Redesign the 22 rimfire.

[Crosshair]

I've been thinking about this for awhile and figured I would throw out this thought exercise.

Lets say you had a chance to redesign the 22 Long Rifle Cartridge. Then, wave a magic wand and rechamber all 22 Rimfire rifles in the new cartridge and retool all the 22 rimfire ammo equipment. W're going to keep the MAP of 24,000 PSI just because of the nature of rimfire cases can't handle more.

What would your cartridge look like?

My thoughts:

One problem with the 22 Long Rifle is that it was originally a black powder cartridge. Meaning that the cartridge is oversize for smokeless, leading to incomplete powder burn. Which makes the 22 LR dirtier than it needs to be.

Another "problem" is the heeled bullet. This is damaging to accuracy.

First thing I would do is have a non-heeled bullet. Since it's not going to use a heeled bullet the case is going to be arger in diameter, meaning more powder space. The case is going to be much shorter than the current Long Rifle case. Probably only about as long as the 22 short case. Whatever the length is, it would be sized correctly for the smokeless powder charge needed. This would make for a far cleaner burning round. The non-heeled bullet would probably lend itself to more reliable feeding as well.

Anything wrong with these ideas? What would you do?

[scottl]

If it ain't broke don't fix it.I think reason my 22 gets so dirty is I'll put 3x-4x rounds thru it than my 9mm or .45 when I shoot it.

[Rembrandt]

Redesign the case to continue to ignite as a rimfire but keep the rim the same diameter as the rest of the cartridge....that would allow stacking in a magazine without the curved banana design. Hence a true high capacity magazines that could hold considerably more.

[Crosshair]

If it ain't broke don't fix it.I think reason my 22 gets so dirty is I'll put 3x-4x rounds thru it than my 9mm or .45 when I shoot it.

Errr, it's plenty broken. Just not enough to make it worthwhile to switch. That's why I'm making this a hypothetical situation where you get a magic wand.

the 22 rimfire is dirty because the case is oversized and it has a low pressure limit because of the nature of rimfire cartridges. This results in incomplete combustion. We can't do anything about the latter, but we can do something about the former. I scrape the unburned powder out of my 22 suppressor and light it for giggles. You get quite a bit of it in there after only a little shooting.

The heeled bullet has been obsolete for 140 years.

Redesign the case to continue to ignite as a rimfire but keep the rim the same diameter as the rest of the cartridge.

Um, that's like making a Kosher ham sandwich. If you take away the rim then there is no way to ignite the powder. Unless you like using priming compounds so sensitive that the round fires when you drop it.

that would allow stacking in a magazine without the curved banana design. Hence a true high capacity magazines that could hold considerably more.

What's wrong with the curved design? My 10/22 mags work just fine. My Calico M-100 holds 100 rounds of 22 rimfire just fine.

Again, you can't get rid of the rim. It's not an option because you need it for reliable ignition.

[FrankenMauser]

.... It would look like .22 LR .... with heeled bullets .... and operate at 800 to 1,300 fps ....


So, it would be what we currently know as .22 LR.

I completely understand the desire for something new and "better", but the .22 Short/Long/LR work quite well the way they are. I also really appreciate being able to load my Winchester 62A clone with .22 Short (CB) ammo, shoot it without ear plugs, have half a box of ammo in the magazine, and shoot .22 LR a couple minutes later (without swapping parts, or making changes). Or... load half a magazine of .22 Shorts, and the rest .22 LR - at the same time.

Redesign the case to continue to ignite as a rimfire but keep the rim the same diameter as the rest of the cartridge....that would allow stacking in a magazine without the curved banana design. Hence a true high capacity magazines that could hold considerably more.

Um....? Seriously?
Without a rim, a straight-walled .22 LR can't head space. You would chamber a round, and not be able to set it off. It would slide forward in the chamber, until it encountered a tight section in the throat or the rifling lands in the bore. The whole reason .22 Short/Long/LR guns can use all three cartridges (with different lengths), is because the chamber is the same diameter as the bore and the bullets are "heeled".

A heeled bullet is a bullet that has a rebated section at the base, so it can fit in a casing that is actually smaller than the bullet diameter.

And... like Crosshair said: how would you ignite it? Priming compound requires two surfaces for it to be crushed between. (And, since .22 rimfire priming compounds are fairly hard to ignite - they actually add crushed glass and silica to the mixture to help.) Having priming compound on the base of your proposed cartridge wouldn't do anything. A box of that ammo would be a box of guaranteed factory duds.

[knight0334]

In addition to the above post, you'd need the rim to contact the barrel to pinch it to ignite the cartridge. A rimless or rebated rim would not be able to be ignited.


The 22rf needs no revisions. Any changes will only jack up the prices of ammo more than it has climbed in the last 5 years.

[Bud Helms]

The whole reason .22 Short/Long/LR guns can use all three cartridges (with different lengths), is because the chamber is the same diameter as the bore and the bullets are "heeled".

Well, I thought the reason you can shoot all three in the same chamber was because of the rim.

Also, I don't think a rimless .22 couldn't be ignited, but it would probably be extremely unreliable for the reason that without a firm striking surface, the firing pin would tend to push the cartridge up into the chamber (already mentioned). That would make subsequent attempts to fire that cartridge even less likely and in this case you would have a live round stuck some ways up into the chamber (think of a .22 short in a LR chamber). It probably wouldn't be stuck hard, but it would require a clearing from the muzzle end.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the rim is what keeps it in place for firing.

A lot of people have spent a lot of their time trying to fix the .22 rimfire. Time and fingers.

[CajunBass]

Let me think about it for 100 years or so. Get back to me.

[Baryngyl]

With no rim, how would you extract the cartridge, especially if it did not fire.


Michael Grace

[Mal H]

I started to say the same thing as scottl - why fix a working cartridge?

But, with the "magic wand" concept, I would say you have some very good ideas, Crosshair.

About the only thing I would add is some way to fix the primer problem in .22's. If you open an unfired cartridge and dump the powder, you'll see that the priming compound is simply swirled into the rim, and the compound is brittle. It is easily broken if handled too roughly, and the primer bits and pieces dislodge from the rim and just float around inside the case. I've carried out enough post mortems on Remington .22's to know that.

Oh, they will take quite a bit of abuse, but not nearly as much as a centerfire primer - not even close.

So, to improve that, I would design the rim to be more of an annular ring instead of the groove shape it has now. In other words, the space holding the priming compound would be larger in the middle of the rim than it is on the case side of the rim. That design would tend to afix the priming compound in place better. Even if the compound broke due to rough handling, it would still be confined to the rim area.

[Rembrandt]

Originally Posted by Crosshair

....you can't get rid of the rim. It's not an option because you need it for reliable ignition.

I was thinking more along the lines of micro-electronic ignition or proximity ignition.....of course if I had all the answers, sure wouldn't be posting here for someone to take to the patent office.

....or perhaps the time is right for a return of case-less ammo.

[Crankylove]

....or perhaps the time is right for a return of case-less ammo.

The return of the Tround?

[azyogi]

Since you didn't exclude the WMRF I'd like to see a few changes to it. Faster powder for use in pistols. A superlong 60 grn round for use in the .22lr cylinder of my magnum revolver, picture a Aguila SSS on a .22 long rifle case instead of a .22 short case, again with a fast powder. Instead of subsonic push that 60 grn as fast as the pressure will allow.

[Goldy]

Simple ! Make the case just slightly larger in diameter so there's no need for the heeled bullet. Flat based, jacketed, 35 grain poly tipped bullet.

A quick twist with a reamer would open up the chamber a few thousands. Most firing pins are wide enough to work.
Probably only cost a buck or so a round !

[kozak6]

The Tround wasn't caseless. Rather, each round had its own chamber.

With a .22 lr, it could make feeding from a high cap magazine a little simpler, but it seems that's the only possible advantage.

One problem with the 22 Long Rifle is that it was originally a black powder cartridge. Meaning that the cartridge is oversize for smokeless, leading to incomplete powder burn. Which makes the 22 LR dirtier than it needs to be.

If a shorter overall length would keep it cleaner, I'd be ok with that. But would it cause problems for those who like .22 SSS?

The only real problem I have with the .22 lr is that the rim makes it difficult to feed from a hi cap magazine. But I don't know what can be done about that since it is a rimfire.

Something else that would be cool would be if the .22 lr could be safely fired in a .22 wmr chamber.

Speaking of the .22 wmr, a reloadable non-rimmed alternative could also be interesting.

[Crankylove]

The Tround wasn't caseless. Rather, each round had its own chamber.

Maybe so, but it was also a solution in search of a problem.

[FrankenMauser]

Well, I thought the reason you can shoot all three in the same chamber was because of the rim.

That is true, Bud.

But.. it is only safe because of the heeled bullets, and bore-diameter case body. If the .22 LR didn't use heeled bullets, you could only shoot .22 LR in that chamber. Shooting a .22 Short or .22 Long in a .22 LR "Improved" chamber has several problems:
1. A very long, unsupported jump to the chamber throat. When the bullet hit the throat, it would likely be canted, and suffer damage.
2. That unsupported jump to the throat means the cartridges experience a sudden, and total loss of pressure - as the gases escape around the bullet. (Without a heeled bullet, the case has to be larger than bore size.)
3. Again, during the unsupported jump to the throat... The loss of pressure means the case will no longer be pressed against the chamber walls. The hot gases will also escape the chamber by blowing by the casing, and back toward the shooter.
4. The cartridge would lose too much pressure, and waste to much energy to be useful - even if pressure was regained when the bullet finally made it to the throat. The result would likely be a stuck bullet, 99% of the time.

--

If you want to reinvent .22 LR - that's fine. I would put my money on making it centerfire (if you want a "new" cartridge - build a new cartridge).

In my opinion, we already have the centerfire evolutionary cousin to the .22 LR: It's called 5.7x28mm FN.
Everyone always wants better bullets, more speed, more reliability, and a cleaner gun in the end. The FiveSeven cartridge is that evolutionary step.

But... the current .22 Short/Long/Long Rifle interchangeability is appreciated by many shooters, and the current cartridge design is required for safety and reliability. When you sit down and analyze why these cartridges are so versatile, popular, and eternal.... it makes it very difficult to change anything about the .22 RF trio, without undoing part of the equation.

Speaking of the .22 wmr, a reloadable non-rimmed alternative could also be interesting.

See the 5.7x28mm FN reference, above.

If you're willing to deal with a rim, there were several black powder, rimmed, straight-walled, .22 caliber cartridges around the turn of the 20th century.
If you don't want a black powder cartridge .... the .22 Hornet works as a tapered case. And... the .22 CCM (Cooper Centerfire Magnum) is almost a perfect duplicate of the .22 WMR, but in a centerfire, reloadable form.

This thread is a good reminder of what Wildcatters encounter all the time: Almost any "good idea" for a cartridge has already been done. Some times they fail. Some times they succeed. Some times they fail unnecessarily. The .22 CCM was a great cartridge, but failed due to an ammunition problem. Fiocchi was the only ammunition company that contracted with Cooper, to produce ammo for the rifles Cooper built. It turned out that Fiocchi took some short cuts in forming their dies for the brass drawing process. Those shortcuts over-worked the brass, and made the cases brittle. Most ruptured, or even shattered at the first firing.




You know... the .17 HM2 and .17 HMR could just as easily be considered the "new" .22 LR and WMR, as anything else.

[Bud Helms]

Well. I learn something every day.

Thanks, FrankenMauser.

[LaserSpot]

The .22 LR is popular because it's cheap, low-noise, and accurate. Anything that replaces it should have all three, plus increased reliability and accuracy. The 5.7x28mm FN is a good round, but it's never going to be cheap and low-noise.

With modern manufacturing techniques, I think a small non-reloadable centerfire cartridge could be produced for not much more than .22 LR, maybe even for less. It might be an aluminum case, or a balloon head brass case with an internal steel anvil. I think some early center fire ammo was designed this way.

The cost of materials is the major reason why ammo prices are going up; a non-brass case would save money. Not being a rimfire, it could be straight-sided and would feed more reliably from a magazine; ignition would probably be more reliable too.

How about a special economy version of .25 ACP or .32 ACP? The case would be made from plastic, steel, aluminum, or zinc alloy. Modern precision manufacturing would ensure consistency and accuracy.

With cheap, high-quality ammo, Ruger might sell 10/25 or 10/32 rifles based on the 10/22. It would be perfect for low noise target shooting, plinking and hunting/pest elimination.

[Buzzard Bait]

So if we do away with the heeled bullet we could head space on the case mouth. As far as doing away with rim we could roll in a extractor grove around the base which would leave a pocket for our priming compound. Sure would be a lot of nice guns that wouldn't use it. It would be more adaptable to non lead bullets
bb

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Goldy

Simple ! Make the case just slightly larger in diameter so there's no need for the heeled bullet. Flat based, jacketed, 35 grain poly tipped bullet.

A quick twist with a reamer would open up the chamber a few thousands. Most firing pins are wide enough to work.
Probably only cost a buck or so a round !

It's been done. A LONG time ago.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/history_rimfire_ammo.htm

In 1890 the .22 Winchester Rim Fire (WRF) was introduced. This cartridge is loaded with a 45 grain, flat point, inside lubricated bullet with a full diameter heel, rather than the tapered heel bullet of the .22 LR. The .22 WRF fires a .224" diameter bullet, just like modern centerfire .22s and the later .22 Magnum (WMR). At one time a 40 grain HP bullet was also available, but it has since fallen by the wayside.

Remington called this cartridge the .22 Remington Special, and loaded it with a 45 grain RN bullet. The .22 Rem. Spec. and .22 WRF are the same cartridge and are interchangeable.

The .22 WRF is a good small game cartridge, superior to the .22 LR. CCI loads the ammunition, and Winchester does an occasional run of .22 WRF. Modern CCI ammo is loaded to a MV of 1300 fps and ME of 169 ft. lbs.

Today the .22 WRF is kept alive primarily as a less destructive small game load for rifles chambered for the .22 WMR cartridge. The .22 Magnum is a lengthened version of the .22 WRF and will chamber in firearms designed for the .22 WMR, much as .38 Special ammunition may be fired from .357 Magnum guns, although it will not function correctly in autoloaders.

In the early 20th Century a pair of cartridges about the same size and offering about the same ballistics as the .22 LR were introduced. These were designed for use in autoloading rifles, used smokeless powder and inside lubricated bullets, and in that respect are a more modern design than the .22 LR. However, as soon as the established .22 LR was universally converted to smokeless powder, the .22 Auto cartridges became superfluous.

The .22 Winchester Automatic cartridge was designed for their Model 1903 autoloading rifle (discontinued in 1932). Ammo was produced into the 1970's. Remington's .22 Automatic appeared in their Model 16 autoloader. That rifle was discontinued in 1928, and the ammunition was not loaded after the Second World War. Although similar, these two cartridges differ dimensionally and are not interchangeable.

My grandfather had a Winchester Model 1903 ... that's what I learned to shoot with. I always wondered how the ammo might work in something like a Ruger Single Six with the WMR cylinder, but ... I don't have any of the ammo (nor do I have the rifle), so it's a moot point.

I was interested in the reference to the .22 WRF. Does anyone know how that compares to the .22 WAR (or is it .22 WRA?) dimensionally and ballistically?