22LR reloading powder charge

[AlHunt]

I'm awaiting a crimp die from Old West and I'm ready to start assembling 22LR with my Fedarm cases and 38 grain bullets from my NOE mold, which I'm powder coating. Finally.

I have Titegroup, AA2, AA7 and W748 in stock.

I'm thinking to use .5, 1.0 and maybe 1.5 grains of the Titegroup.

Anyone have any experience, thoughts or actual data?

I'm going to start with my 4" barrel K-22. Just the primer will drive the powder coated bullet out of the barrel.

[rancher1913]

do a site search on member "traffer" (might be misspelled but it will still work) he has numerous write ups on reloading 22lr.

[John Boy]

1.7 to 2.0gr Bullseye.
4.5gr Swiss Null-B or FFFFg

[AlHunt]

1.7 to 2.0gr Bullseye.
4.5gr Swiss Null-B or FFFFg


Bullseye, Titegroup and AA2 are all pretty close in burn rates. The latter 2 I have.

Ive also seen that 3N37 is touted as having been developed for the 22LR and it's one powder away from AA7. I can't remember the company right off, but they're selling machined bullets and die sets, and they have some pretty crazy looking load data that I won't even quote. I think it includes AA7.

[AlHunt]

I have not used AA2 or Titegroup But...
I have calculated these in QuickLoad.
AA2 is a TAD slower than Titegroup.
The faster the powder the less you want to use...
1.5gn of AA2 will give you about 1250fps with a 40gn bullet depending on the depth of crimp.
1.5gn of Titegroup will push a 40 gn about 1350fps.
My advise is to start with 1.3 gn of AA2 or 1.2gn of Titegroup.
Run them through a chronograph.
When you start to get up to 1400+fps the cases will start showing signs of overpressure.
These thin cases have a very abrupt pressure ceiling. 50fps will make a big difference in the 1400fps range.
I think Tite Group would be easier to meter in those small amounts but whatever you think.
(EDIT) I just noticed you are running these in a pistol. My calculations are for a 22" barrel.
You are going to have a lot of unburnt powder in a pistol unless you do a tight crimp. I have shot reloads in pistols but never tested loads or chronoed them. If I were loading for a pistol test I would start with 1.3gn of Titegroup and see what it chrono's at. My guess is that the bullet is going to be exiting the barrel before the big pressure spike...that is a GUESS.
Again I think you will need a good crimp for a pistol. (the crimp allows the pressure to build before the bullet leaves the case which seems to enable these loads to burn to a more complete state)
WEAR EYE PROTECTION when testing these.
Let us know how the tests go.

Thank you VERY much. I've read a lot of your stuff on these 22's and I know you know what you're talking about.

I don't need 1400 FPS, I just want to make reliable, accurate ammo. I do not have a chronometer. I'll just stay away from the top end. I have plenty of various factory ammo if I feel the need for speed.

I'll report back to this thread in a week or two once I get to play with it some. I have a few different 22's I can try out.

I appreciate everyone's feedback.

[uscra112]

Ever give a thought to Herco?

[AlHunt]

Ever give a thought to Herco?

Not Herco but a couple others I saw recommended along the way.

The obvious problem is actually getting powders. I have 4 or 5 pounds of both AA2 and Titegroup. 3N37 claims to have been developed specifically for 22LR. A little pricey but if I have to go on a quest for powder, that would be high on my list. Availability is the big driving factor at the moment.

[uscra112]

I did some comparisons with 3N37 in Quickload, which is what led me to Herco. It's only slightly faster than 3N37, and being significantly slower than Bullseye it has potential for more velocity (in rifle-length barrels) at the same or lower peak pressure in my .25 Stevens loading plans.

As you say, however, availability is everything. I'm lucky (or foresighted) enough to have bought a pound of Herco about ten years ago, and then never opened it.

[AlHunt]

Well, the Old West crimping die arrived today and I just had to load a few to see how it worked. In case anyone is curious, it's a modified Lee FCD and a custom shell holder for the 22.

Started with the Titegroup and ran:
1 round @ 1.0 grains
2 rounds @ 1.2 grains
3 rounds @ 1.3 grains
3 rounds @ 1.2 grains

Compared, subjectively, to Winchester 40 grain High Velocity RN

1 grain was a bunny fart and extracted fine
1.2 felt recoil was somewhat lighter than the Winchester
1.3 grains was comparable

Both 1.2 and 1.3 exhibited slightly difficult extraction.

All levels threw burning powder out the muzzle, as predicted by Traffer. The Winchester did not.

The base of the 1.0 round expanded comparably to the Winchester. 1.2 and 1.3 both expanded a couple thousands more.

The revolver hasn't been cleaned well in a month of Sundays so before I play any more it'll get a thorough cleaning to include scrubbing out the chambers.

The only part that bothers me is that 1/3 of the Fedarm primed cases required a second strike.

Definitely a slow process but I expected that. It reminds me of my earliest days reloading, lubing and sizing my bullets in the Lee hammer through sizer, casting in a single cavity Ideal mold and weighing each powder charge because who could afford one of those fancy powder measure things ... ?

So it begins.

[AlHunt]

Very good. thanks for the info.
I would be curious to see pictures of the loaded cartridges. Crimp is important and I have experimented with different depths. Curious to see how deep these guys are crimped.
Also, you may have seen that I make swaging dies for 22lr. My shop (mini lathe in the living room) is shut down right now because we moved to an apartment where I can't get away with machining...lol. But maybe down the road if you keep an interest we can work out getting you set up with a swaging setup.

I did see where you made the crimp die from a FCD. Then I saw now much time you spent and I decided 60 bucks wasn't so bad .. :) And yes, I'd be quite interested in swaging, I've looked at your info on that, too. But it's beyond any gear and equipment I have. I'm jealous of your lathe.

I'll spend some quality time with the digital camera tomorrow and get pics of the fired rounds, make up a few more so you can see my crimp and anything else that seems relevant.

I appreciate you looking at my project.

[cameron.meeks]

Herco is also dirty. May want to look elsware because of fowling

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[wbbh]

I'd try VV N310, it very fast and clean burning.

[AlHunt]

OK, it took me to today to get some pics and the digital camera gave me problems so these are cell phone pics.

The pics show how the cases expanded and my crimp on a couple of ones I loaded today with AA2. I tried 1.0, 1.2 and 1.4 grains. Subjectively, 1.0 had roughly the same recoil as the aforementioned Winchester factory High Velocity. 1.2 and 1.4 escalated a little but not much. AA2 at all levels threw an equivalent amount of burning powder from the muzzle and was on par with the factory ammo.

I have not yet measured the case heads for the AA2 rounds. I'll update this post when I do.

Extraction was again an issue with the handcrafted stuff but I have not cleaned the revolver so the jury is still out on that issue.

[AlHunt]

I think you should adjust the crimp location so they crimp right where the bullet and case meet.
286983286984

No, I wasn't loving it either. Below is my new and improved crimp. I crimped until they stopped spinning and then a touch more. I have the little dimples made by the modified FCD.

I loaded a half dozen today after scrubbing the chambers of the old revolver and fired them. Same problems, FT Fire of 1 in 3 and sticky extraction. I loaded a magazine full for the Ruger Standard Model and got 100% ignition. They fed and extracted fine. I'll get a new hammer spring for that 66 year old revolver.

As soon as I find a magazine for my old rifle, I'll run a few in there and see how it goes.

Looks like I'll load up 50 or so of AA2 @ 1.2 grains and do some accuracy testing.

[uscra112]

For what it's worth. when Stevens introduced the .22 Long Rifle for their family of single shots, it wasn't crimped at all. Only when the round caught on with makers of repeaters did the ammo companies start to crimp it, so the bullet wouldn't come loose in the magazine. And that's still the only reason to crimp it.

[uscra112]

Might want to check the firing pin protrusion of that revolver. It doesn't take much of a blow to fire the .22LR.

[AlHunt]

For what it's worth. when Stevens introduced the .22 Long Rifle for their family of single shots, it wasn't crimped at all. Only when the round caught on with makers of repeaters did the ammo companies start to crimp it, so the bullet wouldn't come loose in the magazine. And that's still the only reason to crimp it.

Yeah, I was vaguely aware of the long history of the 22LR. In my particular case, the bullets would slip out of the case with no crimp at all.

Good thought to check the firing pin on the revolver. It's fired ... well, a lot of rounds in 67 years. Thinking about it, I did have 1 or 2 FTFs with the Winchester too. Of course, I wanted to blame the ammo .... :)

[uscra112]

We who shoot the obsolete .32 Long (Colt) rimfires have the same problem. If the heel isn't a snug fit in the case, which is a tricky thing to achieve, we use a drop of blue Loctite. Superglue ought to work, too. Not crimping will of course affect the powder burn, but it also avoids any distortion of the heel.

[uscra112]

Crimping didn't start with the change to smokeless.

[uscra112]

I suppose chamber form factor must have something to do with it. Competition chambers that jam the bullet into the lands would work with less (or no) crimp.

[AlHunt]

Well, Traffer had a couple of posts that disappeared ...

One of them, regarding HS-6, caused me to wonder about AA7. I'm quite sure I saw data for it (and I HAVE some) but it seems like it'd be pretty slow. It's at 74 on one burn rate chart, HS-6 is at 60 and 3N37 is in the middle at 64.

Anybody have any thoughts on AA7 for the 22LR?

[uscra112]

Comparing in Quickload, AA7 looks too slow, but not so much as to say don't try it. Charge for 1200 fps in an 18 inch barrel would be around 2.5 grains. In MY model, which may or may not be all that close to reality. I don't load the .22 LR, so it hasn't been proven.

A negative from the calculation is that only 67% of the charge actually burns.

HS-6 is almost exactly like 3N37.

[AlHunt]

Comparing in Quickload, AA7 looks too slow, but not so much as to say don't try it. Charge for 1200 fps in an 18 inch barrel would be around 2.5 grains. In MY model, which may or may not be all that close to reality. I don't load the .22 LR, so it hasn't been proven.

A negative from the calculation is that only 67% of the charge actually burns.

HS-6 is almost exactly like 3N37.

So out of a 4" barrel, AA7 is going to be pretty anemic. I'll keep an eye out for the HS-6 or 3N37.

How confident can I be that if 2.5gr of AA7 in the 22LR case would lead to excessive pressure, that Quickload would flag it as dangerous?

Thanks for your help.

[Traffer]

PM me if you want any of my input
I am not here to argue with anyone

[uscra112]

Define excessive pressure. SAAMI says something like 25k, but from my "thought experiments" in Quickload I don't think commercial ammo is loaded any higher that about 12k. Possible exception of the "hypervelocity" roiunds like Stingers. I caution again that my model uses a case volume measured by the water method, which is very difficult to do accurately for such a tiny case.

[AlHunt]

Define excessive pressure. SAAMI says something like 25k, but from my "thought experiments" in Quickload I don't think commercial ammo is loaded any higher that about 12k. Possible exception of the "hypervelocity" roiunds like Stingers. I caution again that my model uses a case volume measured by the water method, which is very difficult to do accurately for such a tiny case.

Excessive pressure would be anything that might blow a case. Sounds like 2.5 is well below spec. I may try it just to see once I get my rifle back in the wind.

I understand that anything I assemble, I'm on my own and flying half blind.

[Traffer]

The effective pressure maximum is 19,000 psi.
16,000 psi will show signs of overpressure.
Depending on the gun...some guns will allow the cases to blow more consistently.
It seems that the newer rifles are designed so that the bottoms of the bolts have a void or open area so the cases when rupturing will blow the gasses downward and out of the face of the shooter.
These modern bolt faces with the thin cases will have case failures at about 18,000 psi.
That is usually equavilent to about 1500 fps with a 40 gn bullet in a 22" rifle barrel.
Overpressure signs start to show up at about 1400 fps in the same situation.
These pictures show some eley cases that were overpressured. The polygonal notch on the head is the area where the bolt face was void. The ones that have bulging but not blown were shooting a 40 gn bullet at 1450 fps which is equavilent to about 16,000 psi.
287055
Edit:
The pressures are estimated from the chronographed velocities and run through Quickload. I have discovered that there are variables which would cause my pressure assumptions to be off.
The velocities for 40gn bullets are correct. But the maximum pressure of 19000 psi is not correct. It appears that as SAMI published maximums...The 1500fps 40 gn bullets are rather pushing 22000+ psi.
Thus the overpressuring signs on these cases are in the 20000 psi range and the blown cases are in the 25000 psi range (estimated).

[Traffer]

I had compiled a list of what I think would be ideal powders for 22lr. I have not tested these but rather worked them out with a combination of Quickload specs and pictures of the actual powder (to make sure these powders were of small enough grain to practically load in the tiny 22lr cases)
I will have to look for that list ...
Also I have recently been looking at some very fast shotgun powders which are not often used for pistol reloading. Some of these look very promising.
It is imperitive that loads be worked out according to a good program like quickload. two tenths of a grain can make a DANGEROUS difference with these extremely fast powders.
WEAR EYE PROTECTION when working with this stuff. I would be blind right now if I hadn't.

[uscra112]

Pretty dramatic, there, Traffer!

What are you using for the case volume parameter in QL? I'm using 4.90 grains H2O, but I don't trust it very much.

Superfast powders produce higher peak pressures per unit of muzzle velocity - but you knew that. That's why I'm looking at Herco and even Blue Dot for my .25 Stevens rimfire loads. Not really comparable since the .25 has 3x the case capacity

[Traffer]

I am a novice at using the calculators. Using Gordons Reloading tool now. The way I went about it was by testing loads with the chrono then matching the velocities with QL.
Velocities of 1450fps with a 40gn powder coated bullet started showing signs of overpressure. Velocities of 1600+ fps would blow out most cases
I only used HS-6 for testing.
2.7gn of HS-6 did the 1600+fps velocities with blown cases.
2.4gn of HS-6 ran about 1350 to 1400 fps.
I set QL to show those specs with all parameters and used that model to plug in other powders. The pmax of the 2.7gn HS-6 showed about 19000psi so I thought that was a correct parameter. But that was wrong. I had some other parameters set incorrectly. It is actually about 25000psi.
I tried to find powders that would balance powder burnt near 100% with pmax as close to 10x the velocities. Some have higher velocities per pressure because of the timing of the spike.
It is hard to use these calculators for 22lr because some parameters don't want to enter. They want the diameter of the bullet to be within .001" of the bore, which is not correct for a 22lr. So I have to fudge the parameters a bit to get it right.
I seat the bullets .100" into the case which lowers the capacity quite a bit. So I figure about 4.0 grains of H2O capacity. I think it is actually a little less than that. But that figure works.
From my testing and info from others who use faster powders I am pretty sure of my calculations.
Crimp does make a considerable difference...if you change the values of initial pressure in Gordons Reloading Guide it shows up. I don't know how to relate the initial pressure to crimp pull weight but it should be substantial.
Also, interestingly QL has a variable for slickness of the bullet (I forget what they call it) which also makes a considerable difference.
Anyway I know from experience that without a crimp HS-6 is not a viable propellant according to the tests the late John Kort did. With the crimp however, HS-6 is a very good propellant. I believe it, or something very similar, is used by commercial ammunition manufacturers.

[uscra112]

Well, you must be doing something close to what I'm doing, because my .22LR model gives me very similar answers.

My seating depth is .093, very close to yours.

As stated I'm using 4.9 as case volume. I think 4.0 is low. I don't think my weighing and measuring was that far off.

My bore area setting is .037293 (24.06 square millimeters)

Shot start parameter I have set at 1234. Purely arbitrary - I use that number for all cast bullets except very hard ones. Crimp would of course alter this. (I do not crimp any of my single-shot loads, from the .25 Stevens on up.) Impossible for us to measure independent of all the other factors anyway.

I'm calling the bullet a flatbase. I think it becomes one as soon as the heel is out of the case.

I get 24986 for 2.7 grains of HS-6, with 1570 fps from an 18" barrel. Not tested over a chronograph.

That "friction proofing" is for molycoated jacketed bullet. Not relevant for us. Ignore it.

HS-6 and 3N37 yield very similar pressure/time curves, despite having differing factors. So does Power Pistol, which is designed for 9mm loading, at much higher pressures. I will have to see what it does in my .25 loads. I'd expect SDs to go up when used at 12kpsi, but who knows?

[AlHunt]

The effective pressure maximum is 19,000 psi.
16,000 psi will show signs of overpressure.
Depending on the gun...some guns will allow the cases to blow more consistently.
It seems that the newer rifles are designed so that the bottoms of the bolts have a void or open area so the cases when rupturing will blow the gasses downward and out of the face of the shooter.
These modern bolt faces with the thin cases will have case failures at about 18,000 psi.
That is usually equavilent to about 1500 fps with a 40 gn bullet in a 22" rifle barrel.
Overpressure signs start to show up at about 1400 fps in the same situation.
These pictures show some eley cases that were overpressured. The polygonal notch on the head is the area where the bolt face was void. The ones that have bulging but not blown were shooting a 40 gn bullet at 1450 fps which is equavilent to about 16,000 psi.
287055
Edit:
The pressures are estimated from the chronographed velocities and run through Quickload. I have discovered that there are variables which would cause my pressure assumptions to be off.
The velocities for 40gn bullets are correct. But the maximum pressure of 19000 psi is not correct. It appears that as SAMI published maximums...The 1500fps 40 gn bullets are rather pushing 22000+ psi.
Thus the overpressuring signs on these cases are in the 20000 psi range and the blown cases are in the 25000 psi range (estimated).

I'm getting just enough rounding on the bottom of these Fedarm cases that you can rock it slightly on the bench but it's hard to see. This is @ 1.2grains of AA2.

[Traffer]

"I'm getting just enough rounding on the bottom of these Fedarm cases that you can rock it slightly on the bench but it's hard to see. This is @ 1.2grains of AA2."
According to both quick load and gordons reloading calculators 1.2 gn of AA#2 should be well within limits. Even 1.5 gn should be plenty safe.
QL shows under 16000psi with 1.5gn of AA#2... That is well within limits.

[AlHunt]

Well, playing with these 1.2grain AA2 charges is interesting.

I'm seeing a few split cases and having difficult extraction in both test guns (S&W K-22 and Ruger Standard Model)

The cases are splitting lengthwise, towards the front of the case.

Backed off to 1.1 and the split cases go away but extraction is a real bear.

I think I'm going back to the Titegroup and see if I have the same problems.

[Traffer]

Well, playing with these 1.2grain AA2 charges is interesting.

I'm seeing a few split cases and having difficult extraction in both test guns (S&W K-22 and Ruger Standard Model)

The cases are splitting lengthwise, towards the front of the case.

Backed off to 1.1 and the split cases go away but extraction is a real bear.

I think I'm going back to the Titegroup and see if I have the same problems.

I have never encountered split cases lengthwise. It may be that very fast burning powder won't work. I have seen people use bulleseye and red dot and they have not reported split cases. It is an interesting development...beyond my understanding of this stuff, I guess.

[AlHunt]

I have never encountered split cases lengthwise. It may be that very fast burning powder won't work. I have seen people use bulleseye and red dot and they have not reported split cases. It is an interesting development...beyond my understanding of this stuff, I guess.

Here's one with a small split. The others, which I set aside for reference ... somewhere ... are split about half way down.

I wonder if my crimp is too heavy ... ?

Edit: Thinking about it, I moved the crimp just slightly back down and it's heavier. The splits started showing up in the heavier crimp ... I think. Tomorrow's another day. I think I'll back the crimp off and see what happens.

[Traffer]

It's hard to tell but the little pinch marks actually fold the case and could cause the start of a crack. You may want to try setting your collet to bottom out before the segments of the collet come together completely...leaving a little space between so the pinch marks are not so tight.

[uscra112]

Maybe I'm repeating myself here but. . . . Fast powders give higher peak pressures per unit of muzzle velocity than slower ones. Very obvious when you run scenarios in Quickload. Increasing the crimp or the bullet weight exaggerates this.

Something I've learned from expanding .17WSM to make .25 Stevens: They don't make any effort to keep the case mouths from being brittle. (It's only going to be fired once.)

[AlHunt]

Maybe I'm repeating myself here but. . . . Fast powders give higher peak pressures per unit of muzzle velocity than slower ones. Very obvious when you run scenarios in Quickload. Increasing the crimp or the bullet weight exaggerates this.

Something I've learned from expanding .17WSM to make .25 Stevens: They don't make any effort to keep the case mouths from being brittle. (It's only going to be fired once.)

I'll probably give the AA7 a quick few rounds just to see, despite the unburned powder. Maybe the slower pressure curve will ease case expansion. Maybe neither of those AAs are going to be suitable. I have my eye out for 3N37 locally. Shipping and hazmat make buying 1 pound online way too expensive.

I hope fine tuning that crimp on AA2 will ease my extraction issue, too. And case splitting.

[Traffer]

I'll probably give the AA7 a quick few rounds just to see, despite the unburned powder. Maybe the slower pressure curve will ease case expansion. Maybe neither of those AAs are going to be suitable. I have my eye out for 3N37 locally. Shipping and hazmat make buying 1 pound online way too expensive.

I hope fine tuning that crimp on AA2 will ease my extraction issue, too. And case splitting.

I know quite a few people who have used fast powders without case splitting. They do not crimp though. Perhaps with AA2 you could experiment with a very light crimp and see what happens.

[uscra112]

The least crimp necessary to keep the bullets from coming loose under recoil is probably best.

[AlHunt]

A few limited test runs yesterday and today with just enough crimp to keep the bullet in the case seem to have resolved the case splitting. Learning curve.

Also, I ran a number of AA7 loads up to 2.5 grains with passable results. No more muzzle flash than anything else and I don't see copious amounts of unburned powder. That doesn't mean it's not just blowing right out the muzzle.

One interesting development is that the powder coated bullets cause occasional difficult chambering in the Ruger Standard Model. The bolt doesn't close with authority and the round will fail to fire but will fire in the revolver. I may have to go to lubed bullets.

[Traffer]

You can size the powder coated bullets after you coat them. I can't make anything right now because my machining stuff is in storage (maybe forever) but I can look through my stuff to see if there is something I can send you to size them with.

[AlHunt]

You can size the powder coated bullets after you coat them. I can't make anything right now because my machining stuff is in storage (maybe forever) but I can look through my stuff to see if there is something I can send you to size them with.

I appreciate the offer. I'm running them through the .225 Lee sizer, same as I use for the AR. I suspect the chamber in that particular gun may just be short and the end of the bullet with thick powder coating may be stopping just short.

I have a few leads on a magazine for the rifle and that will give me another test bed.

[AlHunt]

Well, I made up about a dozen test rounds, 2.5gr of AA7, lubed and sized bullets and just enough crimp to keep the bullet from turning.

Flawless in the Ruger Standard Model. Difficult extraction in the revolver but ran fine. I'll have to spend some quality time with the micrometer and see if I can identify the extraction problem with the revolver. It may just be tight chambers in the K-22.

Subjectively this load has a little heavier recoil than the Winchester High Velocity and about the same muzzle flash.

[uscra112]

Oooooh, you've got a K-22. If mine is any example, yes, the chambers run small. Depending on what you've been shooting in it previously, it may just need an aggressive cleaning. Run a bronze wire brush in it using an electric drill and Hoppes' #9.

[AlHunt]

I downloaded Gordon's Reloading Tool. Very neat thing. I do see where AA7 and even 2 are predicted to have very low percentages of powder burned, whereas Titegroup predicts 100%. So, back to Titegroup I went. 1.4 grains is slightly more energetic than my old faithful Winchester ammo and runs 100% with my tweaked bullet and crimp setup in the Ruger. Lacking a chronograph, I'm going to back down to 1.3 grains and start to look at accuracy.

It doesn't make sense to load almost twice as much AA7 for similar velocities as Titegroup and not even burn all the AA7.

I weighed spent Winchester cases against Fedarm and found the Fedarm running a half grain heavier. So it's not like they're inferior cases.

Interesting project.

[uscra112]

In your pistol-length barrels, AA#7 isn't going to burn a high percentage of the charge. It just doesn't have time. An 18" rifle barrel is another story.

AA#2 should burn better than 80%. If that model says otherwise, it's wrong.

It's my understanding that the Gordon software doesn't use factory or lab-derived powder data.

[AlHunt]

In your pistol-length barrels, AA#7 isn't going to burn a high percentage of the charge. It just doesn't have time. An 18" rifle barrel is another story.

AA#2 should burn better than 80%. If that model says otherwise, it's wrong.

It's my understanding that the Gordon software doesn't use factory or lab-derived powder data.

Yeah, the AA2 was around 80. Low enough to trigger a warning but I could tweak it to make the warning go away. Don't remember what exactly.

I tinkered with the Gordons, matching known manufacturer data. The predicted velocities and pressures were similar but slightly different. So I have some level of confidence in the non-standard things we're looking at.

[Mr. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang]

Well, I made up about a dozen test rounds, 2.5gr of AA7, lubed and sized bullets and just enough crimp to keep the bullet from turning.


Those are some nice looking rounds

[Traffer]

The reason they are not chambering completely is because of the shape of the ogive. I made a continuous ogive bullet for a few years which chambered well in my rifles. But when I used that design for a person with a match rifle chamber they got stuck just like your K22. Match chambers are tighter than normal chambers.They are designed for the stepped bullet design.
The step effectively narrows the ogive by starting the diameter at about .209" insted of the non stepped ogive which starts at the largest diameter of the bullet (.2242")
That is why I went back to making stepped bullets. Here is a video

https://youtu.be/IeF2asd3vx8

[uscra112]

Um, .22 revolver chambers are straight through. Ogive form doesn't matter. Semi-autos of course have chambers like rifles.

[Traffer]

Um, .22 revolver chambers are straight through. Ogive form doesn't matter. Semi-autos of course have chambers like rifles.

It matters where the rifling starts. If a narrower bullet works so will a bullet with a stepped ogive. Should I draw you a picture?

[uscra112]

Are we not talking about his K-22 revolver?

[AlHunt]

The reason they are not chambering completely is because of the shape of the ogive. I made a continuous ogive bullet for a few years which chambered well in my rifles. But when I used that design for a person with a match rifle chamber they got stuck just like your K22. Match chambers are tighter than normal chambers.They are designed for the stepped bullet design.
The step effectively narrows the ogive by starting the diameter at about .209" insted of the non stepped ogive which starts at the largest diameter of the bullet (.2242")
That is why I went back to making stepped bullets. Here is a video

https://youtu.be/IeF2asd3vx8

That looks like a heavy bullet. I like the hollow base.

Part of what got me in trouble was my method of powder coating. I just bake them in a pile and slam them into a cardboard box right out of the oven to separate them, leaving some slightly lumpy noses. In larger caliber chambers that hasn't been a problem. The Ruger semiauto apparently has a close fitting throat and some of the little flaws and imperfections prevent the round from fully seating.

I've had good success powder coating with the 5.56 and 223 Wylde chambers because the throats on those are larger.

So, I'll drop the powder coat for the moment, work up some rounds and maybe look at Hi-Tek coating. I *think* that goes on thinner.