Cutting edge bullets are going to be a thing
- Thread starter scuba52
- Start date
- Location
- Prince Albert, Sk
10,000 joules?
- Location
- West Quebec
Just think of the price if it becomes available..
The Cutting Edge ELR .22LR bullets were discussed in an earlier thread on CGN and it was based on information then available. While not intended as conclusive data about the bullets, the Instragram post, together with information on Facebook, add new and welcome details.
In a recent demonstration Cutting Edge achieved two hits out of ten on a 36" X 36" plate at 1042 yards. More regular hits were achieved at 500 and 600 yards on the same sized target. The rifle was a Vudoo V22 with a 1:6 twist Bartlein barrel. In a FB post, the manufacturer says it will "shoot perfectly in a standard 1 - 16 barrel." The 32 grain solid copper ammo has a MV about 1400 - 1450 fps and goes through the transonic zone at about 200 - 300 yards. Earlier iterations had a pointy bullet, but it seems that the bullets used in the test referred to in the OP are a flat nose variant.
Below is the earlier bullet design, followed by the newer, flatter nosed one.
It is not possible yet to get ready-to-shoot manufactured ammo with the Cutting Edge bullet. Cutting Edge says as soon as they find a reliable primed brass supplier it will be offering shooters a reloading kit so that will include 1000 bullets and 1000 primed cases. No date for this is available.
There is no date offered when the reloading kit will be ready for sale. They are looking for an ammo maker to produce ready-to-go ammo. At this time it appears there are no ammo makers in discussions with Cutting Edge to produce ammo with the CE bullets.
On FB, Cutting Edge says that in the 1:16 barrel the bullet gives 1/2" groups at 100 yards, while the 1:6 barrel produces 3/4" groups. The manufacturer suggests the 1:6 barrel produces better accuracy at longer ranges because the slower twist rounds destabilize sooner, while the faster twist will hold stabilizing longer and promote better accuracy at longer ranges. The belief is the slower twist bullets are tumbling or wobbling off the course of trajectory.
On this note, here are a couple of questions that some readers may be able to address. It can be noted that in 1:16 barrels any standard .22LR ammo that is more accurate at 100 yards than another variety of .22LR ammo will continue to be more accurate than the other as it goes downrange. Why would the 1:16 Cutting Edge bullets, which are more accurate than the 1:6 bullets at 100 yards, give up their accuracy and supposedly begin to destabilize once they've travelled over 100 yards? It's not like bullets have a built-in odometer that tells them that once they've reached a certain distance they're free to pack it in. What force of physics acts on them to make them less stable once they've gone beyond a certain distance? Is it a characteristic of the Cutting Edge bullets only?
In any event, this is exciting news for long range shooters looking to improve on what must often be inconsistent results achievable with standard .22LR ammo. The results are inconsistent for a number of reasons, not the least being inconsistent muzzle velocities obtained with good traditional .22LR match ammo, which can easily have an ES over 30 fps. At 500 yards a 30 fps difference between two rounds produces over 20 inches of vertical.
A key to this ammo being a potential game changer is its higher BC, which should improve its ballistics, making it retain its velocity and resist wind better than standard .22LR ammo. An important question is can this ammo be produced to have the relatively consistent MVs so important in long range .22LR shooting? If a faster bullet like the Cutting Edge had a relatively small ES it would have less vertical between rounds at the MV extremes than standard .22LR match ammo with a similar ES. But here lies the crux of the issue: the ballistic advantages of the Cutting Edge bullet makes it better than the standard .22LR bullet designs, but if ammo production doesn't result in consistent MV's and low ES will the Cutting Edge bullet design be enough to mitigate inconsistent ammo MVs and ES?
Of course, another key to this ammo being a game changer is its cost. Will this ammo be affordable? Initially, it is to be available as a reloading kit. If it costs less to reload this .22LR ammo than it costs to reload .22 centerfire ammo then there may indeed cause for celebration among long distance shooters. Will there be an ammo producer that shares the enthusiasm of Cutting Edge for this bullet design? At this time, since there doesn't appear to be many ammo makers knocking down the doors at Cutting Edge, the first question will be answered soonest by shooters reloading the ammo themselves once the kits are made available.
In a recent demonstration Cutting Edge achieved two hits out of ten on a 36" X 36" plate at 1042 yards. More regular hits were achieved at 500 and 600 yards on the same sized target. The rifle was a Vudoo V22 with a 1:6 twist Bartlein barrel. In a FB post, the manufacturer says it will "shoot perfectly in a standard 1 - 16 barrel." The 32 grain solid copper ammo has a MV about 1400 - 1450 fps and goes through the transonic zone at about 200 - 300 yards. Earlier iterations had a pointy bullet, but it seems that the bullets used in the test referred to in the OP are a flat nose variant.
Below is the earlier bullet design, followed by the newer, flatter nosed one.
It is not possible yet to get ready-to-shoot manufactured ammo with the Cutting Edge bullet. Cutting Edge says as soon as they find a reliable primed brass supplier it will be offering shooters a reloading kit so that will include 1000 bullets and 1000 primed cases. No date for this is available.
There is no date offered when the reloading kit will be ready for sale. They are looking for an ammo maker to produce ready-to-go ammo. At this time it appears there are no ammo makers in discussions with Cutting Edge to produce ammo with the CE bullets.
On FB, Cutting Edge says that in the 1:16 barrel the bullet gives 1/2" groups at 100 yards, while the 1:6 barrel produces 3/4" groups. The manufacturer suggests the 1:6 barrel produces better accuracy at longer ranges because the slower twist rounds destabilize sooner, while the faster twist will hold stabilizing longer and promote better accuracy at longer ranges. The belief is the slower twist bullets are tumbling or wobbling off the course of trajectory.
On this note, here are a couple of questions that some readers may be able to address. It can be noted that in 1:16 barrels any standard .22LR ammo that is more accurate at 100 yards than another variety of .22LR ammo will continue to be more accurate than the other as it goes downrange. Why would the 1:16 Cutting Edge bullets, which are more accurate than the 1:6 bullets at 100 yards, give up their accuracy and supposedly begin to destabilize once they've travelled over 100 yards? It's not like bullets have a built-in odometer that tells them that once they've reached a certain distance they're free to pack it in. What force of physics acts on them to make them less stable once they've gone beyond a certain distance? Is it a characteristic of the Cutting Edge bullets only?
In any event, this is exciting news for long range shooters looking to improve on what must often be inconsistent results achievable with standard .22LR ammo. The results are inconsistent for a number of reasons, not the least being inconsistent muzzle velocities obtained with good traditional .22LR match ammo, which can easily have an ES over 30 fps. At 500 yards a 30 fps difference between two rounds produces over 20 inches of vertical.
A key to this ammo being a potential game changer is its higher BC, which should improve its ballistics, making it retain its velocity and resist wind better than standard .22LR ammo. An important question is can this ammo be produced to have the relatively consistent MVs so important in long range .22LR shooting? If a faster bullet like the Cutting Edge had a relatively small ES it would have less vertical between rounds at the MV extremes than standard .22LR match ammo with a similar ES. But here lies the crux of the issue: the ballistic advantages of the Cutting Edge bullet makes it better than the standard .22LR bullet designs, but if ammo production doesn't result in consistent MV's and low ES will the Cutting Edge bullet design be enough to mitigate inconsistent ammo MVs and ES?
Of course, another key to this ammo being a game changer is its cost. Will this ammo be affordable? Initially, it is to be available as a reloading kit. If it costs less to reload this .22LR ammo than it costs to reload .22 centerfire ammo then there may indeed cause for celebration among long distance shooters. Will there be an ammo producer that shares the enthusiasm of Cutting Edge for this bullet design? At this time, since there doesn't appear to be many ammo makers knocking down the doors at Cutting Edge, the first question will be answered soonest by shooters reloading the ammo themselves once the kits are made available.
Last edited:
Other than saying what it is described to be, what more should be said? The manufacturer says it has no problems in the transonic zone, which it reaches some 200 - 300 yards downrange. We have limited information about these bullets. As a result, we may have to rely for now on their claims. When others use the bullets we should know more.
I'm more curious about how the 1:6 barrel is able to ostensibly deliver better accuracy at longer ranges than the 1:16 barrel, even though the latter produces considerably better accuracy at 100 yards.
The only thing that makes logical sense to me would be if the projectile is only barely spinning fast enough with the 1:16 twist, and as the rotation slows it loses stability.
What I really don't understand is why a 1:6 twist? I get it if a 1:16 isn't ideal but 1:6 seems like a huge jump... Do people even use 1:6 barrels in 22cal centerfires with the heavy VLD bullets available these days?
My guess is that the crazy fast spin rate helps stabilize it as the round slows to ridiculous speeds. What makes a 308 lose stability? Does spin rate vs velocity have more to do with it than we think. Maybe the transonic barrier is not what we think it is. I’m curious what happens when you run a match grade hv round through a faster twist barrel?
I don't think the spin slows nearly as quickly as velocity does. Do they make match grade HV ammo? Seems most of it is SV?
Correct. A stable bullet at the muzzle will only increase in stability as the RPM decays slower then the velocity. Transonic is a different matter though.
Yes, 1:6 and 1:7 twists are common for shooting the heavier 223 bullets.
Remember, these are solid copper lathe turned bullets, monometal bullets require a faster then usual twist.
There is no ammo available. Cutting Edge makes bullets. Since they don't have an ammo making partner, they intend to offer a reloading kit which will include dies and bullets and primed cases. Those are not yet available and there's no information about when they will be. Cutting Edge is looking for an ammo making partner to produce the ready-to-shoot ammo. It may be a long wait for that marriage to be consumated.
I knew 1:7 was used, wasn't sure about 1:6. Either way, big difference between a 80+ gr VLD bullet and a 32gr bullet, even if it is copper. I can't imagine a 32gr copper bullet requires a faster twist than a lead bullet twice that weight, and 1:9 twists shoot 62gr pills just fine. I would love to see their reasoning for going 1:6 and not something in the 1:9-1:12 range.
I meant in general, not specifically this ammo.
To me the question is that if they make reloading available to 22 LR shooters, will we see an explosion in rimfire reloading, and can a hand loader get better accuracy with rimfire than we currently see with factory ammo? I've never pulled apart a box of Tenex to see what the consistency of the case, powder charge and bullet weight is - maybe I should, it could prove educational.
The tiny powder charge in a .22LR round means that a wee fraction of a grain difference is a much larger percentage difference than it would be in a big cartridge. Most of us are used to a tenth of a grain as our measurement granularity, but for precision .22 to actually group well I'd expect to need to be better than that, possibly down around the hundredths of a grain.
Apparently I misunderstood. I thought that since the thread was about Cutting Edge that's what the question was about. To whom are you referring when you ask if "they" make match grade HV ammo?
There are kits available to reload .22LR ammo. Below are two examples.
These emerged during the period of .22LR ammo scarcity in the U.S. and to serve the survivalist enthusiasts. One of the challenges is a source for the heeled bullets used in .22LR ammo. Unlike .22 centerfire ammo, the exposed part of the bullet is the same diameter as the case, while the part of the .22LR bullet that is inside the case is smaller. One solution is for the reloader to cast his own bullets. Previously used cases are cleaned and primed and the propellant is added and the boolit crimped into place.
As might be expected, the results in terms of precision on targets leave something to be desired. Reloading .22LR with kits such as these will not be a viable substitute for quality match ammo.
For more details, see h t t p s://www.ssusa.org/articles/2015/8/18/reloading-22-long-rifle-a-new-option-for-competitors/
and h t t p s://www.ammoland.com/2015/11/reloading-22lr-ammo/#axzz6C0RPW393
and h t t p://22lrreloader.com/design-details/
