Using hot 22LR ammo in old guns

[Trey45]

CCI mini mag 40 grain listed at 1235 fps
CCI Velocitor 40 grain ammo listed at 1435 fps
Aguila Interceptor 40 grain ammo listed at 1470 fps

Are there any dangers involved in using these high velocity rounds in older rifles?
50 plus years old.

[Heavy]

What I found out after purchasing very old Smith&Wesson 22/32 4" kit gun at a yard sale. It would handle the new rim-fire ammo but would stick in the chambers and have some swelling. Called Smith&Wesson and the man told to shoot standard and or subsonic ammo. Also wanted them to refurbish the old revolver. New blueing etc. he said no go because if anything messed up they did not have the parts to fix. So subsonic and CB caps are what it gets feed now. :-D

[zuke]

Why?
Get a newer gun to use, their made out of better metal.
Rifle or pistol?

[Jim]

Trey, I wouldn't hesitate to fire any of those you listed in guns that were made in the mid 1900's.

[Trey45]

Why?
Get a newer gun to use, their made out of better metal.
Rifle or pistol?

I have around 15 22LR's, some new, some old. The purpose for my question was to ascertain if one or more of these high performance cartridges ended up in one of my mid and early 1900's guns it wasn't going to harm it.

Thanks Jim, that's pretty much what I figured too, I just needed to hear it from someone else.

[gnoahhh]

If the gun was built since the advent of HV ammo, I should think one could get away with it- IF it's in sound condition and built to an intelligent design. I certainly wouldn't fire that stuff in an old boy's single shot (what we called "cat rifles" when I was a kid)- Stevens Crackshots, early Favorites, Visible Loaders, etc. due to an almost non-existent safety margin. Nor would I fire it in early autoloaders such as a pre-1932 Woodsman that would sustain damage from the increased battering.

Personally I never felt the need for the hyper-velocity stuff. As a rule it's not as accurate (at least in any of my guns) and doesn't kill little critters any more dead than a well placed standard velocity bullet.

[jh45gun]

Stick with the standard loadings why batter the gun.

[KCSO]

What gun? 22's range from Flobert to Browning and the gun makesa lot of difference. In a Rolling block or Flobert I would say to go easy unless the gun has been rebarreled recently, but in say a Remington 513 or Browning T bot go for it.

[9.3X62AL]

I've only had one rifle or handgun where this question came up--a first-year Marlin Model 39 (1922?) that pre-dated HV ammo's onset.

Like mentioned above, the hyper-velocity 22 LR stuff has never shot that well in my firearms. I lean heavily toward CCI Mini Mags these days as my "default" go-to 22 LR chow. It runs consistently and reliably, and seems to be at or near the top in the accuracy results with my guns. There are a couple (SIG Mosquito and Winchester 290) that refuse to run on anything else. It's not cheap, but who needs the aggravation posed by bulk-box **** that stalls, misfires, jams, and squibs?

[Jon K]

I tend to stay away from high velocity ammo.....rebarrel or not.
I have a Marlin Model 29, which are rumored to be prone to cracked firing pins. Is this pressure or metalurgy??? I would rather not have to deal with the headache.

Jon

[jhrosier]

I loosened up an old bolt gun shooting CCI Stingers. Fortunately it had no great value.
I would only shoot standard velocity ammo in an old or valuable older gun because of this.

Jack

[fecmech]

I'm not sure it makes any difference. I was on a site sometime back that listed the pressures for .22 ammo and what surprised me was that it was all the same at about 24K psi. Even std velocity .22's were at that pressure along with the HV stuff. Go to page 8 and 9 on the rimfire section of this link, it shows all the rimfire cartridge specs. (under SAMMI/ANSI standards)
http://www.saami.org/specifications_and_information/index.cfm

[gnoahhh]

Those figures are for maximum allowable pressure, not what the different cartridges actually generate.

[fecmech]

Those figures are for maximum allowable pressure, not what the different cartridges actually generate.

That's true but faster powder means less powder. Less powder means more profit, as long as you are in spec where would you load a price sensitive ammunition like .22 rimfire that you manufacture by the Gazillions???

[gnoahhh]

Huh? Not sure I understand your question.

[fecmech]

Huh? Not sure I understand your question.

As a manufacturer you use specifications and limits to your advantage. You will use the fastest powder that you can to get the velocity you desire by working close to the maximum pressure as your limit. By using the faster powder you use less powder to achieve your desired velocity.
Since I don't know loads for .22 rimfires I'll give you a centerfire example. Lets say you as a manufacturer want to sell .38 spl 158 gr swc's at an advertised velocity of 800 fps. You can safely load them at that velocity with say 3.5 grs of bullseye and 16000 psi. You could also achieve that velocity with approx 6.7 grs of Blue Dot at roughly 13-14k psi. Why would you as a manufacturer want to use more of a slower powder to achieve the same velocity that you can do more cheaply with less powder at a higher pressure and still be safely within specifications. There is no advantage for you as a manufacturer to work to lower pressures.

[gnoahhh]

That may well be true, but it doesn't mean that those pressures listed on the SAAMI chart are what those various types of .22RFs are actually operating at. Those numbers spell out what they recommend as maximum safe operating pressure and nothing more.

It would indeed be interesting to see what pressures the various types and brands of RF ammo actually generate.

I seriously doubt that in this litigious age the manufacturers are offering stuff that's on the ragged edge of those SAAMI specs. The last thing they want is to be flooded with lawsuits from idiots wrecking their guns and injuring themselves by firing high pressure ammo in old relics. But, I could be wrong.

[fecmech]

I don't think manufacturers load on the "ragged edge" of anything. They are working with"In house" ballistic labs, they do spec the powders they buy and are working with new brass and bullets. I don't think it's much of a stretch for them to test for and achieve ballistic uniformity that keeps them near but uniformly under the pressure spec. They could care less about old guns etc, that's built in to the pressure specification originally (ie. 44 spl sammi spec). As long as their ammo meets SAMMI specs for max pressure, extreme pressure spread etc they are building a safe consumer commodity that would be relatively immune to lawsuits.

[Bongo]

I know this is an older thread but I want to give some personal experience that may save someone some aggravation. I shot some Aguila Intercetor ammo from my 1953 Marlin 39a and it broke my firing pin. I was lucky to get a correct replacement pin. I won't go any hotter than CCI mini-mag hp in it now.

[Bazoo]

In 1930, they came out with the first high velocity 22 long rifle, and by 1932 guns were made to suit. Any gun made after 1932 should be perfectly fine with a steady diet of high velocity 22.

CCI stingers came out in 1967, which was the first hyper velocity 22 lr. So its safe to say guns before that are not going to fair well with hyper velocity LR usage, and guns made since then should be fine. However, Its my opinion that the use of hyper velocity ammo is more subjective to the strength and type of firearms it should be used in.

~Bazoo

[Finster101]

Maybe it's just me but if you don't need the hotter ammo why use it. I do understand if it's all you can get. I generally use standard velocity for target shooting and really don't have a need for anything else even in newer guns.

[Drm50]

Early semi autos will take a beating from hyper velocity 22s. They can go metal to metal and can
wreck the gun with one shot. I would not be afraid to shoot the Hi-vel, which is about standard
now in a solid condition bolt action. I have seen the old single shots blow out the rim in extractor
area from HI-V ammo. S&W revolvers on the old 22/32 I frame shold be only used with Standard
V ammo, and they were the stronger one of the era. When you get to the improved I frame they
will handle Hi-V, but I wouldn't shoot the Hyper in them. My brother had a Walther 22 that was a
Bolt/ semi convertable, made about 1927 it was a beautiful little gun. He only fired target ammo
in it. One of his inlaws fired a Stinger in it and the knob snapped off the bolt handle in semi mode.
I have also see early Woodsman and Hi Standard auto pistols beat up from bulk Hi-speed ammo.
Good rule of thumb, if you are in doubt don't use Hi-V in older guns, never Hyper-V.

[9.3X62AL]

I have an *interesting* 22 LR target gun that I bought about 3 years ago. It started life as a Kimber 82G, but was altered into a rimfire benchrest rig by way of a truck-axle 21" barrel and 2 oz. trigger. Yes, that trigger scares me spitless. But can that rifle EVER SHOOT. I have about 1500 rounds through it now, and NONE have been hyper-velocity screamers. I have tried a half-dozen each of both HV and SV loads, and at 50 yards the 10-round group sizes with the HV stuff average about 10%-15% larger than the SV, and the group centers with SV hit about 1" to 1-1/4" lower than do their HV counterparts. Best load? Eley Subsonic 40 grain HP. But even CCI Mini Mags shoot under 1" groups at 50 yards. Conclusion--don't shoot cheap junk ammo in 22 LR.. The small boost in price between, say, bulk box 22 LR and Mini-Mags pays a handsome dividend in downrange accuracy and consistency. Conversely, downrange results between CCI SV or MM and Eley Tenex or Subsonic HP is not nearly as wide as their disparate pricing would lead you to believe. Not in my rifle, at least. Better, YES--but not 2X or 3X better. Conclusion--CCI makes some very good 22 LR ammo at reasonable pricing. I have not been able to try out any CCI Green Tag for a long time--I would like to, vs. the Eley in this fat-barreled monster.

In the context of the O/P's question, the over/under on usage of HV or hyper-vel 22 LR ammo in a pre-1930s firearm weight heavily in favor of of standard velocity ammo. There isn't a huge fall-off in performance, trajectory difference at reasonable rimfire ranges is almost microscopic, and SV stuff of good make is darn accurate ammo.

[Jack Stanley]

I suspect it would really depend on the firearm you wanted to use the ammo in . The old High Standard model "D" I had would not be a good candidate . One of the new bolt actions you can use about anything .

Jack

[OldManFomOklahoma]

I don't know why dad bought a Remington 241 in 22 sorts only but thats what I learned to shoot with. Back in the 50's the summers were hot Southwest Oklahoma's ecology had cornered the market on Jack rabbits, Bob White quail and bull frogs. Dad did't pay me an allowance he just paid me buck for dead Jack rabbit I shot and I paid for ammo. Running over them with the car didn't count. After the first summer any Jack that got up inside 100 yards was in serious trouble. I think my longest kill on a running Jack was 140 yards. The guys I hunted with all used 22 Long rifle ammo some with the hottest stuff they could find. I usually shot 39 g Remington ammo that was blazing along at 1,045 feet per second because it was the most accurate thing I could consistently find and afford.

I was killing rabbits after the guys with me quit shooting because the rabbit was out of range for them or they were out of ammo.

A neighbor long past away used to poach deer with 22 short in a single shot rifle. One shot was all he ever needed and shorts are almost the same as having a silencer. He told me if anyone ever approached him he disappeared in the night and the rifle went down a well, lake or in waiting hiding place.

Get the most accurate ammo and leave the rest to the shooter.
----
Man is the only creature that consumes without producing. He does not give milk, he does not lay eggs, he is too weak to pull the plough, he cannot run fast enough to catch rabbits. Yet he is lord of all the animals. - George Orwell

[country gent]

I would be more concerned with the handguns as a lot of the target grade pistols list standard velocity ammo for them in the owners manuals. My Smith and Wesson 41, marvel conversion and colt ace state standard velocity. I have also found better accuracy with the standard velocity ammos than High velocity grades, especially at longer ranges. Going to hotter ammo will shorten the life of even the modern firearms meant for it over the lighter stuff.

[Jedman]

I have several of the early " boys " rifles, Stevens Crack Shot, H&A swinging block, ect. and they are not built solid enough for any of the modern Hi Velocity ammo.
The pins are small and made of soft steel and even the hammers and breech blocks are not hardened enough to resist peening from some of the early standard velocity shorts so I would never shoot the hotter ammo in any gun that shows wear or is loose.

Jedman

[GCBurner]

My old Stevens Crack Shot 26 is marked on the chamber "No High Velocity Ammunition."

[quack1]

Remington saw fit to increase the size of the locking lug on the bolt when they redesigned the model 12 after hi-speed ammunition came out. Use of the hi-speed ammunition was breaking the lugs in model 12's.
The difference in the lugs between model 12 and 121 bolts:
197097

[w5pv]

I use .22 cal CCI shorts mini mags shoots very well and in the range of a standard 22LR.I shoot these in an old Remington 541 single shot that was made when?.I haven't taken the time to research the gun and may do that today.

[17nut]

When did SAAMI set the 24kpsi standard?
Seems to be dictated by the case as most all rimfires are the same max. pressure.

[BAGTIC]

The max pressures for all 22 RF cartridges are within 1,000 psi of one another. None are going to be "too much" for a fixed breech gun fit to be fired with any. The exception will be with blowback autoloaders where powder burning characteristics can effect the bolt blow back speed.

[popper]

And beat the buffer to pieces.

[Texas by God]

I stick with regular hi-speed loads since a Stinger blew the extractor off my son's 59 Remington. CCI Mini Mags are my favorite. I do use some subsonics in revolvers and my 581 Rem.

[Multigunner]

The major concern in using modern .22 ammunition in very old rifles is that most older .22 rifles used very soft steel for the barrels, some even used brass barrel liners in a tubular steel jacket.
I've seen numerous warnings against use of modern ammunition in some highly collectable .22 rimfire military training rifles still in use during WW2. The Winder "Musket" .22 was especially noted for developing badly swollen chambers after continuous use of high speed shorts.

I've run across a few of the older pre WW2 rifles that have badly swollen chambers. The Hamilton News Boy rifles with brass liner ( to avoid corrosion) were noted for this. A Japanese replica of the Hamilton used a solid steel barrel to avoid this.

[slumlord44]

I have always stuck with standard velocity ammo in the older guns whenever in doubt. I have a collection of Stevens Boys rifles that I only use standard velocity. The larger 44 and 44 1/2 guns will handle the high velocity stuff but I usually use standard velocity any way. The Remington 541 simi auto was designed for high velocity. The 41 that it replaced was not and high velocity will damage it. Best to be cautious with the early stuff.