Cutting Edge ELR ammo - Page 4 - RimfireCentral.com Forums

Go Back   RimfireCentral.com Forums > >

Notices

Join Team RFC to remove these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #46  
Old 02-09-2020, 02:35 PM
BobSc
US Army Veteran

Join Date: 
Dec 2012
Location: 
Oregon
Posts: 
1,220
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)


Log in to see fewer ads
Interesting conversation so far, but I'm not sure the difference in barrel steel really relates to the use of these bullets or not. Seems like someone who would spend the money to purchase high end ammo these days would barely flinch at replacing a barrel every few thousand rounds if necessary to be competitive...
It isn't hard to imagine these bullets being made useful for rimfire and/or centerfire rounds since the weights they are describing are also quite common to .223 based centerfire cartridges. Length can be handled a number of different ways by changing ogive shape, to designing the tail to fit into the case to a predetermined length. Cost of these bullets doesn't necessarily have to be excessive with the availability of automatic screw machines that can quickly make identical copies of small items from an automatically fed rod of copper, brass, or whatever metal the shop needs to feed into the machine from the customer order sheet. Buying a softer alloy of copper for this purpose wouldn't be a big change and the machine does the rest- turning out thousands of identical pieces each day once the machine and template are set up.

I'll be curious to see how this comes out in the end in a lot of different ways- cost, accuracy, popularity, sustainability, and use by known competitors....

I wonder if they will be posting their testing results?

Bob
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 02-09-2020, 02:47 PM
Phil in Alabama's Avatar
Phil in Alabama

Join Date: 
Apr 2002
Location: 
world of pain
Posts: 
6,542
TPC Rating: 
100% (7)
The steel used in barrels isn't going to be a problem, the ballistic coefficient will be with these. Pointy doesn't necessarily mean high ballistic coefficient, the entire bullets shape does, as does the length and the weight. Currently made round nose bullets used in .22 long rifle march cartridges has a ballistic coefficient of .140. The bullet used in Remington Premier .22 WMR has bc of .137, while the bullets used in the .17 cal. rimfires has a bc of .125. Until someone can post what the real tested ballistic coefficient of these new bullets is, there is zero evidence that they will perform any better than existing bullets. Precisely shaped bullets might fly truer, enhancing accuracy, IF the cartridge manufacturer chosen can keep velocity variations from round to round small.

The bullets in the photos appear to have very little straight sides, which is the bearing surface that rides the bore walls, promising very poor lateral stability. Corkscrewing bullets won't bring anyone a win. Until the real product is made and tested, any opinions whether negative or positive are speculation and mean little.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 02-09-2020, 06:39 PM
Penage Guy's Avatar
Penage Guy

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Ontario, Canada
Posts: 
4,331
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobSc View Post
Interesting conversation so far, but I'm not sure the difference in barrel steel really relates to the use of these bullets or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil in Alabama View Post
The steel used in barrels isn't going to be a problem, the ballistic coefficient will be with these.
The question of barrel steel arose when some posters suggested that rimfire barrels were in fact softer steel than other barrels. No evidence for that has yet been posted.

The question of the cost of the bullets is relevant. Currently Cutting Edge's least expensive solid copper .224 caliber bullet, the same material as proposed for the .22LR bullet, is about $35 -- or about $0.50 each bullet. Readers can decide if this kind of pricing is sustainable for .22LR ammo, considering of course that the rest of the ammo component and manufacturing costs are not included. Even at half the price, that is at $0.25 for the bullet alone, makes for pricy ammo.

An important difficulty is inevitably the MV for the ammo. It should be either subsonic for the entire distance to be shot or it should remain supersonic. The nature of the .22LR casing and rifle chamber don't bode well for the latter. At the same time pointy bullets, such as those proposed, aren't conducive to good ballistics at MV's that don't exceed the transonic zone.

A key characteristic of good .22LR match ammo for long distance shooting is consistent muzzle velocity. Any superior new, "magic" bullet will have to be in an ammo that has a relatively low ES to be effective at long range.

It is very unlikely this new magic bullet will fly. There's good .22LR match ammo available for shooters to use that should be considered affordable by Cutting Edge bullet pricing alone.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 02-09-2020, 07:53 PM
1813benny
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Apr 2005
Location: 
between here n there....
Posts: 
853
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by M52E1 View Post
As someone mentioned earlier, if it really worked then it would have been done years ago and I agree with that sentiment. If someone wants to try and hit targets beyond 200 yards then more power to them, however I don't see there being a sustainable market for this ammunition.
I have to agree with Bill. The last real advancements for .22 rimfire was the dimpled case (Olymp then Federal) followed by the Eley EPS bullet.

Several other negatives that go against the new ammo making it to market:
- This ammo would be illegal for ISSF events. Per the rules, "Rimfire Long Rifle. Only bullets made of lead or similar soft material are permitted." That will automatically rule out use by the vast majority of consumers of rimfire ammunition world wide.
-Not getting into an entire discussion again on barrel material, but would a special barrel w/ unique bore dimensions be needed? The soft lead is what makes the seal in the bore - what impact would the copper jacket have on that aspect?
-An entirely new set up for chambering would be needed vs how the current .22 soft lead projectiles engage the rifling.
-Between chambers and possible barrel dimension changes, it would most likely result in having a dedicated barrel for the new ammo and it would not be able to be used interchangeably with standard .22 lead LR match ammunition.
-My sides are hurting right now laughing over the new threads on "small bore rile cleaning recommendations" and the possible crossover between lead and copper. This is YEARS of online "experts" and their pi55ing matches.
-Finally, the jacketed bullets may or may not be able to be used on all ranges. That is specific to different areas of the country and also actual range / backstop designs.

More to come on this, but from the prone/position competition view point, piece price combined with even part of the other issues, it would be an uphill battle for success for the size of the market.
Regards
ken
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 02-09-2020, 10:17 PM
Al the Infidel's Avatar
Al the Infidel
US Marines Disabled American Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jan 2007
Location: 
Yoopersville, MI
Posts: 
1,013,338
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil in Alabama View Post
Until the real product is made and tested, any opinions whether negative or positive are speculation and mean little.
But but but, Phil, we thrive on speculation, that my wife has tutored me so well on.
I do not think it will grow wings however I welcome being proven wrong with open receivers and soft barrels with improper twists. truth!
__________________
Wash your hands, wear a mask indoors, and use your brain, please. Grandma and grandpa thank you.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 02-13-2020, 08:51 PM
BadgerJack's Avatar
BadgerJack
US Army Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Feb 2018
Location: 
Nawthern Virginia
Posts: 
177
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
There have certainly been sanctioned matches out to 300 yards with the .22 LR cartridge, but that seems to have ended sometime between the end of WWII and the end of the Korean war, and not one person can explain why the Military Matches went from 300 yards to 50 feet by the beginning of our "involvement" in Vietnam... back in the mid-late 1960s' some of us were still shooting 300 yards with our .22 LR Math rifles. Some of us were still shooting at 300 yards until our eyes gave out and nerve damage settled in, (just about ten or twevle years ago).

This is an excerpt from Research Press, "A Short History of Long Range Shooting in the USA" which has a short mention of 300 yards in the first paragraph:

"... Limited to just two sighting shots a wise long-range smallbore competitor would have taken the time to obtain a good 100 yard zero for both elevation and windage with quality match ammunition. From this point it was simply a matter of clicking up the Winchester 5A, or it’s successor the Lyman 5A telescopic sight a matter of 20 minutes from 100 to 200 yards and 21 minutes more for 300 yards, assuming the bases were 7.2 inches on center. In the mid 1930s, when Lyman, Unertl, and Fecker introduced scopes with larger diameter objective bells and higher magnification, shooters had to go to taller bases to keep the scope clear of the barrel as the externally adjusted scopes were elevated.

At a time when the quality of ammunition and rifles was such that perfect scores at 100 yards were worth space in shooting publications some of the runs of consecutive fives and Vs at 200 yards are phenomenal. Famed belly shooter Thurman Randle, of Texas, and his Winchester 52 rifle “Bacon Getter”, established a national record in 1933 of 196 bulls that would stand for seven years.

During the summer of 1940 the grandly titled “Smallbore All Range Championship” was held at Poughkeepsie, New York. This "anysight" event called for ten record shots at 50, 100, 150, 175, and 200 yards with sighting shots allowed only at 50 yards. Military style pit service was provided at 150 yards and beyond to insure that the shooters might see shot location. The final match of the day was the Swiss Match. A young Art Jackson lay down at 4 PM with half of a box of Western Super Match ammunition to try his luck. Four and a half hours after he started, the setting sun made it difficult to see the cross hair reticule of his scope and, finally out of ammunition, light, and feeling in his left arm, he was forced to stop with an unofficial count of 325 bulls. The scorekeeper’s official tally marks showed one less and his scorecard declared he had fired a new record of 324 consecutive fives with 238 Vs. The feat stands as a monument to both the endurance of the shooter and the generosity of the bystanders who donated some six boxes of Super Match ammunition to keep him going when his scanty supply gave out."
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 02-21-2020, 07:36 AM
mako_cc

Join Date: 
Jul 2016
Posts: 
1
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
For what its worth, Green Mountain provides a barrel material for every 22 barrel I looked at. They offer a number of 10/22 barrels.

http://www.gmriflebarrel.com/ruger10...ement-barrels/

Everything I saw was either 4140CM or 416SS.

-Chad
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 02-21-2020, 12:06 PM
Penage Guy's Avatar
Penage Guy

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Ontario, Canada
Posts: 
4,331
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
There continues to be an absence of evidence that rimfire barrels are made from "softer" steel than centerfire barrels.

According to information received from Lothar Walther "We produce our .22LRs from 416R gun barrel quality steel. The raw material used in centerfire and rimfire is the same. We use a proprietary steel for a lot of our centerfire, but we also use some 416R for them." (emphasis added)
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 02-21-2020, 07:46 PM
zukiphile
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jun 2002
Location: 
ohio
Posts: 
1,201
TPC Rating: 
100% (6)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penage Guy View Post
There continues to be an absence of evidence that rimfire barrels are made from "softer" steel than centerfire barrels.
Ruger reports that it uses 1018 and 1137 on some rimfire barrels, not 4140 or 4150. That doesn't mean that every manufacturer uses a different grade in rimfire.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 02-22-2020, 06:24 PM
California

Join Date: 
Feb 2020
Posts: 
12
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Cool

I think there could be a market for this ammo in California where non-tox is mandated for any hunting with 22's.
I would buy some for limited hunting applications because the current non-tox "green" ammo offerings are not very accurate.
Since we are all movie and rock stars here we can afford it.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 02-23-2020, 10:41 AM
JB in SC
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Mar 2002
Location: 
Upstate
Posts: 
2,598
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
It was popular at one time to load centerfire bullets in the .22 Magnum.

Turned solid brass bullets have been used in .22 LR since 1979 by some ingenious experimenters. Mainly for their penetration.

I remain skeptical of these ever getting to market.

Last edited by JB in SC; 02-23-2020 at 10:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 04-20-2020, 08:17 PM
Migolito

Join Date: 
Apr 2020
Posts: 
3
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
I can't wait for this ammo. I hunt in Cali...which means I am REQUIRED to use non-lead ammo. I'll definately use this for hunting. I pay over a $1- per round for my deer/elk rounds, so, seriously no big deal to spend $ on a 22lr hunting round.

Also, IF this ammo is extremely accurate, most folks will sell thier first born to buy a box. WE already spend our paycheck just to shrink the group by .1". Honestly, most of these negative comments I remember reading when the 17 HMR was introduced.....
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:10 AM.

Privacy Policy

DMCA Notice

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©2000-2018 RimfireCentral.com
x