surprising subsonic

[Litl_Red]

Some subsonic LR ammo showed up on the front porch the other day. The reason was really simple. I wanted to see if it was more or less accurate than the same company's StandardVelocity.

It did differ somewhat from the SV. It was a hollow point but still had the same weight as their SV. Both were 40gr but the SS was hollow point. I also wanted to see if the SS bullet happened to show better ballistic coefficient performance. That 4grains and hollow could have resulted in a bit longer aspect ratio. or not.

The surprise showed up on the first two groups

o shot to sight in.

See what's surprising?

 

[#1gohunt]

Little better grouping, but still having fliers?

 

[Litl_Red]

Look at the top right holes. Notice how off center the hole is inside the black circle? That is a "picture" of how much the slug is wobbling. Notice how far from the center of the group those wobbling bullets are?

Ever wonder why so many targets are printed on that kind of paper, a somewhat rough, grainey paper? It shows wobble better.

 

[11B CIB]

Is this the CCI subsonic Lead hollow point (1050fps) versus CCI standard (1070fps)?

 

[GymB]

Ever wonder why so many targets are printed on that kind of paper, a somewhat rough, grainey paper? It shows wobble better.

or because its cheap, really really cheap.

Did you have a backer on the target?

 

[Litl_Red]

Is this the CCI subsonic Lead hollow point (1050fps) versus CCI standard (1070fps)?

it was labeled: Subsonic

 

[11B CIB]

it was labeled: Subsonic

Those are my favorite. Only 20fps slower but I like the HPs and they sound great out of pistol and rifle hosts with a can and are sufficiently accurate for my needs

 

[Litl_Red]

or because its cheap, really really cheap.

Did you have a backer on the target?

Actually, that really really cheap paper got a leg up years and years ago as "official". That was back when most matches were on bullseye targets and scoring rings were what counted. Paper that wasn't the right consistency didn't punch as finely and was considered to score less "accurately". I can remember the NRA explaining why they only accepted official targets. One of the reasons had to do with paper characteristics. I don't remember the adjective they used. It was truly a different world back when.

 

[Litl_Red]

I should really set up my chronograph.

chuckle.... and check the water content of the paper. 😉

 

[Litl_Red]

Didn't plan to setup the chronograph.
I shot some Subsonic in a rifle that had shot CCI Standard Velocity over my chrono at ~1000fps. That's subsonic and about as fast as you can get and still be subsonic.
Every slug showed wobble on the paper setup at 25 and 50 yds. I'd put money on a bet CCI loaded my lot of SS to a velocity that's too slow to stabilize the slug they loaded.

 

[Litl_Red]

So... I've been shooting the rifle that put all those wobbling/un-stabilized Subsonic slugs downrange, trying to find an ammo it "liked". Been shooting it a lot, since it recently got an almost total overhaul. And discovering that it didn't like a lot of different stuff. And that rifle never stops surprising.

In the midst of running another string of five 5-shot groups I decided to do something fun and ran one of the Spooky Spider targets.

(shakes head .... again and again)


This was 14 rounds of pure luck. Shot with an ammo the rifle otherwise doesn't seem to like (but not the Subsonic). And followed by nothing even remotely similar.

 

[Litl_Red]

gotta admit that proves the fallibility of small sample sizes.