Back in 1991, I joined Federal Cartridge Company as a Product Development Engineer. I had a total experience of 4 years in the army (11B) and a degree in Mechanical Engineering from UW-Madison (the ink was still wet). The first project I was involved in was the 22 Ultra Match, which culminated in Bob Foth and Launi Meili medalling in the '92 Olympics. Unfortunately, I didn't have a lot to offer in terms of experience but I had plenty of enthusiasm. I got to travel to the olympic training center in Colorado Springs and met with the team members on several occasions. Pretty heady stuff for a kid off the dairy farm. Imagine being a football fan and having the chance to rub elbows with Tom Brady; well, that was me going to CO and hanging out with the shooting team.

In the very beginning of the project, we (FCC) were given some boat-tail bullet designs which were created by some high-tech aerospace company. Federal tried for nearly a year to make those designs work. Looking back, they gave us a bunch of designs but not a single 10-round group. It was my first important lesson that:

"In theory, practice and theory are the same. In Practice, they are not."

35 years later, I smile whenever I see the packaging on Lapua's 22LR ammo. I smile because it is reassuring to know that the eternal disconnect between engineering/technicians and marketing/advertising still exists.

 

Back when Federal developed the Ultra Match did they study the Russian Olymp-R 22 bullet? If so can you tell me more about that bullet?

 

The .22LR heeled bullet is what it is and that's not going to change.

A major difference between the .22LR round and most others, including the .21 Sharps, is that the .22LR bullet is heeled. This means that the outside dimension of the bullet is the same as the outside dimension of the casing, with the part of the bullet inside the casing being smaller in diameter than the widest part that's visible.



One of the things that distinguishes the .22LR bullet is the heel cavity at the bottom of the bullet. The heel itself is the bottom rim that surrounds the cavity. This rim is relatively delicate and it's form and condition are important for accuracy performance.

A good part or all of the narrower part of the bullet, the section inside the casing, becomes expanded with the heel cavity when it is exposed to the force of the detonation of primer and propellant and goes down the bore. The form of the heel of the bullets must be near perfect to allow the bullets to get into and down the bore with repeatable consistency.

Steve Boelter, author of Rifleman's Guide to Rimfire Ammunition and former president of Anschutz North America was interviewed by Michael R. Shea in his book Rimfire Revolution. Boelter was asked about the importance of the heel.




George E. Frost, an engineer who was in the ammunition making industry for decades, wrote an indispensable book called Ammunition Making, (1990). On pages 129 - 130 he said the following about the importance bullet heel and recalled an experiment that demonstrated the significance of imperfect .22LR bullet heels.

Forming the bullet means getting it perfectly round, with the ogive equally symmetrical. Most
of all getting the heel, whether flat or boattailed, to a perfect circle concentric with the body of the
bullet.

Dr. Mann, eighty years ago or so, mentioned this strongly in his work on the “Flight of the
Bullet from Powder to Target." He found that irregularity in the shape of the nose didn't have
nearly as much effect as even the smallest irregularity in the perfection of the heel. Pete Brown
used to demonstrate the truth of Dr. Mann's finding in the accuracy tunnel, where no wind blew. He
could take ten cartridges from a good-shooting lot of .22 rimfire ammunition, mutilate the bullet noses
with a pair of pliers, and shoot a group hardly distinguishable from an unmutilated group. But,
taking a good-shooting lot of rimfire match bullets, nicking the heels, then loading and shooting them,
spread the shots widely.

 

For years Ive been seeing the same result on snow bank pick-up bullets on my range in the spring; fully engraved to the base which cannot happen unless in the bore.
Finally FINALLY, real pics!

 

Thanks for posting that. It's very educational.

 

After reading the posts here and in combination with what is said in the above video, I think another problem is that poorly distributed material of lead-tin-antimony mixture cause uneven hardness in the bullet. That will cause the uneven expansion of the bullet heel which then cause poor precision and flyers. That, together with less than optimum chamber to keep the bullet straight and over sized barrel bore with less pressure built-up which also increase uneven expansion of the bullet heel, increase the problem even further.

This off-balance together with other factors like barrel vibration / harmonics that might be increased by the off-balance of the bullet and other barrel imperfections including a not-so-good crown, will cause the bullet to fly at an angle. This following screenshots from the video of The Slow Mo Guys show such a bullet pitching upwards. (I don't know if the above reasons in par.1 caused this.) The bullet might yaw as well but we cannot see it from this angle.

Here are the screenshots and the video for reference thereafter.

View attachment 555841

View attachment 555842

View attachment 555843

The video is about another subject but the high speed footage demonstrate the skew flight of the bullet perfectly. It could help if one could catch that bullet without damage to inspect it's condition as well as inspection the condition of the barrel and everything discussed here.

 

I was wonder about the heel obturation. Thanks for clarifying Really interesting thread.

 

Phil Sharpe, who probably wrote the original book on reloading, mentioned that he got curious about how much a soft lead bullet deformed while making the jump from the cylinder of a revolver into the forcing cone of the barrel. He tried, without success, to bore out a barrel enough to let a .38 bullet go through without touching. He gave up when he fired a few rounds from a K-38 with the barrel removed altogether and found marks from the threads inside the frame. He concluded that an unjacketed lead bullet goes through a barrel very much like toothpaste through a tube. I think that was about the time he began experimenting with gas check bullets.

 

This is one of the most interesting threads I've read in quite a while. Thanks folks!

 

This is an interesting topic. My real question is how did the Slo Mo guys get 870000fps out of their bullet? I think as far as the 21 Sharp is concerned, it is a solution in search of a problem. I get that the manufactures put out new things in hopes that they catch on but they seldom do. The accuracy of the heeled bullet in 22RF has been very well established over it's lifetime and I think the 21 is really going to have to go some to improve on it. Not to mention that it is going to require more work and more materials to make those jacketed bullets. I don't see how they will be able to sell them at the same price point as the 22LR. I think that the best thing to do is buy the first box of 21 Sharp you see and put it in your collection next to the box of 30 Ultimate Carry, 9mm H&R rimmed and the myriad of other one shot wonders that were marketed like they were going to change the shooting world.

 

My real question is how did the Slo Mo guys get 870000fps out of their bullet?

Ha-ha. Yes, they should really call it something else than Frames Per Second.
Really, Feet Per Second was first. 😃

 

I remember hearing about this topic back in the late 90's. On one of my 50 yd practice sessions with my bench gun I nipped off the nose of a Midas L round at an angle. After putting 4 rounds in a neat little hole I fired the altered one. It went in the same hole. Only one round, not much of a test, but I convince easily.

 

Interesting post. I'll be back.

Smooth

 

What the H---E---double toothpicks? Lones' last name got edited out of my last post.

 

Federal used to make match ammo with the dimple. I think it was in the Gold Medal line. I used to shoot it in a bulls eye league. I used it for a while but CCI Green Tag shot better out of my pistol and I abandoned it. I might have a box of it hanging around but I'll have to look for it.

 

There's a lot more going on with the humble 22LR ammunition than is commonly known.
Getting the most consistent bullet, to upset properly, in a uniform barrel from a perfectly shaped chamber, over and over.
It's amazing when it all comes together!
Thanks for all the contributions!

 

Well and so... the .22 Long Rifle Cartridge is 19th century technology... it evolved from earlier rimfire cartridges and was introduced in 1887. Most of the other odd-ball 19th century cartridges disappeared long ago due to lack of interest.
And rightly so.

But the .22LR has earned its place in a large percentage of American households because
it is cheap, it is reliable, and .22 weapons are very accurate. Also they don't break anyone's eardrums and they don't break anyone's bank account, families can go shooting together without scaring the kids or traumatizing them with bruised shoulders and ringing ears.

The above picture shows Boy Scouts shooting .22s. That's not going to change IMHO.
I shot .22s at Boy Scout camp at a range that was a lot more crude, the camp didn't have
too much excess funds. We shot prone, on old bunk house mattresses. No ear plugs,
no safety glasses...
But they taught me how to shoot, and I've never forgotten how it felt.
I don't want some new hot hyped up cartridge to replace the .22 Long Rifle.
Most of us are doing just fine with it, thank you. This is NOT the Olympics.
This is real America... kids of grade school age shooting .22 rifles to learn about
firearm safety and to get a merit badge.
I think literally millions of Americans own .22 cal. weapons, and the same in Canada and Mexico, ...both of which countries have very strict gun laws. IMHO the .22LR weapons
and ammo are the heart and soul of American shooting. Including Canada and Mexico.
Prolly world wide.

Inventors and sales guys can work harder than (your favorite hyperbole here...
I like "cats covering up sh*t") trying to create, present, market the hell out of
and finally SELL the Next Big Thing...
But all their effort and hype and expense will not change anything IMHO.
The .22 LR will not be replaced at any time soon IMHO. I know, I know, there's a lot
of hype and activity with the .17 caliber, but it isn't making much of a dent among guys like
me anyway. Who needs it? .22 Match shooters? MAYBE...

But how much do you get if you win one of the competitions we here about on this forum?
Is the winner's prize big enough to justify scrapping your .22 and buying a whole new rifle, or
even a new barrel for your existing competition gun(s)? Who needs it?

Which is the question to ask about the 21 Sharp. I did read through this whole thread,
I was kind of fascinated by the level of OCD on display. *smiles... I suffer from OCD too,
but only mildly by comparison. *shrugs
It's also a cold snowy winter's day and I'm not inclined to take my .22 out to the range
(which might be closed for the Winter anyway). Last winter I was "tape bedding"
my 1022 using aluminum tape to make a snug fit in the stock, and I was cutting a small
1" square out of a perfectly good bicycle tire tube, and gluing that square of bike tire tube under the barrel of my 1022 at the fore end.

Those humble mods didn't turn me into an Olympic shooter, or my 1022 into a 'ten rounds
in the same hole" rifle. If I fire ten careful shots from a decent rest at a clear target at fifty yards, she might put eight of them in the same raggedy hole. That's good enough for me.
I always figure fliers are caused by me yanking on the trigger or being twitchy at the bench.
I don't blame my rifle.... or my ammunition.
And I'm not interested in buying a new barrel in the hopes that my 1022 would function well
(or at all) with the new ammo. And I don't wish to buy a new rifle or pistol to shoot the hot new round. I have this one:

I like my 1022 right well. Shooting it makes me happy. I can hit the target with this rifle.
I've accumulated a stash of good quality .22 ammo for it.
I hate the idea that some new upstart caliber would make all of this obsolete.
I already feel obsolete durn it... AND I don't believe that this will happen
any time soon. I hope not, anyway.

 

I still have one brick of the Federal UM1. Was super consistent shot to shot as I remember. Wish they still made it. When I was in AMU, before Federal made UM1 we use to shoot Winchester pistol match ammo on the pistol team and it shot well. When they stopped making it only the Europeans were making match ammo and they saved the best lots for the European teams. The Russian ammo was in a league by itself, that is why Federal copied it. You would think with the advances in powder and priming a US company could make some good match ammo at a decent price. But I guess as long as we keep buying the crap they are turning out they have no incentive to improve.

 

I think this thread is the best that's been posted here in a very long time.

 

.

 

During 1903, Winchester thought it good to re-design the .22 rimfire with the same bullet diameter but with a bigger case diameter. After about 30 years they ceased production.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If I am not mistaken, that experimental lives on in the .22 Winchester Magnum. Works great for what it is, a stout rimfire round.

However, What I see is that even if a round could truly be found to be a major improvement, the total mass of rifles chambered in .22LR and the intrenched process and equipment to make the rounds for those rifles, would make a change beyond the reach of this century.

 

Good post "Dead Eye," but unfortunately, I can't bring up your attachments; the server can't find them. I was able to look at the video, and that was very informative and very much worth a look.

When you quoted Win-9422's posting, did you make your reply within the quote and not after the end of the quote. I had to expand everything in order to see what you posted.

 

It was supposed to be a comment of the original post. Got kind a mucked up. All the attachments are in the OP’s post.

 

I don't know much about .22 bullet design but from what I found from I learned from:

The Best of The Best Gets Better - Shooting Times

You don't have to be an Olympic shooter to appreciate Eley's excellent rimfire ammunition.

www.shootingtimes.com

"They could actually pinch the nose of the bullet with a pair of pliers and it would have a much lesser effect on point of impact. Consequently, the heel of every TenEx bullet is visually inspected by computer before loading, and bullets with even the slightest imperfection are discarded. "

 

I always thought something was off with the .22. Chalked it up to the rimfire and small powder load; but now I think it’s the heel and crimp strength. Handloaders always talk about how the crimp improves power. I’m pretty sure if the 22 was choked up with a longer heel, you could get better performance. I mean how easy is it to unseat a .22? I’m game for the 21. No more oil and the speed makes sense with modern ammo.

 

The heel has nothing to do with pull strength. That is created by the knife cut that all 22 bullets have. This cut is to expand the diameter of the lead bullet so it grips the case. Note that some bullets spin in the case but most match round I have tested are solid in the case with at least an attempt to control pull strength. Those who are hand loading for top precision are very fussy about uniform pull strength, going so far as to ream the inside of the case and turn the outside so the every case has the same inside and outside diameter. This does help to improve precision.

 

Outside lubrication is a problem with heeled bullet cartridges.

 

In what way?

 

Keep in mind the 21 Sharp was introduced with all copper bullets. The no lead 22lr bullets don't work very well but are required for hunting in some states like Kalifornistan. This was probably the demographic Winchester was looking at.

 

Speaking of crimps; I have an interesting story.
Back in '91, one time I hauled UM1 samples out to the US Shooting Team in Colorado Springs. One of the team members experienced a misfire, and then another, with my samples. Much to my embarrassment, 50 rounds had been loaded without powder. The "misfired" rounds looked completely intact. The fired priming compound hadn't pushed the bullets out of the cases in the slightest. That night I sat in my motel room with a powder scale and sorted the entire sample batch to separate the rounds without powder. A typical powder charge is ~1 grain.

Now here is the interesting part.

When I pried the "misfired" bullets from their cases, I could hear pressurized gas escaping. I could spin the bullets in the cases but it remained sealed tight enough to hold pressure.

To this day, every time I full up the gas tank on my truck, I think of the rotary joints on the gas hose. Somehow they don't leak and it always reminds me of that batch of ammo way back when.