Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of.....22LR Accuracy. An Experiment.

**Silvercrow1** · 02-21-2014, 11:17 AM

First looked at the Paco Kelley device. Consists of a "collet" made from round stock (brass I believe?) with a hole drilled through it. Inletted on one end to facilitate insertion of a live .22LR round. In the other end one of a few "rods", the latter shaped to form various bullet shapes by swaging, is inserted. The unit is placed on a hard flat surface, cartridge facing up, and the rod is "wacked" (tapped actually) to re-form the bullet. Shapes include things Paco calls "Nasti-nose" and the like are formed. There are also a "dished out nose" and a "federal Hydro Shock" style hollow point. The unit can reportedly be used with an arbor press too (seems safer and more uniform with a press, don't you think?) There are reportedly various diameter "collets available; .223, .224 etc.

Second unit is a "D-Rock". Similar to the Kelly unit, there are 1,762 different rods that can be purchased separately re-forming bullet heads into such configurations as the "Mt. Rushmore" head and one that imprints the "Lord's Prayer". Only kiddin'! An exaggeration...but only slightly.

Finally, I looked at the Neal Waltz unit. This is a sizing "die" that fits into a single stage press. There are two common head formers available; a "hollow pointer" and a "flat-nosed-nippler" (my terminology), the latter strikingly resembling an Eley match bullet. It is totally adjustable and comes with a .22LR cartridge holder. A third head former is reportedly available but I currently have no details.

I bought the Waltz device (OUCH$). Seems to me to be more controllable, is VERY well made, is adjustable for amount of swage and out of all 3, Waltz responded to e-mails within 24 hours, and spoke to me extensively on the phone once. I like they guy! His device is expensive but out of the three- the better for me.

Continued...

**Silvercrow1** · 02-21-2014, 11:43 AM

"Geez Brian, whatcha gonna do with all this cr...er...stuff?" Glad you asked, fellow .22LR fiends!
My intention is to 1- take lower and medium grade .22LR ammo. and, keeping some "standard", measure and sort some by rim thickness; modify some measured / sorted ammo., modify some un-measured / unsorted ammo. ; perform "tests" on all and report findings here.

I've read TONS of verbiage on how modifications, measuring / sorting etc. either improves, or doesn't improve, "standard" ammo. But haven't read where the tests were done within the same manufacturers types AND have not seen the resultant targets. (SOME exceptions, but few, and in my opinion, not conclusive). One extensive test I saw listed an unbelievable amount of ammo. manufacturers and types and was shot indoors in a "tunnel" range. The rifle used was an Olympic class model. VERY impressive documentation but ammo. was unsorted / unmodified and the rifle used...well...it wasn't an "every-person's" rifle. Sabe?

This is the "average Joe's" testing so the test rifle will be my MKII, will report later what scope will be used. Distance will be 50 yards from the bench- rifle "bagged" front and rear. I'll do my best to keep it real; atmospheric conditions, sobriety of shooter (me) etc.

The ammo. that I'll be using is as follows: (if velocities are listed, they are PUBLISHED and not chrono'd). Testing will be done WITHIN the types- no sense comparing sub-sonic ammo. to HV, CCI to Remington, in my opinion.

Trying to determine 1- does sorting matter? 2- does modifying bullet matter 3- how much does it matter, if at all?

Shooting for Groups / Accuracy / Consistancy

Vintage T-22 Western (1060 FPS)
CCI Stinger (1540 FPS)
CCI Mini Mag (1235 FPS)
CCI Standard (researching)
Norma "Tactical" (LOL) (1040 FPS)
Federal Lightning (1240 FPS)
Federal Game Shock (researching)
Remington Golden (1255 FPS)
Remington Subsonic (1050 FPS)
Eley Match (used as a "standard")

My rifle is PLENTY accurate and I ain't so bad either. THERE is ALWAYS room for improvement though...so here goes!
And YES- I will include pics.
This is gonna take a while- please be patient.
Thank you- Brian