Ranger modification .

[bbgun]

Flint,   I have been wondering  that same thing for years.

[adp3]

45flint,
They've made a low powered round for over a hundred years, the .22 WRF.  The .22 WMR is just a lengthened .22 WRF case with a jacketed or plated bullet and a powder charge increase.  The WRF has a 45 grain lead bullet.  CCI and Winchester make the round in limited runs.  Pre-panic costs was around $9 a box.  Velocity from a mini should run somewhere between 800 and 900 fps.

Best Regards,
ADP3

[45flint]

45flint,
They've made a low powered round for over a hundred years, the .22 WRF.  The .22 WMR is just a lengthened .22 WRF case with a jacketed or plated bullet and a powder charge increase.  The WRF has a 45 grain lead bullet.  CCI and Winchester make the round in limited runs.  Pre-panic costs was around $9 a box.  Velocity from a mini should run somewhere between 800 and 900 fps.

Best Regards,
ADP3

But given the case differences I assume you shouldn't fire a WRF in a WMR?

[45flint]

45flint,
They've made a low powered round for over a hundred years, the .22 WRF.  The .22 WMR is just a lengthened .22 WRF case with a jacketed or plated bullet and a powder charge increase.  The WRF has a 45 grain lead bullet.  CCI and Winchester make the round in limited runs.  Pre-panic costs was around $9 a box.  Velocity from a mini should run somewhere between 800 and 900 fps.

Best Regards,
ADP3

Great forum adp3 is correct, .22WRF is to a WMR as a 38 special is to a 357 mag.   It would be the low powered cartridge I was looking for.  See this discussion.

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-607024.html

Steve

[TwoGunJayne]

(Source SAAMI.org)

.22 Remington Special, a.k.a. .22 WRF (Winchester Rim Fire) can be fired in a .22 magnum (WMR) chamber. It's just like putting a .22 short into a .22 long rifle chamber.

Just for fun:
Has anyone heard of the .22 Extra Long? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Extra_Long
It's because it's compatible with basically... nothing. Like the .22 Winchester Automatic Rimfire, it is incompatible with the other technologies for the sake of simply not fitting. It was an "engineering mistake" based on gun powders at the time.

Good GRIEF, there have been a lot of rimfire cartridges!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rimfire_cartridges

    2.34mm
    4mm
    .14 Alton Jones
    .17 Mach 2
    .17 Hornady Magnum
    .17 Winchester Super Magnum
    5 mm Remington Rimfire Magnum
    .22 Short
    .22 Long
    .22 Extra Long
    .22 Long Rifle
    .22 WMR
    .22 WRF
    .22 ILARCO
    .22 CB
    .22 BB
    .22 Remington Automatic
    .22 Winchester Automatic
    6 mm
    .25 Short
    .25 Stevens
    .25 Stevens Short
    .267 Remington
    .277 rimfire
    .30 rimfire
    .310 Remington Skeet
    .31 Eley
    .32 rimfire
    .340 rimfire revolver
    .35 Allen
    9 mm Rimfire Shotgun Shell
    .38 rimfire
    .41 Short
    .41 Swiss
    .42 Allen
    .44 Short & Long
    .440
    .442 Eley
    .44 Henry
    .45 Danish
    .46 rimfire (.46 Extra Short, Short, Long, & Extra Long)
    .50 Remington Navy
    .50 Government
    .56-46, 56-50, 56-52, .56-56 Spencer
    .58 Gatling
    .58 Joslyn carbine
    .58 Mont Storm
    .58 Miller
    1" Gatling (one specimen known)

[heyjoe]

I also wonder why someone does not make a low powered practice round for the 22 mag?  They do it for the 22 LR?

if you are referring to the 22 short, they pre date the 22 lr.

[TwoGunJayne]

Hey! I just noticed that CCI says their .22 WRF is not reccomended for use in revolvers!

http://www.cci-ammunition.com/products/detail.aspx?use=1&loadNo=0069

I guess I've been a bad boy... Never had a problem, though.

EDIT: The warning is for antique WRF revolvers. Disregard the warning for new production, disregard for any new .22 mag. The reason? Antique WRF guns had a slightly different bore and weren't meant for jacketed bullets. There's no reason a modern .22 mag bore, chamber, and barrel can't handle the above linked CCI WRF ammo. BTW, that CCI WRF I linked uses a modern TNT JHP. How about that?

You'd think they'd be a little more forthcoming on the details of a problem rather than just say "no revolvers." Oh well. There's a bit more to it than that.