Fine Figure of a Man
Member
Considering the billions of rounds of 22LR ammo makers produce, I think it's safe to assume they have found the most cost effective methods of producing bullets.
What is the point of .22LR hollow point plinking ammo?
- Thread starter rpenmanparker
- Start date
- Status
Hoxviii
Member
I use them for varmint control, mainly groundhog. The impact difference between a 36 grain HP and a 40 LRN at 1250fps (marketed) is dramatic. 40 LRN the animal writhes and struggles, and will still be suffering 30 minutes later with a headshot, and it'll take a second shot to finish things. With 36 HP, they fall over and that's it. I buy brick ammo for varmint control, because why would I spend any more than I need to?
I only LRN'd a groundhog once, thought he was dead, then found him dragging around the yard. Since then it's the cheap HPs, and no suffering animals.
Carl N. Brown
Member
What is the point of .22LR hollowpont plinking ammo?
[sarcasm] The point is hollow, obviously. [/sarcasm]
Seriously though.
I like to plink with the ammo that is same as or is close to the ammo I intend to hunt game with or use for protection against minor predators or use to eliminate pest animals if necessary. To me, that's one point of target pratice: use ammo that matches the bullet weight, trajectory, etc of the "serious" work ammo.
For many years, the unofficial local public shooting range was an abandoned rock quarry nicknamed the Five Caves just outside the city limits. I observed fewer ricochets with hollowpoints than with lead round nose or copper plated round nose .22 LR especially shooting tin cans floating in the quarry pond or shooting at targets backed by limestone.
Why waste the copper?
The copper plate on .22 LR is pretty thin -- just enough to prevent the exposed lead from oxidizing without resorting to heavy wax. Remington Golden Bullet uses what is called gilding metal, a kind of brass as I recall. Plated .22 LR does not use as much copper as jacketed bullets use. The .22LR CPHP Copper Plated Hollow Point cheap practice ammo would not be cheap if they used copper or brass jackets.
I do shoot .22 LR 40gr lead round nose standard velocity CCI, a lubed plain lead bullet, a lot in my Ruger MkII. It does feel waxy and is prone to gather lint if carried in the pocket. I don't have that problem with .22LR Federal CPHP which are not so waxy.
[sarcasm] The point is hollow, obviously. [/sarcasm]
Seriously though.
I like to plink with the ammo that is same as or is close to the ammo I intend to hunt game with or use for protection against minor predators or use to eliminate pest animals if necessary. To me, that's one point of target pratice: use ammo that matches the bullet weight, trajectory, etc of the "serious" work ammo.
For many years, the unofficial local public shooting range was an abandoned rock quarry nicknamed the Five Caves just outside the city limits. I observed fewer ricochets with hollowpoints than with lead round nose or copper plated round nose .22 LR especially shooting tin cans floating in the quarry pond or shooting at targets backed by limestone.
Why waste the copper?
The copper plate on .22 LR is pretty thin -- just enough to prevent the exposed lead from oxidizing without resorting to heavy wax. Remington Golden Bullet uses what is called gilding metal, a kind of brass as I recall. Plated .22 LR does not use as much copper as jacketed bullets use. The .22LR CPHP Copper Plated Hollow Point cheap practice ammo would not be cheap if they used copper or brass jackets.
I do shoot .22 LR 40gr lead round nose standard velocity CCI, a lubed plain lead bullet, a lot in my Ruger MkII. It does feel waxy and is prone to gather lint if carried in the pocket. I don't have that problem with .22LR Federal CPHP which are not so waxy.
The bullet isn't any more complex. Either way it's a swaged bullet. Im guessing it doesn't take any extra work to press the 36 grain chunk of lead into the hollow point mold than it does to press the 40 grain bullet into the round nose mold.
Like others have said the HP is faster, has a flatter trajectory and might expand better. If you like the RN stuff buy it instead... Seems pretty simple.
Like others have said the HP is faster, has a flatter trajectory and might expand better. If you like the RN stuff buy it instead... Seems pretty simple.
243winxb
Member
This Youtube video shows the copper plating process.
Looks like an extra step is needed, that should raise the cost over a wax lubed bullet?
Looks like an extra step is needed, that should raise the cost over a wax lubed bullet?
Deus Machina
Member
There's going to be an extra step anyway.
Plate in copper and rinse, or tumble in wax and dry?
Probably cheaper to use whichever machines are already paid off.
FWIW, I've had guns that shot the 36gr hollowpoints more accurately than the 40gr solid equivalent.
I'm sure that's just the usual rimfire pickiness in which the gun likes the same length lighter, or the slightly different shape or something, but for the same price it's what I stuck with.
Plate in copper and rinse, or tumble in wax and dry?
Probably cheaper to use whichever machines are already paid off.
FWIW, I've had guns that shot the 36gr hollowpoints more accurately than the 40gr solid equivalent.
I'm sure that's just the usual rimfire pickiness in which the gun likes the same length lighter, or the slightly different shape or something, but for the same price it's what I stuck with.
GooseGestapo
Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2003
- Messages
- 6,149
Anyone who doubts if a .22lr HP expands needs to go to YouTube and search for expansion tests on the CCI MiniMag.
How does 11” of penetration and expansion to .41” sound?
The bulk ammo is basically manufactured to a price point. I’ve got a plethora of .22’s in my stash. Hi-vel, standard vel, plinking junk, top end match, hyper vel.
Depends on whether I want to shoot bug holes at 50yds, or blast something to tiny bits, or quietly dispatch a nuisance critter.
How does 11” of penetration and expansion to .41” sound?
The bulk ammo is basically manufactured to a price point. I’ve got a plethora of .22’s in my stash. Hi-vel, standard vel, plinking junk, top end match, hyper vel.
Depends on whether I want to shoot bug holes at 50yds, or blast something to tiny bits, or quietly dispatch a nuisance critter.
OP
OP
rpenmanparker
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2018
- Messages
- 2,456
But the MiniMag costs 2.5X what the HP plinking junk costs. To me that makes sense.
Sistema1927
Member
Maybe you have found your niche and can exploit it. Possibly these big name .22 LR manufacturers can be beat at their own game. After 150+ years maybe they have missed a trick.
If it bothers you so much, then start cranking out billions of bullets, undercut the competition, and make millions of dollars.
Until then I will continue to buy what the others have put on the market.
If it bothers you so much, then start cranking out billions of bullets, undercut the competition, and make millions of dollars.
Until then I will continue to buy what the others have put on the market.
Sav .250
Member
Not all select the same ammo for target practice. IMO< it was not intended for target practice.
More of a personal choice.
More of a personal choice.
OP
OP
rpenmanparker
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2018
- Messages
- 2,456
Feeling snarky today?
The brass elves all retired and the new generation of elves only wants to sit in their parents' basement and watch Netflix. I read that a company is going to make silicone android elves to punch hollow points in .22 bullets. Or was that for a different purpose? I forget.
illinoisburt
Member
No idea what you were shooting back then, but I can assure you I see a definite difference in performance when hunting/pest control & I've been using cheap Winchester and Remington hollowpoints for a long time. Body hit on a squirrel with round nose is a sure way to leave them in the tree. Hollow points are DRT. Same goes for rats, skunks, raccoons, and especially nuisance birds like pigeons. The round nose slip through and animals run/fly off which is a major headache. It's absolutely not fun to dig dead stinky animals out from under stoops or climb up to remove them from gutters.
George P
member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2018
- Messages
- 7,772
More like 4 million rounds per DAY:
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2014/05/how-22-lr-ammunition-is-made-must-see-video/
MedWheeler
Member
The manufacturers make it.
People buy it.
The manufacturers make money.
The manufacturers make more.
People buy it....
I don't see that as "waste".
People buy it.
The manufacturers make money.
The manufacturers make more.
People buy it....
I don't see that as "waste".
bassjam
Member
I think a lot tend to forget that we are downright spoiled today. 50 or more years ago there wasn't hundreds of different types of .22 rounds to choose from. You bought a brick of ammo at the local hardware store and you used it for plinking, target practice, and hunting. Today we can choose a round that will do exactly what we need, but in the past one round did everything. So I'm sure hollow points are kind of a legacy thing that's stuck around.
But some people do still hunt/varmint control with what you call "junk" rounds. A hollow point certainly expands more than a solid tip, and I've found that Golden Bullets are as accurate out of most of my .22's as Mini Mags are. So why not save some money when you can get away with it and use the bulk rounds?
But some people do still hunt/varmint control with what you call "junk" rounds. A hollow point certainly expands more than a solid tip, and I've found that Golden Bullets are as accurate out of most of my .22's as Mini Mags are. So why not save some money when you can get away with it and use the bulk rounds?
GBExpat
Member
It is good to hear that they have improved the product. I started shooting .22LR when it cost less than a penny per round (Eisenhower was President) and pretty much stopped when it had climbed to a penny, or a bit more, per round (LBJ).
After discovering that those little buggers were not opening up as I expected/hoped, I wondered if the lead alloy of the bullets was being made too hard to allow expansion. Perhaps in more recent times they have altered the bullet formula.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
A little information goes a long, long way. Firstly, .22LR is copper washed, not plated. Secondly, HP ammo is no more difficult to manufacture than roundnose, because it's all just soft swaged lead. Third, some of us would like to be able to hunt with the same ammo we plink with. It simplifies everything. Fourth, it DOES expand and it DOES make a difference. Of course, I've only been doing it for 35yrs so maybe I missed a trick somewhere.
This is why I use the Remington GBHP for virtually everything, except when I need subs from a rifle. These were all fired from a pistol, except one. From left to right they are: CCI Minimag, CCI Velocitor, Browning high velocity HP, Remington Golden Bullet, Norma Subsonic HP (pistol/rifle).
This is why I use the Remington GBHP for virtually everything, except when I need subs from a rifle. These were all fired from a pistol, except one. From left to right they are: CCI Minimag, CCI Velocitor, Browning high velocity HP, Remington Golden Bullet, Norma Subsonic HP (pistol/rifle).
denton
Member
Having a hollow point might help with expansion, but I think that is not the main reason for having them in .22. In handgun ammunition, the jacketed hollow center is all about expansion. But in most rifle ammunition the issue is ballistic coefficient. Higher BC yields a longer trajectory with less wind deflection.
Swifty Morgan
member
If you took the weight of the copper in a .22 casing and divided it by the weight of the copper in the bullet plating, I wonder how big the number would be.
A casing is something like 70% copper, depending on the round.
Let's see.
Let's say a .22 round has a surface area of 2 square centimeters, or 200 square millimeters, which is probably not far from the real figure. Assume a coating thickness of one thousandth of an inch, or roughly 0.025 mm. That is probably a good guess, for a round that doesn't have a real jacket. You get about 5 cubic mm of copper, assuming the plating is pure.
If you unfold a .22 casing, you get something like 4 square centimeters of brass, so 400 square millimeters. The thickness of a .22 casing varies, but we can call it 0.020", which is probably not far off if you average it out. Call it half a millimeter. This gives you something like 200 cubic millimeters of brass, so maybe 150-ish cubic millimeters of copper.
Divide 150 by 5, and you get 30. So the amount of copper in a copper-washed bullet is likely to be something like 1/50 to 1/20 of the amount in the casing, with lots of leeway because I had to make some guesses.
There is a Youtube video that shows CCI making .22 rounds. They put a coating on every round, including lead bullets. They use something they call "black lead" on standard velocity rounds. Looks like there is a coating cost even for lead bullets. That makes the cost difference even smaller. The choice isn't coating or no coating. It's one coating which costs a certain amount, versus another coating which may or may not cost more.
I don't know if black lead is real lead or graphite, which is also called "black lead."
A shell retails for as little as 5 cents, and that includes propellant, primer, shipping, advertising, overhead at the retailer, lawsuits, and so on. How much of the cost we pay is in the metal? Not a whole lot, I would think. So 5% or so of a very small number, which, itself, is not the entire retail cost...it doesn't seem significant. I'll bet the cost of doing the plating, in labor and tools, is way higher than the cost of the metal in the copper sulfate.
Cleaned-up, used .22 brass in tiny packets costs a little over 1 cent per round on the web, so the cost to CCI must be way less. Maybe a quarter of a cent? What's a twentieth of a fourth? Not much.
Feel free to check my figures. I am prone to careless mistakes
A casing is something like 70% copper, depending on the round.
Let's see.
Let's say a .22 round has a surface area of 2 square centimeters, or 200 square millimeters, which is probably not far from the real figure. Assume a coating thickness of one thousandth of an inch, or roughly 0.025 mm. That is probably a good guess, for a round that doesn't have a real jacket. You get about 5 cubic mm of copper, assuming the plating is pure.
If you unfold a .22 casing, you get something like 4 square centimeters of brass, so 400 square millimeters. The thickness of a .22 casing varies, but we can call it 0.020", which is probably not far off if you average it out. Call it half a millimeter. This gives you something like 200 cubic millimeters of brass, so maybe 150-ish cubic millimeters of copper.
Divide 150 by 5, and you get 30. So the amount of copper in a copper-washed bullet is likely to be something like 1/50 to 1/20 of the amount in the casing, with lots of leeway because I had to make some guesses.
There is a Youtube video that shows CCI making .22 rounds. They put a coating on every round, including lead bullets. They use something they call "black lead" on standard velocity rounds. Looks like there is a coating cost even for lead bullets. That makes the cost difference even smaller. The choice isn't coating or no coating. It's one coating which costs a certain amount, versus another coating which may or may not cost more.
I don't know if black lead is real lead or graphite, which is also called "black lead."
A shell retails for as little as 5 cents, and that includes propellant, primer, shipping, advertising, overhead at the retailer, lawsuits, and so on. How much of the cost we pay is in the metal? Not a whole lot, I would think. So 5% or so of a very small number, which, itself, is not the entire retail cost...it doesn't seem significant. I'll bet the cost of doing the plating, in labor and tools, is way higher than the cost of the metal in the copper sulfate.
Cleaned-up, used .22 brass in tiny packets costs a little over 1 cent per round on the web, so the cost to CCI must be way less. Maybe a quarter of a cent? What's a twentieth of a fourth? Not much.
Feel free to check my figures. I am prone to careless mistakes
JeeperCreeper
Member
If two things cost virtually the same, wouldn't you pick the better one?
That logic goes with selling and buying and manufacturing.
That logic goes with selling and buying and manufacturing.
I found the same as the above post. I had a lot of jays feeding off the maize in my boar feeder. .22 hollowpoint subsonics kill the jays on the spot. I've changed rifles and as i can't fit a suppressor on my new rifle i used CCi standard velocity round nose instead. I was not impressed with how many jays flew away after a solid hit. They may have only made it to another tree and then died,but not what i want to see. The difference between round nose and hollow point was very noticeable. I'll have to find a hollow point standard velocity that shoots well in my new rifle for the jay cull in the Autumn. A couple of years ago i shot a scabby fox out the back of my house with the sub sonic hollow points. I shot it in the chest and it went down like it was struck by lightning.
stchman
Member
To quote a famous saying from other forums:
Because reasons.
JK. I would imagine that people would hunt and plink with the same ammo. Also some folks "feel" they are getting a better deal if they get HP .22LR ammo for the same price they get non-HP ammo.
cougar1717
Member
While the HP does provide the benefit of expansion for hunting purposes, if the discussion solely concerns plinking ammo, the point of HP's in 22LR is mainly marketing.
HP's are not more accurate than RN (of comparable quality, of course). If it were so, target ammo would utilize the feature.
The "why bother with it?" question is easy. The ammo manufacturer provides 36gr of lead instead of 40gr for the same price per brick - so there is material savings. "Hollow point" is also a buzzword that manufacturers put all over their packaging. "Why buy regular 22LR when you get the added benefit of a hollow point?" I was in a big box store one day looking at some Geco Semi-auto (which is RN) that the store had on sale as a promotion. At this particular store, it is apparent that guy behind the counter has the main task of getting customers away from low margin products and toward higher margin products - i.e. - make the retailer money. As I was trying to find a similar lot number of ammo purchased previously, he throws me his best sales pitch on Armscor 22LR solely because it has...... you guessed it........ a hollow point.
For hunting, HP's are very useful. For target shooting - it's very difficult to beat 40gr RN @ 1080fps. And for plinking - as long as it feeds! - it doesn't matter HP vs RN.
Why isn't it all plastic/polymer coated?
CCI is testing this out right now to see if it is profitable/marketable/desired by customers - first with the Christmas pack and now with the Patriot pack. Special editions to test the waters. The jury is still out. A polymer coating will make for "cleaner ammo" than those that use more bullet lube. The make/break point will be how accurate it really is and if that level of accuracy is acceptable to most consumers.
The typical copper washing is relatively cheap and increases shelf life and gives some level of protection from the lead oxidizing. Even some of the cheapest, berdan primered, corrosive centerfire ammo was copper washed.
HP's are not more accurate than RN (of comparable quality, of course). If it were so, target ammo would utilize the feature.
The "why bother with it?" question is easy. The ammo manufacturer provides 36gr of lead instead of 40gr for the same price per brick - so there is material savings. "Hollow point" is also a buzzword that manufacturers put all over their packaging. "Why buy regular 22LR when you get the added benefit of a hollow point?" I was in a big box store one day looking at some Geco Semi-auto (which is RN) that the store had on sale as a promotion. At this particular store, it is apparent that guy behind the counter has the main task of getting customers away from low margin products and toward higher margin products - i.e. - make the retailer money. As I was trying to find a similar lot number of ammo purchased previously, he throws me his best sales pitch on Armscor 22LR solely because it has...... you guessed it........ a hollow point.
For hunting, HP's are very useful. For target shooting - it's very difficult to beat 40gr RN @ 1080fps. And for plinking - as long as it feeds! - it doesn't matter HP vs RN.
Why isn't it all plastic/polymer coated?
CCI is testing this out right now to see if it is profitable/marketable/desired by customers - first with the Christmas pack and now with the Patriot pack. Special editions to test the waters. The jury is still out. A polymer coating will make for "cleaner ammo" than those that use more bullet lube. The make/break point will be how accurate it really is and if that level of accuracy is acceptable to most consumers.
The typical copper washing is relatively cheap and increases shelf life and gives some level of protection from the lead oxidizing. Even some of the cheapest, berdan primered, corrosive centerfire ammo was copper washed.
RedlegRick
Member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2017
- Messages
- 728
I don't buy .22 ammo because it has or hasn't a hollow point or what it's coated with, I buy the stuff I can afford at the time (my Walther P22 excepted), and if I find two brands the same price I've been known to use the good old 'eeny meeny miney moe' method to choose. Then I simply adapt to the minor differences between it and what I sighted my rifle in with. I've found most budget rimfire ammo seems to group about the same for me, minute of squirrel/rabbit/tin can/paper target.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
