Lack of .22WMR AR-15s due to what?

[Stargazer65]

Is the lack due to insufficient market? I can understand this, .22lr is cheap and .223 is as cheap or cheaper and more powerful, so why bother with a .22WMR AR-15.

Or is this an engineering issue inherent in the rifle design mixed with the cartridge?

I was wondering, because as I brought up in another thread. A rimfire AR-15 is still CT legal.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=8938723&postcount=18

Wouldn't a .22WMR AR-15 become more appealing under those restrictions?

 

[tyeo098]

Rimmed cartridge.

 

[Davek1977]

Rimmed cartridge.

So is the 22 LR, and plenty of 22 AR's out there, and I believe Alexader Arms makes one in .17 hmr, which is simply the WMR necked down. I think if there was a true market for it, it could be done, but as of now, there just isn't

 

[silicosys4]

I wouldn't want one for many reasons, while I would want a .22lr ar-15.
The .22wmr offers nothing over either the .22lr or the .223, imo.
Rounds are almost as expensive for the .22wmr as for the .223, no advantage there,
the .22wmr does nothing new performance wise,
and you can't reload the .22wmr.
However, at .30/rd for .223 vs .04/rd for .22lr, there are many advantages to a .22lr ar15.

 

[anothernewb]

I think the 22wmr suffers in an ar package the same way it suffers in the other autoloaders. problems with blowback bolts on magnum rounds.

 

[Fishbed77]

A .22WMR just doesn't seem to serve much of a purpose to me.

A .22LR AR-15 (I own one) is great for training, or just plain 'ol fun. Ammo (if you can find it) is cheap.

Since .22WMR costs as much as 9mm ammo, there isn't much use for it in an AR-15 (which can be had in 9mm). IMHO, there isn't much need for a 9mm AR-15. May as well just step up to 5.56mm/.223.

 

[7.62 Nato]

I'd like to have a CMMG .22WMR AR-15 conversion.

 

[jpwilly]

I'd like a 22WMR too. Why not? Heck in a few years the Army will most likely adapt it anyway cause you can carry a lot more rounds and its almost effective as 223! Bawahaha!

 

[Texan Scott]

Lack of interest.

 

[351 WINCHESTER]

Ammo too expensive?

 

[cat_IT_guy]

Interesting.... mainstream, I understand low demand - more expensive than .22lr but not as powerful as .223. However, if, as per the OP, .22mag could be had whereas the centerfire .223 could not due to whatever rediculous legislation, it is considerably more powerful than .22lr. Interesting. If I lived in such a state (I soon might... IL politicians leave a lot to be desired), it could be one of the more viable options. I'd likely be interested in purchasing one if I could no longer purchase a .223 AR.

 

[jmorris]

Scott nailed it, interest.

More logical than the subsonic 223 threads though.

 

[CraigC]

The .22Mag is an excellent cartridge but one difficult to design an autoloader around. The pressure peak is comparable to the .22LR but it has a long pressure curve. The rim poses little problem whatsoever. I'd like to see one offered for close to the price of the .22LR uppers. For those a little closer to the ground, there is a massive performance gap between the .22LR and the .223. Which is covered handily by cartridges like the .17HMR, .22Mag and the various small centerfires like the .22Hornet and .218Bee.

People have weird ideas about the .22Mag. For example:

The .22wmr offers nothing over either the .22lr or the .223, imo.
Rounds are almost as expensive for the .22wmr as for the .223, no advantage there,
the .22wmr does nothing new performance wise

Let's see, the .22Mag runs 800fps faster with a heavier, jacketed bullet. Which doubles the effective range of the .22LR. Is capable of taking larger varmints and predators more consistently. Is more accurate at 100-150yds than the .22LR. Is FAR quieter than the .223 and last I checked, 50rds of premium .22Mag costs about the same as 20rds of cheap .223.

 

[jim243]

^^^^ I have to agree with CraigC. There are semi-auto 22 mags rifles made (few). But it is doable in a AR format, but why? Cost is higher than 22 LR and interest in that bullet is very small. I have one as a bolt action rifle and like to shoot it, but that is for small varmints up to 35 lbs. Any varmint larger I would use my 223s. Also range on the 22 mag will max out at 200 to 250 yards in providing proper power on target. Any shots longer and the 223 will do a much better job.

Just not a popular round with so many others that have better performance (17 HMR, 22 Hornet, 22-250, 243, 6.5 6.8)

Jim

 

[backbencher]

A full up .22" WMR AR would be appealing if you lived in a People's Republic, but would cost more than the equivalent Ruger 10/22, so now you're paying for looks. To design a drop-in blowback bolt for AR's is tricky, b/c of the pressure curve, & the liability if someone takes your kit, throws a .17" bbl on it, & blows themselves up. Also, a drop in bolt replacement would do the folks in the P'sRs no good, so the kit would have to be designed as both a drop-in for .223" chambers & a setup for a dedicated .22" WMR bbl - and the bbl would have to be sourced. Small market + uncertain return + difficult design + liability + two design requirement + price ceiling (under 10/22) = no product.

 

[silicosys4]

People have weird ideas about the .22Mag. For example:


Let's see, the .22Mag runs 800fps faster with a heavier, jacketed bullet. Which doubles the effective range of the .22LR. Is capable of taking larger varmints and predators more consistently. Is more accurate at 100-150yds than the .22LR. Is FAR quieter than the .223 and last I checked, 50rds of premium .22Mag costs about the same as 20rds of cheap .223.

I guess a longer explanation is in order.....
I should have specified that I reload, that makes a world of difference, and leaves the .22wmr in the dust as far as versatility. As far as price, you are a little off, Tula .223 is $6.50 or so for 20 rounds, so they are both about the same, pricewise for blasting. Premium .22wmr is going to be more accurate than the cheap stuff, but not more so than handloads, and even a 2moa tula .223 round is accurate enough to take coyotes with at ranges beyond that of the .22wmr, and retains far more energy as well.
My interest in non reloadable rimfire cartridges ends at the .22lr because of cost, and I can load .223 for cheaper than I can buy .22wmr. That extra 800fps costs so much more than .22lr that it negates any advantage, especially considering that .223 costs about the same as .22wmr if you reload. .22wmr isn't cheap, at least not here. Its about $15/50, cheap .223 is about the same at $6-$7/20 of Tula. Thats a quadroupling of your costs over the .22lr for that extra 800 fps in performance, to still come up short over the .223, and to not be able to reload your brass. The .22wmr is more versatile than the .22lr, and the .223 is more versatile than both. I just can't see your point in the difference in noise between the .223 and the .22wmr. They both require ear protection, and in some cases, such as out of a pistol, the .22wmr sounds louder than a .223, at least to me.

I will say I have more confidence in the .223 to generate the velocities needed to ensure longer range bullet performance. I don't trust the .22wmr with expanding bullets to expand properly at longer ranges, or in many cases, to expand at all.

Again, its an opinion and everyone has different ones based on their requirements. Sorry, personally I'm still not seeing it. The .22wmr offers nothing over the .223 IMO
I guess a lot of people have the same wierd ideas. Its not a very popular cartridge.
The people that are fans really like it though, if it were reloadable or cheaper I would probably be interested. I have a .22lr single six with a .22wmr cylinder, I've never once been tempted to use... I can't justify spending $15 for 50 .22wmr rounds when I can load about 6 times that many shots of .38spcl for less money via reloading.

If it came down to either having a rimfire AR15 or no AR15 at all, I'd still prefer .22lr due to ammo costs and availability.

 

[CraigC]

Standard factory loads should be less than $10 a box and that's good ammo, not at all comparable to that Tula crap. Nothing in .22Mag should cost $15. Last .223 I bought was the cheapest domestic ammo I could find at just under $8 per box of 20. Sorry but that's a huge difference.

Yes, I handload too. The cheapest .223 game bullet I can find in a quick search, bought by the 1000, is $4.50 per 50rds. I bought primers just before the panic started and they come up to $1.50/50. We're already up to $6/50rds. Figuring H335 at $158/8lbs and a 26gr charge, your powder will cost you $3.66/50rds. Let's assume cheap or free brass and that's per 50rds, you're spending $9.66/50rds for .223. Plus whatever you had to pay in shipping or sales tax. Which can make a significant difference but for now, let's just stick to retail. So let's dispense with the nonsense about reloading .223 for less than you can buy .22Mag. I don't know about you but I value my time. Now I'm not going to figure in a labor cost for my handloading but my time is valued all the same. I do NOT, under any circumstances, consider it "free" because it is the most valuable commodity many of us have. Not everybody wants to handload for every cartridge they shoot. I shoot on my own property and have no desire to handload for anything that throws its brass in the grass.

On to the guns. Virtually ANY .223 rifle will cost you a lot more than a lot of .22Mag's. You can buy a Savage 93 that will shoot MOA with preferred loads for well under $250. A good .223 will cost at least twice that, if not three times.

Noise. Yes, you should wear hearing protection with either cartridge but one can use the .22Mag in the field, as intended, without fear of blowing your eardrums. Some varmint hunting is done in close proximity to dwellings and some folks have issues with the noise a .223 generates but the rimfire magnums are okay.

Some folks simply don't 'need' more than the .17 or .22 rimfire magnums. Believe it or not, some folks need more than the .22LR but less than the .223 and the .22Mag fits in there nicely. If all you need is to handle small game, varmints and predators out to 150yds, the .223 is a lot of unnecessary expense, muzzle blast and in the case of handloading, effort. Which is why I own several rimfire magnums but only one .223. Even though I DO handload. I like to be able to buy a few boxes of rimfire magnums to handle pest control and spend my time at the loading bench loading for my sixguns.

 

[DNS]

My favorite caliber!
I never would have bought an AR in .223 if the magnum had been available.

 

[moxie]

Is there a .22WMR semi-auto pistol or rifle out there that works reliably? In any configuration? I can't recall a good example. Engineering problem as described above. The .17 HMR suffers from the same problem. The AMT pistol was as unreliable as you can find, although very pretty. Ditto the Excel. Both rounds work great in revolvers and bolt actions. Alexander Arms has an AR looking .17 HMR blowback that costs over a grand. Don't have any personal experience with it.

 

[matrem]

Is the lack due to insufficient market?

In any free enterprise economy that is the key factor.

Not going to pick nits with anything said here, but the fact is, .22 Win Mag is far less than halfway between .22lr and .223 in performance, and more than halfway between the two in cost.

My .22 mag has taken dozens of g-hogs & other vermin, and I like it rather well, but I'm not at all surprised that the market just isn't there for ARs chambered for them.

 

[DM~]

Is there a .22WMR semi-auto pistol or rifle out there that works reliably? In any configuration? I can't recall a good example. Engineering problem as described above. The .17 HMR suffers from the same problem. The AMT pistol was as unreliable as you can find, although very pretty. Ditto the Excel. Both rounds work great in revolvers and bolt actions. Alexander Arms has an AR looking .17 HMR blowback that costs over a grand. Don't have any personal experience with it.

The Remington 597M is reliable and they shoot very well...

I bought mine many years ago and it's accurate and has been 100% reliable.

The BEST part is, i don't have to reload it!!

DM

 

[backbencher]

My brother has a Grendel .22" WMR pistol that's a great way to burn through several $ worth of ammo in a mag dump. The new Kel-Tec looks to be quite similar to the old design. He's not had any issues w/ the Grendel that I can recall other than having to retighten the safety screw.

 

[moxie]

Didn't realize the 597 came in WMR! I note that Remington quit making it in .17HMR.

 

[DM~]

EAA is even importing an semi auto "bull pup" in 22Win mag... (also in LR) AND it can be used in either right or left handed...

DM

 

[DaveyMG]

Buy a Remington 597 in .22WMR, and a Remington 597 VTR (only available in .22LR afaik) and swap all the furniture around, resell the 597 .22LR with the laminate stock, keep the super rare VTR .22WMR the VTR can also wear typical AR grips/handguards/stocks. Get a 3/8" dovetail to picatinny rail adaptor to finish off the A3 appearance conversion. Not quite exactly a .22WMR AR, but easier and more reliable than trying to custom modify a 15-22 or other into a WMR (which would require custom barrel, bolt machining, and non-existent magazines)