Rifle Shooter – July 2019

88 http://www.rifleshootermagazine.co.uk

ACCURACY AND LOAD PERFORMANCE WITH MATTHEW CAMERON

There is nothing different or remarkable about any of these

rifles – all are stock standard factory issue To get some

consistency, all ammunition for each rifle was loaded on the

same day using the same powder lot. The tests would

consist of:

(a) Comfortable: A clean barrel with a singular shot fired

and marked on the target, followed by a further three shots

fired at a comfortable pace. Measurement between the first

shot and the centre of the following three shots.

(b) Timed: A clean barrel with a singular shot fired and

marked on the target. The barrel would then be allowed to

cool to ambient conditions, say 15 minutes, followed by a

further three singular shots at five-minute intervals.

Measurement as above.

Each barrel would be cleaned in the same manner after

each four shots. The results of each target to be contained

in a simple spreadsheet to compare the results; it should be

a very interesting exercise. Another problem when conducting

such tests outdoors is the changing conditions, not only daily

but sometimes hourly, and this will inevitably affect the

results. All loads would be shot off both front and rear rests

to get the best stability. The loads were quite conventional

and the components were simply those available. All were

load-developed at some stage and none produced signs of

excessive pressure. It should be noted that of the 40 groups

fired, only one had the initial shot within the group.

I found the results very interesting. Overall, the best

consistency was achieved by the .22-250 Remington in the

Savage LRPV and its bull barrel with a 1:9 twist rate. The

Savage LRPV would have confounded the critics – it was

actually capable of some consistency, something that is not

supposed to happen in a factory rifle! It is also interesting to

note that the slow-fired groups were, on average, larger than

the comfortable shooting speed! We fired five groups for

each test. Of course, there are those who would say that the

number of sample shots is insufficient; I suggest there are

enough to predict a general trend.

I was not surprised at the relatively poor showing of

the .243 Winchester results. The velocity was down by a

considerable amount, indicating considerable wear; rough

records indicate some 2,500 rounds through it. With the

Swift, slow shooting produced the best groups, which is

perhaps not all that surprising as it is a relatively hot

varmint cartridge.

The other surprise was the Savage in .25-06 Remington.

The rifle did, in fact, produce many sub-MOA groups; note

that the comfortable shooting speed test almost averaged

MOA group size. Entry-level rifles are not supposed to shoot

with this level of accuracy. All food for thought!

Shoot safe!

»
Cartridge Diff 1/ Group Diff 2/ Group
group (a) size group (b) size
.22-250 R 0.69" 0.67" 0.664" 0.835"
.243 Win. 1.22" 1.68" 1.06" 1.57"
.220 Swift 0.65" 1.50" 0.96" 1.19"
.25-06 R 0.65" 1.05" 0.75" 1.44"
(a) = comfortable (b) = timed

BELOW LEFT: Typical

result from .22-250

Remington at a

comfortable pace

BELOW RIGHT: The

.243 Win target for

the timed-shot test

BOTTOM LEFT: Two

projectiles, one hole!

The .25-06 Rem

offered one of the

better targets

BOTTOM RIGHT: The

.220 Swift during the

timed-shot test