Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Rimfire and Centerfire

  • 24-02-2015 12:26am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,335 ✭✭✭


    This may well be a question I should know the answer to.

    I understand the difference between both. Where the firing pin hits, where the primer is, can't reload .22s because the striking surface is crushed..

    But why isn't there a centerfire .22 ? What is it about a .22 in particular that makes it a rimfire ? Why not take a .22 bullet and put it on a centerfiring casing designed to fit it ?

    Obviously I'm missing something blatant.


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,638 ✭✭✭✭Witcher


    Heckler wrote: »
    This may well be a question I should know the answer to.

    I understand the difference between both. Where the firing pin hits, where the primer is, can't reload .22s etc.

    But why isn't there a centerfire .22 ? What is it about a .22 in particular that makes it a rimfire ? Why not take a .22 bullet and put it on a centerfiring casing designed to fit it ?

    Obviously I'm missing something blatant.

    There are centrefire .22's; .220 Swift, .22-250, .223 etc.

    The term '.22' really just refers to the bullet diameter, you can get a 40 grain .22lr round and a .220 Swift 40 grain round, they're both '.22's' (with tiny difference in diameter) but they're just shaped differently- one round nose bullet and one spitzer. The Swift also has a big oul milk bottle behind it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,335 ✭✭✭Heckler


    Strider wrote: »
    There are centrefire .22's; .220 Swift, .22-250, .223 etc.

    The term '.22' really just refers to the bullet diameter, you can get a 40 grain .22lr round and a .220 Swift 40 grain round, they're both '.22's' (with tiny difference in diameter) but they're just shaped differently- one round nose bullet and one spitzer. The Swift also has a big oul milk bottle behind it.

    Just when I thought I had a basic grasp on ballistics. Oh well.....


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 428 ✭✭EWQuinn


    "But why isn't there a centerfire .22 ? What is it about a .22 in particular that makes it a rimfire ? Why not take a .22 bullet and put it on a centerfiring casing designed to fit it ?"

    They had that same idea back in the 1920's. So they invented the .22 Hornet center fire, driving a 45 gr .22 bullet 2,700 fps instead of the .22 LR driving a 40 gr bullet 1,200 fps. The first of the high velocity, center fire .22's. Now there are a bunch of them with large bottle neck cases driving pointy bullets up to and over 4,000 fps in some.

    The first mass produced full bore cartridges in the US in the mid 1800s were rimfire which quickly evolved into center fire.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,391 ✭✭✭extremetaz


    Heckler wrote: »
    Just when I thought I had a basic grasp on ballistics. Oh well.....

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rifle_cartridges

    if you can think of it, there's probably been some attempt at it somewhere at some time. ;)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,061 ✭✭✭clivej


    Also you can only push a lead bullet so fast. The lead starts to strip off in the barrel, heat build up on the bullet head as it goes down the barrel, etc.
    The HV rounds have a copper wash on them as the speeds are greater. I don't know if that's why they have it on though.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭yubabill1


    clivej wrote: »
    Also you can only push a lead bullet so fast. The lead starts to strip off in the barrel, heat build up on the bullet head as it goes down the barrel, etc.
    The HV rounds have a copper wash on them as the speeds are greater. I don't know if that's why they have it on though.

    The copper jacket is indeed to stop melting at the bullet/barrel interface at higher velocities.

    The high velocity .22LR Stinger (c.1600 fps) has a copper jacket for just this reason, as does the Yellow Jacket (c.1400 fps), I think.

    .22LR ammo is really cheap to produce, partly because the primer is contained in the rim, which is formed by a "bump" during manufacture.

    .22 centrefires require a separate primer and a primer receptacle machined into the bullet case, adding to cost.

    nearest thing to centrefire .22LR might be 5.7 x 28 from FN, (also 4.6 x 30 from HK, but that's .17 diameter). Both are similar to .22 Magnum in performance, but with enhanced characteristics for reliability and efficacy.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭juice1304


    stigers dont have a jacket it is only a copper wash.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭yubabill1


    juice1304 wrote: »
    stigers dont have a jacket it is only a copper wash.

    Looks electroplated to me. That's a jacket IMHO.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭juice1304


    a jacketed bullet is different it is a lead core swedged into a copper case or "jacket".

    strip2bc.jpg


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭yubabill1


    That's a cup-and core, or pointed soft point in old money.

    I don't know how the Stinger is manufactured, but I have seen the copper jacket partially separate - not often - from the lead core on recovered pills.

    As I said, it looks electroplated, but either way, the copper can partially separate from the lead core, but it sticks really well.

    I don't know what a copper wash is, but I do not know another way to bond copper to lead chemically and the jacket is way too thin to join mechanically.

    OK, I googled this - think someone posted link to this article on boards previously:

    "Unlike many lubricated-lead bullets of the time, the 32-grain Stinger bullet was copper plated, accomplished through an electro-chemical process. Even though the technology was in use since the 1930’s, it still was not a simple process for mass production."


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,772 ✭✭✭meathstevie


    yubabill1 wrote: »
    The copper jacket is indeed to stop melting at the bullet/barrel interface at higher velocities.

    The high velocity .22LR Stinger (c.1600 fps) has a copper jacket for just this reason, as does the Yellow Jacket (c.1400 fps), I think.

    .22LR ammo is really cheap to produce, partly because the primer is contained in the rim, which is formed by a "bump" during manufacture.

    .22 centrefires require a separate primer and a primer receptacle machined into the bullet case, adding to cost.

    nearest thing to centrefire .22LR might be 5.7 x 28 from FN, (also 4.6 x 30 from HK, but that's .17 diameter). Both are similar to .22 Magnum in performance, but with enhanced characteristics for reliability and efficacy.

    Beg to differ on 5.7 and 4.6 from FN and H&K, those little nasty fast ones have been designed as to do to light body armour what traditional pistol calibers can't.

    The logic behind the likes of a P90 and an MP7 is near assault rifle capability in a compact package.

    Some compromise compared to proper rifles had to be accepted when it comes to longer range accuracy but the bullet design allows for far greater accuracy over distance than traditional pistol ammo submachine guns or handguns while still penetrating stuff a pistol or revolver round gets stuck in.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭yubabill1


    Beg to differ on 5.7 and 4.6 from FN and H&K, those little nasty fast ones have been designed as to do to light body armour what traditional pistol calibers can't.

    The logic behind the likes of a P90 and an MP7 is near assault rifle capability in a compact package.

    Some compromise compared to proper rifles had to be accepted when it comes to longer range accuracy but the bullet design allows for far greater accuracy over distance than traditional pistol ammo submachine guns or handguns while still penetrating stuff a pistol or revolver round gets stuck in.

    Agreed there are dedicated AP rounds for 5.7 and 4.6, but other ammo is available for civilian use.

    Also forgot to mention that 5.7 and 4.6 designed to give good results from short barrels.

    Personally, I'm very happy with my 223 and see the 5.7 and 4.6 as rounds with specialised applications.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,772 ✭✭✭meathstevie


    yubabill1 wrote: »
    Agreed there are dedicated AP rounds for 5.7 and 4.6, but other ammo is available for civilian use.

    Also forgot to mention that 5.7 and 4.6 designed to give good results from short barrels.

    Personally, I'm very happy with my 223 and see the 5.7 and 4.6 as rounds with specialised applications.

    That's exactly what they are and both FN and H&K as far as I know reserve the full auto versions and AP ammo strictly for police and military use.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭yubabill1


    That's exactly what they are and both FN and H&K as far as I know reserve the full auto versions and AP ammo strictly for police and military use.

    http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2013/10/16/5-7x28mm-body-armor/


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,772 ✭✭✭meathstevie


    yubabill1 wrote: »

    All in all an interesting discussion but I think we're drifting a bit :)


Advertisement