Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters .22 RF alternatives

I, for one, can only hope this thing takes off......................

and, for us Kommiefornia dwellers, that Hornady figures out a non-lead projectile for us. Heck, at the ranges I'd be interested in using it for bunnies and such, dang near a simple copper "wadcutter" cylinder would work. They seem to have worked quite accurately in .38's for years, why not a short range .22?

Thanks for the update Florida guy,

Geno

If the shellholder fits the rim why couldn’t you use the priming punch on the press?

I was thinking that a small diameter pipe cutting tool with a dulled cutter or a bullet cannelure tool might work as another way to crimp but it looks like you have solved that problem.

Dan,
just stumbled on an 8 lb jug of 800x, mostly full. Was wondering what kind of Trap load I was going to use it for...... then saw this post. I can't even count High enough for the number of possible loads in this package. I may have just set in a Life Time Supply....... who knew.

The rim is quite petite and it isn't obvious to me it would survive the stress of primer seating. Open question at this point and the brass supply is limited.

Most recent test was directed at a common charge with differing lubes. I don't know the findings to be definitive, but conclude they all work. No leading observed. The one interesting anomaly is found in the extreme outlier on the 1st Norma fouler target and for each CF group, which was the first shot of each group. I also found it interesting that in the last 15 shot group of Norma TAC the ES numbers were no different that with the CF rounds. Changes in lube apparently do leave a hint, and maybe the velocity deviations I've been experiencing are within norms for some RF ammo?

Because of the issues related in the last post about the crimp tool I will await the next round to see if that plays well. At the moment I am optimistic about the outcome.

If you'll note the Charge/Residue ratio in the upper left you will see it to be a fair bit less than the previous round. Not noted on the target is that the last round of the 1.2 800X series tickled the chronograph at 1116 fps and had a familiar crack to go with it. It was the 6 o'clock hit below the center dot in the target.



My .02 on it is that I have a field functional rifle for small game and plinking. Of course the testing is not done and I'll be back with more.......you knew that, right?

Still following (trolling?) here.

Thanks

Round 12 just concluded with some interesting results. I'll not bother you with another target picture, there was nothing exceptional therein.

Ran the standard 5 rounds of Norma TAC before and after and 4 groups of 5 with 1.0 grain of WW231. 2 groups were lubed with the SPG/graphite mix and the other 2 with NASA lube. They were all crimped easily with the tools pictured in the previous post and primed with Federal 100 (SPP) primers @ 20 yards.

Averages for each pair of groups:

SPG lube:....1066 fps, ES 50, Sd 20 w/ average group size of .75"
NASA lube:..1089 fps, ES 35, Sd 14 w/ average group size of .51"
Norma TAC:..1065 fps, ES 38, Sd 16 w/ average group size of .32"

Comparative averages with uncrimped loads w/same charge and CCI SPP:

SPG:...........1025 fps, ES 55, Sd 23 (2 groups)
NASA:.........1029 fps, ES 56, Sd 20 (1 group)

Having violated one of the basic tenants of research (changing more than one variable) I will revisit the exercise with ammo not crimped. I found it interesting that the average velocity increase was 41 fps for the SPG lube set and 60 fps for the NASA lube set. Whether this was from the primers or crimp I cannot confirm but suspect it is a primer influence more than anything else, if for no other reason than the ES/Sd numbers were lower. The small velocity advantage of NASA lube is consistent with the previous round and I suspect it will wind up my go to lube for this drill.

Only other interesting point was the amount of unburnt powder was greatly diminished to ~13% or 2.6 grains.

Forgot to mention that prior to lubing the ammo I put 10 rounds in a 10/22 mag and cycled them thru the action without a hiccup.

And the train keeps on rollin' along!

Dan, I may have missed it in an earlier post................what is NASA lube? Something you go scrounge off the launch mechanism at Canaveral?

Geno

Geno,

It is sold by the Bullshop under that brand name, intended for BP bullets. Has a consistency like warmed beeswax and looks like it was made from distilled martians.

'Nuther item I failed to mention has to do with the primers. The Federal 100s may be a little hotter and/or have thinner cup wall thickness. They were all flat across the case head plane after being shot and noticeably more resistant to extraction . CCI's retain their rounded corners after firing.

Never underestimate the primer’s effect in small cartridge applications! 😲

I’ve only played with light cast loads in the Hornet and Bee. However, in spite of the conventional wisdom that suggests ‘softer’ igniting primers, even with full throttle loads of lil’gun and jacketed bullets, my No. 1 shot patterns with the Lyman 55 cast with 5+ grains of Lil’gun unless I fired the charge with CCI 450s. Perhaps it’s the extra space in the voluminous 🙄 Hornet case that requires it, but I would never assume the primer won’t change the results.




I don’t believe the charge weight on the L’gun loads is actual, but it was the #5 rotor in the Little Dandy RCBS measure.

Thanks DD for that info.

Geno

Though not directly related to ongoing affairs I benefited from a little learning today. Went to the 20 yard line with express intent of disposing of some old trash RF ammo and took a bit of Norma TAC along for the same purpose. Because I was plinking rather than testing I did an elbow rest.



Targets were shot L-R then row 2 and all were 5 shots each except the single wad on row 2 which was 8 shots. The learning part of it went to two points: First, the row 2 target was shot with CCI CB longs. The Contender w/ Bullberry match barrel is the first rifle that has ever shot anything other than patterns with that stuff. Had to chuckle as despite firing more rounds it grouped better than half of the TAC groups.

Second, you may recall my mention of powder residue from recent tests and it has ranged from the 13-30 something %, and the very excellent performance of the powder salvaged from some WOLF MT ammo? Today's shooting deposited 3/10th grain of residue for 28 rounds, or slightly more than 1%. I don't know the charge of the CB ammo but assume something around .5-.7 grains. I need some of that powder..........

coolamundo baby

Yes, you need some of the powder............onward the experimenter

Was going to ask about the chamber in that bbl but re-read post and saw it's a match bbl and therefore likely to have a match chamber.

Geno

Ok. I haven’t read the whole thread and I’m posting this more as a book mark than anything. But, I think a reloadable 22 RF or RFM is a very desirable concept and I would buy one. Every time I shoot my 22LR and see the pile of empties on the ground the inner tree hugger and Scot in me thinks it’s a damn shame to waste that brass. I’m on page seven and hope this ends well. Go DD I’m rooting for you.

Brink,
its going to cos you a day of your life, but the 50 pages is worth it............ if your at work!

Never forget that Mr. Speer and Mr. Hornady got their starts swaging .22 bullets from used rimfire cases. Drop in some lead, and run the cases into a swaging die, presto!chango! a new bullet for your .22 Hornet/Donaldson Wasp, R2 Lovell, whatever. Corbin still makes the dies, if your inner Scotsman still has a yen for empty rimfire cases.

Hope you all will forgive a somewhat long winded post, but there are some interesting developments to pass along.

First item I will discuss is the results of Round 13 which was shaped by developments of the previous round.

3 groups of 5 loads preceded by Norma Tac with followup at the end with Wolf MT. The reason for the mild charges goes to a discovery during the priming of the cases. If you recall during the previous round I loaded 1.0 grains of WW231 with Federal 100 primers (SPP). Purpose of the run was to compare lube types and it was somewhat unexpected to see a significant jump in velocity, ostensibly from the change of primers. Ballpark increase of 50+ fps for a given charge, and even a few good numbers on the side. I noticed when cleaning the cases that the primers appeared somewhat flattened and were noticeably more resistant to removal than the CCI SPP had been. I didn't think much about it, all seemed good.

Then I started priming the cases for this round and found that 5 would no longer hold a primer. Oops. Found the primer pockets of those rounds had expanded to .177"-.178" and the case below the web had expanded to .226"+/- a hair. The number of cases so affected correlated to the number of rounds fired that tickled or surpassed the speed of sound (~11116 fps). Sooooo, i downloaded this round with fond hopes of not replicating the occurrance.

All cases were primed with Federal 100 primers and the bullets lubed with NASA lube. There was no leading observed and all cases are usable for the next iteration. Don't know why, but the making of 4 holes with 5 shots seems to be my signature these days.



A few points for your consideration. The group fired with Red Dot used a spiral lube groove by use of a knife. The other two were knurled with a file edge.

The velocity gain by use of the Federal primers is significant. The info below reflects the average velocity from previous rounds of the same charge first, then the velocity with Federal primers.

WW231 CCI/910 fps FED/1047 fps
700X CCI/920 fps FED/1002 fps
Red Dot CCI/944 fps FED/998 fps

The gain varied from about 50 fps to near 150 fps.

I spoke with Jimy about this and he suggested that a measure of the primer dims and cup wall thickness might be of use, before and after firing.

Unfired CCI and FED primers mic'd at .175" diameter with a cup wall thickness of .015" as best I can determine.


If you will look closely at the top row of brass (WW231 charge) you will note there is obvious flattening of the primer.



I have no fired CCI primers on hand, but the measurements after firing for these primers showed the cup diameter held at .175" at the mid point, and .180" at what had been the radiused segment, or that which forms the intersection of primer and case head against the breech face.

The debris was once again collected from the muffler and is the result of 15 CF rounds and 10 RF rounds. Total weight was 2.8 grains...the very few larger flakes below appear consistent with RF powder residue, but I am not certain that is the case. Total charge weight for the CF rounds was 12,5 gr and is estimated at 9 grains for the factory rimfire. 2.8 gr of residue is approximately 13% of total charge. Yes, it burns....



Last on the news front: I spoke with the director of engineering at Hornady and I think if fair to say he was quite intrigued with the concept. With that said, there are technical hurdles to overcome....high hurdles indeed. One of the most daunting is the process of making brass. As I understood it, swagging brass of such small dimensions is a very challenging proposition. He also opined that the Achilles Heel of the .22 RF ammo is the heeled bullet design. I get that, but might have said something about it being easier than sending man to the moon. I left the conversation with the thought that the case is still open for review, but if anything happens it won't be tomorrow.

If any of you fellas are intent on pursuit of this endeavor I'll pass along some contacts for brass supply.

1st on my list is Jimy here on the 'Fire. He has provided all of the brass I've used to date. I think it is fairly close to perfect for standard velocity performance and as noted by the "round #" the first supply has been reloaded at least 13 times without the use of genuine reloading tools. I have not averaged groups sizes in fine detail but my sense of it with a wide variety of powders is it will produce sub 1/2" groups @ 20 yards and I've a few less than 1" at 50 yards. My smallest group to date at 20 yards is .28" for 5 shots.

I am perfectly content with standard velocity, ie. ~1050 fps for this project. Maybe you are as well, but maybe not.

I strongly recommend Steve Brooks for moulds if you are so inclined. http://brooksmoulds.com/index.html

Other brass suppliers:

RCC Brass in Amarillo, TX: https://www.rccbrass.com/
Quality Cartridge in Maryland, http://www.qual-cart.com/

I have opened dialog with RCC with the intention of exploring the realm of higher velocity for this project. Subject to success on this point you can consider that the initial set up for their machinery will be complete within the next 30 days and I speculate the expense associated with the initial work will not be a factor....unless you change the specs.

There you go...the new project is the 22 DD Magnum😀

Was gonna call it the .22 CF Mangle'm. Might get a few libs to stroke out over such a monsterous thing?

This is the best thread I have read in a while. I hope you find the holy Grail Dan. Good luck.