22 pressure?

[Potashminer]

Not so much about the guns - but about the ammunition. I was just reading on a chat room where a poster claimed that one must not use "modern" rimfire ammo in elderly (circa 1920) rimfire guns, because the pressure of modern ammo is "too high" compared to what was available then.

So, SAAMI Z299.1 - 2015, appears to set Maximum Average Pressure (MAP) for 22 Short at 21,000 psi, and 24,000 psi for 22 Long, 22 Long Rifle and 22 Win Mag. Any clues what the number have been way back then? I do not think SAAMI even existed prior to mid 1920's, so there must have been some other or older standard being used back then?

 

[Mystic Precision]

What is the operating pressure of Black powder?

That is what fueled early rimfire shells.

Jerry

 

[Potashminer]

Thanks Jerry - further looking on Internet revealed that original 22 Short was 4 grains Black Powder, 22 Long was 5 grains Black Powder and 22 Long Rifle was 6 grains Black Powder. (or maybe it said 3, 4 and 5 grains respectively). Not sure that helps me a lot - I suspect that pressure must also vary with the weight of bullet, and perhaps the composition of the primer?

As an alternative question - is anyone aware what might be the "lower pressure" rounds made today for 22 Long Rifle - versus a "higher pressure" round? I do not think that is the same as velocity - since I believe that one can increase or reduce pressure by swapping powders and primers - without affecting velocity too much - to a point.

 

[marshall]

I don't have a clue what pressures where on old 22's most where 22 long, no long rifle, and the reason so many old 22's are sewer pipes where black power.
and corrosive primer material.
Dad's 22 single shot that lived in the barn with the cows never had a cleaning rod down the barrel for 40-50 yrs till I restored it about 60 yrs ago.
If he could see light after blowing the spiders out, it was good to go.
All it ever did was point blank cow killer.

 

[alpining]

I know what you mean - I've only ever seen recommendations against using "high velocity" ammunition in the old old guns. I think most people probably assume this means the same things as "high pressure", though.

Personally, I use current 22LR ammunition marketed as "standard/subsonic/target" without concern. These are typically advertised as 40gr at around 1050fps according to the box, with traditional lubed LRN bullets. Gotta be "lower pressure" than 40gr at 1250fps.

Does 22LR show up in QuickLoad? Maybe someone could look it up, guessing at likely powders...

 

[mckutzy]

Grain size of black powder means alot in the firearm of which it is being fired in..

 

[Mystic Precision]

If listed, look up load data using Trailboss... maybe Hodgdon lists pressures?

That is the low pressure, smokeless powder replacement for black powder.

If the rifle is that much of an antique, maybe hanging it on the wall is the safest option???

Jerry

 

[Potashminer]

Thank you - was something that I never thought about before - there are two, possibly 100 year old, on the way to me - I never previously owned ones that old - do not need to "blow them up" - but I do hope they are in fit shape for firing them. From pictures and research, both should be marked as .22 Long Rifle. Wikipedia says the cartridge was introduced in 1887, so was around for a few years before these rifles were made. I guess I have become curious what pressure levels those old ones were built for.

 

[Suther]

I know what you mean - I've only ever seen recommendations against using "high velocity" ammunition in the old old guns. I think most people probably assume this means the same things as "high pressure", though.

Personally, I use current 22LR ammunition marketed as "standard/subsonic/target" without concern. These are typically advertised as 40gr at around 1050fps according to the box, with traditional lubed LRN bullets. Gotta be "lower pressure" than 40gr at 1250fps.

Does 22LR show up in QuickLoad? Maybe someone could look it up, guessing at likely powders...

This is my understanding as well, it came up when looking for information on Stevens Favorites and Marksmans. A quick google search suggests Cartridges of The World states 1930 was the first HV 22lr ammo.

If you're really concerned you could look at some even slower ammo, I can only assume something like CCI Quiets going 710fps are going to be even lower pressure, but that is purely speculation on my part.

 

[grauhanen]

Rimfire ammo such as the familiar .22 began as a black powder cartridge. By the mid-1920's, non-corrosive priming and smokeless powders had been developed and put to use. MV's with these ammos were typically no more than 1100 fps. High velocity ammo with greater MV's were developed by late 1926. By the early 1930's some HV ammo was available up to 1300 fps.

For what it's worth, in two popular and serious books from the period, Edward Crossman's Small Bore Rifle Shooting (1927) and C. S. Landis's 22 Caliber rifle Shooting (1932), there is no advice or recommendation against using HV ammo in contemporary rifles.

 

[alpining]

Thank you - was something that I never thought about before - there are two, possibly 100 year old, on the way to me - I never previously owned ones that old - do not need to "blow them up" - but I do hope they are in fit shape for firing them. ...

Now I'm curious, what do you have on the way?

I'm no expert on old guns, but for "only" 100 years old, I don't think you have much to worry about with 1050fps ammunition. That would be around the same standard as ammunition from the era.

Or as Suther said, if you could always use CCI Quiet if you're worried.

 

[Mystic Precision]

Thank you - was something that I never thought about before - there are two, possibly 100 year old, on the way to me - I never previously owned ones that old - do not need to "blow them up" - but I do hope they are in fit shape for firing them. From pictures and research, both should be marked as .22 Long Rifle. Wikipedia says the cartridge was introduced in 1887, so was around for a few years before these rifles were made. I guess I have become curious what pressure levels those old ones were built for.

Were these rifles/actions ever used for other cartridges?

Like now... manfs have used the same action for a range of chamberings and if this applies to your rifles, then any pistol or rifle cartridge would certainly be loaded to much higher loads

Enjoy your new antiques...

Jerry

 

[trevj]

Rimfire ammo such as the familiar .22 began as a black powder cartridge. By the mid-1920's, non-corrosive priming and smokeless powders had been developed and put to use. MV's with these ammos were typically no more than 1100 fps. High velocity ammo with greater MV's were developed by late 1926. By the early 1930's some HV ammo was available up to 1300 fps.

For what it's worth, in two popular and serious books from the period, Edward Crossman's Small Bore Rifle Shooting (1927) and C. S. Landis's 22 Caliber rifle Shooting (1932), there is no advice or recommendation against using HV ammo in contemporary rifles.

A good quality rifle from about any era, should handle modern High Velocity .22 ammo, just fine.

It gets a lot sketchier, when dealing with the low priced 'boy's rifles', that were so common and cheap then. They are not all created equal.

A Stevens Favorite is one example. They have a bit of a reputation for 'shooting loose', as the action pins leave a gap between the action walls and the components, allowing flex, and eventually, bending of the screws. As the entire load of firing, is carried by only the two screws, this can become a problem. One in good shape is a decent gun, one in poor shape, with about any ammo, is a hazard to the operator.
Others worth a hard look, are the various variations on a falling/rolling block type action, where the breech block has very little material actually holding the cartridge in place. Remington Model 6, for one example, some of the Stevens Little Scout models too. But lots of others like them, where you #### the hammer, then flip open a little tilting block.

Of the lightweight Stevens rifles, the 'Maynard' style lever operated break open type guns are likely to be the safest and most durable, I think.

At the end of the day, you pretty much have to judge each make and model, on it's own merits, condition, and quality. I have seen repeatedly, recommendations to stick to "Standard Velocity", 1100-ish FPS velocity ammunition, as it supposedly matches the pressures of the old ammo, which may not be absolutely correct, but... Waddya gonna do... Most of the folks around, are not reloading .22 rimfire, so you gotta pick and choose from what is available.

Right now, if I were wanting to shoot one of the sketchier models, I would gravitate hard towards the CCI Quiets as my first pick for ammo.

 

[Potashminer]

Thank you. The two rifles in question. One is a Deutsche Werke - Werke Erfurht - probably a Model 1 from the Seller's pictures. Other one is indeed a potentially "sketchy" "Boy's Rifle" - seller's words say it is a Steven's Favourite 1915 - but picture shown suggests it might be a Model 17 - Canada Post claims I will have the rifles in hand next week, so maybe I can discover more about them, then. For now, not finding anything other than "High Velocity" .22 Long Rifle ammo here - so maybe going to be making a shopping trip.

 

[dead meat]

The problem started with "chat room". lots of experts on the interweb. When you get hands on to see what condition they are in go from there. Personally i wouldn't shoot high velocity ammo from either of the firearms you list.

 

[grauhanen]

Personally i wouldn't shoot high velocity ammo from either of the firearms you list.

That's a good point when it comes to firearms that are old or may be of a questionable quality or neglect-caused condition. Standard velocity ammo will do all that's required of a .22LR firearm, especially one that's a century old.

 

[cement head]

Thank you. The two rifles in question. One is a Deutsche Werke - Werke Erfurht - probably a Model 1 from the Seller's pictures. Other one is indeed a potentially "sketchy" "Boy's Rifle" - seller's words say it is a Steven's Favourite 1915 - but picture shown suggests it might be a Model 17 - Canada Post claims I will have the rifles in hand next week, so maybe I can discover more about them, then. For now, not finding anything other than "High Velocity" .22 Long Rifle ammo here - so maybe going to be making a shopping trip.

If they are older than 1920 I would stick with standard velocity 22 shells . I was looking at a 1912 Ross 22 rifle a while ago and the owner said it wasn't a good idea to fire the newer high velocity shells in it . CB longs or standard velocity shells. not the other high velocity shells . I always wear safety glasses instead of my prescription glasses when test firing numerous shells out of older rifles - test firing . plus ear plugs . just my opinion . nothing like having brass in your face or worse . have fun.

 

[cosmic]

Hmm... Years ago, I was given a Remington model 12 that was owned by my uncle since he was a boy. It was in relatively good shape, but knowing my uncle, it had been shot a lot. Bore was shiney, with rifling still visible. I went out with a box of Whiz-Bangs to give it a go. It had a peep sight on the tang, so I was keen to see it perform. Chambered a shell, pulled the trigger, gun went bang and the milk jug went unscathed. Took several more shots to no effect. However, I did notice a puff of smoke exitting the action every time I shot it. Further investigation revealed that the shell casings were split, allowing gas to escape and the bullet to skip out of the barrel about 20 ft.
The gun had been shot so much that the chamber had worn oversize. Not surprising, given that these guns were made with mild steel barrels, and likely many other parts.
Why am I relating this story? As a previous poster has stated, a lot of these older guns have essentially worn out due to wear. Rather than a catastrophic failure, issues such as mine present themselves. I would try a 22 short or 22 subsonic in the subject rifles, and make an assessment after the first shot....

 

[alpining]

If they are older than 1920 I would stick with standard velocity 22 shells ....

Good conservative advice all around.

But I will add that "standard velocity" doesn't have a very firm definition, and some types of "standard velocity" 22LR might still have relatively higher pressure by virtue of having heavier bullets. I currently have two different types of Winchester 22LR bulk packs that fall into this category, both with 45gr CPRN and both are marketed as for use with suppressors. One is called "M22 Subsonic" (advertised 1060fps) and the other simply "Standard Velocity" (305m/s, or 1000fps).

 

[Potashminer]

With some more reading on Internet - maybe the thing is related to the hardness of the bullet used. There is a "magic" relationship of about 1422 between Brinell Hardness and chamber pressure to be used. So, apparently not many have ever found out what actual pressures that manufacturers load their .22 up to - is known what SAAMI sets for Maximum - but appears few get close to that without very hard bullets. Apparently. So 40/1 lead/tin or similar going to be Brinell Hardness about 7 (?) - multiply by magic 1422 and you get roughly 10,000 PSI as the chamber pressure for that hardness of bullet. Note, is no reference to the VELOCITY of it - is about the PRESSURE generated by the loading. If one uses "soft" lead bullets, going to have lower pressures that are usable, versus "hard" lead bullets. I think. Coatings, jacketing, alloys with antinomy all work to make the bullet harder - to allow more velocity - which likely means more breech pressure. But I still can not find anything definitive about that - is all written as "should be"; "likely is" and so on.

That 1422 number is discussed in Chapter 10 of "Modern Reloading - Second Edition" by Richard Lee, for those that care to read up on how that number is derived - or at least Richard Lee's version of that.

So, I guess I am still looking to find out what is the lower, or lowest PRESSURE loadings available for modern .22 Long Rifle.