Just read an interesting post over at Rimfire Central. A discussion concerned loading small centerfires to obtain the report level of rimfires. One opinion is that it could be done (e.g., with a .222 Rem.), and at lower cost through reloading, than buying most rimfire cartridges, especially the pricey .17 RF ammo. Can one achieve the two goals of lower cost/round and comparable report in a small bore center fire rifle? I'm thinking of taking up reloading if it's true. Thanks.
Is there a CF cartridge to mimic .17/.22 RFs?
- Thread starter DeadCalm
- Start date
- Status
doc2rn
Member
.222 Swift
Grayrock
Member
What about a .25 Auto? I suppose you could load it to lower pressures. Of course, it might not function in a pistol then. I guess you could have a bolt action rifle custom made to that caliber, but that would probably eat up any savings you were expecting to reap. Question is : WHY? Is .22 LR too expensive? I have also heard of a low report round called a .300 Whisper (I think).
MMCSRET
Member
17 Cooper C.F. and 17 hornet.
It's not the expense so much as the versatility. Well, OK, expense is a factor, but not primary. It's more about bullet weight and construction. I'd like to be able to hit targets up to 200–225 yards. And critters up through the size of coyotes. (I've heard that the bullets in the .17s fail miserably as coyote rounds.) After that, it's probably time to unrack the .22-250. Hmm . . . Could the .22-250 be "downloaded" enough to meet these requirements? God knows, I've collected enough brass from not re-loading all these years.
MMCSRET
Member
I have never used either. I am fond of 221 Fire Ball and have been thinking about the new 17 F.B.
Auburn1992
Member
The 22-250 can apparently be downloaded to 22 mag levels
I'd bet that you could do it with the .32 H&R Mag in a Marlin 1894 or maybe with the .38 Special. I never loaded .38's just for that purpose when I had my Marlin but even at "regular" levels they were pretty quiet.
I've also wondered about this but from a different point of view - to see if there was a way to get a "reloadable, renewable .22 LR".
I've also wondered about this but from a different point of view - to see if there was a way to get a "reloadable, renewable .22 LR".
yes, actually if you look at obsolete rounds, there are a handful of old ones out there that match the 22magnum rimfire
22-15-60 stevens. As the name implies a 60 grain .22 cal bullet on 15 grains of FFg blackpowder giving 1100 fps and 170 fl/lbs energy. Use 3.4 grains of Unique instead, according to Lymans
22 Extra Long Centerfire 45 grain bullet on 8-10 grains of FFFg black powder giving 1100 fps and 120 ft/lbs
22 winchester centerfire (22WCF) a 45 grain bullet on 13 grains of FFFg black powder for 1500 fps, 250 ft/lbs energy
also, the 25 NAA round which is a bottlenecked 32acp, throws a 35 grain .25 bullet at 1050 fps.
the 5mm clement auto (36 grains at 1030 fps) and the 5mm bergmenn (35 grains at 600fps)
The 22 remington jet magnum, also called the 22 center fire magnum throws a 40 grain bullet at 1800 fps for 288 ft/lbs of energy. Apparently the S&W M53 revolver for it also came with inserts that allowed you to fire 22 rimfire. The 22 jet magnum is a necked down and shortened 357 magnum case. I bet that was a real joy in the marlin model 62 lever gun
I'll close with the 256 winchester magnum which is closely tied with the Ruger Hawkeye single shot pistol even though it first came out in the marlin model 62 lever action. When fired out of a 24" barrel the 60 grain bullet reaches 2800 fps.
Wait, I can't close yet, because while I am sick of typing about the really obscure, no one has mentioned the good old 25-20, which is just the 22 hornet with a big fat .25 bullet, both of them decending from the 32-20. Goon above me mentioned the 32 magum in a marlin lever gun, why bother, there are some new 32-20s for the lever guns to please the cowboy action shooting crowds, probably going to be some 25-20s there too.
22-15-60 stevens. As the name implies a 60 grain .22 cal bullet on 15 grains of FFg blackpowder giving 1100 fps and 170 fl/lbs energy. Use 3.4 grains of Unique instead, according to Lymans
22 Extra Long Centerfire 45 grain bullet on 8-10 grains of FFFg black powder giving 1100 fps and 120 ft/lbs
22 winchester centerfire (22WCF) a 45 grain bullet on 13 grains of FFFg black powder for 1500 fps, 250 ft/lbs energy
also, the 25 NAA round which is a bottlenecked 32acp, throws a 35 grain .25 bullet at 1050 fps.
the 5mm clement auto (36 grains at 1030 fps) and the 5mm bergmenn (35 grains at 600fps)
The 22 remington jet magnum, also called the 22 center fire magnum throws a 40 grain bullet at 1800 fps for 288 ft/lbs of energy. Apparently the S&W M53 revolver for it also came with inserts that allowed you to fire 22 rimfire. The 22 jet magnum is a necked down and shortened 357 magnum case. I bet that was a real joy in the marlin model 62 lever gun
I'll close with the 256 winchester magnum which is closely tied with the Ruger Hawkeye single shot pistol even though it first came out in the marlin model 62 lever action. When fired out of a 24" barrel the 60 grain bullet reaches 2800 fps.
Wait, I can't close yet, because while I am sick of typing about the really obscure, no one has mentioned the good old 25-20, which is just the 22 hornet with a big fat .25 bullet, both of them decending from the 32-20. Goon above me mentioned the 32 magum in a marlin lever gun, why bother, there are some new 32-20s for the lever guns to please the cowboy action shooting crowds, probably going to be some 25-20s there too.
bonza
Member
I've always been very fond of the .218 Bee. Don't own one right now, but am considering buying another, possible a Ruger No.1 this time.
This is good. So the .22 Hornet or the .218 Bee could be reasonably loaded down to noise levels near those of .22 LRs? Without getting this pushed out into a reloading post (no offense to reloaders, but we're talking about the noise part here, not ballistics, he pleaded with the administrator), tell me if this makes sense:
--The .218 Bee is nominally faster than the .22 Hornet
--The Bee has a reputation as a quieter round than the .222, .223, cartridge class.
--The Hornet burns less powder than the Bee, therefore muzzle blast from the Hornet should be even less than the Bee.
--The Hornet may also be more adaptable to safe, and lower, minimum powder charges than the Bee, thereby giving it further noise reduction, down to, or below a .22 LR or .17 RF?
Meanwhile, either could be ramped up to coyote-strength loads as needed. But of course that means a new rifle and scope. Geez, maybe I should just cheat, spend the money on a suppressor, and put it on the .22-250. It's a c.1970 Model 700, 200 rounds through it, and shoots .75-moa with Remington factory 55 grainers.
I think my brain just imploded. Help me.
--The .218 Bee is nominally faster than the .22 Hornet
--The Bee has a reputation as a quieter round than the .222, .223, cartridge class.
--The Hornet burns less powder than the Bee, therefore muzzle blast from the Hornet should be even less than the Bee.
--The Hornet may also be more adaptable to safe, and lower, minimum powder charges than the Bee, thereby giving it further noise reduction, down to, or below a .22 LR or .17 RF?
Meanwhile, either could be ramped up to coyote-strength loads as needed. But of course that means a new rifle and scope. Geez, maybe I should just cheat, spend the money on a suppressor, and put it on the .22-250. It's a c.1970 Model 700, 200 rounds through it, and shoots .75-moa with Remington factory 55 grainers.
I think my brain just imploded. Help me.
Auburn1992
Member
I've read in one of those little books that give imformation about most bullets and powder... If you use some lead bullet (forgot which make), its possible to download it to ~1,600 ft/s if I'm not mistaken.
deadin
Member
A word of caution...
Be very careful when developing "squib" loads (i.e.low power) loads in a larger CF case. There is purportedly a thing called "detonation" that can occur with extremely light loads in a larger case. I say "purportedly" because I have seen arguments as to whether such a thing actually exists or not. Smokeless powder is meant to burn, not explode. Detonation is when it explodes and supposedly can occur with very light loads in a large case.
I don't know if there is anything to the "rumor" but it has been around a long time. Because it has been reported of detonation taking a gun apart, I would do some research into it before starting to work up light powder loads.
Be very careful when developing "squib" loads (i.e.low power) loads in a larger CF case. There is purportedly a thing called "detonation" that can occur with extremely light loads in a larger case. I say "purportedly" because I have seen arguments as to whether such a thing actually exists or not. Smokeless powder is meant to burn, not explode. Detonation is when it explodes and supposedly can occur with very light loads in a large case.
I don't know if there is anything to the "rumor" but it has been around a long time. Because it has been reported of detonation taking a gun apart, I would do some research into it before starting to work up light powder loads.
Oleg Volk
Moderator Emeritus
Consider that noise increased a lot with velocity and bore size. So keep velocity down, bore size down and you are left with long, heavy, quickly spun bullets.
I've read of the dangers of under loading cases too, but can't puzzle out the physics. How would a 1/2 grain or full grain of powder be the tipping point between a fast burn and a detonation? I think I'll scoot over to the reloaders and see what they know about it.
I understand detonation happens when there's excessive empty space in the cartridge, and the struck primer ignites too much powder instead of making a neat controlled burn starting at the back of the case and moving forward. See pic: bottom round would be severely underloaded.
Attachments
WheelchairBandit
Member
I am currently toying with a Contender Carbine with a 24 inch custom shop barrel in 32 H&R Magnum,with the express purpose of loading it to very quiet noise levels.I hit a road block trying to use 32 S&Ws in it,and am now going to try Magnum brass using light loads of IMR Trailboss.
I have a 22 Short Match barrel currently on order from T/C,and once I get that I will most likely order another in 25 ACP.
WB.
Officers'Wife
Member
Hi Dead Calm,
Pick up a copy of training manual 'Military Explosives' and read the section discussing detonation. It explains the process far better than you will find on a message board if only for depth.
Selena
Pick up a copy of training manual 'Military Explosives' and read the section discussing detonation. It explains the process far better than you will find on a message board if only for depth.
Selena
Archie
Member
Again, this is perilously close to a reloading thread, but the .22 Hornet is a much better choice than .22-250 for downloading.
As alluded to earlier initially by deadin, small charges in large cases give unpredictable results. The truth is, no one really knows why (it cannot be done on command, that is) it happens, but it does happen. Best theory is when the powder is loose, all of it - or at least too much of it - burns at once.
At any rate, for downloading to .22 Magnum or .22 Long Rifle levels of velocity and pressure, the .223 Remington Magnum, 5.56x45 NATO or .222 Remington would be much better than the .22-250 and the 2.. Hornet even better.
I keep thinking I want light .22 Hornet bolt gun - an then find a source for .22 caliber cast lead bullets (maybe cast my own.) A small dose of quick powder and I have a .22 Long Rifle sort of rifle that costs less than .22 Long Rifle.
So many bright ideas, so little money. Sigh....
As alluded to earlier initially by deadin, small charges in large cases give unpredictable results. The truth is, no one really knows why (it cannot be done on command, that is) it happens, but it does happen. Best theory is when the powder is loose, all of it - or at least too much of it - burns at once.
At any rate, for downloading to .22 Magnum or .22 Long Rifle levels of velocity and pressure, the .223 Remington Magnum, 5.56x45 NATO or .222 Remington would be much better than the .22-250 and the 2.. Hornet even better.
I keep thinking I want light .22 Hornet bolt gun - an then find a source for .22 caliber cast lead bullets (maybe cast my own.) A small dose of quick powder and I have a .22 Long Rifle sort of rifle that costs less than .22 Long Rifle.
So many bright ideas, so little money. Sigh....
Floppy_D
Member In Memoriam
Crystal River Charlie
Member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2006
- Messages
- 26
How about the .17 Remington Fireball CF
- Status
