Compact 22 bullet speeds

[n601ap]

Chronometer set at 10 feet, temperature 75 degrees, stock weapon hand held, average of 10 rounds, 40 grain bullets:

Actual Speed Speed on Box

Aguila Interceptor 1095 f/p/s 1460
Federal Target 943 f/p/s 1200 Remington 950 f/p/s 1250

As an added note, in a Sig Sauer 1911-22 with a five inch barrel the speeds were almost 150 f/p/s faster.

And yes, I know the advertised speeds were from a rifle, but the decrease in speed is still interesting.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

What was the weapon used?

 

[Ranger17]

considering the short barrel on the 22c guess (from my limited knowledge) the slower speeds could make sense.
Though is a drop of 25%+/- from advertised 'normal' for a variation even in shorter barrels? Or are at times the advertised speeds maybe a little "best case scenario" to help sell the item

 

[Alk8944]

Unless you have some sort of magic watch I think you meant chronograph.

From several hundred .22 Long Rifle cartridges of various brands which I have chronographed you usually get close to published velocity from a 6" barreled handgun. Assuming you used a 2" barrel what you got is what would be expected.

 

[WaMike]

Somewhere in the bowels of firearms history is a test of .22 LR speed in various barrel lengths. If I recall correctly, the test began with a 24" barrel and speeds increased with each inch removed until the barrel was down to about 18". Then the speeds decreased as the barrel was shortened down further. I don't recall the ammo brand or whether or not it was high velocity or target grade.

Apparently, over 18", friction decreased velocity. And under 18", the tested load was not as efficient (don't ask me for details or the veracity of the test; it's just one of those useless tidbits stuck in my shaky memory).

And obviously, this same test would vary with different brands, bullets, etc., etc. My guess is that pistol target loads might suffer friction loss in a longer barrel than would high speed hunting loads. Further, some longer target barreled rifles are obviously more accurate than some shorter barrels, even though the longer barrel might suffer slightly in velocity.

Well.....that's enough nonsense for tonight.....

 

[n601ap]

. Assuming you used a 2" barrel what you got is what would be expected.[/QUOTE]


Assuming a 2" barrel means either you do not know the Compact 22 has a 3.5 inch barrel or you assumed for some reason that I changed the barrel length for some other assumed reason.

 

[Gamecock]

Thanks for sharing the info, n601ap.

And welcome to the forum.

 

[Speedo2]

Some additional data for consideration:

Chrono results for CCI Mini-Mag 22LR:
Ruger Mk-II w/ 7-7/8" BBL @ ~1170 fps
Kimber 1911 w/ 5" BBL @ ~ 1050 fps
Galesi M506 w/ 3" BBL @ ~ 360 fps (...really!)

Chrono results for SK Magazine (low end SV target ammo) 22 LR
S&W 617 w/ 6" BBL @ ~ 850 fps
Kimber 1911 w/ 5" BBL @ ~ 880 fps
CZ 452 w/ 22-1/2" BBL @ ~ 1040 fps (pretty close to design)
(Not sure the SV stuff would have cleared the BBL in the Galesi.)

Much depends upon the gun as well as its BBL. Your results for your ammo selections seem to me to be about as expected. -S2

 

[Cardboard_killer]

Check out this site for some interesting testing:
BBTI - Ballistics by the Inch :: Calibers/Cartridges

 

[jim46ok]

Check out this site for some interesting testing:
BBTI - Ballistics by the Inch :: Calibers/Cartridges

"Velly Intelesting" (quote Arty Johnson, Laugh In). Also, when seeking a subsonic load, it has been found that .22 lr from a suppressed pistol slows to SS at about 4.5" or so.. again, ammo dependent.