Just curious. Why do we have rimfire?

[Kelor]

Is there a specific reason why we have rimfire ammo? Is it difficult to make a .22 in centerfire, and can centerfire ammo be made without a removable primer?

I'm curious why one format hasn't taken over the entire market.

[rottenit]

My guess at one point would have been cost. rimfire is pretty cheap to make and was relatively available until recently. Also at this point rimfire (.22) has a huge market share. Im guessing that some of the newer stuff like HMR is a ploy to get more $$$$ with a ammo lock-in.

[20mm]

Re: Just curious. Why do we have rimfire?

Because people got sick of pinfire during the pinfire ammo shortage of 1861. Damn union hoarders.

[DanM]

OK, (draws a deep breath) here we go. Some history;

First there were muzzle loaders of various types (matchlocks, wheellocks, flintlocks, percussion,...) with no cartridge.

Then came the paper cartridge in about 1600 to speed up the loading of the muzzle loader.

The needle gun used a self-contained paper cartridge with primer, powder, and bullet together. Such as the Dreyse needle gun of 1839. The primer was on the base of the bullet, and the needle (firing pin) penetrated the bottom of the paper case through the powder and hit the primer. But this was not a particularly robust mechanism.

Pinfire cartridges came into their own along with breechloaders in the mid-1800's. The first metallic cartridges, they carried their own firing pin sticking out the side of the cartridge almost at the base of the case. Used in rifles and shotguns for a time, they were longest used in revolvers - almost to 1900 in Europe. Obsolete once rimfire and centerfire arms became available because of faster and easier loading.

Rimfire cartridges were developed at almost the same time as the pinfire was. Many pistol and some rifle rimfire cartridges were marketed from 1845 to the 1870s, like the .38 Short and Long, .44 Henry, .56-56 Spencer, and the .58 Gatling. Until Winchester introduced the .44 WCF (Winchester Center Fire also known as the .44-40) in 1873. Large caliber rimfires quickly declined because centerfires were more powerful and reliable. But small caliber rimfires increased in use. The first .22 caliber application used no gunpowder, only the primer charge to propel a ball bearing (BB). This was a gallery cartridge only. But Smith & Wesson made a popular .22 caliber revolver in 1857 using the '.22 short'. And the .22 rimfire took off. The '.22 long' came out in 1871 with the same bullet and more powder. Stevens Arms later added a longer/heavier bullet and 20% more gunpowder and created the '.22 long rifle' cartridge.

Centerfire cartridges being designed to house a central primer in the base and the maturing of metal drawing techniques created larger and more powerful cartridges. They were also more reliable due to the better primer types and smokeless powder becoming available.

OK, now to the OP's question. It is possible to make .22 caliber centerfire/reloadable cartridges? Yes, but not in the .22 RF size/format. I don't know of a primer that would fit the diameter of the .22 RF. The .22 Hornet is pretty small, centerfire, and reloadable. But it's bigger than .22 RF. Plus the .22 RF has been so successful for so long that there is not that much market pressure for its replacement. (I know there's the .17 HMR, .17 Mach2, and .17 Win Super Mag but that's a different caliber. We'll see how they do.) So .22 rimfire continues to be one of the most popular cartridges on the planet.

Now that was easy, wasn't it?

[crbutler]

I guess my answer is that until relatively recently, the rimfire was a older technology that was cheaper than centerfire cartridges (for multiple reasons), but due to the need to crush the rim for ignition, it is restricted to lower pressure loadings.

Probably the two things rimfire was good for in a market sense was that it was not reloadable, at least in the realistic sense of the word, so that the ammo companies had a guaranteed market; and it was old technology , so it was cheap and no retooling to make it was needed.

The ammo companies were able to make a modest return on investment (as equipment costs were nearly nil), it was a safe bet as other than an ammo manufacturer there was no competition, and it was cheap and plentiful.

That has all changed in the last 6-8 years and I am not sure if rimfire will ever regain its lost position as its price is climbing, and the ammo companies look at the return on capital for a new centerfire plant as being superior to a rimfire.

I am not saying rimfire will go away, just that it will not be the great bargain it was in the past.

[Ghost]

I am not saying rimfire will go away, just that it will not be the great bargain it was in the past.

Is there currently anything cheaper than 22LR to buy?

[PhilaBOR]

.25 ACP is center fire and just .03" larger diameter than .22 rim fire. Probably costs more to make.
WWB 50 rounds $25.99 at Brownells.

[crbutler]

.22 RF is currently not really obtainable. How much do you have to pay for it to get it now?

Reloading CF handgun ammo in a low pressure case is almost in the same ballpark if you cast your own bullets.

It used to be I could buy a couple bricks of good .22 RF for what I spent on a single box of .45 ACP. (20:1) Now if you can find the cheap stuff (not the better grade ammo I was buying) its closer to 10:1, even if you can find it at a place that isn't gouging.

Cheaper, yes. Not as great a value as it was, and you can't depend on it being available. Frankly, shortages are the new normal.