really poor performance with Winchester "super suppressed" ammo

Jayne

Jayne

Just here for the memes
Charter Member
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Joined
Dec 16, 2016
Messages
8,028
Location
Unincorporated Wake County
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
Now that .22 is plentiful again I've been buying various types just to see what works and what doesn't so that during the next panic I'm only over-paying for ammo I know my guns like. Or something.

Anyway, I got one box of Winchester Super Suppressed 45gr subsonics to try out. Out of my S&W compact and TS conversion they were horrible. Not baffle strike horrible but still "missing the bullet trap at 15 yards" bad. I stopped using them at that point.

Today I took them to the range with some other random 5 cent / round stuff (as pictured below) and ran them out of my Savage bolt gun. Off the bipod and rear bag, at 50 yards the others were averaging 0.25" - 1" for 5 shot groups. The Winchester? Had trouble keeping them on the paper plate. At 100 yards they were patterning like an a cylinder bore choke. Useless for anything but making noise.

I don't know if I just got a bad batch or what, but these will not get a buy rating from me.

IMG_2813.jpg
 
Slacker said:
CCI std is my "go to" for everything.
It works great for me and it's easily bought by the brick.
Click to expand...

Mine too. It's got the most consistent accuracy, cycles all the guns that need cycling, doesn't sound too bad out of the can. It just wasn't available for a while.

Can't even recall what started the .22 panic, but I'm sure it will happen again.
 
Jayne said:
Mine too. It's got the most consistent accuracy, cycles all the guns that need cycling, doesn't sound too bad out of the can. It just wasn't available for a while.

Can't even recall what started the .22 panic, but I'm sure it will happen again.
Click to expand...

But by then you’ll have reinforced the floor under one of your closets to hold all the full ammo cans you’ve collected.
 
NKD said:
Some of the real heavy .22 subs probably prefer and shorter twist than what most guns will have.
Click to expand...
Ditto

I would imagine 45 grain bullets would be ok though. I think ive seen 60 grain 22lr, but your typical 1:16 twist probably wouldn't work with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKD
Green mountain used to make a 1/9 twist for those 60grn bullets. Not sure if they still do.

I have no experience with them. Just thinking out loud. Just seems like if AR barrels are sensitive to barrel weight/twist rate, than .22lr would be to some degree as well.

If those bullets are opening up that much seems like it could be a stabilization issue with not enough spin. Be interesting to try different twists.
 
Have no idea what my CZ likes but Aguila is popping less than 1” groups at 50 yards and longer. The velocity of 1250 is keeping me from shooting better but I’ve got cases of them. I would like to hear how the Sellier&Bellot performs and a price per round. Never seen any at a gun store or big box store.
 
NKD said:
Some of the real heavy .22 subs probably prefer and shorter twist than what most guns will have.
Click to expand...

Usually if a round requires some special twist rate it's labeled on the box, isn't it? Or is that just for bullets for handloaders?

There is nothing on the package that mentions twist, and nothing on the web site. They mostly tout quiet, clean burning and non-leading.

Back in CA I had some of that lead-free .22LR stuff for hunting (after the lead ban) and it was amazingly inaccurate. Like "can't hit a rabbit at 15 yards" inaccurate. The bullets were really, really hard and I always figured they just couldn't engage the rifling correctly. Perhaps that's what's going on here, to make them non-leading in cans they've made them harder than usual which means they don't spin all that well and we get this problem?

I'm sure I have a box of that lead free stuff kicking around somewhere, I should break it out and try it head-to-head with CCI, just to see.
 
The answer lies in the title - "really poor performance with Winchester..." you didn't need to say anything else. :)

Seriously though - I think its a competition between Winchester and Remington to see who can produce the worst possible rimfire round without getting sued.
 
Jayne said:
Usually if a round requires some special twist rate it's labeled on the box, isn't it? Or is that just for bullets for handloaders?

There is nothing on the package that mentions twist, and nothing on the web site. They mostly tout quiet, clean burning and non-leading.

Back in CA I had some of that lead-free .22LR stuff for hunting (after the lead ban) and it was amazingly inaccurate. Like "can't hit a rabbit at 15 yards" inaccurate. The bullets were really, really hard and I always figured they just couldn't engage the rifling correctly. Perhaps that's what's going on here, to make them non-leading in cans they've made them harder than usual which means they don't spin all that well and we get this problem?

I'm sure I have a box of that lead free stuff kicking around somewhere, I should break it out and try it head-to-head with CCI, just to see.
Click to expand...

I've personally never seen barrel twist listed on any box of ammo.
Do you see it on a box of 77 grain 5.556? Or 55 grain? Those both like different twists generally, but not always of course.Maybe its there but I've never seen it. Maybe you are on to something with hardness. I have no idea.

@Geerubb probably has it right!
 
Geerubb said:
The answer lies in the title - "really poor performance with Winchester..." you didn't need to say anything else. :)

Seriously though - I think its a competition between Winchester and Remington to see who can produce the worst possible rimfire round without getting sued.
Click to expand...
I second this. Remington GBs are bad but I've not been impressed with any Winchester rimfire at all, even 22mag.
 
So if I am going to ruin a barrel with cheap ammo should I ruin the Ruger 10/22 TD stock barrel instead of a CZ? Cheaper to ge a new Ruger barrel than a Lilja for a CZ right? I ma pretty sure I have a decent amount of Remington and Winchester in my stash from the dark days of 22lr.
 
CZfool68 said:
So if I am going to ruin a barrel with cheap ammo should I ruin the Ruger 10/22 TD stock barrel instead of a CZ? Cheaper to ge a new Ruger barrel than a Lilja for a CZ right? I ma pretty sure I have a decent amount of Remington and Winchester in my stash from the dark days of 22lr.
Click to expand...

I doubt lead 22 will lead to any unwanted wear.
Though with my own results, Tenex seems to be my only ammo to use in my 10/22
 
I’m surprised with the hate on Winchester .22 ammo. The 22 rifles I’ve owned have all eaten it up with no problems. The Henry Survival Rifle that I used to have liked it better than any other ammunition. I got a decent amount of it during the shortage from grabbing it whenever I saw it.





CBF42F70-F0D6-42A2-BD70-1C78591412B1.jpeg
 
ChickenHawk said:
I’m surprised with the hate on Winchester .22 ammo. The 22 rifles I’ve owned have all eaten it up with no problems. The Henry Survival Rifle that I used to have liked it better than any other ammunition. I got a decent amount of it during the shortage from grabbing it whenever I saw it.





View attachment 66576
Click to expand...

I think the hate comes from its lack of consistency and accuracy. It feeds fine in my guns, but there are some flyers. And it is filthy stuff. So is the Remington. I have a stash from the dark days of 22, but with prices and availability right now I don't buy it anymore.
 
The only Winchester 22lr ammo I remember using in recent years is the Super X. I had no issues with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom