Rifle vs pistol .22 ammunition

I see some ammunition manufacturers offer "rifle" and "pistol" .22 ammunition.  The difference seems to the velocity is lower with the pistol ammunition.  I have been using standard velocity in my S&W 41 and recently purchased Pardini SP.  Should I be using "pistol" ammunition?  What about subsonic - seems to be similar to "pistol" variants.

Standard velocity (1070-80) is just fine

Subsonic and some pistol ammo will cause cycling problems when you least expect it.

Lapua Pistol King and Pistol OSP have the velocity measured from a 4.7" barrel
SK Pistol Match and Pistol Match special have velocities measured from a 5.9 " barrel

Most other 22 LR ammo has velocities measured from 20-26" barrels.

CCI in the online catalog does show an estimated handgun velocity but doesn't show a barrel length or handgun revolver/pistol type.
CCI Standard Velocity is listed as 1070 fps, estimated handgun is shown as 940 fps. 
(same speeds for Pistol match and green tag)
CCI Blazer 40gr RN is listed as 1235 and 1060 for a handgun.

That is pretty close to actual chrono data I've seen posted-
What 22.lr ammo for a Walther GSP? (bullseyeforum.net)

I didn't even think about the velocity difference between rifle and pistol barrel lengths.  That makes a lot of sense.

Quite some time ago I read that match pistol ammo is designed to run a semi auto while match rifle ammunition is used in bolt action rifles so it doesn't need the pressure to cycle anything. They also test and rate their products either with pistol or rifle depending on the use (at least SK does because I just read that in their catalog)  By that testing, they will show lower velocity in a handgun cartridge than a rifle will but if what I heard is true, the pistol cartridge is actually "hotter"
 This is specifically match ammunition designed for ISSF competition so Eley, SK, Lapua etc are the manufacturers that would use that logic.  When it comes to American ammunition I would think they market things however they think they will sell the best.  "Match accuracy" has a different meaning to the average US consumer and we also tend to buy higher velocity stuff whether we need it or not.  We do use semi auto rifles quite a bit more so our manufacturers would want to assure their ammo would function a 10/22 (or whatever else) so my guess is that our ammunition is mostly all loaded to a somewhat higher pressure to achieve that goal.

John

Your pistol will tell you what ammo it likes. I had been using SK Pistol Match in my 41 for a couple of years then a couple of months ago I tried some SK Rifle Match with very good success.

Greetings,

I shot a Match in Oregon a few weeks past and had a pleasant chat with Mel Makin at lunch.

He mentioned that the old Eley TENEX in the cardboard boxes shot much better than the offering in the newer plastic boxes.

It seems that Eley changed the powder formulation to better suit the Rifle shooters. The powder burn rate is different.

Also note that in Europe, Match Pistol is generally referred to Free Pistol. Here, the barrels are much longer and the high end ammo companies tailor the ammunition for the Free Pistol. Usually a lower velocity that quite often will not function an autoloader.

Much testing has revealed that ammo with a velocity of 960 fps will function an autoloader. This is actual velocity measured with a chronograph.

The velocity quoted on the box is generally directed towards rifle and is Reference Only.

One exception is that Eley now publish the velocity as part of the lot number. This velocity is with a rifle.

Cheers,

Dave

Some testing thru my 208s:
MFR.      Avg Vel/Sd
Aguila SV - 1033/7
Aguila Sub - 937/7
CCI SV - 941/14
Eley Club - 932/16
Eley Bullseye - 988/13
Lapua OSP - 857/44
FIOCCHI 22FLRN - 968/13
S&B Club - 970/5

I have seen plenty of SK Pistol Match in use both indoor and out in Bullseye matches & leagues.  I have also seen plenty of RWS Target Rifle.  Too bad you just cannot find it. The Aguila SV is pretty popular, even if it is a bit snappy.  The S&B Club is surprisingly accurate for $32/500.  I have cleaned a couple TF and RF with it.  Pretty much never see Lapua, Eley Tenex or Match or RWS R50.

Maybe next time, I can quickly get some chrono data of a variety of 22s.   I don’t have a tremendous variety but I’ll shoot what I have.

In my short time with "Precision Pistol", I found the above to be true. Below are my results.

SK Plus cycles some what reliably.
SK Rifle cycles none of the time.
CCI std. velocity cycles the most reliably.

The above data was gathered personally on the firing line and reflects my frustration or happiness with the above brands.  
Very technical as you can see.
Velocity in my opinion is secondary to the gun cycling. There's really nothing like shooting rapid fire waiting for the gun to hang up.

Shot from Ruger Mark IV.

Dave,
The rifle shooters who shot the paperboy Eley Tenex also lament the change that they made in the priming compound and 40+ years after the change also question it.
Who really knows the reason why.

Fc60 quoted "old Eley TENEX in the cardboard boxes shot much better than the offering in the newer plastic boxes."
Note that Eley now offer Tenex (for rifle), Tenex Pistol (with a round nose bullet) and Tenex Rapid Fire Pistol.
I have not shot any Tenex and don't doubt Mel's words.

I suffered major problems recently with an older batch of Eley Bullseye Pistol X, eventually tracked down to about 20% of that batch being over length and dragging in Pardini magazines. More recent production seems to be OK in length, but I get more light strike misfires in various guns than before. Disappointing.

I can only guess that Quality Control is just not as good as it once was. Pity.

I have found that SK Standard Plus will cycle my MG2 EVO, but will not cycle my Nelson Conversion. SK Pistol Match will cycle the Nelson Conversion, quite reliably, and the EVO. I noticed that with a scrubbed and dried chamber, the SK Standard Plus plus does not always fall freely (aka the "plunk test") down to the chamber face in the Nelson, but PM does. So with a precision micrometer, I sampled/measured case diameter, and the SK PM was about a quarter to one half thousandth smaller. This should *not* be as they supposedly come off the same production line, with the Standard Plus supposedly grouping better than the PM. Another noticeable difference in my lots...the PM has more applied lubricant. I believe that's important, but could require a Q-tip through the chamber every 50 rounds or so since it could grab some gritty residue in the chamber. But I'm okay with that. 

With a scrubbed and dried chamber in my EVO, the Standard Plus plunks easily...even a bit "sloppy" if there is such a thing. 

So IMHO, the plunk test is what I would use to "pre-evaluate" any .22 ammo. Then it's about cycling. Accuracy (group size) is up to you and your skill level.  

Other Notes:

CCI Standard (new light blue paper boxes) will not cycle the Nelson. It fails the plunk test. It works better than 99% in the EVO.

I have some Center-X but have not tried that yet in the EVO or the Nelson.

I use SK Standard Plus in my Ruger 10/22. In some lots, I've encountered cycling problems, even though I installed the improved Volquartsen guide rod and handle. So I'm going to try PM in the 10/22. 

As others have mentioned, I think SK Rifle Match is best in a bolt gun.

Roy,
Dave may have knowledge of the reason for the change than I do.
I know that there are still many that shot the paper-box stuff who wish that they still made it that way/that good.

I've had some good lots of the newer stuff but there have been years that I had difficulty in finding ammo that tested well enough to buy a case (rifle).

I would really like to know more factual backstory he behind the reason to change the priming compound as well as the EPS bullet vs the traditional round nose type.

I have heard that their accuracy test standards for qualifying Tenex have been pretty standard, but issues such as overall length and their standards for that are a different matter.