Anyone loaded .22LR for 1km/s?


PDA






bigalexe
December 6, 2009, 12:03 AM
This is a "loaded" question. Also you can substitute .243 or .270 because I know .22lr is very small and slightly bigger rounds might be better suited to this.

I would like to know if anyone has done experiments loading small calibers to fly at very high speeds. I looked and according to Wikipedia the 40gr .22LR is considered to have a muzzle velocity of 330m/s. The long range cartridges of .338 and .408 each have muzzle velocities in excess of 3 times that. So I'm wondering if anyone has ever tried to overload a .22LR cartridge for longer range. Secondly assuming the case and gun don't explode, would the round still be as accurate?

Reason:
I am a small guy, very small, and I would love to be able to shoot long range if only at paper. Following the laws of inertia, F=M*A, and Action/Reaction, you can deduce that a 40gr bullet accelerated to 1km/s will have far less recoil than a 200gr .338 Lapua bullet accelerated to the same velocity so I would be able to shoot long range.

sorry about using metrics, much easier to do math with it.

If you enjoyed reading about "Anyone loaded .22LR for 1km/s?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
bullseye308
December 6, 2009, 12:16 AM
What about taking a .22 and shooting at 9mm casings at 100 yards? I have heard that was good practice for simulated 1000 yard shooting on a small range.

Might not be tha answer you are looking for, but it may be a viable substitute.

Definitely do not think about "overloading" a .22. It uses powder you can't get to do what it does. If you ever pull a bullet, the case is almost full anyway.

fireman 9731
December 6, 2009, 01:15 AM
The solution is the venerable 22-250.

You can push a 40gr slug up to 4400 FPS. The only problem is that at longer distances you will have much more wind deflection and energy loss than with a heavier bullet. I have seen some people shoot a thousand yards with a .223, but it isn't easy!

If you really want to shoot a thousand yards, without much recoil, Get a heavy barreled 45-70!

ljnowell
December 6, 2009, 02:31 AM
If you really want to shoot a thousand yards, without much recoil, Get a heavy barreled 45-70!
??????

David Wile
December 6, 2009, 02:49 AM
Hey ljnowell,

Yep, you can shoot a 45-70 a thousand yards quite comfortably even with my 1895 Marlin Cowboy with only a 26 inch barrel. The only thing is, the bullet shoots a big arc, and it sure is not a speedy thing going down range. However, a big 400 grain bullet will not get pushed around as much by crosswinds as a 40 grain bullet, and it will not lose as much of its speed while going the distance.

Best wishes,
Dave Wile

rcmodel
December 6, 2009, 11:50 AM
So I'm wondering if anyone has ever tried to overload a .22LR cartridge for longer range.NO.
The case, rifle action, and soft lead bullet would not withstand any higher pressure then the factory .22RF round is already loaded at.

In the second place, nobody reloads .22 RF or pulls the bullets and changes the powder charge.
Empty primed RF cases are not sold, .22 RF reloading dies are not made, and the heel-type soft lead bullets would be distroyed if you tried to pull them to change the powder charge.

If you want a faster .22RF with higher velocity and longer range, you want a .22 WMR / .22 Magnum.

If you want longer range then that, you want a .223, or 22-250, or 220 Swift.

But if you want to shoot 1,000 yards, you want a .30 cal or larger with bullets that have high sectional density and will fly that far.
No .22 is going to do it.

rc

PT1911
December 6, 2009, 12:07 PM
what he said.

RandyP
December 6, 2009, 12:15 PM
I recall seeing a gun magazine article, probably from back in the 60's (OK, I'm an old fart-lol) where a crafty soul necked down a .50 BMG case to accept a standard .22LR bullet.

I cannot recall if firing it resulted in instant vaporizaton of the lead -lol

rcmodel
December 6, 2009, 12:30 PM
It was a joke that made the rounds of all the gun magazines back then.

Upon close inspection of the photos, you could usually find a thin solder joint where they cut off a .22 cal case neck and soldered it to a cut-off .50 BMG case.

rc

highorder
December 6, 2009, 12:36 PM
rc, and you suggesting the soldered joint wouldn't hold?...
;)

rcmodel
December 6, 2009, 12:55 PM
I never said that!

I think a soldered together .22/.50 BMG would be a fine idea, for someone else to try! :D

rc

RandyP
December 6, 2009, 01:04 PM
My bad....lol....I reckon the wildest wildcat that actually fired would have to be the 338-50 Talbot then.

bigalexe
December 6, 2009, 01:13 PM
Thanks for the responses, hadn't thought of .22-250 or that a 45-70 could be made to recoil lightly. I did look at some tables last night after posting which is something I hadn't done before since reloading is a foreign art to my brain. I found some reloads of .223 that were in the neighborhood of what I'm looking for as far as velocity is concerned and that may be my answer due to the plethora of guns out there that shoot that caliber.

Also on the whole solder bit... wouldn't the burning powder heat and melt the solder, thus the bullet dragging the casing down the barrel resulting in wrecked rifling? Sounds like a fine idea to make a tent-pole out of a perfectly good barrel to me.

rcmodel
December 6, 2009, 01:17 PM
There is no doubt whatsoever that a soldered together case would seperate the first time it was fired.

As I said earlier, it was a cobbled together joke making the rounds of the gun mags many years a go.

rc

NCsmitty
December 6, 2009, 01:26 PM
Perhaps this will get it done for you, and it is a viable caliber.

http://www.reloadersnest.com/detail.asp?CaliberID=100&BulletWeight=30&LoadID=1130




NCsmitty

depoloni
December 6, 2009, 02:13 PM
http://ammoguide.com/gfx/web/joinme/22-50bmg.gifhttp://ammoguide.com/gfx/web/joinme/22-50bmg-top80p.gif

Oh... it's been done several ways. A mite pricey to reload for between powder and all though. 22-cal 55gr HP.

Ol` Joe
December 6, 2009, 02:46 PM
Look at one of the 6mm or 6.5s they are becoming the choice for 1K yd shooting today and recoil is minimal compared to some other cartridges. The 260 Rem or 6.5 Creedmoor will do a good job and the 6.5x284 will out shoot (wind drift & trajectory) a lot of larger rounds at extended range.
The 6x47 and a couple other 6mm`s could be fine choices too.

dmazur
December 6, 2009, 02:54 PM
Another idea for consideration is muzzle brakes. Redirection of energy helps mitigate recoil, even in fairly light rifles.

It is easier to find bullets with a high BC in calibers larger than .22. Not much larger, say 6mm, but larger nonetheless.

High BC is a significant factor in long-range shooting, not just a high MV.

So, you might look at a more conventional 6mm or .30 cal cartridge and plan on having a muzzle brake added. Then you can shoot all day and still have an intact shoulder. :)

Jim Watson
December 6, 2009, 03:01 PM
Thanks for the responses, hadn't thought of .22-250 or that a 45-70 could be made to recoil lightly.

Somebody was joshing you, pard. A .45-70 loaded for long range is a shoulder thumper. Reason I shoot a .40-65 with a 400 grain bullet instead of a .45 cal. 500+.

How long a range do you seriously expect to shoot your Mach 3 .22 at?
A GOOD .223 with the RIGHT barrel and bullets is a fine little 600 yard gun.

ljnowell
December 6, 2009, 03:45 PM
Hey ljnowell,

Yep, you can shoot a 45-70 a thousand yards quite comfortably even with my 1895 Marlin Cowboy with only a 26 inch barrel. The only thing is, the bullet shoots a big arc, and it sure is not a speedy thing going down range. However, a big 400 grain bullet will not get pushed around as much by crosswinds as a 40 grain bullet, and it will not lose as much of its speed while going the distance.

Best wishes,
Dave Wile


I know it can be done, but I think he was looking for something that wouldnt require that level of holdover. Either way, I want a 4-70 like yours, they are awesome.

bonez
December 6, 2009, 04:24 PM
What do you consider "Long Range"? Our silouette club shoots 22LR at 200 yards all the time.

David Wile
December 6, 2009, 04:35 PM
Hey Jim,

I wasn't joshing him about the 45-70 being able to shoot 1000 yards with rather mild recoil. I have the Marlin Cowboy in 45-70, and I know it can be loaded far beyond what I am willing to take on the shoulder. I also know the 45-70 can be loaded milder so it does not rock your world, and yet it is still able to ring the steel silhouette targets. And when I watched them shooting those things at 1000 yards, they were using 400 and 500 grain bullets to drop them in on the targets. The shooters were also not shooting the shoulder busting loads the 45-70 is capable of. It is quite interesting to see a fellow shoot his 45-70, then raise his head and wait a few seconds for the bullet to hit the target 1000 yards downrange. I have heard some folks claim they could see and follow the flight of the bullet down range, but you could not prove it by me. In any case, you don't have to thump your shoulder to shoot a 45-70 long range, and the big heavy bullet certainly is less affected by crosswinds than the little .22 peashooters and even the .30 calibers. Once they get those big 45-70s sighted in, they can lay big bullets in on a target all day. My Cowboy barrel is considered long by some at 26 inches. Many of the long range 45-70 shooters, however, make mine look like a peashooter. They commonly have 30 and 32 in barrels, and I have seen two 36 inch monsters. I am telling you those big long barrels throw 500 grain bullets down range, and the shooter hardly shows any sign of recoil.

Best wishes,
Dave Wile

Ranb
December 6, 2009, 05:03 PM
3260 fps = 1km/sec? The cartridge I use for light recoil and high speed is the 17 mach IV. A 20 grain bullet at 4000 fps is nice. The BC sucks, but it is still moving quick at 200 yards.

Using the calculater at http://kwk.us/recoil.html I get 1.7 ft-lbs recoil with a 6 pound rifle chambered in 17M4 at 4000 fps and 1.0 ft-lbs for a 22lr at 3260 fps. Compare this to a 223 remington with 4.1 ft-lbs.

Ranb

bigalexe
December 6, 2009, 05:09 PM
By long range im referring to max of 600 yards. That is the longest range locally for me, the ranges I go to usually are 100 yards unless you stand in the parking lot which is heavily frowned upon. The object as stated is target shooting and not knocking over deer so power isn't much of a factor.

Also I will look into Muzzle Brakes because I know the owner of Magna-Port.

rcmodel
December 6, 2009, 05:19 PM
You can do 600 yards with a .223 with a 1/7 twist barrel and heavy match bullets.

There would be to little recoil to bother anyone in a heavy barrel bolt action or AR-15 rifle.

I presonally think you will find recoil intolerable with a 45-70 and 600 yard capable loads.

rc

Afy
December 6, 2009, 05:28 PM
3260 fps is fairly easy to achieve with a .22-250 no issues. No recoil to speak of either.

Would it hit targets at 1000 M, if you are a good shot.. sure..
Want practise with a .22lr.. shoot paint balls at 100 m, you would be surprised how difficult it is to get one to explode.

Jim Watson
December 6, 2009, 10:26 PM
Dave,

Like I said, I shoot a .40-65 with a 400 grain bullet at 1200 fps from an 11 pound Browning BPCR because the same gun in .45-70-500 just kicks the dickens out of me. For that matter, I would not be shooting the .40 if my .38-55 knocked down the 500 metre rams reliably. Ringing that kind of steel does not count.
Maybe I am a wimp, there were shooters with up to .45-90-540 at the Southern Regional Mid-Range championships and they seemed to hold up pretty well. But I cannot imagine shooting any number of full power loads in a Marlin, much less magnumized nitro ammo.

fireman 9731
December 7, 2009, 01:00 AM
I always perceived the recoil of my 45-70 as more of a shove than a kick, even with moderate loads. Shooting black powder or equivalent loads seems like a breeze to me... but then again, I'm young, 6'2'' and 275lbs.

MichaelK
December 7, 2009, 12:13 PM
Bigalexe
How about a .17HMR? The 1km/sec is just a round number, not something you HAVE to achieve. A 25 grain .17 bullet is going at about 750 mps (2550 fps) and has next to no recoil. One hundred yard targets are easy with a .17. What would you want to shoot at that out 600 yards anyway?

If you decide you really need a bit more umph to get out there, there are lots of low recoild choices to select from. In terms of buying factory ammo, you could select the .204 Ruger, .22Hornet, .222 Remington, .223 (that's 5.6X45). If you eventially want something for both target and hunting you could work up to .243/6mm.

To start with, I think you're a lot better off sticking with buying factory ammo than trying to make your own. I'd buy one of the above calibers that has cheap ammo you can buy in bulk.

627PCFan
December 7, 2009, 01:46 PM
Get a 26" Swede w/full bull barrel and live a long and happy life-

justashooter in pa
December 8, 2009, 02:17 PM
There is no doubt whatsoever that a soldered together case would seperate the first time it was fired.

As I said earlier, it was a cobbled together joke making the rounds of the gun mags many years a go.

rc


somebody needs to read a bit more. cases made from components soldered together date back to the 1870's, and joint failure was not the issue that resulted in their abandonment. it was simply less expensive to form brass in single blanks, once the process had been refined and automated. IIRC, maynard cases were soldered from multiple components until the turn of the century.

rcmodel
December 8, 2009, 03:08 PM
somebody needs to read a bit more.
Well thanks for the suggestion.
But I have read a little bit about guns, I guess. :rolleyes:

Perhaps you are the one who should go back and read Post #8 in this thread.

We were not talking about 1870's black powder cases.
(which were soldered copper foil strip, not brass by the way)

We were talking about a .50 cal BMG case necked down to .224" caliber, and loaded to at least 50,000 PSI pressure or so.

rc

Quoheleth
December 8, 2009, 03:34 PM
To the OP:
What about the .17 HRM? It's supposed to be an excellent long-range bullet and very, very negligable recoil.

Edit to add: Sorry...someone beat me to it, about three posts earlier. Mea culpa...

Q

millertyme
December 9, 2009, 01:34 AM
Why the hell is it that when people start throwing around 6.5's they never mention a .264 Winmag? They're pretty damn available these days, Ruger has a current offering in that loading, better performance over other 6.5's, etc, etc. What's the deal?

jmorris
December 9, 2009, 08:41 AM
If you want to practice long range shooting and wind reading a .22 LR at 300 yards has about the same amount of bullet drop as a .308 at 1000 yards (156”).

rogn
December 9, 2009, 08:49 AM
The 223 as stated will work . An 1-8" will handle 77gr and most will andle 80gr. These can be found in AR form and are extremely accurate. A really serious longer ranger is the 22BR which with the appropriate twis can go 1000 yds with bullets up to 90 gr. Recoil in a 10# rifle is negligible and a heavy bench gun may not move at all. Ive seen 600 yd 5 shotgroups< 2 1/4". handloading unfortunately is the only way.

Speedo66
December 9, 2009, 10:31 AM
You can do 600 yards with a .223 with a 1/7 twist barrel and heavy match bullets.

There would be to little recoil to bother anyone in a heavy barrel bolt action or AR-15 rifle.

I presonally think you will find recoil intolerable with a 45-70 and 600 yard capable loads.

rc

I don't even enjoy standard 45-70 loads in my Trapdoor carbine. Of course it has a curved steel butt plate that could double as a medieval torture device. :eek:

bigalexe
December 9, 2009, 12:02 PM
Yeah a .17hmr would work, just hadn't thought of it.

I want to shoot long range because its utterly fascinating to me to be able to shoot a tiny little chunk of lead consistently out to 600yd. Now I know that downsizing targets to say a bottle cap at 100yd is essentially the same thing as making the range longer but something about shooting very long distances just seems so cool. In short: I'm an Engineering/Machining student and I like precision, increasing precision with a gun means smaller groups at longer ranges more consistently.

~z
December 9, 2009, 03:47 PM
Downsizing targets at shorter range is NOT the same. There is a whole lot more 'craft' involved at extended range. Short range small targets is just a precision game that requires an accurate rifle and a good shooter. Extended ranges require the shooter to account for changing atmospheric conditions among other things.
~z

Ol` Joe
December 9, 2009, 09:09 PM
Let me know when ya try the 17HMR at 600 yd. I`m likely within 45-60 minutes of your range at most, and would like to see how the wind works on those 17 gr bullets :evil:

Ranb
December 10, 2009, 06:41 PM
My LAR 50 bmg will do 1.5" groups at 200 yards, but the groups open up to ten inches at 550 yards. I really wish reduced targets at short range was the same, but I know it is not.

Ranb

If you enjoyed reading about "Anyone loaded .22LR for 1km/s?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!