TargetTalk

Is RWS Target Pistol suitable for use as training ammo for Free Pistol ?

The only other "low cost" ammo I can get my hand on is RWS Rifle Match but I find it has a rather severe recoil.

Thank you.

I don't see why not, but try it and see would be my suggestion.

Rob.

By chance I was using up some of my RWS Target Pistol last night, and its not great for free pistol. If you manage recoil well, then you are fine. With that said, if you have a choice between RWS pistol and rifle, I personally have found the rifle varient to work better in my free pistols.

Good luck,

Wai:

Consider the following humbly offered observations. And personal opinions, which might not be worth much. The answer to this question (of the "Which 22 Works Best in My Gun?" variety) is *always*

"IT DEPENDS"

It depends on what your specific needs/requirements are. For example, you mention "extreme recoil" which is apparently a particular concern of yours (not a generally shared concern in free pistol). How much precision/accuracy is needed? You mention it will be "training ammo" but I'm not sure if you imply that our accuracy/precision requirements for training ammo should be lower than for competition ammo . . . that is also an arguable point. How much variance in extreme spread matters to you? .1"? .5"? 1"?

Riffing off the "precision/accuracy" issue, you *have* to shoot it in your gun and see.

Rifles are particularly sensitive (it would seem) in this regard, with respect to group size. I have multi-$$$ match grade rifles that will shoot dimes at 100 meters with "relatively" cheap-ass ammo (CCI Std Vel shoots much, much better than any Ely . . . or other "match grade" stuff, including CCI Match!). And other rifles that need caviar ammo or they won't group at all. Very counter-intuitive.

Other folks will tell you that you could shoot rocks out of a pistol and it wouldn't make any difference (well, sort of true for 25 yards for semi-auto center fire stuff, within reason), but at 50m, for small bore, individual guns (by serial number- NOT type of gun) will prefer an individual lot number of ammo (by lot number- NOT brand/type of ammo).

Anyhow

Nobody can tell you whether or not Brand X ammo is "good" for your gun without first knowing a) what your needs are (yes, I know, Free Pistol training, but are you a 520 shooter or a 570 shooter?) and b) shooting the ammo through your gun under "bench conditions" and seeing the groups.

Steve Swartz

wai wrote:Is RWS Target Pistol suitable for use as training ammo for Free Pistol ?

The only other "low cost" ammo I can get my hand on is RWS Rifle Match but I find it has a rather severe recoil.

Thank you.

To amplify Steve's comments, every chamber/barrel is unique, as is every lot of ammunition. That's why Eley and SK have customer ranges, so shooters can come match their gun to a particular lot of ammunition.

Folks who have done it can tell you that, from their gun, the best groups are half the size of the biggest groups, the variable being which lot of ammo was tested. This is true even in a product as consistent as TENEX.

Testing ammunition from one batch of any brand is not likely to lead to any valid conclusion, so long as you're testing quality amunition to begin with.

Lastly, recoil in a Free Pistol? Do explain this a bit:-)

I personally have not encountered any problem using Target Pistol. However, I am still getting a lot of 4, 5's so a flyer due to lousy ammo is not going to be some thing I will notice.

However, the other shooters around all seem to think I should be using some other stuff instead, then again, these guys all have some form of sponsorship for their ammo so cost is NOT a issue for them.

I guess what I would like to know is that is there some technical differences between all these 0.22 ammo ? Does the propellant on the Target Pistol have a faster burn rate ? Higher peak pressure ? etc etc

Or, is the difference mainly in better quality and QC ?

wai wrote:
I guess what I would like to know is that is there some technical differences between all these 0.22 ammo ? Does the propellant on the Target Pistol have a faster burn rate ? Higher peak pressure ? etc etc

Or, is the difference mainly in better quality and QC ?

In the specific case of Eley, all their ammunition comes from one of two (2) production lines. The white bullet line makes what they hope is TENEX; off-spec product gets either a Match EPS or a Pistol Match label, depending on where it fell on the performance spectrum during QA testing. ~7% is destroyed and never leaves the factory.

Similarly, the black bullet line is supposed to make Club. Everything else is a grade of off-spec Club.

To finally answer your question, it's all made the same. The label tells what it turned out to be.

Govtmodel wrote "Lastly, recoil in a Free Pistol? Do explain this a bit:-)"

I'll assume you really were kidding when you wrote that line, since recoil management plays a very significant role in free pistol scores. Sure, it's not a .45ACP. But all you have to do is relax your grip a bit and you'll find that recoil will push the bullets out of the black and waaaaaay into the white. So yes, recoil in an FP is a pretty important consideration. If you think that recoil management is only applicable to "manly" pistols like .45 Gov't models then I'd strongly advise you to reconsider your position or face some embarassing scores on the Free Pistol line.

To get back to the original question, the RWS ammo will almost certainly work in your free pistol. As others have pointed out, how well it works depends on a lot of variables unique to you. I personally dislike the stuff because I find it's recoil is harsh and it's the dirtiest ammo I've ever fired, save for Sellier and Ballot.

I used to shoot RWS Target Pistol about 10 years ago. Then all I could find was RWS Target Rifle. I called their UD importer/distributor in NJ and emailed them overseas. The assured me Rifle and Pistol was the same. Perhaps "pistol" has become a bad word in te US.

Mark Briggs wrote:
I'll assume you really were kidding when you wrote that line, since recoil management plays a very significant role in free pistol scores. Sure, it's not a .45ACP. But all you have to do is relax your grip a bit and you'll find that recoil will push the bullets out of the black and waaaaaay into the white. So yes, recoil in an FP is a pretty important consideration. If you think that recoil management is only applicable to "manly" pistols like .45 Gov't models then I'd strongly advise you to reconsider your position or face some embarrassing scores on the Free Pistol line.

My FP scores were always embarrassing! I do realize how challenging FP is.

Here's a bizarre thought:

The physical action of recoil against your hand is pretty much negligable (from an accuracy/precision/consistency perspective).

The recoil in your head, however, can be an issue.

Perhaps all flinching is mental. If you flinch during recoil, the shot is already gone; so who cares? If you flinch before recoil, that is of course another story indeed!

A tight grip will, and can, prevent the negative effects of mental flinching. Grip it so hard you can't even feel it go off . . . and your follow-through will be impeccable. Your hand may be shivering from the exertion, but that's the downside of the trade-off.

A grip that is firm enough to support perfect trigger control is really all that's needed. The trigger backlash will affect the muzzle before the round is away. The physical rotation under recoil (as long as your grip is CONSISTENT), for a pistol, is much less important.

There are plenty of world class shooters though who swear by the "squeeze the sap out of the wood" level of gripping pressure. That's the way they were taught, and it certainly doesn't hurt their performance, as long as they are not gripping so hard that fatigue sets in.

I had a dog once that had to turn around three times before defecating . . . ;^)

Steve Swartz

. . . it might not have really helped the process any, but the dog apparently thought it was necessary! So who am I to judge, as I am not a dog?

Are we missing something here?

Considering target ammo: I thought 'pistol' ammo was designed with a faster burn rate than 'rifle' ammo for two reasons: firstly, to get a reasonable muzzle velocity out of such a short barrel, and secondly, to cycle blow-back mechanisms properly. Rifle ammo is designed with a slower burn rate to give a gentler recoil; the muzzle velocity ends up OK because the bullet can accelerate all the time it travels along the barrel.

Therefore, it's not surprising that 'rifle' ammo might be preferred in a free pistol.

Shooting Kiwi wrote:Are we missing something here?

Considering target ammo: I thought 'pistol' ammo was designed with a faster burn rate than 'rifle' ammo for two reasons: firstly, to get a reasonable muzzle velocity out of such a short barrel, and secondly, to cycle blow-back mechanisms properly. Rifle ammo is designed with a slower burn rate to give a gentler recoil; the muzzle velocity ends up OK because the bullet can accelerate all the time it travels along the barrel.

Therefore, it's not surprising that 'rifle' ammo might be preferred in a free pistol.

In the case of Eley, that not true. There are two production lines, one making white bullet product and one making black bullet product. The goal of the white line is to make TENEX, the goal of the black line is to make Club. The powder and the charge is the same.

Pistol Match is off-spec TENEX. Target Pistol is off-spec Club.

Normally I pretty much echo Steve's comments, but in this case I must disagree. Recoil has a HUGE impact on accuracy/precision/consistency. All you have to do to see this is to take an FP with a Rink grip on it and change the tension on the palmshelf support (the portion that touches the back of the hand). You'll see your point of impact shift substantially. That's an effect of recoil. Same goes for adding or removing weight from the muzzle, you'll see a shift in point of impact.

I think what we're discounting is the fact that the recoil impulse begins the moment the bullet begins to move forward in the barrel. Remember Mr. Newton and his law about "equal and opposite reaction"? Well, that reaction starts as soon as the primary action takes place - as soon as the bullet begins to move. The old statement that recoil doesn't effect pistol accuracy because the bullet's already left the barrel is, frankly, defying the laws of physics.

OK Steve - turn the flame-thrower on and let's hear your retort! ;-)

Mark:

No flames, just clarification/restatement for the purpose of avoiding wrestling with straw men):

1) Physical Recoil: physics

2) Mental Recoil: physiology

Physical recoil is consistent- as long as your technique is reasonably consistent. The actual physical recoil effect will itself be consistent. As long as you are gripping the gun with the same number of fingers, in the same hand, etc. The physical dynamics will be consistent . . . at least within the time it takes the bullet/pellet to leave the muzzle.

[if this is where the disagreement is, then let's "do the math"]

And therefore we can ignore them. (Remember the assumptions above. If you are a 520 shooter and/or grip the gun "wildly" differently for each time you shoot a shot, then maybe physical recoil does have an unpredictable/inconsistent effect).

Mental Recoil is inconsistent- the way you react to and/or anticipate the recoil will cause yout o fling the muzzle around while the bullet/pellet is still in the barrel.

Steve

I have shot lots of different stuff through my free pistols, some hard some soft. I doubt if I can tell much difference in the accuracy between the extremes, but I do prefer lighter recoiling ammo because it is less distracting to me. Most free pistol shooters will tell you that 80% of free pistol is mental and the other 20% is in your head, so if you can shoot the ammo you like, then do. If you are restricted to a certain ammo, then you will have to find a way to ignore the extra blast, not always easy, but not insurmountable. Some of us try to shoot U.S.Bullseye, and the .45 recoils more than a free pistol, we have to just keep training. Good luck to you. Dwaine

Steve - I think we're kinda on the same track, plus or minus a few minor variables. In truth I would have been surprised if you had responded with a flame as you have always been guilty of gentlemanly conduct on this forum and as a result I hold you in high esteem.

1) You state recoil is consistent. I dispute this statement because each type of ammo uses a different powder and primer, producing different bullet accelleration characteristics and thus different recoil impulse characteristics. There's no denying that raw Newtonian physics dictate that actual recoil will vary between ammunition types.

2) Physiology. Ah, here's where we get to the really good stuff! If we assume the shooter is very much like a machine rest and grips the gun in EXACTLY the same manner every time, then the recoil effects stated in 1) above would be measureable in terms of either absolute group size or relative point of impact.

BUT we humans are not machine rests, so this is where physiology plays a large roll in dealing with recoil. For some of us our grips don't fit as well as they should. Others can't "squeeze the sap from the wood" to make a vise-like grip, while others have lower ability to stabilize a heavy pistol. And the list goes on and on. What this really boils down to is that the man-machine interface is absolutely unique to the individual shooter and pistol combination. That means that each man-machine interface will respond uniquely to each particular type of ammunition based on the differences noted in 1) above. Which in turn means that some of us will find a particular ammo, such as RWS Pistol, to recoil too heavily to allow us to maintain a decent group. That's because our particular man-machine interface is better tuned to a different ammo with a different recoil characteristic.

3) Mental aspects of recoil - oh boy, this one's trouble! I started shooting far too big a gun far too early in life and as a result have been battling a nasty flinch for 30 years or more. Once I get the Free Pistol mental game sorted out I'll post back here. Come to think of it, by the time I get the mental game figured out I'll likely only have to think good thoughts and they'll instantly be teleported onto your computer screen! LoL

One other major point I'll make here... I've shot many rounds through my free pistols from a machine rest. Almost all but the very cheapest ammo is capable of producing sub-10-ring sized groups when shot from a machine rest. Many types of ammo will hold the group within the X-ring. So all those shots that aren't in the 10-ring are not the fault of the ammo!

Oh, I should mention that in my testing RWS Target Pistol did not group well in either my Toz35 or Morini CM84. But the groups were still within the 10-ring. Each 10-shot string had at least one or two fliers which pushed the group size out so it was barely within the 10-ring. The other 8 or 9 shots in the groups generally were about the size of the X-ring.

Mark:

Some additional clarifying points (referenced to your points):

1) I'm talking about physical recoil differences *within a brand/type* of ammo; not differences *between brands.* Of course if we fire each shot with a different brand/type of ammo we will see inconsistencies in the effects of recoil!

2) I'm not talking about human machine rests- and I think this is the "nub" of where we may actually disagree. It is my contention that the human system does not have to be "perfect" in order for the PHYSICAL effects of recoil to be negligable. No machine rest required- just a reasonably repeatable grip (my comment about using the same number of fingers each time you fire was not made tongue-in-cheek!). Order of magnitude of what I mean by "reasonable:" Don't alternate between holding the gun right side up and upside down. Perfection not required.

To the second ebedded issue in your point 2), I would agree that the more "perfect" your grip is, the more "ammo tolerant" your system will be. Here, it is my contention though that as long as you are reasonably consistent (assuming not perfect, but a reasonalby amount of hand strength etc. as long as your technique is consistent) then the PHYSICAL effects of recoil will be negligable over a very wide range of recoil as represented by modern match grade .22 LR ammo.

3) I think we agree on this last part! Of course, if you *believe* the recoil of RWS is "Stout" then the PHYSICAL effects of recoil don't matter worth a rip. Your brain is going to play all kinds of tricks on you (hmmm . . . how reasonably "consistent" can you be if you think the load is going to take your hand off?)

You have probably seen the effect of handing a big-bore pistol to someone who is reasonably talented . . . first shot is a center X . . .and they never put another one in the black! The PHYSICAL effects of the recoil had nothing to do with it . . .

One final thing I have noted is that I too have found material differences in *relative* accuracy (not just absolute terms, which is to be expected) between what groups best in a rest and what groups best in my hand.

For rifles at 100 yards.

I have never seen this "harmonic damping?" effect in pistol though. What groups best in the rest of my FP generally carries forward onto the firing line.

Hmmm . . . maybe purely anecdotal BS.

Steve

Steve - responses likewise numbered so we of little spare brainpower don't get confused. OK, so "I" of little spare brainpower don't get confused!

1) I think we're pretty much in agreement here. The only thing I would add is again anecdotal BS. We had a batch of bad Eley Target Pistol about 2 years ago - it was pretty good except for one or two shots per box would be very soft. Those were definitely "felt", and one happened while I was conducting a training exercise with another shooter wherin I was spotting and he was calling his shots, with the two results being compared. He is a very experienced shooter and was calling his shots well, normally within 1 scoring ring and within 45degrees of quadrental placement. When the "soft" shot happened his comment was very interesting. "Broke like a solid 10, but I bet that poofter is down in the white at 6 o'clock." Sure enough, it was either a 4 or 5 straight down at 6 o'clock.

All this to say that sometimes even within a single brand of ammo we sometimes get detectable differences in recoil. And if that's the case, it's normally NOT a good thing!

2) I agree that we have an essential disagreement on this point, but I wouldn't catagorize it as a black/white kind of disagreement, but more a discussion on the magnitude of effect. I think what we agree on is that once you've got the man-machine interface tuned for a specific brand of ammo then you have essentially removed recoil from the equation, as we've agreed that recoil should be a constant factor when shooting the same type of ammo.

But where we likely disagree the most is in the manageability of the recoil impulse from some types of ammo. I've tried to shoot RWS Target Pistol and find that its recoil impulse is very sharp. But that's because I've "tuned my system" for use with Eley. If I were to take the time to tune my gun, grip, and gripping force for the Target Pistol I'm sure I would eventually get to a point of shooting good groups with it.

In essence, most of us have tuned ourselves and our guns to shoot consistently because we tend to stick to the same kind of ammo and tune for best results with it. A change of ammo represents a disturbance in an otherwise stable system, and this disturbance will invariably result in larger group sizes until the system adapts to the change. The closer we are to having a perfect grip fit and perfect consistency in gripping the gun, the shorter will be the period of adaptation.

I will add that I'm very fortunate to have found one case of very old Eley Tenex (still in the orange cardboard boxes!) that groups very, very well from a machine rest, and coincidentally also groups very well when fired from my hand. I save this stuff as my "match" ammo as it is, so far, the best "gold standard" that I've encountered.

Egads - I think we could write a master's thesis on this topic! ;-)

Mark Briggs wrote:I will add that I'm very fortunate to have found one case of very old Eley Tenex (still in the orange cardboard boxes!)

IIRC they changed from cardboard to plastic boxes in about 1979/80.