.22 Standard Velocity vs High Velocity question

First topic message reminder :

I'm new to Bullseye, and have been shooting with CCI High Velocity rounds, which seem fine.

One of the other shooters saw my ammo, and advised that I use Standard Velocity instead, so I picked up a couple hundred rounds of CCI Standard, and it works just fine in my pistol.

My question is . . . why is Standard Velocity ammo better for bullseye, and why is it *more* expensive than High Velocity? (I would have thought it would be the other way around.)

But isn't it about how standard isn't impacted by wind as much as rounds above the speed out sound? I thought that's where a lot of the issue comes in, esp. using high velocity outdoors.

This one question could spark an eternity of debate and discussion about transonic characteristics and bullet shapes.
In general, bullets become less stable as they cross the sonic speed band.  Bullet shape, including nose shape (secant vs tangent ogive), tail shape (boattail and angle thereof, stepped boattail, flat base, etc), meplat and length vs diameter all play a role in transonic characteristics. 
Basically, read Brian Litz if you're that interested.  Otherwise, shoot what has been proven to work best in your pistol for different ranges.

I talked to a gunsmith at Clark's who had worked on hundreds of S&W M41's. His comment was that older pistols are made of softer steels than new ones, and the new ones are "better" made, but not necessarily more accurate, or reliable! 

(However in his magic hands he had made M41's work that the custom shop at S&W did not)


He described M41 slides that were "bent like a banana"  If you look at a M41 slide, the rail is below the breech face, resulting in bending moment during firing. Also, the older S&W's (this is a M46)



have a thin rail compared with later pistols.




Anyway, I am of the opinion that SV is less stressful on a M41 than HV.

Do replace vintage recoil springs with new. The M46 recoil spring had taken a set since 1968



In so far as a Ruger MKII, I doubt the difference in pressure and slide velocity makes a difference. Of all the things, HV ammunition caused stove pipes and failures to feed in my MK1 Ruger





The MK1 chugs along reliably with SV, so I suspect, I need to change the recoil spring. I will get around to that, eventually.

I can only say for one of my guns.  The manual for the Hammerli 208/215 say specifically to only use standard velocity ammunition.  I only use standard velocity in any target pistol or rifle. There used to be some semi-auto .22 rifles that only worked well with high velocity but they were not target rifles.  The reason his velocity does not work well in the wind is explained in the book "Successful Shooting". I'm afraid I cannot lay my hands on it right now.  It may have to do with going from supersonic to sub-sonic or simply the change of velocity but I cannot remember.

DLB

Most of the 22 LR ammo published velocity data are from a 20 inch or longer barrel.
SAAMI shows a 24"-barrel length for test barrels.

Out of a 5.5" Model 41 even CCI Blazer 40 gr at a published velocity of 1235 fps will be subsonic.
CCI shows an estimated velocity from a handgun in their catalog for the Blazer at 1060 fps.
CC303_2024_CCI_Catalog_Single_Pages-compressed.pdf (cci-ammunition.com)

One test in a 5.5" 41 I found online showed CCI Blazer with a 1113 fps velocity (still under the speed of sound ~1144 fps depending on the atmospheric conditions and altitude)

 

Brand	Published Velocity	Measured Velocity	ES	SD
Wolf Match Extra	1085	870	103	31
CCI Standard	1070	932	50	16
SK Standard +	1073	933	51	11
Eley Subsonic HP (38g)	1020	933	57	13
Remington Target	1150	961	85	21
Norma Tac-22	1083	974	33	10
Eley Club	1067	980	88	16
Aquila Target	1080	999	61	21
Federal Auto Match	1200	1033	78	23
Federal Champion Solid	1240	1075	52	14
Federal Range Pack	1200	1078	53	14
CCI Blazer	1235	1113	54	12

(1) Ammo testing in my 41 | Rimfire Central Firearm Forum

 STEVE SAMELAK 7/5/2019, 8:50 pm

In my mind it's like the guy that buys a sports car that complains about the price of fuel & maintenance.

Have you met any BE shooters?
I am often amazed at people who buy a high end pistol, all this gear, and bitch about ammo prices.
We are cheap b*stards. 
I'm not suggesting you but Midas or Tenex, but CCI SV is about the cheapest you should run. It has cycled, and been accurate in every .22LR pistol I own.

shanneba wrote:Most of the 22 LR ammo published velocity data are from a 20 inch or longer barrel.
SAAMI shows a 24"-barrel length for test barrels.

Out of a 5.5" Model 41 even CCI Blazer 40 gr at a published velocity of 1235 fps will be subsonic.
CCI shows an estimated velocity from a handgun in their catalog for the Blazer at 1060 fps.
CC303_2024_CCI_Catalog_Single_Pages-compressed.pdf (cci-ammunition.com)

One test in a 5.5" 41 I found online showed CCI Blazer with a 1113 fps velocity (still under the speed of sound ~1144 fps depending on the atmospheric conditions and altitude)

Brand	Published Velocity	Measured Velocity	ES	SD
Wolf Match Extra	1085	870	103	31
CCI Standard	1070	932	50	16
SK Standard +	1073	933	51	11
Eley Subsonic HP (38g)	1020	933	57	13
Remington Target	1150	961	85	21
Norma Tac-22	1083	974	33	10
Eley Club	1067	980	88	16
Aquila Target	1080	999	61	21
Federal Auto Match	1200	1033	78	23
Federal Champion Solid	1240	1075	52	14
Federal Range Pack	1200	1078	53	14
CCI Blazer	1235	1113	54	12

(1) Ammo testing in my 41 | Rimfire Central Firearm Forum

The Standard Deviation on the Norma Tac-22 is interesting. It is probably the lowest cost per round of the reported group. Consistent velocity is good but reliability is best. I use Tac-22 for training but would not use it for competition because of sketchy reliability. However, the SK Standard + is close to Tac-22 on velocity while being a more reliable round. Reliability meaning it goes bang 99.9% of the time. Thanks for sharing this data.

-m-