Market research regarding Barnes heavy weight slugs for .22s
We at Surefire Casting are considering bringing to market some heavy slugs for the .22 airgun. We’ve been kicking some ideas around with Gary Barnes regarding what is feasible and worthwhile to pursue. What we’re thinking of is a slug that would be in the 50gr range for powerful .22s that have maxed out what they can get out of the commercially available pellet designs. We don’t have the time or resources available to investigate every .22 out there to see what it likes best or can handle so we’re asking for some help.
We would like to know what you think the optimum mass would be for a heavy slug. Should we look at 50gr as the target weight or would a 55-60gr slug be better? Is .218 the best diameter to size to? We understand that most of you will be using choked barrels so the slug will have to be designed to cope with that. Still, there might be some size that works better than others.
How about those of you with guns that use a magazine: what is the longest slug that your gun can load in the magazine without jamming? Would a “power round” that has to be single loaded be worthwhile?
Is a heavy weight slug something you would actually consider worth paying a premium for? Casting slugs by hand is not the way to compete with big companies that can use machines to make thousands of slugs while we wait for the lead pot to get hot! Is this even worth it? Would you pay $15 per 100 to get heavy slugs for your .22 airgun?
We have had pretty good luck with our .25 slugs and have lots of very satisfied customers. We’ve also had a bunch of calls for us to make a .22 version. We’re not sure given the limited volume if it is worth pursuing. If we go ahead with the .22 model, we’d like to make sure it fits as many of the powerhouse .22’s out there as possible.
If you have a powerful .22 that shoots the available pellets at or near the maximum velocity they deliver good accuracy, please chime in with your opinions or observations.
All Replies
Okay Jerry, i’ll get a slug size for you from my HW barrel.
Cheers,
Walter…
Hi Walter,
Yes and no, to answer the question. I’ve got a .22 Monsoon and I should be able to slug that for some data. I have no idea where that barrel comes from though so I don’t know that the data is applicable to the guns the customers will be shooting. I’ve got a couple .22 springers as well but again , I don’t know who makes the barrels. I should slug the .22 Discovery as well. So, yes I have a .22 barrel to slug (and will) but no, I don’t have the barrel most likely to be in use by the most likely customer.
If you can provide data on the HW barrel, I would appreciate it. Given that Mac1 sells those to hobbiests and home tuners, there might be some folks who have them and also want to push a big slug.
I think you’re right regarding the 40 grainer. We need to keep friction down and we need to be able to cope with the choke most of the barrels out there are likely to have. Clearly, we’re not going to have a simple design that is easy to cast! But, if we get pretty close to 40gr, we might be able to end some of the discussion regarding the power and velocity achievable with a .22 air rifle!
I suspect that if you do start producing them, and then the good reports start coming in, other guys are going to be interested. As you say Jerry, theres been lots of comments in the past about a good heavy weight .22 which these guns are perfect for. Its gonna be double price for me due to the shipping, but you can count me in, can’t wait….. 😀
And seeing as my .22 rig is up and running as opposed to the .25, you can rest assured that I’ll be doing a review on them. 🙄
You mean you don’t have a .22 barrel to slug and so you need sizes?
I use the HW barrels that Tim Mac1 sells so would that size help you out?
IMHO the .22 might drive a 40 grainer as long as the friction is kept low. The .25 shines with the increased push area.
So 40ish grains would get my vote.
Let em know if you need size info.
Walter….
We didn’t have any significant customer input when we designed the .25 series and those have turned out pretty well. We’ve got a good number of customers and new and repeat customers are coming in at a slow but regular pace. We have had a lot of folks ask about a .22 version via email, PMs and a few posts too. That led me to believe that there might be a market for a .22 heavy slug as well. I’m starting to re-think that. Maybe it’s just the crappy economy that is causing the folks that expressed interest before to realize that they probably won’t be buying premium pellets when the cheaper ones will do 90% of what they want to do.
It wasn’t that long ago there was a huge thread about high speed and high power .22 airguns and what the maximum might be/had been done etc. I would have thought that the opportunity to get a slug designed for an airgun but the same weight as a .22LR might bring some of those folks out again!
Oh well, as of right now I’m going to give it some more thought and time to decide if the effort is worth it. If we go forward I’m not going to worry about Rapid or Daystate or any of the expensive guns’ magazines as I don’t think those guys will ever buy any slugs. I’d like to find a design that can fit the Condor first but also be sized to fit the Korean guns. Anyone have any barrel data for them? The Koreans would be priority 2 at best though based on the sales of the .25 to Condor guys almost exclusively.
I’m a little surprised by the lack of interest except for the few posters on this thread. The Rapid guys have had nothing to say at all. The worlds’ biggest airgun forum generated no meaningful input. Fortunately a couple power hungry folks here chimed in!
We didn’t have any significant customer input when we designed the .25 series and those have turned out pretty well. We’ve got a good number of customers and new and repeat customers are coming in at a slow but regular pace. We have had a lot of folks ask about a .22 version via email, PMs and a few posts too. That led me to believe that there might be a market for a .22 heavy slug as well. I’m starting to re-think that. Maybe it’s just the crappy economy that is causing the folks that expressed interest before to realize that they probably won’t be buying premium pellets when the cheaper ones will do 90% of what they want to do.
It wasn’t that long ago there was a huge thread about high speed and high power .22 airguns and what the maximum might be/had been done etc. I would have thought that the opportunity to get a slug designed for an airgun but the same weight as a .22LR might bring some of those folks out again!
Oh well, as of right now I’m going to give it some more thought and time to decide if the effort is worth it. If we go forward I’m not going to worry about Rapid or Daystate or any of the expensive guns’ magazines as I don’t think those guys will ever buy any slugs. I’d like to find a design that can fit the Condor first but also be sized to fit the Korean guns. Anyone have any barrel data for them? The Koreans would be priority 2 at best though based on the sales of the .25 to Condor guys almost exclusively.
It is looking like low 40’s for a target weight is emerging as a consensus. I’m thinking the LW barrels are .216 across the lands and .218 across the grooves, has anyone actually slugged one?
I vote for 40 Gr. To Black sabots point, I may be off base here but if the objective is delivering max energy to the target, a blunt nose pellet will do that much better than a pointed tip. 40 Gr. seems like a good compromise, it’s heavier than what’s available now, yet shouldn’t be too long for the rapids, and most guys should still be able to push it fast enough.
42 gr. in .25 run between 900-950, in a .22 you would lose about 25fps. so lets figure 875-925, so I’d think going up another 8gr. would be some thing too slow, I think 43gr. would match the now 60 gr. .25s.
Sharpshooter,
No, the rebatted boattail would not cost any velocity. The pressure in the chamber acts on all surfaces in all directions and the force vectors equal out. We could make a slug with an ogive tail and it would shoot just as fast as a flat base slug. In fact, I have a ogive base slug that should have been shot the other direction but is not long enough to engage the rifling well enough when loaded the proper direction. It is actually a little faster shot backwards! Shows what I know….
Yes , we need to avoid getting too long. If we keep the slug a reasonable length and low enough weight, we can shoot it fast enough to get enough spin to stabalize it. That’s the trade off. 90gr would be huge power but it would not be stable. 40gr will be fast enough in a bunch of rifles but will it carry enough power to be worth the extra expense over a typical Eun Jin? Gotta find that compromise!
So just to make sure I am on track, what your are spec’ing is basically a .45LC bullet (at least the nose section) scaled down to .22 cal.? That would surely be pretty hard hitting, but wouldn’t the BC achieved be greater if the nose of the bullet was of a “spitzer” design rather than a modified mini-ball?
Again, my slant on this is long range energy retention and less wind drift from that higher BC which may make me one of the few concerned with it’s performance at 100 yds.
I also understand that we are only concerned with subsonic velocities here and that because of that most of the drag is on the bullet’s base rather than it’s nose unlike a supersonic bullet fired from a firearm, but would it not still allow a greater sectional density and therefore higher BC?
(not arguing, just trying to gleen as much info as possible)
the longer length created by a spitzer shape (in 2 bullets of equal weight) would be slightly better in BC but is unlikely to be stable in current twist rate barrels. There must be a balance between shape of the bullet and twist rate to achieve required accuracy. Need enough ogive to streamline the projectile, without creating excessive length.
Used to shoot a lot of cast bullets at reduced velocity in centerfire rifles.
.223 Rem in match shooting is a great example of overcomming the imbalance. Bullets over the years have become heavier and longer in .22 but originally 63gr was the heaviest commonly used, as the fastest twist rate commonly available was 1-10. Then came the 69gr which recommended 1-7 or 1-8 twist. Now there are 80+ gr .22 cal match bullets but a 1-7 twist is MINIMUM to get good stabilization. Even if we rebarreled our guns to this faster twist rate the resistance of the rifling would increase dramatically and negate any benefit of the heavier bullet(reduced velocity due to resistance).
I’m not kidding guys, we are pretty sure we want to do the .22 slug but we want some input as we want to sell the damn things not just enjoy them ourselves! That means making what the customer wants. If these slugs are going to be pure Talon/Condor slugs per the design input from Talonairgun.com members, so be it. I’ve asked for input on 3 forums but you guys are the only ones to step up with a comment or two. I guess if the Rapid guys don’t want to say what their max length is, they are happy with their little bitty pellets! 😆
Now, sharpshooter, remember that the nose of the slug has far less impact than the base on BC or coefficient of drag for a subsonic projectile. I was expecting you to demand a rebatted boattail base!
while it would be nice, RBT is not practical at our “chamber” pressure. it would cause forward pressure to be redirected outward instead of forward for the portion of the base that was rebated, leaving just the smaller flat base to carry the brunt of the load to create forward motion.
If you want to be practical, a slight hollow base would be better, but then the casting becomes much more difficult.
Jerry, I’m not married to that magical number of 950 it just seem like with the twist rate of our barrels this is were we get the flattest trajectory and the best accuracy trade off, and as black sabot hit on – the less thinking I have to do when hunting the better.
I’m definitely not apposed to to a heaver/slower slug as long as it shoots relatively flat, but if I could get those higher numbers with the heaver slug, well then I’m just holding even more energy at range which just makes me a happy little guy, and I will defiantly pay for shipping and give straight forward feed back when it comes time to test them out 😉
Looks like Jerry just covered that while I was typing my last post. Thanks Jerry…………..now go build some us some bullets!!
and as far as getting no response from the rapid guys -they are too busy poo-pooing anything that is not a rapid to have time for sharing their input 😮 .
[quote=”shrpshotr28″]
As far as BC is concerned, maybe a 1.5 radius ogive w/ 1/2 diameter meplat (flat nose).
So just to make sure I am on track, what your are spec’ing is basically a .45LC bullet (at least the nose section) scaled down to .22 cal.? That would surely be pretty hard hitting, but wouldn’t the BC achieved be greater if the nose of the bullet was of a “spitzer” design rather than a modified mini-ball?
Again, my slant on this is long range energy retention and less wind drift from that higher BC which may make me one of the few concerned with it’s performance at 100 yds.
I also understand that we are only concerned with subsonic velocities here and that because of that most of the drag is on the bullet’s base rather than it’s nose unlike a supersonic bullet fired from a firearm, but would it not still allow a greater sectional density and therefore higher BC?
(not arguing, just trying to gleen as much info as possible)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
i dont yet have a condor but will be ordering end of month and i would love to see some 40-45 grainers available. id be willing to pay more money for a better product. i dont wanna switch up to a 25 barrel if i dont have to but a heavy 22 would be great
just my .02 cents for what its worth