Gents please ignore the one sd error shown. We had a snafu with either the chrono or myself. The xtreme shot comparable sd to the special match each session
Between your channel and ‘Day At The Range’ (and I must include Cyclops Joe in this mix)…I find more useful information on .22 ammunition than any other RUclips channels 👍🤘👍🤘👍🤘
Absolutely the most accurate 22 rimfire ammo I ever shot was the dimpled primer match ammo from federal that they made in the 90s wish someone would make something like it again.
Amen to that. I had 3-4 boxes and didn't really appreciate what I had until it was too late to buy more. Jeez, with the current interest in precision 22 you'd think Federal would bring that stuff back. Do the Eastern European or Russian (can't remember which) Olympians still have access to the stuff Federal copied when they made that?
I have spent a small fortune on high end PCP Airguns , compressors and a small fortune in slugs ! Between the air leaks , heavy weight and having high pressure air available I am relegated to bench shooting with these PCP’s ! 22 rim fire is so much more convenient for hunting , plinking and competition. Enjoy your videos ! 👍
Continually, the best practical rimfire info on RUclips. Thanks again, brother. Helps with shooting paper or bushy tails. I really value the info for making the best decisions. I'm still trying to find Pursuit of Accuracy camo straws for my next hunt...😜
Good video. A semi-interesting story: about a month ago I shot an NRL22 match with a 10/22. I determined that Norma Match was the best choice given my options at the time. A week before the match I shot some groups and got my dope, everything looked good. Match day was right around freezing and the Norma Match felt like it was shooting slower than expected. It was .2-.6 mils low depending on the target range. My unscientific conclusion was that the heavy lube on the Norma Match did not like the cold temperature. For this and a couple of other reasons I decided not to use Norma Match anymore. Now that I think about it, calling this a semi-interesting story was a bit of a stretch. Anyhoo, thanks for doing what you do.
I have been experimenting with lubes/lubed bullets/lubed barrels in all combinations, no different than anything else in modern 22LR rifles & ammo.....simply put - insanity - from one group to the next, & I only shoot at 100Y. JUST when you think you got it......WhiskeyTangoFox !! .... over 50 years ago I only shot out to 75Y with cheap-ass Marlins & K-mart 4X scope, & what ever I could get for ammo, & NEVER cleaned barrels, EVER - not a squirrel lived out to 75Y, ALL headshots - 100%...sitting on my butt up against a tree, rifle on knee.....WTH happened....now - ALL new shit, $1500- $2500 later - not much improvement if any.....SMH !!!!....lol
Bought a brick last summer of the norma to test. Wasnt the best at 50, 100, 150m from my t1x, but in windy conditions and 300 meters it held its accuracy better vs other match ammo that was more accurate at the shorter distances
The regular Norma match I just tested at 50 yards. Shot 1/2” groups out of a CZ457 with Lilja. I’m stoked to run it at my next NRL. Not bad for $7 a box ammo. No matter how good the ELR stuff is…I just can’t justify $30 in ammo costs for a single comp, let alone all the practice costs. They’re outta their mind at that price.
Thanks Josh. I’m probably going to just get a few boxes rather than a whole brick at this time. One box for each of my guns to see if any of them like this brand.
The Norma extreme is the same as the Rws long range plus ive tested both and it only comes into its own over 300 yards and good at 500 yards saves about 10 moa at 500 yards i worked for the uk importer . and use to lot test for them.
Ive never seen ammo that didnt perform at 150 and 200 become a performer at distance. Not saying its not possible, litz says its not possible, but im sure there are occassions. Im also not worried about more speed to get less drop because the un sexy side of speed no one talks about for 22lr is that it becomes less wind stable. I will take the extra dialing over less wind steerability for long range shooting any day
What I find concerning is the price points you are seeing some of the "match " grade ammo these days approaching that $25 a box of 50 threshold which in my opinion is getting ridiculous. I can understand the $15-$18 or so premium pricing on the good stuff but it is reaching a point the products performance at these really high levels is not matching what the price point is. Just like this video, the $15 a box ammo performed as well as the new higher priced stuff so how can they justify the higher prices?
Both rifles you used were button rifled. A Kriger or Bartlein would be cut rifled and most Rugers are hammer forged. Using rifles with different types of barrels would make the test more informative. But I always enjoy your videos.
Good first test, but definitely needs additional testing. Any ammo needs lot testing to find what shoots best in your rifle. Temperature, humidity and wind will have an impact on the results. I would not write it off yet. I agree that expectations are high when you look at the cost compared to other ammo. I have a few boxes and I am going to go for the 300/400 yd steel. That's the only way to see if it's hype or not.
That will make it tough to compete with other ammo. I checked my boxes and they only have a bar code. There is an (01) before the code, but who knows what that means. Thanks for the test run video. I was hoping to see some real data to compare with other high end ammo.
Great video josh not seen the Norma yet but have tried the rws version off memory it was running around 1250 in my 1710 Ran it against R50 at 50 and 100 on a very windy day was OK but had double the SD 12😮 Strangely it was the best match ammo on the Kyl at 221 y 202m
Compare against SK long Range and match barrels that have different types of rifling, (button, cut, hammered). That would tell us a lot more about this ammo.
I wouldnt expect to see any differance until out to 3 4 500 yards when the projectiles spin has slowed "extreme". I think this is when the sectional density may play a big part. Not only have they Gouged the lead out of the base but the price ffs. Wouldnt it only be one more die and step in the manufacturing process ?
I think we all knew it was going to be another norma gimmick 😊 we have seen much better ammo on your channel for less dough. Thanks for revealing the truth and setting things straight! 🙌 🎉
The FX Chrony does not reliably show an accurate BC because it does not actually pick up the bullet for the full distance and instead guesses at what the speed will be at said distances.
Yeah as i understand it, its picking up mv and then velocity at 1 more point. That is actually all thats needed to calculate bc. Then the other distsnces are plotted in by the results of the read 2 points. Much like a kestrel works for dope.
@@PursuitofAccuracy Yeah, that's correct. You only need two exact speeds at two exact distances. However, I really don't think it's reliably doing that. There's no reason at all it should change based on the distance you're shooting. The closer to the muzzle you capture that second speed the less accurate that calculation tends to be. In other videos I've seen it show two different muzzle velocities which it then showed as being the exact same speed when they reached 50, 100 etc multiple times in a row.
@@MMBRM ah that is interesting. I will pay attention to that on my next outing. I will see if they list what distance the 2nd shot will be picked up at as well. Ive used it to line out some dope sucessfully before but anything once can be a fluke. Ive used it more as a tool to compare different projectiles. Thanks for watching and commenting
@@PursuitofAccuracy Yeah, one of the reasons this initially occurred to me is that you shoot in a tight lane with lots of obstructions etc. This won't allow it to accurately measure bullet speed at the further distances. Also it clearly can't pick it up further than whatever target you are shooting it at. Actually now that I think about it maybe when you were shooting at the further targets it was able to pick up the bullet at a further distance and make a more accurate calculation? It's too bad the garmin can't pick up multiple distances or you could compare. If you happen to have a lab radar it will do it and it will only give you a speed at a further distance if it actually sees the projectile there. It does not fill in the blanks with expected speeds. My pleasure! Thanks for taking the time to reply. I enjoy your content and your straightforward approach.
@@PursuitofAccuracy I'm guessing you may not pay too much attention to the comments on old videos but I thought of an experiment to test where the FX is picking up the second velocity. If you take a target board and move it closer and closer until it no longer gives a BC then you'll know. If it's still giving you a BC when the target is 10 yards away you know it's not making a very accurate prediction(It obviously can't keep reading a bullet it can't see behind a target). You'd also be able to see if/how the BC changed as you moved it closer which would give some insight into how it's making the calculation.
Hey Josh, any plans to retest this now that we have warmer temps? Whidden has a bunch of lots of this stuff to choose, might be interesting to see if you got a bum lot or got bit by cold weather. IME, Norma doesn't do well in the cold.
Very interesting That Norma bullet looks like the one they use in the RWS R-Plus long range. 43g with a cone base. Would you be able to compare the Norma to the R-Plus long rang next time. Ps. I use RWS for my long range shooting Any time I tested Norma it never shot well for me. Keep up the good work 🍀💪🇮🇪
It depends a lot on setup. Seeing how consistent the numbers were i use it as a comparison tool and not for data to true with. For comparative reasons ive found it to be a good tool
Hey Pursuit of Accuracy...Ive got a 22lr chamber question. What reamer does CZ457 use? Mine is crazy accurate and I'm building a Custom.Whats the best reamer for a bolt action magazine fed? Ihave a Stiller action & Lilja 3 groove barrel? Freeland MG is what I'm looking at.Also looked at Lilja Match..I called Lilja and the girl a Lilja couldn't tell me squat.except I think we use Lilja 3 reamer now.She had No info on dimensions.Everyone at Shit Show I guess
Theres a ton of reamers and guys using reamerless chambers now. Most smiths are not gonna give up their chamber dimensions freely to anyone if its their reamer, just how it is. Jgs chambers have worked well for me in the past
@@PursuitofAccuracy I was just asking you which reamer you have used that works best for you.But It does not really matter.Its not that important. Dave Kiff at PTG c is designing one.There are so many it really boils down to which ammo you want to shoot and build one to fit it.
I'd test everything you can. They all like something a little different it seems But for cheap ish fun cci sv or Norma tac 22 seems to be a good starting point
Does the first impact then become the point of aim? Do you try and keyhole the first round or are you still aiming center target? Always Wondered. My guess is the first scenario.
I almost bought some kinda glad I didn't now after seeing this video I would do at least 400 yard testing due to their claims about the distances you can shoot this ammo.
@hopefloats7573 500 with a 6.5 is to ezey. I like the challenge of shooting 22lr long range. I've made it out to 300yrd so far with 4" groups so I'm thinking it's possible.
I would have liked to see it against a $8 box of Norma Match. I have a lot of it my MTR doesn’t hate. Let me know if you want a box and I’ll donate it for some channel content. I also have some RWS Rifle Match at $11 a box that shoots about the same SD’s and ES’s
It starts from 40 cents per round - are they f***ng crazy there? I would rather hand load .223 rem for this money and get better results at further distances.
“Groups do not reconverge.” Tuners would like a word with you. The concept of positive compensation is based on changing where groups converge to happen at the distance you want it to happen at. Tune a rifle to get the absolute best groups you can get at 50 yards and you’ve now made it shoot worse at every other distance. That’s the whole point of a tuner and positive compensation. What you do with the tuner changes where the “best distance” is located. The same thing still happens without a tuner installed. You just give up control over where that “best distance” is without one. This is easy to test with a centrefire rifle and multiple electronic targets. Set one up at 100 yards, 200 yards, 300 yards, etc., such that one bullet will go through every target frame and you will see for yourself that a 1” group (or ~1 MOA) group at 100 yards does bot translate into a 2” group (still ~1 MOA) at 200 yards and a 3” group (still ~1 MOA) at 300 yards, etc. A given rifle with a given load will shoot best at precisely ONE distance and will shoot worse than that at every other distance. This is confirmed by simple ballistic theory. I’ll give you an exaggerated example to illustrate the point. That rifle might shoot 1 MOA at 100 yards, and the same bullets continuing on to 200 yards might yield a 0.75 MOA group at that distance, and then 0.5 MOA at 300 yards, and then 0.75 MOA at 400 yards, 1.0 MOA at 500 yards, 1.5 MOA at 600 yards, 2.0 MOA at 700 yards. In that case you can see rather easily that the best group is at 300 yards. And it shoots worse every where else. Every single rifle is like that. A given rifle with a given load shoots best at one distance, and only one distance. Real results won’t be exaggerated that badly, but the same idea still applies. If you can gather together two or more electronic targets to set up at different distances that will be the easiest way to confirm this with your own eyes. Shoot a few different rifles and a few different loads and you will see that each one will shoot better at a specific distance and worse at the others. And the idea of positive compensation explains why. Playing with a ballistic calculator can help understand this, too. A ballistic calculator will give you what would happen in an ideal situation where you have perfect bullets with perfect loads and barrels that do not vibrate. Real world results deviate from what the calculator tells you because bullets aren’t perfect, loads aren’t perfect, barrels vibrate, etc. Shoot a 5-shot group with the chronograph set up. You’ll have the velocity for each shot. You’ll have the actual landing spot on target for each shot. Use the calculator to determine what the elevation of each shot should have been in an ideal situation and compare that to the actual results. On average, a large part of the deviation from the calculator’s ideal result is because the barrel vibrated and was pointing somewhere else. A tuner lets you turn that phenomenon into positive compensation if you set it up correctly. The calculator might tell you that with the velocity spread of those 5 shots you should have had a 1 MOA group. But you actually got a 0.5 MOA group. Why? Positive compensation is why. Maybe you actually got a 1.5 MOA group instead. It is still the same reason, only in this case you would call it negative compensation. Positive compensation means you ultimately aim faster shots lower and aim slower shots higher. Adjust the amount of compensation just the right amount via a tuner and you’ll have faster and slower shots hitting at the same elevation. So you get groups that are better than without the tuner. Get it wrong and you might aim faster shots higher and slower shots lower, resulting in groups that are bigger than without the tuner.
Im basing that off of brian litz and their near millions of rounds down range testing with some of the best tech in the business, they make the custom curves for kestrels etc. Im not gonna argue against litz, you can but im not lol
@@PursuitofAccuracy Just because the guy has learned a lot doesn’t mean he’s learned everything. He couldn’t even make a rimfire tuner work. He chose a stupid barrel for that test, and a random tuner that didn’t… meh. He was dumb that day. He’s not a god. He’s just a man. That he’s learned more than most people doesn’t mean he always knows what he’s talking about. He literally thinks tuners don’t work, despite every single ARA competitor using them, some better than others. He’s capable of being wrong, just like you and me.
@@ClaytonMacleod yeah im not saying hes infallable but he tested convergence with thousands of rounds and it never happened. But that isnt the point really. I was saying those groups arent going to shrink up at 500 yards just because its got a new bullet design and marketed as a long range ammo.
@@PursuitofAccuracy Like I said, tuners wouldn’t work if convergence wasn’t a thing. And also like I said, this is incredibly easy to test for yourself if you have centrefire rifles and more than one ShotMarker electronic target to shoot through. All rifle/load combinations shoot best at one distance. That’s just how it works.
@@PursuitofAccuracy Smallbore metallic silhouette is shot with targets at 40 m, 60m, 77 m, and 100 m. We need zeroes for all four distances, and as a result we shoot many groups at all four distances while testing and zeroing. And when we lot test ammunition at buying time we test all the different lots at all four distances each. Every single lot performs differently at all four distances. We all look for whatever shoots best for us at the 77 m distance. That’s because turkeys at 77 m are the hardest target to hit. We accept a small amount of error at the other animals:distances in order to get the best performance at the hardest animal. During those tests over many years of competition we’ve all had ammo that shoots best at one of the distances but worse at all the others. It always works that way. One year I even set up a test where I shot through paper at all four distances at once, just like the centrefire/ShotMarker test I suggested. So one bullet went though all four targets. I used the thinnest paper I could find to taint the results the least, as the bullets will indeed be disturbed by going through the paper to some degree. And when measuring all the targets and compensating for distance by converting to MOA the group sizes did indeed vary at each target. They weren’t simply smallest at 40 m and largest at 100 m. The distance that had the smallest group varied with each ammo lot/brand. This is precisely why I said what I said earlier. I’ve seen it with my own eyes with smallbore. The results are slightly tainted by having to use paper, but it was still obvious enough to see it happening. Using centrefire and ShotMarker targets will avoid that tainting of results since nothing touched the bullet. Unfortunately, at the moment I only have access to one ShotMarker target. Believe me, as soon as I have access to more than one the very first test I want to do is to show how convergence is indeed a thing. All rifles shoot a given load best at exactly one distance, and the groups are worse closer snd further than that distance. This is why you shouldn’t do load development for 1000-yard competitions at 100 yards. You’re tuning the load for the wrong distance if you do, making it shoot worse at the other distance as a result.
I DON'T HAVE A ENGINERING DEGREE FROM AN IVY LEAGUE SCHOOL LIKE MIT (THANK GOD) BUT TO IMPROVE BC I THINK YOU START AT THE FRONT OF THE PROJECTILE NOT THE ASS END.. . JUST SAYIN🤔🤔🤔
Great low wind day to try ammo out. Perfect conditions. Thats what i expected to see with the advertised numbers. I would think these engineers would know better by now. They should hire a top notch rimfire benchrest shooter for input. That ammo will never see my guns barrel. Wasted effort norma.
Looks like the Extreme suffers from some marketing hype. An SD of 33 is not acceptable. It looks like it may be suffering from a high velocity first round event just like the Eley does. A rocket tail and a lower BC makes no sense. Over hyped and not worth it.
Well the selling point of the ammo is its better in the wind......so i disagree. Its long range ammo, when your shooting long range your most likely shooting in the wind
Not pointless at all. However, 22LR rifles are notorious for being ammo sensitive, so your rifle may prefer something different. Your chrono numbers reveal potential accuracy of ammo in your rifle.
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
Gents please ignore the one sd error shown. We had a snafu with either the chrono or myself. The xtreme shot comparable sd to the special match each session
It's not easy making premium rimfire ammo.....but marketing rimfire ammo is much easier
Super happy funtime big dik buck smasher cool guy extreme penetrator! 😂😂😂😂
Between your channel and ‘Day At The Range’ (and I must include Cyclops Joe in this mix)…I find more useful information on .22 ammunition than any other RUclips channels 👍🤘👍🤘👍🤘
Thanks brother
Thanks for sharing your results. The community really appreciates the work you do brother!
Thanks brother! We appreciate you
Absolutely the most accurate 22 rimfire ammo I ever shot was the dimpled primer match ammo from federal that they made in the 90s wish someone would make something like it again.
Amen to that. I had 3-4 boxes and didn't really appreciate what I had until it was too late to buy more. Jeez, with the current interest in precision 22 you'd think Federal would bring that stuff back. Do the Eastern European or Russian (can't remember which) Olympians still have access to the stuff Federal copied when they made that?
UM1 was damn good stuff.
Wish I would have bought truckload of it. Agree with you with the interest in rimfire shooting can't believe a manufacturer wouldn't make it again
It’s was good stuff. I’ve got 25 rounds left of the dimpled champion Federal and wish I had 25 cases.
I have spent a small fortune on high end PCP Airguns , compressors and a small fortune in slugs !
Between the air leaks , heavy weight and having high pressure air available I am relegated to bench shooting with these PCP’s !
22 rim fire is so much more convenient for hunting , plinking and competition.
Enjoy your videos ! 👍
Very true
Glad you did this one. I was going to order in a brick of the normal to test. Saved me the time and expense. Thanks
Continually, the best practical rimfire info on RUclips. Thanks again, brother. Helps with shooting paper or bushy tails. I really value the info for making the best decisions. I'm still trying to find Pursuit of Accuracy camo straws for my next hunt...😜
Lol thanks brother. I almost made a fake infomercial on straws 😂
Good video. A semi-interesting story: about a month ago I shot an NRL22 match with a 10/22. I determined that Norma Match was the best choice given my options at the time. A week before the match I shot some groups and got my dope, everything looked good. Match day was right around freezing and the Norma Match felt like it was shooting slower than expected. It was .2-.6 mils low depending on the target range. My unscientific conclusion was that the heavy lube on the Norma Match did not like the cold temperature. For this and a couple of other reasons I decided not to use Norma Match anymore. Now that I think about it, calling this a semi-interesting story was a bit of a stretch. Anyhoo, thanks for doing what you do.
Thanks brother
I have been experimenting with lubes/lubed bullets/lubed barrels in all combinations, no different than anything else in modern 22LR rifles & ammo.....simply put - insanity - from one group to the next, & I only shoot at 100Y. JUST when you think you got it......WhiskeyTangoFox !! .... over 50 years ago I only shot out to 75Y with cheap-ass Marlins & K-mart 4X scope, & what ever I could get for ammo, & NEVER cleaned barrels, EVER - not a squirrel lived out to 75Y, ALL headshots - 100%...sitting on my butt up against a tree, rifle on knee.....WTH happened....now - ALL new shit, $1500- $2500 later - not much improvement if any.....SMH !!!!....lol
A fair & honest comparison… I like it.
I bought 2 50ct boxes and will tested at 200 yds this weekend on my Savage Mark II TR. Thanks for the video.
I'll stick with CCI standard velocity ..all my guns love CCI 1070...
RWS Special Match is made on the R50/100 machines.
I figured it was, much like lapua and eley do
Good stuff Josh. I don't think there's any point in further testing. The ES, SD and BC numbers have already spoken.
Bought a brick last summer of the norma to test. Wasnt the best at 50, 100, 150m from my t1x, but in windy conditions and 300 meters it held its accuracy better vs other match ammo that was more accurate at the shorter distances
From my experience Lapua long range, extreme long range, x act, center X Midas+ and RWS R100 is always good to go
I enjoy watching your videos pursuit of accuracy, do you have a video going over the chronograph you use?
Thanks Josh, and Len. Plenty of good info there. This is the way...
You perceptive son of a gun, this is the way!
The regular Norma match I just tested at 50 yards. Shot 1/2” groups out of a CZ457 with Lilja. I’m stoked to run it at my next NRL. Not bad for $7 a box ammo.
No matter how good the ELR stuff is…I just can’t justify $30 in ammo costs for a single comp, let alone all the practice costs. They’re outta their mind at that price.
Thanks Josh. I’m probably going to just get a few boxes rather than a whole brick at this time. One box for each of my guns to see if any of them like this brand.
Would like to see it tested in a cut rifled barrel and a barrel with a twist that is faster than the normal 1:16.
All my kriegers are 16 twist unfortunately
Very interesting test! I would really like to see your test at 300Y if you can with little wind... ;) thanks
The Norma extreme is the same as the Rws long range plus ive tested both and it only comes into its own over 300 yards and good at 500 yards saves about 10 moa at 500 yards i worked for the uk importer . and use to lot test for them.
Ive never seen ammo that didnt perform at 150 and 200 become a performer at distance. Not saying its not possible, litz says its not possible, but im sure there are occassions.
Im also not worried about more speed to get less drop because the un sexy side of speed no one talks about for 22lr is that it becomes less wind stable. I will take the extra dialing over less wind steerability for long range shooting any day
I also would like to see it with a Krieger or another cut rifled barrel.
Thank you Josh again for a good video of information and data.
Thanks brother
Great video. Not everything that glitters is gold.
I saw these the other day. Thanksnfor the test!!
Thanks brother
What I find concerning is the price points you are seeing some of the "match " grade ammo these days approaching that $25 a box of 50 threshold which in my opinion is getting ridiculous.
I can understand the $15-$18 or so premium pricing on the good stuff but it is reaching a point the products performance at these really high levels is not matching what the price point is.
Just like this video, the $15 a box ammo performed as well as the new higher priced stuff so how can they justify the higher prices?
Thanks Josh ,I’ve been waiting for a review on the ammo
Thank you for the information and video!!!❤
Both rifles you used were button rifled. A Kriger or Bartlein would be cut rifled and most Rugers are hammer forged. Using rifles with different types of barrels would make the test more informative. But I always enjoy your videos.
We had a limited amount of ammo to test with. Picked two rifles and let it eat
Good first test, but definitely needs additional testing. Any ammo needs lot testing to find what shoots best in your rifle. Temperature, humidity and wind will have an impact on the results. I would not write it off yet. I agree that expectations are high when you look at the cost compared to other ammo. I have a few boxes and I am going to go for the 300/400 yd steel. That's the only way to see if it's hype or not.
I dont think they are selling it by lot
That will make it tough to compete with other ammo. I checked my boxes and they only have a bar code. There is an (01) before the code, but who knows what that means. Thanks for the test run video. I was hoping to see some real data to compare with other high end ammo.
@@ericf4779 yeah wish it would have turned out more definitively. Rarely do we get black and white answers in rimfire
Great video josh not seen the Norma yet but have tried the rws version off memory it was running around 1250 in my 1710
Ran it against R50 at 50 and 100 on a very windy day was OK but had double the SD 12😮
Strangely it was the best match ammo on the Kyl at 221 y 202m
Thank you. The only variable that could make it better is a different rifle that MAY like it. The numbers don’t show a reason to spend the extra $.
Yeah we had a limited amount of it so we picked 2 and went for it. Lens rifle shot it pretty well at 50 so figured it was the best chance
Compare against SK long Range and match barrels that have different types of rifling, (button, cut, hammered). That would tell us a lot more about this ammo.
The barrels used were a mullerworks on the cz and a shillen on the rimx
That’s awesome love the info you otta do the same test but with all kinds of different ammo. Love all your videos!!
Thanks brother
@@PursuitofAccuracy not a problem also i make leather sunshade covers if you interested ill make you one on me
@@Leatherman22 did you make the one chris from midwest long range uses?
@@PursuitofAccuracy no not sure who did his but i can make ones like that. Do you have a Facebook or instagram?
I wouldnt expect to see any differance until out to 3 4 500 yards when the projectiles spin has slowed "extreme".
I think this is when the sectional density may play a big part.
Not only have they Gouged the lead out of the base but the price ffs.
Wouldnt it only be one more die and step in the manufacturing process ?
Ive got no idea on the bullet making process brother. Im sure they have spent quite a lot in r&d
just different dies in the swaging machine. should make no difference in the number of steps to make them.
I noticed my pistols and rifles do not perform well until a number of rounds have been shot with it.
Very impressive group at 150 yards
I think we all knew it was going to be another norma gimmick 😊 we have seen much better ammo on your channel for less dough.
Thanks for revealing the truth and setting things straight! 🙌 🎉
Great video as usual. What is that nice looking pad you’ve got on your cheek riser?
Thats an xlr cheek pad i made work 😁
The FX Chrony does not reliably show an accurate BC because it does not actually pick up the bullet for the full distance and instead guesses at what the speed will be at said distances.
Yeah as i understand it, its picking up mv and then velocity at 1 more point. That is actually all thats needed to calculate bc. Then the other distsnces are plotted in by the results of the read 2 points.
Much like a kestrel works for dope.
@@PursuitofAccuracy Yeah, that's correct. You only need two exact speeds at two exact distances. However, I really don't think it's reliably doing that. There's no reason at all it should change based on the distance you're shooting. The closer to the muzzle you capture that second speed the less accurate that calculation tends to be. In other videos I've seen it show two different muzzle velocities which it then showed as being the exact same speed when they reached 50, 100 etc multiple times in a row.
@@MMBRM ah that is interesting. I will pay attention to that on my next outing. I will see if they list what distance the 2nd shot will be picked up at as well.
Ive used it to line out some dope sucessfully before but anything once can be a fluke. Ive used it more as a tool to compare different projectiles.
Thanks for watching and commenting
@@PursuitofAccuracy Yeah, one of the reasons this initially occurred to me is that you shoot in a tight lane with lots of obstructions etc. This won't allow it to accurately measure bullet speed at the further distances. Also it clearly can't pick it up further than whatever target you are shooting it at. Actually now that I think about it maybe when you were shooting at the further targets it was able to pick up the bullet at a further distance and make a more accurate calculation? It's too bad the garmin can't pick up multiple distances or you could compare. If you happen to have a lab radar it will do it and it will only give you a speed at a further distance if it actually sees the projectile there. It does not fill in the blanks with expected speeds. My pleasure! Thanks for taking the time to reply. I enjoy your content and your straightforward approach.
@@PursuitofAccuracy I'm guessing you may not pay too much attention to the comments on old videos but I thought of an experiment to test where the FX is picking up the second velocity. If you take a target board and move it closer and closer until it no longer gives a BC then you'll know. If it's still giving you a BC when the target is 10 yards away you know it's not making a very accurate prediction(It obviously can't keep reading a bullet it can't see behind a target). You'd also be able to see if/how the BC changed as you moved it closer which would give some insight into how it's making the calculation.
Hey Josh, any plans to retest this now that we have warmer temps? Whidden has a bunch of lots of this stuff to choose, might be interesting to see if you got a bum lot or got bit by cold weather. IME, Norma doesn't do well in the cold.
I casually shot some a few weeks ago and it was pretty much identical to what I saw before unfortunately
Very interesting
That Norma bullet looks like the one they use in the RWS R-Plus long range. 43g with a cone base.
Would you be able to compare the Norma to the R-Plus long rang next time.
Ps. I use RWS for my long range shooting
Any time I tested Norma it never shot well for me.
Keep up the good work 🍀💪🇮🇪
I dont think we can get ths rws branded 43 here.
Is that BC reading from the FX accurate. Many people say it’s not
It depends a lot on setup. Seeing how consistent the numbers were i use it as a comparison tool and not for data to true with. For comparative reasons ive found it to be a good tool
Where can I buy an RWS Special Match Test Brick? Thank you.
@@chaguie07171959 you typically call anschutz north america and order one but they havent had any rws in months
you should try RWS r100 if you can get it.
Ive shot and liked r50 but even r50 is over what im willing to pay for prs style shooting. I do want to test the r100 but the price.....oof
Hey Pursuit of Accuracy...Ive got a 22lr chamber question. What reamer does CZ457 use? Mine is crazy accurate and I'm building a Custom.Whats the best reamer for a bolt action magazine fed? Ihave a Stiller action & Lilja 3 groove barrel? Freeland MG is what I'm looking at.Also looked at Lilja Match..I called Lilja and the girl a Lilja couldn't tell me squat.except I think we use Lilja 3 reamer now.She had No info on dimensions.Everyone at Shit Show I guess
Theres a ton of reamers and guys using reamerless chambers now. Most smiths are not gonna give up their chamber dimensions freely to anyone if its their reamer, just how it is.
Jgs chambers have worked well for me in the past
@@PursuitofAccuracy I was just asking you which reamer you have used that works best for you.But It does not really matter.Its not that important. Dave Kiff at PTG c is designing one.There are so many it really boils down to which ammo you want to shoot and build one to fit it.
I bought a CZ-457 this weekend - what ammo would you suggest for 50-100yd target shooting?
I'd test everything you can. They all like something a little different it seems
But for cheap ish fun cci sv or Norma tac 22 seems to be a good starting point
Does the first impact then become the point of aim? Do you try and keyhole the first round or are you still aiming center target? Always Wondered. My guess is the first scenario.
I keep my poa the same
hyou would think if testing Long Range Ammo you would atleast test it at 250 and beyond.So much 22 ammo falls apart past 200 Meters.
Another good one.
I almost bought some kinda glad I didn't now after seeing this video I would do at least 400 yard testing due to their claims about the distances you can shoot this ammo.
Were gonna try and get out and shoot some distance with it soon. First calm day weve had was today and it rained lol
Thanks for testing! Currious what bolt shim you ran in the cz and if you change depending on ammo?
Mine was set up to run with no shims and really prefers eley as it gets a lot of engagement in the lands
Have you shot this ammo comparison at 200 yards? Longer distances than that?
I haven't shot it past the 150 in the video
great job as always buddy
Another Great Video 💯, Thanks 💥💥💥💥💥💥💥
Thanks brother
gotta give Eley and lapua centerX some competition!!
I noticed the warmer the day I shot it the better the SD🤷🏻♂️
What ammo do you recommend to try 500yrd. I'm going to try it this spring.
All the brands have ammo thats really good for long range.
Eley, lapua, rws. R50 has some of the best sd and es numbers ive seen.
6.5 Creedmoor. 500yds with 22lr is too random.
@hopefloats7573 500 with a 6.5 is to ezey. I like the challenge of shooting 22lr long range. I've made it out to 300yrd so far with 4" groups so I'm thinking it's possible.
The only difference I see is 19 dollars a box. In fact, I thought the RWS was just a little better on group size.
I would have liked to see it against a $8 box of Norma Match. I have a lot of it my MTR doesn’t hate. Let me know if you want a box and I’ll donate it for some channel content. I also have some RWS Rifle Match at $11 a box that shoots about the same SD’s and ES’s
It starts from 40 cents per round - are they f***ng crazy there? I would rather hand load .223 rem for this money and get better results at further distances.
There are quite a few match ammos around 20 a box for 22lr. So they arent alone in that price range
I got lucky and paid 130 for my brick I got online
I've had this ammo all it does is jam in my 1911
do 300 on a calm day - with the theme song music 🤓
Theme song no problem, calm day.....may be spring before we get that haha
“Groups do not reconverge.” Tuners would like a word with you. The concept of positive compensation is based on changing where groups converge to happen at the distance you want it to happen at. Tune a rifle to get the absolute best groups you can get at 50 yards and you’ve now made it shoot worse at every other distance. That’s the whole point of a tuner and positive compensation. What you do with the tuner changes where the “best distance” is located. The same thing still happens without a tuner installed. You just give up control over where that “best distance” is without one.
This is easy to test with a centrefire rifle and multiple electronic targets. Set one up at 100 yards, 200 yards, 300 yards, etc., such that one bullet will go through every target frame and you will see for yourself that a 1” group (or ~1 MOA) group at 100 yards does bot translate into a 2” group (still ~1 MOA) at 200 yards and a 3” group (still ~1 MOA) at 300 yards, etc. A given rifle with a given load will shoot best at precisely ONE distance and will shoot worse than that at every other distance. This is confirmed by simple ballistic theory.
I’ll give you an exaggerated example to illustrate the point. That rifle might shoot 1 MOA at 100 yards, and the same bullets continuing on to 200 yards might yield a 0.75 MOA group at that distance, and then 0.5 MOA at 300 yards, and then 0.75 MOA at 400 yards, 1.0 MOA at 500 yards, 1.5 MOA at 600 yards, 2.0 MOA at 700 yards. In that case you can see rather easily that the best group is at 300 yards. And it shoots worse every where else. Every single rifle is like that. A given rifle with a given load shoots best at one distance, and only one distance. Real results won’t be exaggerated that badly, but the same idea still applies. If you can gather together two or more electronic targets to set up at different distances that will be the easiest way to confirm this with your own eyes. Shoot a few different rifles and a few different loads and you will see that each one will shoot better at a specific distance and worse at the others. And the idea of positive compensation explains why.
Playing with a ballistic calculator can help understand this, too. A ballistic calculator will give you what would happen in an ideal situation where you have perfect bullets with perfect loads and barrels that do not vibrate. Real world results deviate from what the calculator tells you because bullets aren’t perfect, loads aren’t perfect, barrels vibrate, etc. Shoot a 5-shot group with the chronograph set up. You’ll have the velocity for each shot. You’ll have the actual landing spot on target for each shot. Use the calculator to determine what the elevation of each shot should have been in an ideal situation and compare that to the actual results. On average, a large part of the deviation from the calculator’s ideal result is because the barrel vibrated and was pointing somewhere else. A tuner lets you turn that phenomenon into positive compensation if you set it up correctly. The calculator might tell you that with the velocity spread of those 5 shots you should have had a 1 MOA group. But you actually got a 0.5 MOA group. Why? Positive compensation is why. Maybe you actually got a 1.5 MOA group instead. It is still the same reason, only in this case you would call it negative compensation. Positive compensation means you ultimately aim faster shots lower and aim slower shots higher. Adjust the amount of compensation just the right amount via a tuner and you’ll have faster and slower shots hitting at the same elevation. So you get groups that are better than without the tuner. Get it wrong and you might aim faster shots higher and slower shots lower, resulting in groups that are bigger than without the tuner.
Im basing that off of brian litz and their near millions of rounds down range testing with some of the best tech in the business, they make the custom curves for kestrels etc. Im not gonna argue against litz, you can but im not lol
@@PursuitofAccuracy Just because the guy has learned a lot doesn’t mean he’s learned everything. He couldn’t even make a rimfire tuner work. He chose a stupid barrel for that test, and a random tuner that didn’t… meh. He was dumb that day. He’s not a god. He’s just a man. That he’s learned more than most people doesn’t mean he always knows what he’s talking about. He literally thinks tuners don’t work, despite every single ARA competitor using them, some better than others. He’s capable of being wrong, just like you and me.
@@ClaytonMacleod yeah im not saying hes infallable but he tested convergence with thousands of rounds and it never happened.
But that isnt the point really. I was saying those groups arent going to shrink up at 500 yards just because its got a new bullet design and marketed as a long range ammo.
@@PursuitofAccuracy Like I said, tuners wouldn’t work if convergence wasn’t a thing. And also like I said, this is incredibly easy to test for yourself if you have centrefire rifles and more than one ShotMarker electronic target to shoot through. All rifle/load combinations shoot best at one distance. That’s just how it works.
@@PursuitofAccuracy Smallbore metallic silhouette is shot with targets at 40 m, 60m, 77 m, and 100 m. We need zeroes for all four distances, and as a result we shoot many groups at all four distances while testing and zeroing. And when we lot test ammunition at buying time we test all the different lots at all four distances each. Every single lot performs differently at all four distances. We all look for whatever shoots best for us at the 77 m distance. That’s because turkeys at 77 m are the hardest target to hit. We accept a small amount of error at the other animals:distances in order to get the best performance at the hardest animal. During those tests over many years of competition we’ve all had ammo that shoots best at one of the distances but worse at all the others. It always works that way. One year I even set up a test where I shot through paper at all four distances at once, just like the centrefire/ShotMarker test I suggested. So one bullet went though all four targets. I used the thinnest paper I could find to taint the results the least, as the bullets will indeed be disturbed by going through the paper to some degree. And when measuring all the targets and compensating for distance by converting to MOA the group sizes did indeed vary at each target. They weren’t simply smallest at 40 m and largest at 100 m. The distance that had the smallest group varied with each ammo lot/brand. This is precisely why I said what I said earlier. I’ve seen it with my own eyes with smallbore. The results are slightly tainted by having to use paper, but it was still obvious enough to see it happening. Using centrefire and ShotMarker targets will avoid that tainting of results since nothing touched the bullet. Unfortunately, at the moment I only have access to one ShotMarker target. Believe me, as soon as I have access to more than one the very first test I want to do is to show how convergence is indeed a thing. All rifles shoot a given load best at exactly one distance, and the groups are worse closer snd further than that distance. This is why you shouldn’t do load development for 1000-yard competitions at 100 yards. You’re tuning the load for the wrong distance if you do, making it shoot worse at the other distance as a result.
👍👍
I DON'T HAVE A ENGINERING DEGREE FROM AN IVY LEAGUE SCHOOL LIKE MIT (THANK GOD) BUT TO IMPROVE BC I THINK YOU START AT THE FRONT OF THE PROJECTILE NOT THE ASS END.. . JUST SAYIN🤔🤔🤔
Never heard of a boattail bullets before huh?
@@DFOOSKING SURE DID EINSTEIN.... THAT WASNT THEIR "NEW N BETTER BC IMPROVEMENT " BUT I GUESS YOUR ENGINERING DEGREE KNOWS ALL🤣🤣🤣🤣
I'll stick with the less expensive Norma. And don't shoot in the wind.🙂
Great low wind day to try ammo out. Perfect conditions. Thats what i expected to see with the advertised numbers. I would think these engineers would know better by now. They should hire a top notch rimfire benchrest shooter for input. That ammo will never see my guns barrel. Wasted effort norma.
It's all what your rifle likes, be it $5 or $25 a box....... With that being said, shoot what you can afford !!
Looks like the Extreme suffers from some marketing hype. An SD of 33 is not acceptable. It looks like it may be suffering from a high velocity first round event just like the Eley does. A rocket tail and a lower BC makes no sense. Over hyped and not worth it.
I think it may have been an error on something. It shot sd's comparable to the rws
$30 a box no thanks
I second that emotion 🤣
This is pointless in windy conditions
Well the selling point of the ammo is its better in the wind......so i disagree. Its long range ammo, when your shooting long range your most likely shooting in the wind
Not pointless at all. However, 22LR rifles are notorious for being ammo sensitive, so your rifle may prefer something different. Your chrono numbers reveal potential accuracy of ammo in your rifle.
My tikka shoots better than your rifles with that ammo. But to shoot the best it needs lapua.
Yeah every barrels gonna prefer something different it seems
I've shot tac-22 that shot better than that.