I’ve been shooting rimfire long enough to see more than a handful of rimfire ammo types go the way of the dodo. Today’s is a particular shame, simply because of how consistent and clean the original formula was. I’m of course talking about Remington’s now-discontinued Standard Velocity Target 40-grain round-nose load. Most of you already know that Remington recently gave their rimfire ammo lineup a facelift, and that facelift also entailed removing some of their legacy ammo offerings from the catalog. So today, in honor of the now-dead ammo, we’ll put it through our standard set of tests to see if it's worth holding onto if you’re lucky enough to have some. Product OverviewProduct Link: https://www.remington.com/rimfire/29-21284.htmlWith 40-grain round nose bullets propelled by powder and primer charges of exacting consistency, Remington 22 Target ammunition delivers match-grade precision in every round. For championship performance, try a box and see for yourself.New and Improved — Revamped primer mixes and industry-leading technology has improved consistency and lowered chamber pressures while maintaining same velocitiesLead Round Nose — This nose design is ideal for target shooting, plinking, and competition shootsMatch Grade Precision — Delivers consistency and accuracy in every round Remington 22 Target Specifications:Part #: 21284Caliber: 22 LRGrain weight: 40Bullet style: Lead round noseMuzzle velocity: 1150 fpsBallistic coefficient: .116Package quantity: 100Usage: Target shootingMSRP: $16.99Availability: DiscontinuedCarries California Proposition 65 warning; shipping restrictions apply I find it interesting that even though this was listed as standard velocity ammunition, it's billed as having “match grade precision” and is also slightly more expensive when compared to CCI Standard Velocity 40gr, which is $14.99 per 100-round plastic sleeve. Target Sports USA has this same ammo listed as out of stock, but at a price of just $6.40 per box or roughly 7 cents per round, similar in price to what you can find CCI Standard for today. The projectiles themselves all seem to be very uniform in shape and surface consistency, and also have a glossy texture to them and don’t seem to actually be lubed in any way, but rather have a “polished” surface that has some inherent lubricity to it. From my observations running a sleeve of this ammo for this article, the ammo feeds very smoothly in the Angsatdt RPR’s Bentz chamber. Typically, poorly made ammo doesn’t feed or chamber easily in this gun, and today was a nice break with the Remington Standard Target. Velocity DataThe Garmin Xero C1 returned some great results for fairly inexpensive ammunition. Keep in mind, the Angstadt RPR, while a very precise rifle, cuts an average of about 100 fps off of the advertised velocities on the box; in this case, 1,150 FPS. A standard deviation of 20.6 fps is also really good, and just a fraction above what my personal standard deviation threshold is for ammo that I reasonably expect to be accurate, rather than just mindlessly plinked with or mag dumped. The extreme spread also has an expected larger but not huge fps range. You’ll see in the accuracy data below that you can almost line the velocity graph up with the groups since there is quite a bit of deviation between the 20th and 40th shots, lining up with how I shoot the 5 targets (top left, top right, bottom left, bottom right, center). On that note, from my research on the subject so far, this ammo would be a perfect candidate for sorting by case rim thickness, which I’m told is one of the best ways to improve the consistency of already good ammo. We’ll be trying that out in a future article once the tool arrives. PrecisionThe ammo is capable of some pretty phenomenal consistency, but still about 10fps higher than that of some of the match ammunition we’ve tested here recently. However, one major caveat to that is that every once in a while you’ll get a round that is clearly louder or quieter than what you’re used to hearing (never supersonic), and that’s usually accompanied by a noticeable point of impact shift even at just 50 yards. This slight inconsistency is probably why this isn’t actually a match ammo, although it's probably as close as Remington has ever gotten to making a standard velocity round-nose match ammo. Two out of 5 of the groups were well under an inch, and all one ragged hole; the three remaining groups were all still roughly an inch in size, but with a tiny bit of extra spread, some of it probably my fault. At the end of the day, however, this is accurate enough for just about any job you have for it, as long as it's within 100 yards or so and you have an optic capable of taking advantage of this type of precision. I personally have enjoyed a few sleeves myself out of one of my recent .22 LR plinker builds. Final ThoughtsThis is an ammo that, once again, I am sad is gone. There do exist, however, two possible successors, one by name and one by spirit. The first, Remington Standard V, has a similar, even slower subsonic velocity than Standard Target, and instead pairs it with a lighter 38-grain round-nose bullet. However, according to Sam S’s tests, Standard V is way more inconsistent in velocity and accuracy, making it less accurate than legacy-era Standard Target. My own tests of Standard V matched up with his results pretty well. Our second heir to the Standard Target lineage could also be Remington’s Subsonic 40-grain load, which we’ve tested to great effect here on Rimfire Report before. Like Standard Target, Remington’s Subsonic 22LR load comes in 40gr, is phenomenally consistent in both accuracy and velocity, and even comes in a 100-round sleeve. The major downside with this ammo is that it's, at best, about 5 cents more expensive than Standard Target. Remington lists it for an apocalyptic MSRP of $41 a box, but you can usually find it in stores or online elsewhere for about $23 a box, which is still not cheap plinking but worth the price if you’re a subsonic critter hunter or just like your rimfire ammo to be as predictable as possible. So while I’m sad that the old Remington Target 40gr round nose load is gone, Remington has at least given us two possible successors that sort of fill the same role, although not perfectly. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this ammo if you’ve had any experience with it. I’d also like to hear what your experiences have been with Remington Standard V, which I have recently picked up a few boxes of and will be testing here soon on The Rimfire Report. So until then, thanks for stopping by to read, and we’ll see you all again next week!