Thoughts?





21 SHARP

Yawn. I'd rather they had put their time into a 5mm/.204 cal. on the .17 WSM case.

Very possibly way better bullet designs could be had over the 160+ year old heeled one, but thinking the LR is dug in way too deep to have something so close to even shake it up.

Yawn

They really ought to concentrate on improving the quality of the RF ammunition they make now.

They’re trying to squeeze it into an mighty tiny niche…..

Might be a run on 22LR ammo if word of this gets out. I'm an average Joe and no way I am rebarreling my 22LR for a smaller grain bullet and no advantage in anything as II can see.

Stupidity.

Suspect they might run up against SAAMI stipulated specifications. That’s likely the reason for the development of so many of the new cartridges which appear to be similar, but not exactly identical, to old cartridge.

Doa, and somewhat moronic.

22LR has its flaws, but is a mature cartridge. Plus below it is 17hm2 which ... I've never seen anyone shoot. And above it are 17hmr and 22wmr which are deeply entrenched, mature and popular cartridges.



A "22lr" with a non heeled bullet seems nice.... but in reality what does it gain? Nothing that makes a "reasonable" sense. It is at best, a side grade.

I’m usually all in on new cartidges that fill a niche, however tiny. Not sure where this one fits in, as some .22 hyper-velocity loads hang right in there with the stated performance of this one, and we all know how claimed performance usually pans out in reality.

3040Krag has a point, based on my last foray into Winchester RF ammo. Lots of duds, and with premium HSHPs, not bulk crap.

Hope it sells better than the last several new cartridges that have came out in the last few years.

It would have the ability to use higher BC bullets for "long range" rimfire shoots.

That sounds like the most marketable reason. The number of target shooters compared to the number of hunters has been increasing for a while now.

Yep.

Long range/precision/practical Rimfire matches are popular right now, so Winchester is probably seeing a market opportunity. Several reasons for the popularity are that rimfire matches don't take such an extensive shooting range as long range centerfire matches, so are able to be done in more locations, and it is also far cheaper to equip the shooter.

Only 22 Long Rifle ammo is legal in PRS matches (or any other sanctioned rimfire rifle matches I am aware of). Benchrest ,Silhouette, Bullseye you name it. Only 22LR is allowed.
THAT is not likely to change. If it were- 22 magnum and 17HMR would already be legal for those matches..

I really believe you are missing the point as to why Winchester is developing the 21 Sharps round.

Hint- it is NOT to compete against the 22 LR as match cartridge.

Ok why? Do they want to compete with 17hm2?

-FACT-

Agreed, and I'd also add that I'd like to see some effort expended on developing "match grade" 22 magnum ammo. Put the same love into it that goes into Eley Tenex for example.

You need to get out more..... You'll see a whole lot more 17 mock2's than you'll EVER see 21 sharps.

Nope.

The reasoning behind a new caliber. The belief is they'll create a market to sell more guns. I bought a 17 HMR because it was new. It doesn't do anything I can do with my .22 LR or .223. If I build it they will come.

^ this pretty much.

I shoot mine a bunch. It's an exceptionally fun round to shoot with very good accuracy.

On this episode of forgotten weapons......

THAT would take way more time and money and expertise than they’s ever want to invest, or frankly IMO, have. If you take a sideways glance at their other newish offerings, the Whizzum and the Legend, they used existing basic cases, the .27 studgun and the .223 pulled after a couple or draws, to make them, minimizing costs. Even the new, improved .270 WTF, is only a slightly tweaked WSM. All three fill niches, but I’m betting the Legend is the one that sticks long-term. That one has probably exceeded all expectations.

There are already well-established makers of .22 match ammo. I really doubt WW could do it. One of the comments at the bottom of that link suggested they’re going after the non-toxic market. Maybe.

I think long range rimfire is more popular and the shooters are more serious than most folks realize. Most guys who are pushing the limits are handloading their ammo, so this may be game changer.

Not with a 27gr bullet……

They are handloading their ammo..... having a non-heel base bullet opens up a world of possibilities.

So what is the market niche that this cartridge is going to fill?

The last 2 rimfire cartridges that were introduced haven't been very successful, the 17HM2 in 2004 and the 17 WSM in 2012. The manufacturers seem to have overestimated the market demand for both of those cartridges.

The 17HM2 is a great cartridge for shooting squirrels if your rifle will shoot the ammo that is available. The Eley/Remington 17 grain ammo was great, but the CCI/Hornady 17 grain ammo not quite as accurate in any rifle that I've shot it in and the 15.5 grain NTX isn't accurate in any rifle that I've shot it in.

The only 17 WSM rifles that I've owned/shot have been Savage B-Mags and they left a lot to be desired. The ammo cost more than 223, so why bother with the 17 WSM when it cost more and provided a lower level of performance?

They may be looking at the precision shooting disciplines and longer-than-traditional rimfire varminting markets, areas where accuracy rules. Eliminating the heel probably makes it easier to make a more accurate bullet form. It will be interesting to see where it goes.

It just occurred to me that they already make a case for a .22 RF with jacketed bullets, two actually. Using those would require tweaking the firing pin location just a bit, I suppose.

I think the rifle manufacturers dropped the ball on the WSM. Or perhaps it's just a weird size that doesn't really fit any existing action. Either way, all that's out there is the too cheap BMag or the too expensive (for what you get) Ruger 77. Would have been good in .22 version for use on hogs here in SC on WMAs, as we can only use what's legal during the current season to hunt hogs. No problem during deer season, but with 3 months of small game after deer season, and only rimfire or shot less than BB being legal for small game on WMA, the options are limited. And they wonder why hogs are prevalent...

I seem to remember from around 1968 A 5mm Remington.

you'd shat yerself if you priced a RimX.......

Yep. Easy enough to change.

Enlighten us as to the purpose.

I’d like to see a HEAVY subsonic 22mag load. Like 60-80 grains.

That would probably require faster twists than any currently available in.22 WMR.

Only thing I can come up with is; it is designed from the beginning to use nonlead bullets, and still be reasonably accurate, which most of the lead free 22's can claim.

To many cartridges....

The only thing I would like to see is a true 22LR magnum. Just stretch it out just a bit more, another 8-10% powder, make it fully backwards compatible with 22LR case and rim dimensions.


I've got a short brief written that I'm tempted to post up and send out to ammo companies...

But I've only been doing this hobby for 3 years and what the [bleep] do I really know...

I'd rather see a modern version of the old .25 rimfire, with both lead and jacketed bullet loads.

I always welcome new cartridges, even though I often don't get excited about them. I suppose some of the concern for a prospective buyer is whether or not the cartridge will endure and be supported. The 17 Mach 2 was a real winner, but for some reason or another is no longer chambered by anyone other than Savage as far as I know. If this one turns out to be a winner, will int continue to see support?

I'm not that experience with guns..

But the Mach 2 failed because it did everything 22LR was doing, at higher velocity, but more cost. Faster, but otherwise similar energy. Heck, as much as I love 17HMR, for the same reason 22WMR is going to remain more popular, it mostly does the same thing. And 22 wmr is just slightly cheaper to make the difference in popularity. I still love my Savage 93R17, fantastic shooter. But ... if I had to pick one over the other, 22WMR is gonna win.

Also past 100y, both HMR and HM2 fall off steeply for energy, and they are small bullets. So any long-range varmint hunting, 22LR will beat 17HM2. The 17HMR beats the smaller 22WMR for energy up to 150? 200y? But loses to larger 22WMR bullets. And again, Cost per round.

This new round has the same problem - 22LR is here, established, mature, and is always going to be cheaper for what is the same basic performance metrics. IT MIGHT see better luck in serious competition shooting. But in lower levels 22LR is gonna be king there simply due to cost and availability.

Would have liked to see a slightly larger case to use jacketed .22 bullets, Then load some with lead bullets for use in the old Win and Rem semi-autos made for non-heeled bullets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Winchester_Automatic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Remington_Automatic

Bruce

I’d like to see the 5mm Remington magnum resurrected in some quality rifles. I believe Agulia makes limited runs of ammo yet. With today’s powder technology and improved bullets I would think it could give the 17HMR a run for the money. A 32 or 35 grain tipped 20 caliber bullet would really extend range and energy.

Throw it in the Wizzum pile…

DOA

I have to disagree with your assessment of the 17HM2.

The 17HM2 does an outstanding job within its performance envelope. In my experience, it is a much better hunting cartridge than the 22 LR beyond 50 yards because its flat trajectory out to around 110 yards makes it much easier to hit what you're aiming at. If you look at a chart comparing the trajectories of the 17HM2, 17HMR, and 22 LR, all with a 100 yard zero, you see that the 22 LR doesn't have flat spot in its trajectory curve, as the bullet is either rising or falling and falling precipitously after 100 yards. IMO, the 17HM2 is a niche cartridge and possibly the best tree squirrel hunting cartridge yet to be introduced. If the 17HM2 had been introduced before the 17HMR it might have gained more market traction, but most people compare the two cartridges on velocity alone and the 17HMR is always going to win that race.

When I hunt colony varmints, I usually bring a 17HMR along to shoot the 0 to 150 pdogs and a 17HM2 to shoot the gsqurrels at the same ranges. I've watched people shoot the 22 LR at gsquirrels and pdogs at longer ranges, but one shot kills were the rare exception compared to both the 17HM2 and 17HMR due to trajectory and wind drift challenges.

Personally, I would rather see them take it a step further and include empty primed brass in the lineup, along with a line of bullets of varying weight/lengths so whacko loonies like me could experiment with custom loading it. Twist the barrels to accommodate them all, like say, a 1-8" or 1-10". (Empty primed brass would be a boon to me and the other half-dozen guys in the country who breech seat cast bullets in .22 single shot target rifles too. Ya see, there's an ulterior motive behind everything!)

Better yet, put the time/money/effort into resurrecting .25 and maybe .32 rimfire ammo. There's a gazillion rifles out there languishing for lack of ammo, plus when people wised up to the benefits of those old cartridges there could well be a resurgence of new guns too, factory and custom. Hell, Winchester themselves could build .25RF guns to use the new ammo and make some coin from that angle also. The development work has already been done 130 years ago, but given modern Americans penchant for re-inventing the wheel that would be ignored and millions would be spent regardless.

Definition of a Winchester engineer: someone who'll go the whole way around his hand to find his thumb.

😂🤣😂🤣😂

aether tech: The 17 Mach2 has NOT failed in my neck'o the woods!
The folks I Hunt Varmints with love this tiny power-house of a rimfire cartridge.
I personally own three heavy barrel factory Rifles in 17 Mach2 and one sporter weight barreled 17 Mach2 Rifle. They ALL are impressively accurate.
My Kimber SVT (Silhouette/Varmint/Target) in 17 Mach2 is so amazingly accurate (with Leupold 6.5x20 EFR scope) that several of my Colony Varmint Hunting partners keep pestering me to sell it to them.
One of my Hunting partners customized a Ruger MK-II Target pistol to shoot the 17 Mach2 rounds and I have shot this rig afield on many occasions - again with amazing results for such a tiny cartridge.
Looking at my stores of munitions I would estimate I went through at least 600 rounds of 17 Mach2 ammo so far this season!
The last two sporting goods stores I traveled to both had 17 Mach2 ammo on their shelves - it was NOT cheap - at $10.99 per 50 rounds. I, fortunately, now have a lifetime supply of Hornady 17 grain V-Max ammo on hand and purchased it before the most recent "shortage" at well BELOW that price.
Lastly the lethality of this tiny cartridge on small game and Varmints also impresses me. For one instance last year a Badger made the mistake of coming out of a hole and stared at me from about 100 yards distant. I had my 17 Mach2 in use at the time and ONE shot from it into the Badgers Adams Apple area kill't that big boar right there!
Like others have alluded to YOU need to get out more, or, hold off on your attempts at besmirching this amazing little cartridge.
Good luck with your letter campaign.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

why not just load a 22 K-Hornet ? that is what i now use works just on animals , matter of fact i now also have a 17 Hornet but have not played with this Ruger rifle yet ?

Do you know why Remington never carried through with the 267 rimfire cartridge? I read somewhere that it was envisioned as a higher velocity version of the 25 Stevens and in the part of New England that I grew up in there were lots of Stevens falling block rifles left to gather cobwebs and dust after CIL stopped making 25 Stevens ammo.

People who have used the Mach 2 generally have a different opinion from those who haven't.

And generally don't say stupid sh it about it......

Kinda like those who have used .22 CF's on deer as opposed to those who haven't.

What if this is being introduced with electronic primer ignition? It would shorten lock times to assist in long range rimfire shooting, and perhaps improve cycle rate for steel challenge. The different case and bullet size might be a way to make it more proprietary to Olin and whoever they could license the concept to.

I think Remington screwd the pooch when they introduced the Etronix in centerfire rather than rimfire. Logistically, CF required Remington to introduce several calibers and bullet choices, and at the same time add primers...What dealers are going to tie up $$ and shelf space .22-250 for ammo and primers that only work in one model of rifle? On top of that the benefit of shorter lock time in a centerfire varmint rifle didn't really extend the shooter's range as much as ballistic reticle scopes and rangefinders did.

But shooting rimfire offhand (whether hunting or target shooting), the shorter lock time, and the electric firing versus a mechanical firing pin strike might make a difference at rimfire distances. Just a thought.

Sadly, that’s probably an even deader idea than a new “brush” cartridge. Speed sells, and small game hunting isn’t nearly as popular as it used to be. Same goes for the various .32s that once were so popular and effective. To be honest, I’ve never found a .22 lacking with the right ammunition either.

I do have some nice flat point loads worked up for my Hornet, but they probably need to be toned down a bit for bunnies and squirrels. I also have the same bullets loaded for my 5.7 S&W, at presumably about 1600 fps. I’ll find out tomorrow morning if they’re gonna work.

I had a 5mm back in the 70's and a 17 HMR shortly after they came out. The 5mm with the original 38 gr. PLHP simply TROUNCED the HMR in retained energy and effectiveness on larger varmints like woodchucks and coyotes. I even killed a few deer with lung shots with my 5mm and it put them down surprisingly fast. I wouldn't care to try that with a 17 HMR. We don't have little colony varmints to shoot around here and I found the HMR less effective than my WMR's on our larger varmints so I eventually sold it. I'd still rather see a 5mm WSM than anything else mentioned here so far. It should easily be able to best the ballistics of the old 5mm Remington.

I think Olin learned a painful lesson about proprietary cartridges with the WSMs. I also have doubts that whoever makes the rules for LR rimfire is going to embrace a new setup that puts the current shooters at a disadvantage. My best guess is something Green for the Kalifornia market and others that may join in with that, but even that seems odd with non-toxic ammo already available.

Based on my experience with their RF stuff, the well-know (and continuing) primer problems, and complaints from a couple of the guys I shoot clays with, they’d perhaps be better off investing in QC, than vaporware.

If the target ammo of this new round (if it were electronic) had a lead 40gr bullet with a muzzle velocity of 1080fps, it would duplicate the current .22LR target ballistics.

The issue then for rule committees would be the physical advantages of the rifle or pistol that has an electronic fire mechanism. Currently it doesn’t seem to have rules on trigger pull weights, scope magnification in many cases, or many mechanical improvements like compensators, tuners, ballistic reticles and the like.

Even so, non competition shooters and hunters would still be a large enough market.

I agree with this.