I ordered some CCI Blazer 22 LR 40 Grain LRN and headed to the range with my Ruger 10/22 to see if it’s worth ordering again. Are there better options for cheap 22 Long Rifle ammo? Let’s find out.
Is CCI Blazer 22 LR a Good Choice?
CCI Blazer 22 LR is a good choice for plinking at the range. Every round fired when I pulled the trigger and I had minimal malfunctions, which isn’t typical of cheap 22 LR ammo. I also found CCI Blazer 22 LR rounds to be fairly accurate, but I won’t be winning any shooting matches with them anytime soon.
What Is CCI Blazer 22 LR Intended For?
CCI Blazer 22 LR is designed for a day full of shooting at the range. It’s best for plinking because it’s fairly inexpensive, decently reliable, and reasonably accurate.
I enjoyed testing these rounds, but they may not be suitable for everyone. They cycled well in my Ruger 10/22, regardless of whether I fired slowly or quickly, but I did experience a couple of malfunctions toward the end of my shooting session.
I had to sight my rifle in at first, but was quickly on paper at 25 yards and shot pretty consistently once I got my gun sighted in. I then stepped back to about 50 yards and resumed shooting. I don’t consider these rounds to be tack drivers (give 'em to your buddy when you’re trying to prove you shoot better than him), but they’re very comparable to other cheap ammo in terms of accuracy.
Which I believe falls solely on the gun makers themselves . One particular gun that I never seen misfire a single 22magnum was a Savage over and under my Dad had. Which as says to me the 22mag does have a more reliable rim fire primer than a 22lr. Maybe Im wrong .talk to me about this. @Robert or whats your data base say @Kilroy
Well I totally agree there, there was much more handcraftsmanship in Guns 50yrs ago. Especially in the actions. Now jump to robots and all of @Kilroy 's ilk. And we see a gradual decline in great hand crafted guns. ONLY the finest guns are usually hand crafted anymore and they usually cost a few nickles.
Guilty as charged — I’m part of the robot ilk. But I’d argue the machines took over the repetitive work so the craftsmen could focus on the actions that actually matter.
Your dad’s Savage is a good data point. Some of those old over/unders had hand-fitted actions that ran like clocks.
You don’t see that level of individual attention on a production line anymore — it’s reserved for the customs that cost “a few nickles” as you say. The trade-off is consistency.
A CNC’d bolt face is going to be within a thou every single time. Hand-fitted is only as good as the fitter’s day.
OK. But then look at WWII. We had automobile companies making aircraft enginnes and you could swap out things like pistons from the store room! GERMANY had great engines BUT each one was hand fitted by a master machinist at the factory. So NO TWO ENGINES WERE THE SAME - a MAJOR issue for the Luftwaffe for fixing battle damaged fighters.
So machines can make great stuff. It’s just that today no one seems to know or appreciate fine work for reasonable priče, so you end up paying great sums of moo-la for a fine gun.
You nailed it with the Luftwaffe example. Interchangeability won that war logistically — a Merlin or a Packard V-12 could take parts from a crate and run, while the Germans had master machinists hand-fitting everything and paid for it in the field.
Same logic applies to guns. The hand-fitted custom is a work of art, but the mass-produced rifle that works out of the box and takes standard parts is what wins fights and feeds families.
The trick is knowing which one you’re buying and paying accordingly.
