesting to see just what kind of difference there might be given the Shaw barrel is the same length as the factory barrel.
 
Last edited:
Likes: Subwrx300
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#9
Enter ER Shaw barrel....

Highlights:
  • Fits VERY tight into receiver.
  • Bolt is very stiff to close but relaxing a bit as surfaces get lapped together.
  • Fit and finish is great, especially for the cost ($250).
  • Side note: If you have a factory barrel, I would highly recommend removing it to clean up the shitty/nasty/gritty anti-seize they use from factory. My barrel and nut had a ton of sand/grit/dirt like stuff all over and probably didn't allow consistent contact with receiver.
OK, as expected, I received my Shaw barrel this afternoon and installed it. It was a little more difficult in removing the old barrel and installing this new one than expected. Apparently, since I've have nearly 1,000 rounds through the factory barrel and much of my shooting has taken place in elevated temperatures, the barrel nut was kind of frozen on due to what looked like some burned oil/grease along with some of that "shitty/nasty/gritty anti-seize they use" at the factory. After getting the action and nut well cleaned up and then install the Shaw barrel, it seem way more than just "very tight" into the receiver. I had to use a rubber ballot to pound the barrel in though it was well lubed. But, it did go in well enough.

As you say, the bolt is very stiff to close . . . a little stiffer than I expected. I'm sure it'll loosen up some over time.

I would recommend every one should consider removing the factory barrel as soon as one purchases one of theses guns and clean that area where the barrel fits into the receiver. When the gun is brand new it's probably the best time as that's when the barrel is probably easiest to remove and the gunk isn't set in from time and barrel heat.

Have clean the new Shaw barrel after installation and found it was somewhat dirty. But the stainless steel barrel cleaned up quick and easy. Patches run through the barrel really smooth compare to the factory barrel.

Now, I just got to find some time this week to get out and break it in and then do some of the testing.
 

Snuby642

Sergeant of the Hide
Feb 11, 2017
870
420
63
#10
Got to love an E R Shaw barrel.
Filling in time between cold bore shots on the feather weight 270 today.

It

20180910_214611.jpg

It likes green tag better, and wolf tm.
Hates anything copper coated .
 
Last edited:
Mar 1, 2013
135
14
18
CA
#11
OK, as expected, I received my Shaw barrel this afternoon and installed it. It was a little more difficult in removing the old barrel and installing this new one than expected. Apparently, since I've have nearly 1,000 rounds through the factory barrel and much of my shooting has taken place in elevated temperatures, the barrel nut was kind of frozen on due to what looked like some burned oil/grease along with some of that "shitty/nasty/gritty anti-seize they use" at the factory. After getting the action and nut well cleaned up and then install the Shaw barrel, it seem way more than just "very tight" into the receiver. I had to use a rubber ballot to pound the barrel in though it was well lubed. But, it did go in well enough.

As you say, the bolt is very stiff to close . . . a little stiffer than I expected. I'm sure it'll loosen up some over time.

I would recommend every one should consider removing the factory barrel as soon as one purchases one of theses guns and clean that area where the barrel fits into the receiver. When the gun is brand new it's probably the best time as that's when the barrel is probably easiest to remove and the gunk isn't set in from time and barrel heat.

Have clean the new Shaw barrel after installation and found it was somewhat dirty. But the stainless steel barrel cleaned up quick and easy. Patches run through the barrel really smooth compare to the factory barrel.

Now, I just got to find some time this week to get out and break it in and then do some of the testing.
Nice review. Putting mine on Thursday. What did you use as lube to help the barrel slide into the action?
 
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#14
Well, my ignorance regarding match grade 22 LR guns and barrels really stood out to me as I did a little research today to better understand what is going on the the "really tight closing bolt" now that I've installed this Shaw barrel. From all that I've read today, match grade chamber's are supposed to be "tight" where the bullet firmly engages the barrel's rifling to get consistent aliment for improved consistency with accuracy. Some match/custom actions have bolts designed with more torque applied when closing the bolt in order to make it easier to close. We're talking about match guns for the bench rest crowd, not the typical plinker/hunter kind of shooter. And with match chambers that are tight like this, one shouldn't plan on using really cheap ammo due to the difficulty in removing unfired rounds (like, STAY AWAY from bulk ammo. . . like say Remington Golden Bullet as well as other jacketed ammo). Though CCI SV is probably an exception, in term of cheap ammo. So . . . if you're someone who hasn't used a barrel with a match chamber, be aware when deciding to upgrade your barrel.

Since my RPR in now stiff to close with this Shaw barrel, I'm thinking on changing the bolt knob to something larger and heavier to help ease the effort for chambering a round.

Some of this has been discussed here on Sniper's Hide:

http://forum.snipershide.com/threads/which-22lr-chamber.167790/
 
Last edited:

Subwrx300

Sergeant of the Hide
Jan 15, 2014
716
328
63
Cedar Springs, MI
#15
Well, my ignorance regarding match grade 22 LR guns and barrels really stood out to me as I did a little research today to better understand what is going on the the "really tight closing bolt" now that I've installed this Shaw barrel. From all that I've read today, match grade chamber's are supposed to be "tight" where the bullet firmly engages the barrel's rifling to get consistent aliment for improved consistency with accuracy. Some match/custom actions have bolts designed with more torque applied when closing the bolt in order to make it easier to close. We're talking about match guns for the bench rest crowd, not the typical plinker/hunter kind of shooter. And with match chambers that are tight like this, one shouldn't plan on using really cheap ammo due to the difficulty in removing unfired rounds (like, STAY AWAY from bulk ammo. . . like say Remington Golden Bullet as well as other jacketed ammo). Though CCI SV is probably an exception, in term of cheap ammo. So . . . if you're someone who hasn't used a barrel with a match chamber, be aware when deciding to upgrade your barrel.

Since my RPR in now stiff to close with this Shaw barrel, I'm thinking on changing the bolt knob to something larger and heavier to help ease the effort for chambering a round.

Some of this has been discussed here on Sniper's Hide:

http://forum.snipershide.com/threads/which-22lr-chamber.167790/
It will get better, even with factory bolt. I'm 1000 bolt cycles plus into this combo and it has softened up. Feels like maybe 50% easier than new (as in halfway between factory barrel and the Shaw after newly installed.)

Be sure to oil the back side of the bolt lever where it came closed against the action body. This helps during the interim break-in process.
 
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#16
While I have a ton of chrono data from my various guns (and a few other's), I went out today and fired some various ammo that I plan to fire when I switch out the barrel this next week with the Shaw and then shoot the same ammo and compare the data. The chrono I use is the Magnospeed V3, which provides pretty accurate results. So, the ammo I fired today is:

  • Winchester Subsonic / (not among the best, but can get some tight consistent groups . . . just can't depend on it)
  • CCI Green Tag / (was out of SV's, did the Green Tag that has been pretty disappointing for me out of my RPRF)
  • CCI SV / (in past, it performed well, better the GT, with tight groups from this barrel and SD's running from 7.8 to 13.2)
  • SK Pistol Match / (either not a good round for this barrel, or the lot is just a bad one; I get pretty disappointing performance)
  • Eley Club / (performed really well with tight groups and single digit SD's; first time I've fired these)
  • Lapua Center-X / (also performs very well with tight groups, though with my lot the 10 shot SD's are low with single digit about half the time)
  • Federal UltraMatch / (the best performer out of this factory barrel of mine with tight groups and lots of single digit SD's

So, since I'll be using the same lot of ammo, it'll be interesting to see just what kind of difference there might be given the Shaw barrel is the same length as the factory barrel.
Out at the range today and fired my first 160 rounds through my new Shaw barrel as I move to get it broken in. Ended the day with 40 rounds using Center-X and Fed Ultra Match which were my best before and are my best again today. In fact, they look a lot better than what I was getting with the factory barrel (see pic). I'm also attaching a PDF file showing the data from my previous outing with the factory barrel along with what I did today.

Some interesting differences:

Tried to fire some Winchester Match ammo and only got off 2 rounds as the second one stuck in the breach even after it fired. Have measured the various ammo and find Winchester to be the largest in diameter, I was kind of expecting there to be an issue like this. I was able to push it out with a cleaning rod. Looking at the lip of the fire brass, it was a little beat up as though it was a little long too and didn't seat well. So . . . NO MORE Winchester ammo for this gun!

When you look at the data, you can see that the velocity for them all is substantially higher out of my Shaw stainless steel barrel than what I got from the factory barrel. I was expecting that. But the Federal Ultra Match is really up there at almost supersonic (altitude at the range is at 1,668 ft). Temperature was at 97°F, which was pretty close to what it was at the previous outing; so none of the change is due to temperature.

Bolt closure wasn't as bad as it felt before I took it out and fired it today. Now I wouldn't call it "tight", but I call it firm. Opening the bolt after a fired round is a bit stiff to where I had to use my other hand to steady the rifle as I lifted the nob up. A longer knob should provide better leverage and over time, I expect it'll get easier too.

I used ruger 10 round mags and there was no feeding problems at all with them. Am still not sure if accuracy is effected by them or not. I'll have to test this comparing mag loaded rounds with hand fed rounds to see if there's any significant difference in accuracy.

After a few more rounds down the tube, I'll also try the experiment with varying the torque of the action screws. Currently have them set at 35 in lbs and I have the block taped on its sides with a plastic tape, has removed all the play it once had.

Am feeling pleased with this barrel as it seems to be giving me the accuracy and consistency I hoped for. It's still good soon and not enough rounds fired to feel I can make that a certainty.

I had picked up a brick of CCI SV's and fired 20 today and they didn't do well for me. The only rounds that did well for me today were the Eley Club, Lapua Center-X and Federal Ultra Match. I had hoped they'd do better as I also hoped that the CCI Green Tag would do well . . . but Green Tag was pretty awful, especially for what I paid for them. Even the numbers show it.

More testing to do. :cool:


These are 5 round groups:

Qh7gsC4.jpg




Edit: Ooops, had to replace the PDF file for the correct one. Note that the "Gun" designated as Ruger Precision RF+S (the "S" for Shaw barrel) is the rounds fired today.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#17
Went out to the range yesterday here in AZ to run various ammo through my new Shaw barrel and set up a target similar to Subwrx300's. Most of my ammo is not the same as his, but that should simply add to the range of ammo we're looking at in this thread. Temperature was on the warm side at 95°F, Humidity at 17% and Altitude at 880 ft. Wind was at 4-5 mph from around 7:00. With cease fire interruptions, I found it a little difficult to maintain some consistency. . .but I expected it an managed. Not my best day of shooting, but not my worst either.

Some things stand out to me with this new Shaw barrel that I see in the data and having fired 380 rounds through it to date:

  • One, it definitely shoots better than the factory barrel as I'd say I get 25% or better accuracy based on what I'm seeing on paper . . . even more so with cheap ammo like Federal's Auto Match.

  • Because this barrel has a match chamber, you're not going to want to fire ammo that has a good likelihood for a FTF as it won't extract when it does. So . . . beware of using cheap ammo in this barrel.

  • Because all Winchester ammo is .001 to .002 in. more in diameter than any of the other brands, therefore they shouldn't be fired in this barrel as they won't extract after firing.

  • For the various ammo, most of them had about 30 fps faster MV's than what came out of the factory barrel

  • For all the varous ammo, the MV's were substantially higher than the published MV and in some cases as much as 60 fps to where some of them showed velocities at or a little more the speed of sound. For example, Federal Ultra Match had some 10 round averages in the 1130's and RWS R50's were right there too. Published MV for Ultra Match is 1070 fps. and for the R50's it's 1082 fps. In any case, one can count on MV's being faster than what's published by the manufactured when they come out of this stainless steel Shaw barrel.

If I were to choose the "best" of all we've seen in this thread, I'd say the RWS R50 would be my top choice (but at 37¢ per round). I like what I'm getting with Eley Club at 16¢ per round having great SD's and ES's. But still, at 6¢ per round, CCI SV's are a great value and good for doing a lot of practice shooting. As one would expect, if one want to really shoot really small groups, one needs to pay the piper.


20180916_105928-01.jpeg

PS: I had about 1/2 dozen calls/flyers that I didn't include in the measurements as this is about the ammo and not the shooter. I've circled them accordingly.
 

Subwrx300

Sergeant of the Hide
Jan 15, 2014
716
328
63
Cedar Springs, MI
#18
I'm noticing a pattern with these barrels running fast. Mine also runs hot, which is problematic given that we are trying to stay subsonic for all rounds to minimize eratic flight. This makes me wonder if there is a barrel can reduce velocity rather than increase it.

I still have the factory barrel and I may run a test with it to see how far back I need to cut it to start reducing velocity (if at all possible). Otherwise, I'm betting a 20-22" would have enough drag to slow the bullets down a tad.

Anyone with experience on this topic? Or know of a way to slow down barrel without reducing precision?
 

Snuby642

Sergeant of the Hide
Feb 11, 2017
870
420
63
#19
It's about 25 fps per inch, there is some slow for me ammo out there.
American Eagle supressor 22 is under 1000 in a 16 inch barrel .
My barrel did not like it but since you have all that length may be better for you.

I'm running 1050-1070 in 16 inch with a can.
Only time it cracks is near 100 pecent humidity and cold out.
Blows my zero everytime it does.
Reminds me check into biathlon loads they have been loaded slower?
 
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#20
I'm noticing a pattern with these barrels running fast. Mine also runs hot, which is problematic given that we are trying to stay subsonic for all rounds to minimize eratic flight. This makes me wonder if there is a barrel can reduce velocity rather than increase it.

I still have the factory barrel and I may run a test with it to see how far back I need to cut it to start reducing velocity (if at all possible). Otherwise, I'm betting a 20-22" would have enough drag to slow the bullets down a tad.

Anyone with experience on this topic? Or know of a way to slow down barrel without reducing precision?
If you look in my posted PDF file above, I've listed velocities from the factory barrel just before I installed this Shaw barrel. So, you can see the difference velocities between the two barrels.

I think stainless steel barrels tends to be a little smoother that many of the other steels that in turn provides some of the increase in velocity. And yes, a longer barrel, like 22 inches or more, would certainly help keep the bullets velocity down and maintain accuracy. From all the data I've read, barrel lengths from 16-18 in is the "sweet spot" for 22LR ammo. So, as far as cutting a barrel to slow it down, it seems it'd have to be something less than 16".

Since speed of sound varies by altitude, it may not be an issue for many people since these velocity increases only get to right at or a little above the speed of sound at sea level.

On the positive side, this extra velocity can be somewhat helpful if you're shoot out to 2 or 3 hundred yards (as long as you're not going supersonic) . . . huh???
 
Last edited:
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#21
It's about 25 fps per inch, there is some slow for me ammo out there.
American Eagle supressor 22 is under 1000 in a 16 inch barrel .
My barrel did not like it but since you have all that length may be better for you.

I'm running 1050-1070 in 16 inch with a can.
Only time it cracks is near 100 pecent humidity and cold out.
Blows my zero everytime it does.
Reminds me check into biathlon loads they have been loaded slower?
Regarding humidity and temp . . .

I would think cold temp helps reduce MV . . . ???

And humidity doesn't affect MV, though it does affect velocity down range. . . huh???
 

Subwrx300

Sergeant of the Hide
Jan 15, 2014
716
328
63
Cedar Springs, MI
#22
If you look in my posted PDF file above, I've listed velocities from the factory barrel just before I installed this Shaw barrel. So, you can see the difference velocities between the two barrels.

I think stainless steel barrels tends to be a little smoother that many of the other steels that in turn provides some of the increase in velocity. And yes, a longer barrel, like 22 inches or more, would certainly help keep the bullets velocity down and maintain accuracy. From all the data I've read, barrel lengths from 16-18 in is the "sweet spot" for 22LR ammo. So, as far as cutting a barrel to slow it down, it seems it'd have to be something less than 16".

Since speed of sound varies by altitude, it may not be an issue for many people since these velocity increases only get to right at or a little above the speed of sound at sea level.

On the positive side, this extra velocity can be somewhat helpful if you're shoot out to 2 or 3 hundred yards (as long as you're not going supersonic) . . . huh???
I did see your data and it was awesome! My point was more about why we try to maximize velocity out of 22lr precision barrels because we really want to make more ammo hit max of 1060 avg to stay well under speed of sound even in cold temps. With an ES of 40 (like decent practice ammo), 10-15% of rounds will crack the speed barrier in cold temps without an average below 1060.

This could be done by designing either longer or shorter barrels but we generally see 16-18" barrels which seem to max velocity rather than focus on staying subsonic. The extra 20-30fps help but the occasional supersonic flyer will likely hurt more. Drop/drift are predictable but transonic destabilizing effects are not.

Great data posts BTW, please keep adding to them and keep updated on here. Super useful info!

Regarding humidity and temp . . .

I would think cold temp helps reduce MV . . . ???

And humidity doesn't affect MV, though it does affect velocity down range. . . huh???
Speed of sound vs temp, here is table of sound barrier at various temps (sea level). Cold temps could lower muzzle velocity because of cold ammo which then has lower velocity. Not sure of temp sensitivity of 22lr though; unsure of how sensitive it is to temp changes.

Humid air is less dense so it will have less drag and result in less drop.

Screenshot_20180917-113906.png
Increased Humidity will increase speed slightly but only at the upper half of humidity levels (50-100%).
 
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#23
I did see your data and it was awesome! My point was more about why we try to maximize velocity out of 22lr precision barrels because we really want to make more ammo hit max of 1060 avg to stay well under speed of sound even in cold temps. With an ES of 40 (like decent practice ammo), 10-15% of rounds will crack the speed barrier in cold temps without an average below 1060.
Yeah, I see . . . but while the speed of sound changes with temp (and thanks for the good chart), so does the rate of burn on the powder resulting is less pressure equal less MV. I can't remember exactly where now, but I read that all 22LR ammo powder is somewhat sensitive to temp (some more than other's), but I think it's all anecdotal. Then there's the issue of how temp affects the lube on the match ammo. I understand that Biathlon Match ammo that's produced uses a special powder and lube for use is particularly low temps.

Lapua Polar Biathlon has a published MV of 1106 fps, which seems too high for really cold conditions since, for example, the chart shows supersonic at 30°F being 1085 fps.

I think maybe I'll try and run a little test by going out to the range and keeping some ammo in a cooler with dry ice then measure the ammo temperature with my infrared thermostat as I hand feed it into the chamber then quickly fire so it doesn't have much of a chance to warm up. I'll have to fire them quickly so the warm/hot chamber doesn't heat them up too quick and MV difference is really all I'd be interested in and not the groups.

Speed of sound vs temp, here is table of sound barrier at various temps (sea level). Cold temps could lower muzzle velocity because of cold ammo which then has lower velocity. Not sure of temp sensitivity of 22lr though; unsure of how sensitive it is to temp changes.
There's several factors at play for temperature differences, like . . . primer ignition variance to temp, powder ignition due to temp, case volume change due to temp, barrel diameter change due to temp, differences in lube recipe from one manufacturer to another, time a round sits in a warm or cold chamber. In any case, when I run the experiment, the temp of the cartridge will be the main variable.

Humid air is less dense so it will have less drag and result in less drop.


Increased Humidity will increase speed slightly but only at the upper half of humidity levels (50-100%).
Yes, but humidity will not change MV . . . only the velocity at points down range.

While humidity will result in increase velocities at POI's "at the upper half of humidity levels (50-100%)", the other side of the coin is, it will slow down velocities at POI's when humidity is very low like I have here is AZ where it's often less than 20% where I shoot and not unusual to see 10%. :eek:
 

Snuby642

Sergeant of the Hide
Feb 11, 2017
870
420
63
#24
The temp charts on speed of sound go along with my shooting.
Not sure how the near 100 percent humidity helps with going sonic but it did.

Barely 40 deg, clouds about 20 ft off the deck, altitude about 300 ft maybe less.
1050 ammo would crack in a 16 inch barrel but not a pistol same suppressor.
1070 ammo cracked in both.

Cloud deck continued to drop and range official threw the towle.
We were the last holdouts anyway.

We continued testing at home out of a window.
Ammo and gun were warmer than 40 but the air out the window was the same.
The results remained very close to the same, so it didn't apear ammo temp was a main
Contributing factor in this example.

Not a calibrated test but was a test nonetheless, best we could do.
I belive temperature on ammo is a thing, but when dealing with subs
Temp on air changing speed of sound is a bigger thing, transition is a bitch.
 
Mar 1, 2013
135
14
18
CA
#25
Maybe the barrel will slow down after lack of cleaning as long as accuracy is still there. I’m at sea level in a dry hot climate. Won’t be able to break in and test the Shaw barrel until Sunday to get some data. I tend to agree that they way the barrel was cut and the material used would make a smoother bore.
 

Snuby642

Sergeant of the Hide
Feb 11, 2017
870
420
63
#26
22 likes hot and dry, I think that is when it runs consistent.
The 1070 runs the best in my 16 inch barrel.
Not often at a place with 40 degrees and clouds on the deck.
I would search out 950 to 1020 ammo and try it just for the speed test.
 
Likes: Hardpan
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#27
I think maybe I'll try and run a little test by going out to the range and keeping some ammo in a cooler with dry ice then measure the ammo temperature with my infrared thermostat as I hand feed it into the chamber then quickly fire so it doesn't have much of a chance to warm up. I'll have to fire them quickly so the warm/hot chamber doesn't heat them up too quick and MV difference is really all I'd be interested in and not the groups.
OK . . . so, I ran this little test as I said above using CCI SV, Federal Ultra Match and Lapua Center-X. The temperature on the ammo sitting on the table (in the shade) was 97°F as measured by my infrared thermometer and those in my cooler measured from 45-50°F. My targets were out at 100 yds, but this test wasn't really about accuracy. This was about the effect of temperature on velocity. Velocity was measured by my MagnetoSpeed v3. I fired 2 sets of 10 for each of the 3 brands of ammo for both hot/warm and for cold. If you look at the attached PDF file you'll see more data than this hot/warm ammo produced the same results as I've gotten before, where the other data comes from temperatures in the 90's as well (it's all sorted by average velocity). So, for all 3 brands you can see that the average velocity was the slowest with the cold ammo (the cold ammo is shown as blue colored font).

Conclusion, based on this little experiment: cold 22LR ammo (as least the one's I tested here) have slower average velocities (around 10 to 20 fps).

I saw some other interesting differences too. Fore example the CCI SV tended to produce much better SD's when cold and I was able to get a group of slighly less than 1 MOA for the cold ones and not anywhere near that for the warm/hot ones. Interestingly, the Federal Ultra Match was just the opposite. Ultra Match apparently doesn't like being cold as the SD's suggest and, the groups were not good either, but were very good when warm (MOA of .912). Lapua's Center=X doesn't seem to care much what temperature it is (as far as the temperature range in this test), though the average velocity was only slightly lower that those of the warm/hot averages.

Again, as fare as accuracy goes, this is not what this test was about. But in my Ruger Precision Rimfire with the Shaw barrel, I typically see better results with Federal Ultra Match and Center-X and this was the case today at 100 yds as well.
 

Attachments

Likes: Subwrx300

Subwrx300

Sergeant of the Hide
Jan 15, 2014
716
328
63
Cedar Springs, MI
#28
OK . . . so, I ran this little test as I said above using CCI SV, Federal Ultra Match and Lapua Center-X. The temperature on the ammo sitting on the table (in the shade) was 97°F as measured by my infrared thermometer and those in my cooler measured from 45-50°F. My targets were out at 100 yds, but this test wasn't really about accuracy. This was about the effect of temperature on velocity. Velocity was measured by my MagnetoSpeed v3. I fired 2 sets of 10 for each of the 3 brands of ammo for both hot/warm and for cold. If you look at the attached PDF file you'll see more data than this hot/warm ammo produced the same results as I've gotten before, where the other data comes from temperatures in the 90's as well (it's all sorted by average velocity). So, for all 3 brands you can see that the average velocity was the slowest with the cold ammo (the cold ammo is shown as blue colored font).

Conclusion, based on this little experiment: cold 22LR ammo (as least the one's I tested here) have slower average velocities (around 10 to 20 fps).

I saw some other interesting differences too. Fore example the CCI SV tended to produce much better SD's when cold and I was able to get a group of slighly less than 1 MOA for the cold ones and not anywhere near that for the warm/hot ones. Interestingly, the Federal Ultra Match was just the opposite. Ultra Match apparently doesn't like being cold as the SD's suggest and, the groups were not good either, but were very good when warm (MOA of .912). Lapua's Center=X doesn't seem to care much what temperature it is (as far as the temperature range in this test), though the average velocity was only slightly lower that those of the warm/hot averages.

Again, as fare as accuracy goes, this is not what this test was about. But in my Ruger Precision Rimfire with the Shaw barrel, I typically see better results with Federal Ultra Match and Center-X and this was the case today at 100 yds as well.
This is one of the coolest test results I've seen in a while! Never would have thought to test rimfire ammo at multiple temps for precision. I'd just have continued shooting what did well at summer temps into fall/winter.

If two types of ammo could be identified for different temps, might save a few bucks if CCI works better into the fall/winter or vice versa. I have CCI SV, Fed Target and SK Match. I'll run the same test and see if I get any similar results. I'll have to use a Labradar though but same concept.

Awesome post @straightshooter1!

Side note: when you run your infrared, do you aim at bullet tips? I've had inconsistent results measuring brass temp (on larger centerfire brass like 223 and 6.5cm). Seems to read the air around the brass rather than the brass. I left some ammo in low salt solution ice bath (double bagged) over night and water measured 27deg. However infrared thermometer read 40 deg, and if I held in my hand measured 60deg.

Which model are you using? Feel free to send via PM if you want. Thanks!
 
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#29
Thanks!

Side note: when you run your infrared, do you aim at bullet tips?
No. I don't try to measure individual cartridges. I measure them as a group (in other words, when I put them close together in a group). This helps with getting a consistent and somewhat accurate reading.

In this little test, I put a box of each brand of ammo in the refrigerator the night before to be sure that cold temperature saturated them well. Then as I headed out to the range, I put a little brick of dry ice in the bottom of a small tote cooler with a little bubble wrap in between to keep away direct contact and loosely wrapped them. I also has a tiny bowl to lay the cartridges in, which also was kept cool in the cooler and would measure the temperature of the cartridges as they lay in the bowl. I left the cartridges in the bowl inside the cooler as I pulled individual cartridges out to hand load them. As soon as a cartridge was chambered, I fired it without any aiming to minimize the time the cold cartridges would sit in a warm/hot chamber (I didn't want the cartridges warming up any more than could be avoided). The warm/hot one's I took my time and aimed for accuracy, though that wasn't part of the test.

However, after I completed the test rounds as planned, I did still have cold cartridges left from the full boxes that were chilled. So, I loaded some in a mag and fired them (somewhat rapidly) to see what kind of groups I could manage. The CCI SV on that PDF file having a 9.7 SD and the lowest average velocity was the one I mentioned that I had gotten less than 1 MOA . . . shooting at 100 yds.
 
Likes: Hardpan
Mar 1, 2013
135
14
18
CA
#30
Thanks!



No. I don't try to measure individual cartridges. I measure them as a group (in other words, when I put them close together in a group). This helps with getting a consistent and somewhat accurate reading.

In this little test, I put a box of each brand of ammo in the refrigerator the night before to be sure that cold temperature saturated them well. Then as I headed out to the range, I put a little brick of dry ice in the bottom of a small tote cooler with a little bubble wrap in between to keep away direct contact and loosely wrapped them. I also has a tiny bowl to lay the cartridges in, which also was kept cool in the cooler and would measure the temperature of the cartridges as they lay in the bowl. I left the cartridges in the bowl inside the cooler as I pulled individual cartridges out to hand load them. As soon as a cartridge was chambered, I fired it without any aiming to minimize the time the cold cartridges would sit in a warm/hot chamber (I didn't want the cartridges warming up any more than could be avoided). The warm/hot one's I took my time and aimed for accuracy, though that wasn't part of the test.

However, after I completed the test rounds as planned, I did still have cold cartridges left from the full boxes that were chilled. So, I loaded some in a mag and fired them (somewhat rapidly) to see what kind of groups I could manage. The CCI SV on that PDF file having a 9.7 SD and the lowest average velocity was the one I mentioned that I had gotten less than 1 MOA . . . shooting at 100 yds.
Thanks for the research!! I’ve noticed the standard velocity or subsonic rounds out of the Shaw barrel avg 30-40 fps more than the factory barrel usually ending up around 1100-1110 fps. High velocity ammo usually avg 50-60 fps more. Temp for the comparisons was about the same +_ 3-5 degrees.
 
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#31
Thanks for the research!! I’ve noticed the standard velocity or subsonic rounds out of the Shaw barrel avg 30-40 fps more than the factory barrel usually ending up around 1100-1110 fps. High velocity ammo usually avg 50-60 fps more. Temp for the comparisons was about the same +_ 3-5 degrees.
Yeah, that about what I'm seeing with mine too.

My CCI SV's are giving me an average of just under 1100 fps, which is about 30 fps faster that I was getting with the factory barrel. Interesting too, the factory barrel was getting about 30 fps more than my factory 10/22 (though the 10/22's barrel is just 1/2" longer, which might account for a little of that difference). So, that's like my Shaw barrel on my RPRF is getting 60 fps faster than my 10/22, which averages just under 1040 fps.
 
Mar 1, 2013
135
14
18
CA
#32
Yeah, that about what I'm seeing with mine too.

My CCI SV's are giving me an average of just under 1100 fps, which is about 30 fps faster that I was getting with the factory barrel. Interesting too, the factory barrel was getting about 30 fps more than my factory 10/22 (though the 10/22's barrel is just 1/2" longer, which might account for a little of that difference). So, that's like my Shaw barrel on my RPRF is getting 60 fps faster than my 10/22, which averages just under 1040 fps.
I think the 10/22 barrels aren’t cut that well as the precision ones or the barrel quality isn’t as good slowing down the rounds. I’m liking the Shaw with the federal auto matches. Roaming around 1240-1260 they seem to stabilize better than 1160-1180 out of the factory barrel out at 100 yards. Every ammo SD was down by a lot. The barrel kept a lot of ammo SD around 12-6. This barrel will easily hit a 3 inch target 10/10 at 100 yards where the factory wouldn’t in 3-8 mph winds. Factory would throw a flyer outside the 3 inch target.
 
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#36
That's new! I haven't seen that before. Wasn't an option a month ago when I ordered. Im curious if speeds will drop a bit to keep subsonics subsonic. My barrel (18") teeters right on the limit with CCI SV and fed Target.

Hopefully someone gets one to test soon.
While 20" barrel would certainly help in keeping the MV's down from what one gets with 18", but I think an even longer barrel would be better for doing this . . . say 24" to get MV's down what's the manufacturers publish. huh? And I think it would help some with accuracy.
 

Jdsanders6

New Hide Member
Oct 2, 2018
3
0
1
#38
I’ve tried everything to get my groups to shoot consistent. Seeing what the 455’s are grouping at with match ammo it has to be the barrel.... at least I hope.
 
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#39
I’ve tried everything to get my groups to shoot consistent. Seeing what the 455’s are grouping at with match ammo it has to be the barrel.... at least I hope.
There seems to be issues with the bedding and the magazine latch assembly being loose that can affect the barrel and the feeding. Did you check that out?

It's been reported that in some cases, the feeding can cause some damage to the bullet as it enters the chamber which would affect consistency.

Maybe Ruger will work out these issues in their future generations??? :unsure:
 
Mar 1, 2013
135
14
18
CA
#40
Going to shim my barrel so the tolerances aren’t too tight and closer to factory. I’m curious if the barrel is shooting fast due to the increased pressure on the rimfire case while chambered... I’m mainly doing it because the back of my bolt handle is rubbing on the metal slot of the chassis when the bolt is locked into battery. It’s creating metal shavings that the bolt will introduce into the barrel. I found the shavings in the barrel during cleaning.
 
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#41
Going to shim my barrel so the tolerances aren’t too tight and closer to factory. I’m curious if the barrel is shooting fast due to the increased pressure on the rimfire case while chambered... I’m mainly doing it because the back of my bolt handle is rubbing on the metal slot of the chassis when the bolt is locked into battery. It’s creating metal shavings that the bolt will introduce into the barrel. I found the shavings in the barrel during cleaning.
I would think that shimming the barrel that way would certainly reduce some pressure resulting lower MV's. It'd be interesting to know just how much a difference. So, if you can, how about posting some numbers here?

Reducing pressure is one way to reduce MV, and though I had mentioned that a longer barrel (like, 24") would tend to help keep MV's subsonic, I got to thinking that a short barrel would also reduce MV. Just how short would work well, I don't know. . . . 16" ???
 

Subwrx300

Sergeant of the Hide
Jan 15, 2014
716
328
63
Cedar Springs, MI
#42
I would think that shimming the barrel that way would certainly reduce some pressure resulting lower MV's. It'd be interesting to know just how much a difference. So, if you can, how about posting some numbers here?

Reducing pressure is one way to reduce MV, and though I had mentioned that a longer barrel (like, 24") would tend to help keep MV's subsonic, I got to thinking that a short barrel would also reduce MV. Just how short would work well, I don't know. . . . 16" ???
I have the factory barrel still and may tinker with cutting it back to see if it reduces velocity. A friend of mine just bought an RPR so I may wait to see if his barrel shoots well. If not, I'll swap him and use his barrel for testing.
 
Mar 1, 2013
135
14
18
CA
#43
I would think that shimming the barrel that way would certainly reduce some pressure resulting lower MV's. It'd be interesting to know just how much a difference. So, if you can, how about posting some numbers here?

Reducing pressure is one way to reduce MV, and though I had mentioned that a longer barrel (like, 24") would tend to help keep MV's subsonic, I got to thinking that a short barrel would also reduce MV. Just how short would work well, I don't know. . . . 16" ???
Definitely will document everything I do and share, especially the chrono numbers before and after. I’m searching for about .0040 of an inch to shim. I have HD foil and foil tape that I will mess around with to get that spacing. I honestly feel the barrel is faster than it should be because of the increased pressure from the bolt closing tight because of lack of clearance.
 
Mar 1, 2013
135
14
18
CA
#44
That does make sense, but never really had a feeding problems from the bx1 10 round mags I use. It will be a week or 2 before I can make it back out to the range for testing but will try that. It just puzzles me the inconsistency. With a 22 a .4 inch 50 yard group “should” be around a inch at 100. I understand wind plays a roll that far out too
 

Subwrx300

Sergeant of the Hide
Jan 15, 2014
716
328
63
Cedar Springs, MI
#45
That does make sense, but never really had a feeding problems from the bx1 10 round mags I use. It will be a week or 2 before I can make it back out to the range for testing but will try that. It just puzzles me the inconsistency. With a 22 a .4 inch 50 yard group “should” be around a inch at 100. I understand wind plays a roll that far out too
Definitely agree that it should be better. I expect about 20-30% group size growth as distance doubles. So 1 moa at 50 would yeild about 1.3 moa at 100, 1.7-1.8 moa at 200, 2.5moa at 400 in ideal conditions.

This has held very true for me in practice. But yours is definitely having some less than ideal results at 100 (more than doubling in size).

Hope you get this solved!
 
Likes: Hardpan
Mar 1, 2013
135
14
18
CA
#46
I forgot to mention that I did bed the action block with foil tape when I changed to the Shaw barrel. I don’t think I expect too much from this barrel. It should give me 1 inch groups at 100.
 
Mar 1, 2013
135
14
18
CA
#47
I forgot to mention that I did bed the action block with foil tape when I changed to the Shaw barrel. I don’t think I expect too much from this barrel. It should give me 1 inch groups at 100.
Definitely agree that it should be better. I expect about 20-30% group size growth as distance doubles. So 1 moa at 50 would yeild about 1.3 moa at 100, 1.7-1.8 moa at 200, 2.5moa at 400 in ideal conditions.

This has held very true for me in practice. But yours is definitely having some less than ideal results at 100 (more than doubling in size).

Hope you get this solved!
I hope I get this solved too. It’s a little frustrating and time consuming. I could have just stayed with the factory barrel with the results I get from the Shaw.
 
Dec 5, 2017
188
58
28
AZ
#49
Definitely agree that it should be better. I expect about 20-30% group size growth as distance doubles. So 1 moa at 50 would yeild about 1.3 moa at 100, 1.7-1.8 moa at 200, 2.5moa at 400 in ideal conditions.
Do I understand you correctly?

1 MOA @ 50 = 1/2"

1.3 MOA @ 100 ~ 1.3"

1.7 - 1.8 MOA @ 200 ~ 3.4"

2.5 MOA @ 400 ~ 10"