New rimfire round

[murf205]

In this certified crazy ammo time, I'm sure that big ammo companies have no interest in producing a brand new rimfire round, BUT...if you could have a new caliber rimfire that could be chambered in rifles, including semi-auto and handguns as well; what would it be? I know that we have a plethora of 17's and 22's both standard and magnum and I guess you could throw in the 5mm Rem since Aguila is making ammo again even though in limited quantities. I'm sure the Rem 591/592 owners are glad. So what would you like to see? For me it would be a 25 about as long as a WMR 22 and it would handle up to 70 grs.

[gewehrfreund]

So, in other words, you want to see the 25 Rimfire reintroduced? That would make a lot of vintage rifle enthusiasts happy, who have these very common rifles, but no (affordable/reliable) ammo available.

[dverna]

Who would be dumb enough to buy guns for it after seeing what happened to the 5mm? What will it do that a .22 Mag doesn't do for those who only buy factory ammo? For reloaders it is a bigger loser....get a .32 CF and play with that.

In "normal" times ammo would be...say...$15/box of 50? So not a "cheap" plinker.

I am curious as to why you would see the need for it.

[Bigslug]

Nah. Just stretch the body on the .25ACP to where it will fit in a .22 WMR action, while keeping it small primer and reloadable. Being semi-rimmed, you get the option of headspacing on the rim (revolvers and single shots), or the case mouth (autoloaders). Make the case shorter than the .22 WMR so that you can make up the extra COAL with either heavy, or pointy, higher BC bullets. Run a fast-twist barrel for those who want to play the heavy/subsonic/suppressed game.

[country gent]

Im thinking a 6mm rimfire, true seated bullet in the 70-75 grn range, with a decent bc and around 1800 fps.

[Gewehr-Guy]

I read in an old book, maybe one of Sharpe's, that Savage /Stevens was looking at modernizing the .25 Stevens rimfire into a better varmint round, but WW2 came along and killed it. I would buy a .25 rimfire rifle, if the cartridges were in the $15 range, but that will never happen.

[Bazoo]

Well, I'll buck the trend. I'd like to see a 36 caliber, I the same dimensions as 38 smith and wesson. Chambered in convertible guns between the two. Flat nosed bullets modeled after the 44 henry. That'd be pretty sweet. If the cost was $10/50 I'd buy a mess of it. Guns would be, replica henry and winchester 66 and 73 rifles. Ruger flat top Blackhawks with some newfangled way to convert the firing pin. Stevens falling block rifles, pump rifles with hammers.

[Bmi48219]

OP posed an interesting question. We shouldn’t completely write off Ammo manufactures’ interest; they are after all profit driven. Look at the variety of small arms types now on the market compared to 25 years ago. Back then people bought handguns, rifles & shotguns. Tactical rifles, assault rifles, tactical shotguns, PCCs, SBRs all became popular in relatively recent times, in part because they fit a niche but also because everyone already had handguns, rifles and shotguns. If you produce a unique product people will buy it because it’s new & different, not always because they need it.
The same goes for cartridges, the rifle cartridge choices available in 1970 were capable of taking down any mammal on the planet. Look how many cartridges are available now. Admittedly some are slightly better at certain applications than their predecessors, but vastly superior? Weatherby is one example. IMO, if manufacturers think it may be profitable they will invest resources in it.
Enough philosophizing, I’d lean toward a .25 rim fire, 70 gr myself for handgun/carbine, but the same in centerfire makes more sense to me.

[murf205]

OP posed an interesting question. We shouldn’t completely write off Ammo manufactures’ interest; they are after all profit driven. Look at the variety of small arms types now on the market compared to 25 years ago. Back then people bought handguns, rifles & shotguns. Tactical rifles, assault rifles, tactical shotguns, PCCs, SBRs all became popular in relatively recent times, in part because they fit a niche but also because everyone already had handguns, rifles and shotguns. If you produce a unique product people will buy it because it’s new & different, not always because they need it.
The same goes for cartridges, the rifle cartridge choices available in 1970 were capable of taking down any mammal on the planet. Look how many cartridges are available now. Admittedly some are slightly better at certain applications than their predecessors, but vastly superior? Weatherby is one example. IMO, if manufacturers think it may be profitable they will invest resources in it.
Enough philosophizing, I’d lean toward a .25 rim fire, 70 gr myself for handgun/carbine, but the same in centerfire makes more sense to me.

The profit driven part for manufactures is a fact and who can blame them when it cost a fortune to create an entirely different cartridge that might flop or not. My question is purely hypothetical and need never entered into it. I guess the wildcatter at heart in me just couldn't leave the rimfires off the list

[dverna]

Well, I'll buck the trend. I'd like to see a 36 caliber, I the same dimensions as 38 smith and wesson. Chambered in convertible guns between the two. Flat nosed bullets modeled after the 44 henry. That'd be pretty sweet. If the cost was $10/50 I'd buy a mess of it. Guns would be, replica henry and winchester 66 and 73 rifles. Ruger flat top Blackhawks with some newfangled way to convert the firing pin. Stevens falling block rifles, pump rifles with hammers.

You must have missed the memo. I fire 38 Spl in my replica 73 (and 6 other guns). Cost of .38's comes out to $3/50 for cast and $5/box of 50 if I have to buy bullets. I can reload brass about 20-30 times. Of course, I am stuck with a cartridge that is over 120 years old. The .357 Mag chamber provides a wide range of performance levels from 650 fps to 1800 fps in rifles. Heck even my grandkids may never have problems getting brass!!! But not everyone reloads so a "cheap" rim fire might have a market but no way will it cost less than $15-20 per box of 50.

The guns you want have been around for decades if you reload. What has held you back? I agree with your desires and that is why I have three rifles and four pistols in .38/.357. But I see no reason to buy a RF and go backwards.

[DDriller]

You must have missed the memo. I fire 38 Spl in my replica 73 (and 6 other guns). Cost of .38's comes out to $3/50 for cast and $5/box of 50 if I have to buy bullets.

You must have primers, powder, and bullets from real old stock. Cheapest I can load 9mm cast is $8/100 with the supplies I have on hand from several years ago with bullets I cast. No way I can get close to that buying bullets.

[Bigslug]

But not everyone reloads so a "cheap" rim fire might have a market but no way will it cost less than $15-20 per box of 50.

That's the one bottleneck that kills the attraction. Brass is unlikely to get cheaper, so you'd better be able to cook these hypotheticals up in aluminum or even polymer. A biodegrading cellulose hull might even have some attraction.

The idea of a one-time use disposable cartridge does have appeal if you can keep the price down. The concept is somewhat stymied by the reality that you have to make it sturdy enough for operating pressure. Seems a worthy engineering study if you know any studious engineers. . .

[Bazoo]

Guess I'm not allowed to like the idea of a useless rimfire in an already obtainable platform.

[Scrounge]

In this certified crazy ammo time, I'm sure that big ammo companies have no interest in producing a brand new rimfire round, BUT...if you could have a new caliber rimfire that could be chambered in rifles, including semi-auto and handguns as well; what would it be? I know that we have a plethora of 17's and 22's both standard and magnum and I guess you could throw in the 5mm Rem since Aguila is making ammo again even though in limited quantities. I'm sure the Rem 591/592 owners are glad. So what would you like to see? For me it would be a 25 about as long as a WMR 22 and it would handle up to 70 grs.

I'm hoping someone will bring back the .32 RF, and RF Long. Seems like great calibers to me, and I've got a Stevens boys rifle in each caliber.

[dtknowles]

I think the gun will be more important than the cartridge. Rifle or pistol it should be selectable for rimfire or center fire. The cartridge should not put old guns in danger so it needs a new bore diameter or maybe something like 8mm has never had a rimfire cartridge arm with a chamber long enough to handle a suggesting 8mm, rimfire/centerfire combo. The revolvers that would work with this new cartridge could just be a rechambering/rebarrel of a bunch that are already in production. Rifles, not really anything in current production seems to be a good match. Most .22 lr. are too small and anything else is too big. Need something like a Martini Cadet or a Stephens Favorite with one exception maybe if you stretched a Marlin MDL 92. I think that would be wicked.

Regarding .25 rimfire, can't you make them from 17 HMR or at least something that would work. Certainly could be necked up to 6mm.

Tim

[Deadeye Bly]

You have to look at the reason the 22 Long Rifle is so successful. It is better and cheaper than anything else. That's why it has held it's place for over 125 years. I had a 22 magnum in my younger years but then got a 22/250 and started reloading. I have never looked back. I have some fine 22 rimfire rifles though and I fully enjoy them.

[country gent]

I would like to see it caseless like the daisy vl. no cost of a brass case. No primer, no extractor or ejector needed.Ammo and firearms would be much cheaper to produce. Am thinking the case is the most expensive component in rim fire ammo

[Bazoo]

One reason 22 LR is still around is that it has the right balance of power and accuracy. 22 LR was made by taking the 22 long case and using the 22 extra long's bullet. The 22 long doesn't have the stoping effect because it uses a lighter bullet, and the extra long didn't have the accuracy. By combining the two they hit on the right combo.

[Chill Wills]

Yes. I would enjoy the availability of a good 25cal rf.
80 grain bullet at 22rf Hv and sub-sonic levels. Priced to sell a lot of it.

That said; It will never happen in these current times or maybe ever. We can't even get primers and powder. (glad I have some)

So, .... we can only hope small primers can become available (plentiful) as well as powders and load the 25-20WCF and 32-20WCF. That is my real world view of it.

[uscra112]

I read in an old book, maybe one of Sharpe's, that Savage /Stevens was looking at modernizing the .25 Stevens rimfire into a better varmint round, but WW2 came along and killed it. I would buy a .25 rimfire rifle, if the cartridges were in the $15 range, but that will never happen.

The .25 RF was a good round for the black powder era, but with non-corrosive smokeless powder the .22 would do anything the blackpowder .25 could do, and it was cheaper.

Two things killed the HV idea, which was proposed by Allyn Tedmon if memory serves. One was that to handle the higher pressure of a HV load, the brass would have had to be thicker and/or harder, which would have made it difficult or impossible for the legions of old "boys' rifles" to fire. (They were designed for the old copper-case ammo.) Second was that so many of those rifles were too weak to take the stresses of a HV round even if they could light the fire. For these reasons there could never be a HV .25 Stevens Rimfire, and it was a no-brainer to drop the project after WW2.

BTW it's possible, but arduous, to make a pretty passable .25 RF round from .17 WSM. Only full size rifles like the Stevens 44 or (my latest acquisition) the 1938 Stevens Model 83 will fire it because of the heavier brass. Both rifles are quite strong enough for HV loads, which I'm holding to 1400 fps until I get my gas-check mould from NOE. Will it do anything that a .22 Magnum won't do? No. I just like a challenge.

Personally, I can't think of any useful rimfire round that isn't already being made.