.22wmr Rifle

Zxthinger

22wmr accuracy is difficult to tame.. Anschutz would be the best manufacture with good accuracy.. perfect barrels, chambers with good lead,rebated crowns et etc

The WMR offers reliable S/A with low maintenance compared to any of the 17hmr S/A's that came and went..

Larger calibers offer more consistent results but the limiting factor with a 22wmr is really the accuracy..

Mellor

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

I dont know how we got into this, but I have been shooting all my life and an old codger now, hence one reason for the change down

Regards the things 'you hear'. The .22wmr has been around for 62 years now.

I'm aware it's been around years. The issues I mentioned as well documented.
As for how we got into it, I don't think you're reading posts very well, but arguing what you think people are saying.

I never mentioned drop or weight. You said who wanted knockdown energy. I gave you an suggesting that outperformed the WMR, that's all it is.
If you want a WMR, don't let anyone stop you.

Because the lighter shot even if they all hit will not do the job. The slug weighing the same as all the shot together, will.

Kinda getting a bet deeper into ballistics here. But if the weight is the same as all the pellets, and the velocity is the same, then the energy is the same.

Bog Trotter99

The .22 has been around longer. Approx 150 years. It has been the choice of target and hunting ammo for probably the same time. The .22wmr is basically a faster version of the .22lr.........for a short time. The .223 even faster again but with extra qualities.

I am not arguing with any posters. I am telling you what I know.

Inaccuracy........A lot of things come into play here. Rimfire are not usually known for precise loading consistency. This can give rise to 'flyers' in standard and even more in cheap ammo.

I am old enough to remember .22 'fairground' ammo. A range of 10ft was way too far for that stuff, it really was that bad.

It is one of this known facts that I have never seen explained but guns do prefer a certain kind of ammunition. Weight, bullet type and manufacture all come into this. So that is all trial and error.

Tumbling on bullets can be caused by a lot of things. Some bullets are designed to tumble after hitting their target. To cause maximum damage. This is done by shape and speed.

One of the main causes of unintentional tumble, is twist rate to bullet weight and velocity.

So if the .22wmr bullets were tumbling and inaccurate (as you have heard) then in 62 years I am sure some rifle manufacturer would have altered their twist rate or changed the shape of their bullets.

Also on accuracy that .22lr and .22wmr are favoured pistol rounds in some countries. Short range weapons with short barrels which may not even burn their powder efficiently can give cause to many complaints on inaccuracy. I have no idea if they use .17hmr in pistols.

Gun manufacturers. Some good. Some not so.

A .17hmr is a completely different kettle of fish. It is smaller and half the weight therefore requires a lot of things to be altered and even more so if you include a huge increase in speed which it must have to perform.

A smaller lighter bullet is massively affected by wind sideways and head on. Therefore it needs to increase its speed to cope with such. Sadly due to gravity and friction it decreases and the wind force effects start to increase the more it slows down.

Heavier bullets are less affected by wind to a point. This why heavy bullets are used for long range instead of light bullets.

Think about it. Why do we not put a .22 on a .50 cal cartridge? It would be a great idea if there were no wind forces.

Moving back to your .17hmr. You take a smaller bullet and put a similar charge behind it then you increase its speed. It can delivery good kinetic energy ft-lbs while it still has that 'extra' speed. But speed is the one major thing you lose when the bullet leaves the barrel. So the kinetic energy decreases as the speed decreases as it does with all bullets. The difference is the .17hmr is half the weight of the .22wmr. So it is lose lose lose all the way. Just as a .223 and .308 bullet which travel at similar speed differences to .17hmr and .22wmr. The heavier bullet is always going to deliver more kinetic energy ft-lbs after a certain distance.

The .17hmr has its place and is most probably a good but underpowered round. The wsm is far more effective.

Is a .17hmr better than a .22wmr? I simply have no idea. But I want my gun for ranges of up to 200 yards extreme and to be able to hit the odd fox well within that distance. I do not want something that can fail to penetrate or easily stopped by hard tissue or explodes on impact.

I hope that clears your points and I am not arguing just stating why etc.

BSA International

.22wmr at 200 yards on fox might be a stretch of it's capabilities.

Have you considered .22 Hornet? Ammo a bit pricey but for hunting that wouldn't be a major issue.

Bog Trotter99

Mellor wrote: »

Kinda getting a bet deeper into ballistics here. But if the weight is the same as all the pellets, and the velocity is the same, then the energy is the same.

No its not and this maybe what you confuse with bullet sizes?

The energy expelled at the shotgun barrel is the same. That is correct. But the difference of that small pellet and the huge slug hitting the target is hugely different even if all of the weight of the shot hits the target.

When you divide the weight of the 1oz shot down into smaller grams, you are dividing the kinetic energy into smaller packages. Whereas the slug is still retaining the full kinetic energy of the 1oz shot.

So example of 10 x 1 ton ford fiesta's hitting a wall in different places all at 10mph and the result is a lot of smashed ford fiestas. But a 10 ton truck hitting the wall at 10mph results in a big hole in the wall.

To compensate the effect of the ford fiestas you need an increase in speed at impact. This you can do with a car because it has its own power source.

A bullet is a spent object and has lost its power source and is slowing all the time. Therefore after a certain range, the speed effect of the lighter bullet has gone and it becomes less and less effective the further it travels.............As do all bullets of all calibres but the bigger the mass, the more kinetic energy it retains.

Bog Trotter99

BSA International wrote: »

.22wmr at 200 yards on fox might be a stretch of it's capabilities.

Have you considered .22 Hornet? Ammo a bit pricey but for hunting that wouldn't be a major issue.

I know I did say a fox at lesser range. (able to hit the odd fox well within that distance.)

cookimonster

Quick WMR Ammo review -

https://youtu.be/21qzDbcI3IA

Bog Trotter99

cookimonster wrote: »

Quick WMR Ammo review -

https://youtu.be/21qzDbcI3IA

Not bad for inaccurate tumbling bullets. I didnt know you could get subs in wmr. Does that do away with the need for a .22lr?:rolleyes:

minktrapper

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

Not bad for inaccurate tumbling bullets. I didnt know you could get subs in wmr. Does that do away with the need for a .22lr?:rolleyes:

More like they make subsonic and birdshot for the WMR but try getting them in Ireland.

Snake_Doctor

It's worth checking out Mark and Sam after work on youtube. He does mostly long range stuff and did some work on the 22 mag, had some good stuff...bty, fan of d cartridge as well, age profile and all that

Mellor

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

One of the main causes of unintentional tumble, is twist rate to bullet weight and velocity.

So if the .22wmr bullets were tumbling and inaccurate (as you have heard) then in 62 years I am sure some rifle manufacturer would have altered their twist rate or changed the shape of their bullets.

I mentioned that as being an issue above.

The difference is the .17hmr is half the weight of the .22wmr. So it is lose lose lose all the way. Just as a .223 and .308 bullet which travel at similar speed differences to .17hmr and .22wmr. The heavier bullet is always going to deliver more kinetic energy ft-lbs after a certain distance.

I suggested the WSM. I haven't studied the ballistic chart side by side with the WMR. But I don't think the WMR carries more energy at any range, open to correct of course.

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

No its not and this maybe what you confuse with bullet sizes?

When you divide the weight of the 1oz shot down into smaller grams, you are dividing the kinetic energy into smaller packages. Whereas the slug is still retaining the full kinetic energy of the 1oz shot.

It actually is in fact. The maths behind it is really simple.
The formula for kinetic energy is (1/2)MV^2. It's proportional to mass.
So if you divide it into smaller packages, you reduce the energy of each, but there are more of them.

If you half the projectile into two rounds, the energy of each is halved. But there are two of them. So added together the total is the same.
If you divide it into 100 projectiles, they each have 100th the energy. But again there is 100 of them.

A slug and pellets, at the same mass and speed have the same kinetic energy.
But as they travel pellets will slow quicker, they are less ballistically less efficient.

So example of 10 x 1 ton ford fiesta's hitting a wall in different places all at 10mph and the result is a lot of smashed ford fiestas. But a 10 ton truck hitting the wall at 10mph results in a big hole in the wall.

The total kinetic energy of the 10 fiestas and the 1 truck are the same.

A bullet is a spent object and has lost its power source and is slowing all the time. Therefore after a certain range, the speed effect of the lighter bullet has gone and it becomes less and less effective the further it travels.............As do all bullets of all calibres but the bigger the mass, the more kinetic energy it retains.

Yes. Energy decreases as a bullet travels. All bullets.

From 100years to 200 yards. A WMR loses 40% of the energy.
A WSM loses 32%. It retains more energy, despite being a bullet of half the weight. Reason being energy increases more proportional to speed than mass.

So yes, we don't but a .22 on a .50 cal cartridge. But we also don't put a cannonball on there either.

Anyway. Rambling a bit. As I said above, you have your heart set on a WMR. It's absolutely up to you. Go for it.

Feisar

It also leaves bc out of the equation, i.e. a long for caliber 6.5 of circa 140 grains retains more energy than a 180 grain 7.62. A 204 Ruger drops and drifts less than a 223.

Bog Trotter99

Mellor wrote: »

Anyway. Rambling a bit. As I said above, you have your heart set on a WMR. It's absolutely up to you. Go for it.

Yes I have decided on what I want for all the reasons I have already mention Mellor. But thanks for your input. We all cant all agree on everything otherwise there would only be one rifle and point of view and life would be so much more boring. It's good to talk.:)

Feisar

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

Yes I have decided on what I want for all the reasons I have already mention Mellor. But thanks for your input. We all cant all agree on everything otherwise there would only be one rifle and point of view and life would be so much more boring. It's good to talk.:)

See what you really need is a 5mm RRM! :P:P:P

Bog Trotter99

Feisar wrote: »

See what you really need is a 5mm RRM! :P:P:P

Never knew of that and just had a quick read.....why?

Mellor

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

lWe all cant all agree on everything otherwise there would only be one rifle and point of view and life would be so much more boring.

Absolutely. I couldn’t agree more.
Happy hunting

Feisar

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

Never knew of that and just had a quick read.....why?

I'd say it was a case of why not! In fairness it appears to be a nice caliber.

Bog Trotter99

An update to this is that I was just told the rifle I wanted wont be available until December in the calibre I wanted.

I will have a re-think, but good possibility I will wait.

One man called Liam, a dealer is the one who I would spend my money with. Great customer service from him. I am sure you all know who he is. So thanks all for the ideas/suggestions and input.

Feisar

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

An update to this is that I was just told the rifle I wanted wont be available until December in the calibre I wanted.

I will have a re-think, but good possibility I will wait.

One man called Liam, a dealer is the one who I would spend my money with. Great customer service from him. I am sure you all know who he is. So thanks all for the ideas/suggestions and input.

I always find yer as well hang on for what you want. Otherwise you’ll either change it or be looking at second choice for years

ace86

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

An update to this is that I was just told the rifle I wanted wont be available until December in the calibre I wanted.

I will have a re-think, but good possibility I will wait.

One man called Liam, a dealer is the one who I would spend my money with. Great customer service from him. I am sure you all know who he is. So thanks all for the ideas/suggestions and input.

Do you mind me asking what kind of rifle and calibre you are getting?
I have been reading the comments on here on .17HMR vs.22WMR and from someone who has had .22wmr as a small rifle for nearly 20 yrs and planning on getting my 3rd the Beargra B14R just bcos its fully adjustable and I can customise it to myself. I currently have a Sako Quad Varmint heavy barrel in .22wmr and it’s fantastic rifle unreal accurate but I never really push it out beyond 120yrds or that way it’s just I prefer to have a bigger calibre for foxes more so me for an effective kill and longer distance if required. I use 30gr Hornady v max ammo the last few years and I find it very good and groups well too.

Bog Trotter99

ace86 wrote: »

Do you mind me asking what kind of rifle and calibre you are getting?
I have been reading the comments on here on .17HMR vs.22WMR and from someone who has had .22wmr as a small rifle for nearly 20 yrs and planning on getting my 3rd the Beargra B14R just bcos its fully adjustable and I can customise it to myself. I currently have a Sako Quad Varmint heavy barrel in .22wmr and it’s fantastic rifle unreal accurate but I never really push it out beyond 120yrds or that way it’s just I prefer to have a bigger calibre for foxes more so me for an effective kill and longer distance if required. I use 30gr Hornady v max ammo the last few years and I find it very good and groups well too.

The rifle I had decided on was the CZ 457 Varmint .22 wmr. Fairly new but production is delayed because of the lockdowns etc.

Your Bearga rifle is very nice but out of my price range.

ace86

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

The rifle I had decided on was the CZ 457 Varmint .22 wmr. Fairly new but production is delayed because of the lockdowns etc.

Your Bearga rifle is very nice but out of my price range.

Thanks, Yes I’m still waiting on a quote on exact price but with brexit and Covid trying to get answers and quotes from manufacturers to suppliers etc and then trying into the country is going to take time.

Mellor

ace86 wrote: »

I currently have a Sako Quad Varmint heavy barrel in .22wmr and it’s fantastic rifle unreal accurate

If you don't mind me asking, do you have the quad in multiple calibres?
I've heard good things and always wondered how well the interchangeable barrels worked in practise.

Bog Trotter99

Mellor wrote: »

If you don't mind me asking, do you have the quad in multiple calibres?
I've heard good things and always wondered how well the interchangeable barrels worked in practise.

There is actually a used one for sale Mellor for 950 I think if I remember correctly. It has both barrels.

Tis an old idea done at least once with air rifles by a gun manufacturer called Webley in the mid 1970's because one size does not fit all and you have the best of both worlds with both calibres.

ace86

Mellor wrote: »

If you don't mind me asking, do you have the quad in multiple calibres?
I've heard good things and always wondered how well the interchangeable barrels worked in practise.

No just in .22wmr bcos I would need a license for every different calibre barrel plus interchangeable magazines but the .22wmr and .17hmr both share the same magazine so all you would have to do is change the barrel.

LIFFY FISHING

Nice Krico .22wmr with bipod and scope for sale in Cill Dara hunting

Sparkey84

another aspect to this guys if we at some point are forced into lead free ammunition the wmr lead free might be a better bullet than the hmr? more space for more mass

Bog Trotter99

Sparkey84 wrote: »

another aspect to this guys if we at some point are forced into lead free ammunition the wmr lead free might be a better bullet than the hmr? more space for more mass

Well if the EU are as good at organizing it as they are with the covid vaccine, then lead free will be a long way away yet and even then nobody will have a clue what to do even if they manage it.

Sparkey84

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

Well if the EU are as good at organizing it as they are with the covid vaccine, then lead free will be a long way away yet and even then nobody will have a clue what to do even if they manage it.

my point was more to do with physics than politics but when it does come i suspect the 17grain hmr would not do well to lose 40ish% of its mass going lead free

Mellor

Sparkey84 wrote: »

my point was more to do with physics than politics but when it does come i suspect the 17grain hmr would not do well to lose 40ish% of its mass going lead free

We'll all be using silver bullets. Monthly werewolf season to coincide with the full moon.