Why is .22 lr rimfire ammo considered dirty?

Status
Not open for further replies.
For one thing, the bullets are lubed (even the copper-washed ammo had a thin laquer lube). This lube can build up in the chambers and does coat the barrel. On the 'up side,' this lube helps protect the bore from rust (reducing the need for constant barrel cleaning and oiling).
 
Good answer, thanks.

I was thinking maybe a slightly different mix of components or such.
 
Much of the crud comes form the primer, and in .22LR the ratio of primer to powder is pretty high.

I shoot externally lubed hard cast lead bullets in 9mm, .40S&W, and .45ACP using Unique, considered a "dirty" powder, and they all stay cleaner than .22LR after 1000 rounds or so -- about the earliest I consider cleaning unless its a carry gun or one I plan to return to the safe for a long rest.

--wally.
 
Some are dirtier than others, I've got some Russian steel case stuff that leaves a lot more soot and unburned powder than anything else I've ever shot.
 
Dirty? I haven't cleaned my Marlin bolt action in over half a year (couple thousand rounds, bulk packs). My 357 revo I have to clean every range trip with my loads. That's "dirty"
 
It can't be worse than the .223 PMC ammo that I shot 152 rounds through a Mini-14 and it took me 2 hours just on the barrel to get it clean.:eek::confused:
 
.22 ammunition dirty? Never noticed. I haven't cleaned my Winchester M290 in a couple of years of use and about 500 to 600 rounds. Doesn't look dirty. Maybe CCI Mini-Mags is just better .22 ammunition then the "junk" you are running through your .22 firearm.
 
Its not that dirty, I'm somewhere over 3k rounds of cheap bulk ammo through my 10/22 since its last cleaning. Still works good.:D
 
CONSIDERED BY WHOM ??!!!
My MKII RUGER STANDARD has over 12,000 rounds through it as we speak. It was last cleaned at 2500 rounds. It is NOT all that dirty and is still going strong, hitting tin cans at 100 yards all day long with every kind of 22LR ammo I have shot in it.
 
The action type matters as much as ammo selection, unless you're just talking about getting the bore dirty. If we're just discussing the bore, most .22LR guns will reach some state of filth in the bore which will be re-applied and wiped out at equilibrium by the passing rounds, I rarely run a brush through .22 bores and almost never run a metal brush through them, Otis-style patches do quite enough to clean the bores of most of my guns, rimfires in particular.

Now, regarding the action of the guns ...
Remember, if you have a closed chamber you will get FAR less crud in the works of the gun compared to a blowback. Un-delayed-blowback release more crud than a delayed-blowback as well.
The point is that casings exiting the chamber can still be releasing crap into the action, (after all they are rocketing their way out and combustion could still be occurring, plus they are getting soot knocked/flaked out of them) ... no matter how fast you can run a lever/bolt/break action gun you won't get the spread of contamination you do with a semiauto.

That said, I'm not too terribly worried about some rimfire crud in my guns. The benefits of shooting cheap rimfire far outweigh the labor of cleanings, and either way most guns average one cleaning per one or two range trips, just to keep the crud from building up in the action.
 
I guess it really depends on how many rounds you run through it whether it be 100 or 50 rounds and depending on caliber anything from a .45, .357 to a .22 LR or .22 Mag.
 
"Maybe CCI Mini-Mags is just better .22 ammunition then the "junk" you are running through your .22 firearm."

LOL.......thats funny since I shoot mostly CCI ammo.

Hell, I didn't think I would be stepping on anyone's toe's by asking this question. The subject of .22 ammo being considered "dirty" vs other ammo has came up on several different gun forums I have visited over the years.
Its not intended to be a put down of the .22 round at all. I think the lube and primer to powder ratio is the answer to my question, it makes sense when you think about it.

Also, it not a problem for my Rugar or any of the other .22's I've shot over the years.

Thanks for the replies.
 
Last edited:
Ooops...Sorry. It's just sooo many people waste their money on those 500 econo packs and expect them to preform as the "better" stuff. Besides my model 290 won't function on the cheap stuff.
 
Dirty or not, most .22 LR rifles and ammo are extremely forgiving. If it cycles and chambers, I'd shoot it.
 
Is the brand made by Remington "Aguila" a dirty round at 1,750 fps?
Isnt' the CCI Stinger 1,640 fps a cleaner round to shoot?
 
Is the brand made by Remington "Aguila" a dirty round at 1,750 fps?
Isnt' the CCI Stinger 1,640 fps a cleaner round to shoot?

FWIW the Stinger's cycle better in my MkIII than the Aguila's. Should keep my super single six in the range rotation though. :)

-MW
 
FWIW the Stinger's cycle better in my MkIII than the Aguila's. Should keep my super single six in the range rotation though. :)

-MW
I do notice a slight more recoil with both Aguila HP and solid points rated at 1,750 vs. the CCI Stinger at 1,640 fps. What is the dirtiest .22 LR round to shoot and the cleanest one to shoot?
 
I wonder how the Aguila hyper velocity rounds have more velocity than the Stingers with the Stingers having just a bit more casing? I know they both are 30 grain bullets.
 
I wonder how the Aguila hyper velocity rounds have more velocity than the Stingers with the Stingers having just a bit more casing? I know they both are 30 grain bullets.
The Stingers whether segmented HP or regular HP are both rated at 1,640 and both are 32 grains.
The Aguilar is 30 grains in either HP or solid point.
I put both brands up next to each other and the casings both match on both.
The Aguilar bullet nose is a little smaller than the Stinger.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top