Hmmmm! Relubing .22 LR's?

[Blackwater]

Just read the post below about relubing some old .22 RF ammo that had been wiped clean, and it started me wondering:

I know that .22 RF's are ammo sensitive, and that different manufacturers use different lubes, and that those lubes may often not be compatible with each other when you shoot various brands indiscriminately, producing larger groups than either will produce when used exclusively.

So .... I was wondering if wiping the rounds I'm shooting with a single, specific lube for ALL the various types and makes of .22 RF might help keep the bore coating more consistent, and maybe produce more consistent accuracy from my guns. Anyone ever tried this, or explored the issue? Anyone who's ever done much testing with various ammo brands/types has found great differences from gun to gun, with each one perferring a different specific ammo brand and loading.

I think we've also found that using one consistent brand of ammo keeps the bore coated, or "seasoned" as some call it, with a very consistent manner that also enhances accuracy and stability of POI on our targets.

It's speculation of course, but what else are we reloaders to do with all the info we have access to BUT speculate and test and try to see if we can't make things just a little bit better and more consistent? It'd give me something to do with my hands while I watch TV, whenever I do that. Might as well do something productive.

Not being able right now to test this very well, due to some medical problems at the moment, my next best option is to ask if anyone has ever tried wiping a consistent coating on them to see if it made a difference. I'm also wondering if wiping plated bullets might help them shoot consistently (or MORE consistently?) with plain lead lubed, target and standard velocity loads. We never run out of questions to ask or tests to make, do we?

[870TC]

There has been discussion of this over on the Rimfire central forums. Several people reported shooting smaller groups with cheap ammo (wildcat, thunderbolt etc) AFTER shooting and seasoning the bore with a high end ammo (wolf, eley etc). Usually the high end ammo had a sticky or greasy feeling lube.

[Blackwater]

Well, that would be a partial "proof" of my theory - that using a consistent lube will yield more consistent results. I know a lot of us have noticed that .22's often shoot very differently (accuracy and POI) according to what ammo and type we use. Many of us have long noted that shooting greased lead vs. plated can also create problems and enlarge groups by trying to mix the lubes (plating vs. grease/wax) without first cleaning the old type lube out before going to another type of RF ammo. There really ought not, I think, to be as much difference as I've often obsserved, and can't help but wonder if relubing RF ammo with a consistent lube type might not provide at least improved consistency and accuracy. Maybe I'll get to try it out soon, and if so, I'll report back.

[Bigslug]

At the risk of sounding snide and flippant, I think the answers you're looking for is "Go out and buy match rounds in big, same lot piles" and "Don't expect identical results with mixed ammo".

Assuredly, you've got the makings of a worthy science project on your hands and should carry on with it, but here's the rub - - folks have been scratching their heads for decades on how to get cheap .22 to group like expensive .22. Ammo gets sorted by cartridge weight and rim thickness (B.T.D.T.), subjected to other arcane measurements, and now. . . lube tweaking. After all that time and energy gets invested in cheap Wally World cartridges, they become magically transformed into EXPENSIVE .22 cartridges - that are probably still lacking in some of the critical assembly, measurement, and quality control steps that make the good stuff good. Good lube won't help much if the manufacturer's powder, primer, brass thickness, and neck tension are all over the place.

Point being - the only area of rimfire ammo production we can truly consider to be under our control is what we choose to buy in the first place. The higher price of Eley, Lapua, etc... is, in effect, paying the manufacturer to weigh your cases, turn necks, check for runout, and all that jazz the Benchresters do. If you can find the magic wand that quickly transforms Blazer into TenEx, you'll be the hero of the century, but changing lead into gold may be a more realistic pursuit. FYI - Eley uses a mix of beeswax and tallow. Good luck!

[country gent]

You might give a mix of beeswax 60% shortening or tallow30% and 10% lanolin a try. I believe alot of 22 lubes also had a powderd rosin in them. But the mentioned lube mix may work out. On the rimfire rounds it needs to be a very stiff lube to handle handling and feeding issues, also so as to not come of in chambers. Application of the bove mix would need to be dipped into while liquid and depending on a good seal between case and bulletheel/

[Grump]

Bigslug has a most valid point on the monetary equivalent of YOUR TIME spent in such a pursuit. Of course, that loses some of its punch for those of us who have more time than money and no realistic opportunities to swap the 3 hours of "processing" a brick of ammo into Tenex for 3 hours of paid labor and the extra $12 (net of minimum wage after taxes, maybe) towards the purchase of ready-made stuff needing no processing.

Adjust the calculations for what you can take home per hour, and your actual time spent messing with the ammo. For myself, the satisfaction of finding out, and/or the satisfaction of keeping something from going to waste (a few interesting "salvage" projects in the past), and/or the satisfaction of just doing something out of the ordinary, is worth far more than the monetary equivalent.

My wife says I can sometimes waste a lot of time experimenting or trying to fix stuff.

We're both right.

[WILCO]

We never run out of questions to ask or tests to make, do we?

That's our nature as casters & handloaders.

[WILCO]

Ammo gets sorted by cartridge weight and rim thickness (B.T.D.T.), subjected to other arcane measurements, and now. . . lube tweaking. After all that time and energy gets invested in cheap Wally World cartridges, they become magically transformed into EXPENSIVE .22 cartridges - that are probably still lacking in some of the critical assembly, measurement, and quality control steps that make the good stuff good. Good lube won't help much if the manufacturer's powder, primer, brass thickness, and neck tension are all over the place.

Seeing as how rimfire ammunition is made to exacting standards of various degrees of quality, I believe it's a worthwhile endeavor to go through the rigors of testing and theories to glean as much as we can, from any brand of ammunition.
There are no companies producing a sub-standard rimfire cartridge. They simply wouldn't exist in a competitive world. I've used quite a bit of rimfire ammunition in my time and they've all performed as expected. The bulk of my sporter rifle days were spent with CCI Blazer, a Chinese bolt action rifle with a scope and a lot of high scores.

[35remington]

You obviously haven't shot much Remington 22 ammo.

[Blackwater]

Bigslug, your point is well taken, and very well established. I simply wish to get a a rather large stash of .22 RF's to shoot their best in my guns. Since it's a sizable supply that I got at a very good price, it just makes sense to want them to perform at the best level I can get them to perform at. It's also something I've often wondered about, but have never gotten my round tuit to try .... yet. There are guys here that are as looney as I am about such stuff, and it's surprising what we can come up with when faced with a reason to work it all out, and I wondered if someone hadn't beaten me to it in this matter.

[Bigslug]

Bigslug, your point is well taken, and very well established. I simply wish to get a a rather large stash of .22 RF's to shoot their best in my guns. Since it's a sizable supply that I got at a very good price, it just makes sense to want them to perform at the best level I can get them to perform at.

OR. . .you can divide your stash. On one side of the garage, you have the gallery pump/10-22/Nylon 66/Model 60 stash of ammo. On the other side, you have the Anschutz/Walther/Feinwerkbau/52/40X/BSA Martini stash of ammo. After weighing and rim sorting close to 2500 rounds of available Federal Match to put my team homies on the podium with a bunch of Eley shooters, I'm ALL about painless answers.

But for the sake of scyuntiffik larnin' stuff, I think the course you should look at pursuing is maximum reduction in bore friction. This will lessen the deformative effects of any given bore, and might flatten velocity numbers out somewhat. I would, however, AT THE VERY LEAST, sort the rounds you plan to test your lubes on into groups of similar weight in order to somewhat control those other manufacturing variables and gain a better idea of what - if anything - your goo is doing for you.

[WILCO]

You obviously haven't shot much Remington 22 ammo.

I've shot a fair amount of it and they're still making more.
Sometimes the issue lies with the user and his/her equipment.

[35remington]

Just because they're making more in this time of panic does not mean they are making it well. They aren't.

No, the issue lies with Remington ammo. Too many squibs and too much velocity variation and ttoo many misfires. If you're not complaining about it it's because you have not shot much of it.

It is a recurring theme on the rimfire boards. If this is news to you it shouldn't be. The issue is definitely not with user's equipment. Their ammo is substandard to downright crappy.

That's as truthful as truth gets.

[Grump]

I've shot a fair amount of it and they're still making more.
Sometimes the issue lies with the user and his/her equipment.

I'm a low-key mild accuracy snob. Gave up on Remington rimfire ammo long, long ago and have no idea if they are doing any better now. Their "Golden Bullet" match consistently did no worse than 2-inch groups for me at 50 yards out of an Anschutz rifle. It also did no better than 1.5 inches at that distance. On a lark, I accuracy tested some Thunderbolt and Viper later, which was even worse most times and never any better.

More recently, I hear references to "Thunderdud", so I am suspicious that Remington's priming is not up to par, at least for that bulk stuff.

Heck, even their attempt at .308 match ammo using the Sierra 168-gr in the early '60s gave disappointing accuracy, both for me much, much later and for an old HP shooter I found who used it when it was fresh.

So, Remington survives in the discount and ordinary Joe markets, but is nowhere to be found in the paper target and iron critters markets, at least where I have had a chance to observe.

I even declined Remington rimfire during the height of the shortage, without even looking at the price it was offered at.

[Iowa Fox]

Didn't some of the old guys dip their 22 Rf bullets in a liquid rosin concoction and let them dry with bullets hanging down before firing them. My old memory tells me they had pretty good luck also.

[Dan4570]

Hi all,

Never tried it with .22 rf ammo. I am experimenting with some stuff I made for BP cartridge that I am dipping the nose of the loaded round in before shooting it. I made up the stuff after reading that the US shooting team, (1800's and shooting Trapdoors) that some of them were dip lubing the loaded round on the range or dipping the loaded round in an oil before loading and firing.
The initial tests of my dip stuff showed about a 5 fps jump in velocities, ( presumably a better gas seal) and next to no powder fouling left in the bbl (10 rounds fired over a chrony. Testing some target loads for a 45-70, experimenting with other factors of the loading process) very promising from the initial experiment
The next test will be on paper when time and weather permits.

Since a .22 is an outside lubed bullet, to add a bit more lube may be very beneficial. I do, after the nose dipped 45-70's, believe that you should get a better gass seal, and possible better accuracy...I may have to drag out my .22 and dip a few to see what happens.

If I get the chance to do so I will try it and post back how it worked for me and I would be interested in how it worked for you.

[mdi]

In my attempts to make more accurate ammo for my .22s (playing around ) I have used a Paco Kelly's rimfire "former". It swages the bullet and either applies a hollow point, cup point or flat point. I have been able to cut 25 yd groups in half using el cheapo, bulk Winchester, Federal and Blazer ammo (I gave up on Remington .22 ammo in 1987). After running some ammo through my Acu'rzr, I would sometimes re-lube with Johnson's Paste Wax, warmed or thinned with mineral spirits (I just dipped the bullets, not the entire cartridge). It seemed to work but I didn't do a side by side comparison...

[bhn22]

You obviously haven't shot much Remington 22 ammo.

You're the man!....

[Eutectic]

Several years ago I experimented with Lee Liquid Alox on some accurate .22 LR rounds that had developed some white oxide. Accuracy was restored!!! For about 10 rounds anyway! Then went to that place in a hand basket! So I experimented with several brands/loads. The LLA was consistent; accuracy always got worse.... A light coat of LLA at that!

I found that rubbing plan ol' Vaseline on oxidized .22 boolits (I recommend using rubber gloves) will clean the oxide nicely. Then I smear a clean coat of Vaseline on them and wipe again. Leave just enough Vaseline to see it's there but not greasy feeling. Then the old rounds will shoot nice groups again.

Eutectic

[3leggedturtle]

I had some W-W 36gr HP's that were extremely dry. Used both Lee case sizing lube or Imperial sizing wax. Both seemed to work equally well.