I was perusing another forum and most of the time, it is a bunch of Google masters posting irrelevant crap about everything gun related. The most recent thing I have read, and it seems like bullshcitt to me, is 22 rimfire tumbling or losing accuracy as they transition from Super sonic to sub sonic. These guys are recommending shooting subs for accuracy at long distance because of this transition. I have shot a metric [bleep] ton of 22 in my life and never had any issue whatsoever due to sonic to sub transition. In fact, I have never even heard of it much less worried about it. So what say the campfire experts?
Never heard of it causing “tumbling”, but the effect is real, and not just with .22s. If you read about real long-range shooting with CFs, you’ll find that keeping velocity supersonic is important to those guys too.
Those that seriously pursue accuracy with our lowly 22's know their stuff and like ammo that starts out at around 1,100 fps. That transonic turbulence realm is a problem. Long range black powder centerfire folks have issues too as they have to be in the 13 to 1,400 fps to do that thousand-yard thing with 500+ grain slugs.
Has physics changed that much on the effect of transition on 22cal between 1990 and 2022? I think not. Although someone could probably redesign the .22 projectile to improve BC.
5. The nonlinear Magnus moment acting on caliber .22 match bullets at transonic and subsonic speeds causes a slow-arm limit cycle yaw of approximately 1.8 degrees. The slow arm grows to the limit cycle value at about 50 metres range, and the limit cycle persists out to 100 metres range. The limit cycle yaw adds approximately 2 percent to the zero-yaw drag, but has an insignificant effect on accuracy, retained velocity and wind sensitivity.
You can read all the articles you want but it doesn't disprove what all of the bench rest shooters in any national event know to be a fact. I guarantee if you go to a bench rest event- where a few thousandth's of an inch can mean winning or losing a match - they will be shooting subsonic ammo - every last one of them. And 22 rimfire ammo is especially sensitive to it due to the poor ballistic shape of most 22 bullets.
I guess there is one answer to this problem- shoot hypervelocity ammo that doesn't drop below the sonic barrier before it reaches the target. The problem is no one loads accurate or competitive hypervelocity ammo..
High velocity .22 LR's start out in the transonic zone so any accuracy loss due to transonic turbulence would take place between the muzzle and about 60 yards.
I was perusing another forum and most of the time, it is a bunch of Google masters posting irrelevant crap about everything gun related. The most recent thing I have read, and it seems like bullshcitt to me, is 22 rimfire tumbling or losing accuracy as they transition from Super sonic to sub sonic. These guys are recommending shooting subs for accuracy at long distance because of this transition. I have shot a metric [bleep] ton of 22 in my life and never had any issue whatsoever due to sonic to sub transition. In fact, I have never even heard of it much less worried about it. So what say the campfire experts?
It's a thing. All competitive .22 shooters use sub-sonic ammo.
I was perusing another forum and most of the time, it is a bunch of Google masters posting irrelevant crap about everything gun related. The most recent thing I have read, and it seems like bullshcitthighly informed perspectives to me, is 22 rimfire tumbling or losing accuracy as they transition from Super sonic to sub sonic. These guys are recommending shooting subs for accuracy at long distance because of this transition. I have shot a metric [bleep] ton of 22 in my life and never had any issue whatsoever due to sonic to sub transition. In fact, I have never even heard of it much less worried about it. So what say the campfire experts?
Fixed that for ya. Thank me later.
Exterior ballistics is rather complicated and a wise man will not leap to conclusions without studying it a bit. You might enjoy the linked book below, but a note of caution. It was crafted by a highly respected expert for graduate level studies.
I've shot thousands of high velocity .22 LR bullets at paper targets from 25, 50, 75, 100, 125 and 150 yards and several points in between {my back yard range has target frames set at 35, 45 and 65 yards presently}. I've never seen any indication of tumbling or instability and like I said before, if you were going to ,you'd see it within the first 60 yards or so and it would show in the form of oblong or out of round holes on paper.
This has been discussed numerous times on several sites I visit and it has been proven that the issue exists. However, how much it actually effects your accuracy is a matter of never ending debate. For guys who shoot for extreme accuracy, any amount that can be accounted for is too much and shooting sub sonic eliminates at least one variable. As far as HV ammo I used to shoot a lot of Winchester Power Points and other ammo in that velocity realm - approx. 1400 fps- and had good results with it for hunting ammo and on paper it was very good, but not what I would call target ammo. Since they moved the manufacture of Win Power Points from Australia to the US, the accuracy isn't what it used to be.
Unless you are a bench rest shooter this may or may not effect you which is why so many guys who say they have shot a ton of .22 ammo in their lifetime call BS on this claim. For hunting accuracy you can probably be minute of squirrel head with most ammo still...
No doubt match ammunition is generally more accurate than high velocity hunting ammo, {I shot competitively myself for years and yea, I used match ammo.} but that does not mean high velocity ammo is going to tumble or even become grossly unstable while going transonic. It also can be quite accurate at extended ranges long after going subsonic as the video posted by MontanaMarine clearly shows.
As stated, if in a shoulder to shoulder match, especially benchrest, when the difference between 1st place and "also ran" is measured in 1/10's of an inch, a wise man stays sub-sonic from the get-go or starts out super-sonic and guarantees it stays that way the whole way to the target (and good luck finding HV ammo that shoots in that league). In situations like that, one swallows one's gut and springs for the $15-20/box stuff. The matches I attend see everybody shooting high end low-vel match stuff. Everybody.
The major suppliers of Eley Tenex, such as Killough's, publish the lot numbers they have available and exact velocity (supplied by Eley) obtained by those specific lots. Speed numbers vary, but fall into a very narrow band of between 1065 and 1080 fps typically. A lot of .22 BR shooters are very fanatical about such things. I shoot in single shot/Schutzen matches where .22RF competition is conducted at 100 yards, both offhand and benchrest, group size and score - and I'm here to tell you that putting ten into the 3/4" 10-ring is no mean feat, especially if there's even the slightest breeze. (The best I ever did was a 249-9C that copped 1st place that day - with a BSA Martini International + Eley Tenex. I have yet to witness a perfect score of 250 although a few such scores pop up around the country during a year.)
I can see where the subsonic has the advantage at rimfire BR distances, 50-200 yards or so??
Now we have long range steel shooting where the distances go much further. I can see where the faster 40gr ammo can have an edge in atmo at those distances.
I've shot plenty of federal bulk 36gr out to 400 yards or so plinking at rocks, pinecones, etc. It definitely doesn't tumble. Maybe elevation is a factor too. What is stable at 4000', may not be stable down by the sea.
There are a lot of variables, and advantages can change with distance, and goals.
Here's an interesting 300-yard test comparing 22LR subsonic to the CCi Velocitor.
This is what I figured. I think it can safely be said, that this transonic theory really doesn't come into play. Maybe if you were shooting inside to negate any and all wind at 50yds the subs may shine. Honestly, I am unconvinced about this theory and if there is some minuscule difference in accuracy, it ain't going to matter in my life.
I have friends at Aberdeen and Crane and will reach out to see if they know of any tests and evaluations done on this theory.
Has physics changed that much on the effect of transition on 22cal between 1990 and 2022? I think not. Although someone could probably redesign the .22 projectile to improve BC.
5. The nonlinear Magnus moment acting on caliber .22 match bullets at transonic and subsonic speeds causes a slow-arm limit cycle yaw of approximately 1.8 degrees. The slow arm grows to the limit cycle value at about 50 metres range, and the limit cycle persists out to 100 metres range. The limit cycle yaw adds approximately 2 percent to the zero-yaw drag, but has an insignificant effect on accuracy, retained velocity and wind sensitivity.
"...but has an insignificant effect on accuracy..."
That's the key word. I does effect accuracy, but is it insignificant for 40 yd rabbit hunting, or for 200 yd target shooting?
At the end of the day only you can decide if it matters enough for you to be concerned in regards to how much the slight destabilization effects you and yours. Get out to the range and start experimenting - oh darn, there's shooting to be done!
Always amazes how solid many are in their beliefs, when they have no solid reason. Ballistic discussions with casual shooters brings this out quickly.
Secondly, the more I learn about the factors that effect accuracy and ballistics, The more it becomes amazing that it is so easy to hit even basketball size targets at 200 yards. With anything.
Mechanically. Not considering human operator screw ups.
The thing is, so many of these factors are insignificant for the vast majority of shooters. Even most serious hunters and recreational shooters. Tolerance stacking may be causing them misses when they try to stretch out. But for many, they didn't expect 100% hits. So some misses are figured to be shooter error. Some hits, may actually be the shooter zigging when the shot was zagging.
20+ years ago a friend and I started on a longer range 22 mission. We were soon frustrated by misses, that we didn't think were shooter error.
Using decent to high quality sporters we then gathered up a bunch of ammo and tried two guns with on a calm morning.
It soon became apparent that we were pissing in the wind with our setups and needed to upgrade to get the mechanical accuracy we wanted. Its no fun not knowing if your hits or misses were equipment or you.
Pretty much gave up there. No desire to dump the necessary cash into it. Now, I believe the equipment is readily.
Big difference between 95+% of 22 use and stretching one way out there and expecting consistent results.
Ammunition quality has more affect on the accuracy. Ammo companies don't load match grade high velocity that I'm aware of, no market demand for it.
The transition from supersonic to subsonic flight causes increased wind drift, by effectively decreasing the bullet's ballistic coefficient. As the shockwave switches positions on the bullet during the transition from supersonic to subsonic speed the bullet's flight path yaws, or takes a minute spiral around the axis of its flight path. This exposes a larger "frontal area" to the air, increasing the drag. So you're really looking at two issues, ammo quality and increased wind drift with high velocity .22 long rifle.
There is a problem with the boat tailed .17M2 bullets tumbling at longer distances as the velocity falls off, approximately 200 yards; the HMR has more speed and avoids that until quite a bit further out. Nothing to do with the .22 LR.
Drag has many variables, but in general terms Mach 1 represents the realm where most drag is found. The transonic velocity zone ranges from around Mach .8-1.2 A point many overlook is how bullet form plays into this. Round nose flat base bullets do just dandy in the subsonic velocity range.
At the end of the day only you can decide if it matters enough for you to be concerned in regards to how much the slight destabilization effects you and yours. Get out to the range and start experimenting - oh darn, there's shooting to be done!
Yeah, tough job, but somebody’s got to do it.
Did my bit this morning, and confirmed that even with a tilted rail, my Tract 1” hunting scope doesn’t have enough clicks for dialing so I can hold right on at 200. Looks like the SS 10x is going back on.
Did my bit this morning, and confirmed that even with a tilted rail, my Tract 1” hunting scope doesn’t have enough clicks for dialing so I can hold right on at 200. Looks like the SS 10x is going back on.
When I was playing with the Martini @ 200 yards I used a set of the Burris Rings with the inserts when I ran out of MOA - Worked pretty well.
Did my bit this morning, and confirmed that even with a tilted rail, my Tract 1” hunting scope doesn’t have enough clicks for dialing so I can hold right on at 200. Looks like the SS 10x is going back on.
Don’t tell Stick…………
That SWFA SS is a great scope.
Was out yesterday morning working up some '06 cast bullet loads and plinking with a Tikka T1x in between strings. It wears a SS 10x mil/mil sighted dead on at 100 yards.
The range has a 6" disc at 200; I had previously worked up a ballistics chart to 200 yards which showed a 4.3 mil come up at 200. So instead of twisting the dial I just held halfway between the 4 and 4.5 mil hash marks - ping ping ping ping ping, five out of five.
Love those 10x mil/mil scopes, especially when SWFA has them on sale, and have purchased six of them over the last couple of years - two for my "serious" .22 rifles and the other four on various long range centerfire rigs.
Back to the thread topic. I was using CCI AR Tactical ammo which throws a a 40 grain bullet right at 1200 fps (1198 avg on the Oehler 35). The bullets surely go subsonic over 200 yards but apparently transiting the sound barrier didn't disturb them enough to miss a 3 MOA target. Not trying to argue or counter the finer points of ballistic theory here but I guess you gotta match your target to your expectations.
Did my bit this morning, and confirmed that even with a tilted rail, my Tract 1” hunting scope doesn’t have enough clicks for dialing so I can hold right on at 200. Looks like the SS 10x is going back on.
When I was playing with the Martini @ 200 yards I used a set of the Burris Rings with the inserts when I ran out of MOA - Worked pretty well.
I have a bunch of those and extra inserts, but the Tract is destined for a Howa Mini that won’t need either. The rings it’s in are Warne Mountain Techs, a new favorite.
Was looking at them online yesterday and decided the MOA version could be useful as well for some stuff since the numbers are marked, no counting needed, just holdover.
My MIL/MIL was already in rings spaced for a rail so mounting it was a quick job. Hoping for a still morning soon.
Did my bit this morning, and confirmed that even with a tilted rail, my Tract 1” hunting scope doesn’t have enough clicks for dialing so I can hold right on at 200. Looks like the SS 10x is going back on.
When I was playing with the Martini @ 200 yards I used a set of the Burris Rings with the inserts when I ran out of MOA - Worked pretty well.
I have a bunch of those and extra inserts, but the Tract is destined for a Howa Mini that won’t need either. The rings it’s in are Warne Mountain Techs, a new favorite.
I like those Warnes myself if I’m mounting flat. The Leupold BCs aren’t half bad either.
This is how I set up my Ruger Precision Rimfire for long range play.
The rifle comes with a 30 moa base attached. I added 20 more with the AR-Stoner mount from Midway. With the SWFA 10X MilQuad scope, this gives 36 Mils (120 moa) of useable elevation in the erector, from a 60 yard zero, with supersonic ammo. Plus there is another 10 mils on the reticle.
On paper that is enough for a direct hold out to 600+ yards. I've only played with it out to around 500 yards.
Most of the time I have this little 1.5-5X Leupold on there, for typical 22 tasks/fun. It has 100 moa on tap. Enough to get to 500+ yards, but harder to see splashes.
Yesterday I bottomed out the Tract and then had to hold about another 18”, plus 6” into the wind I couldn’t feel. Had one round of SK left and guesstimated it onto the 4” plate, very satisfying.
Shoulda got the 30moa Area 419 instead of the 15 I guess.
Did my bit this morning, and confirmed that even with a tilted rail, my Tract 1” hunting scope doesn’t have enough clicks for dialing so I can hold right on at 200. Looks like the SS 10x is going back on.
Don’t tell Stick…………
That SWFA SS is a great scope.
Was out yesterday morning working up some '06 cast bullet loads and plinking with a Tikka T1x in between strings. It wears a SS 10x mil/mil sighted dead on at 100 yards.
The range has a 6" disc at 200; I had previously worked up a ballistics chart to 200 yards which showed a 4.3 mil come up at 200. So instead of twisting the dial I just held halfway between the 4 and 4.5 mil hash marks - ping ping ping ping ping, five out of five.
Love those 10x mil/mil scopes, especially when SWFA has them on sale, and have purchased six of them over the last couple of years - two for my "serious" .22 rifles and the other four on various long range centerfire rigs.
Back to the thread topic. I was using CCI AR Tactical ammo which throws a a 40 grain bullet right at 1200 fps (1198 avg on the Oehler 35). The bullets surely go subsonic over 200 yards but apparently transiting the sound barrier didn't disturb them enough to miss a 3 MOA target. Not trying to argue or counter the finer points of ballistic theory here but I guess you gotta match your target to your expectations.
Originally Posted by Mannlicher
saying 'hmmmmm' as I grab a handful of mixed .22 LR from a jug before going out to shoot..................
And those posts illustrate so much.
Couple weeks ago a daughter and I were out shooting 22 at clay birds. 25-50 yards with MKIIs or her American Rim fire with some cheap 4x scope I picked up. She was working on her offhand and trying to get shots off quicker.
There is a metal swinger at 200 in a lane through the trees, Just for hits and giggles I sat at a bench, rested my elbows, took a SWAG that the junction of the duplex hairs was about right for elevation. DING! First round. Using Golden Bullets from a bucket. Emma had to try, and after she understood the post as the aiming point, Was ringing it at will.
One of those things that shouldn't be. But it is. And way too easy!
To the original poster I hesitate to send you to another forum but you would be interested in a long series of posts by Jala on RF central where he shoots all 50 rounds of a box at 100 yds and another box at 200 yards off of a bench. His work with a few other guys additions show just how challenging it is to get 22lr ammo that has consistency due to many factors. Almost every brand is represented in the testing. Learned a lot looking over the different “Groups” that were represented in that very extensive collection of shooting work. My 22’s are better fed after a bit of scratching around to buy some of the ammo choices that held up better in those shooting groups posted.
To the original poster I hesitate to send you to another forum but you would be interested in a long series of posts by Jala on RF central where he shoots all 50 rounds of a box at 100 yds and another box at 200 yards off of a bench. His work with a few other guys additions show just how challenging it is to get 22lr ammo that has consistency due to many factors. Almost every brand is represented in the testing. Learned a lot looking over the different “Groups” that were represented in that very extensive collection of shooting work. My 22’s are better fed after a bit of scratching around to buy some of the ammo choices that held up better in those shooting groups posted.
Those tests are fascinating. The standard deviation in the velocity of a lot of rimfire ammo is HUGE. Add in a little wind, and you come to realize that what a lot of people say they do at 200 yards with a rimfire is BS.
Not sure what those people are saying they do, but even in the short time I’ve been playing at this I’ve found you can have a lot of fun trying to ring smallish steel out there, but wind, even wind that I can’t see or feel, makes doing it consistently way over my skillset, but the fun remains. Since there have long been competitions at that range, I have to conclude that a lot is possible for someone who’s done his homework. Someday when age really catches up to me and keeps me out of the field, I may devote some time to seriously getting better, maybe not.
I know that since joining rimfirecentral I have changed a lot about what I think about rimfire shooting and how I approach it. I seldom buy anything but subsonic or standard velocity ammo any more. I pay very close attention to what groups my rimfire rifles shoot and which ammo they prefer. And I've become a much more selective collector of .22 rimfire rifles.
I do know that a lot of these cherry picked groups I see guys post are pure BS quite often or the luckiest group in years of trying and by accident they all landed close together. Unless somebody is willing to show the whole result of the day's shooting, I'm not buying their story any more. On the other hand there are some very accomplished shooters on that site that definitely can and have taught me and others a lot about accurate shooting and are willing to help anyone out who asks for help without making them feel like a fool for asking- something this site could use a bit of help with.
![[Linked Image from mcarbo.com]](https://www.mcarbo.com/.Content%20Pages%20Images/22LR%20Ballistics%20Chart/22lr-ballistics-for-your-rifle-webopt.jpg)
![[Linked Image from bergerbullets.com]](https://bergerbullets.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Custom-Drag-Models-for-Extreme-Long-Range.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/UZ1d37I.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/tDxwjgE.jpg)