ITT: Calibers that have no use other than plinking

Proofs? google seems to strongly disagree with that.

Attached: 6467483F-08EC-4483-937C-A9A33223AF33.jpg (1227x513, 148K)

What gun?

The rock island bolt action

rifleshootermag.com/reviews/review-the-22-tcm-cartridge/

>single early production(double digit serial) example of a rifle getting ONLY 2MOA with a 10 shot group means the caliber itself is wildly inaccurate
>who cares about all the people saying its as if not more accurate out of a 1911 than 9mm or .45
Any varmint you can hunt with a handgun could be hunted with the TCM in terms of accuracy.

>It has nothing in common with 9mm
...except that it's the same size, which is what I said. Or have you not noticed that .22 TCM mostly comes in guns you can switch back and forth with 9mm?

You've clearly got your "It's not necked-down 9mm Luger!" on a hair trigger. It's going off at the wrong time.

>rock island
Wow how shocking shitty results from a shitty gun someone call the press

Attached: IMG_20180529_174344.jpg (380x324, 21K)

>the company that made the caliber is so shitty you can’t use their rifles

What the fuck.

This can be true. Making a bullet is a lot easier than making an accurate gun.

>3" at 100 yards from a pistol
>inaccurate
pick one
Unless it's coming from their 1 rifle chambered for it, then you can make that arguement

It says it’s a rifle you fucking sperg

How much of the actual round is sitting in that bottleneck? Wtf it looks so weird and unappealing.

This is now a stealth cut v. uncut thread

No reason to use it over 5.7, except to have the same platform, but then you have to use the worse short version. It is a shit meme.

Look at that big powerful head.

Attached: 300px-6.5_x_55mm.jpg (300x275, 10K)

>.450 bushmaster

All the negatives of 45-70 without the positive of bellowing smoke.

Attached: 450_BM_+_223.jpg (805x1200, 99K)

Probably not much, it’s only a 40grn bullet.

>No reason to use it over 5.7
.22 TCM has close to 50% more case capacity, and guess what? It produces about 50% more muzzle energy out the same length barrel. On top of that are easy conversions with 9mm, and you can make your brass from spent 5.56 or .223 cases.

You get more case capacity but it comes at the expense of cartridge size. A P90 could not hold 50rds of 22tcm

9mm goes right through soft body armor if you get copper bullets.

So you are telling me the cartridge designed for special military applications isnt that great outside of those military applications? What other genius insight do you have user?

And there's the crux of it: 5.7 is for the P90. They were counting on that barrel length to get the most out of that tiny powder charge, and they weren't keeping it short to fit nicely in a comfortable grip. It's not a pistol cartridge.

.22 TCM is made for pistols. It fits through a grip like 9mm and it's got muzzle energy like 9mm. It's generally better.

Yet that is the crux of the .22tcm. It has no clearly defined purpose other than plinking.

also

What are you talking about? It would make a good carry round for chicks if someone made better guns in it.

> 40gr soft point bullet at 2000fps out of a 5" barrel
> commercial loadings around 40,000 PSI (.357 mag levels)
If I absolutely had to choose, I think I'd rather be shot with a 9mm

Well considering that it's the only rifle available chambered in it, the round's performance is inherently tied to the rifle's performance until someone comes along and makes something better.

I know. Your post made it sound like the people making the round couldn't make a shitty gun that goes with it just as some sort of universal rule though.

>no clearly defined purpose
...except to be handgun ammunition with armor penetration and low recoil for fast, accurate follow-up shots.

When the fuck did Armscor get an internet defense force.

I just looked up the damn pressure listings online, you paranoid twat.

Not when it does really well out of all the other firearms it's actually intended for. .22TCM was designed for use in handguns. You're the only one who keeps on bringing up one example of it performing "poorly"(2moa) in one early production rifle.
You're just unbearably autistic and wrong.

I'm not saying to buy into the caliber but if someone decent starts making a pistol in it, it's something to think about.

>picks argument by posting an indefensible position
>inevitably loses argument
>"lololol what's wrong with you that you care enough to rebut me??"
It's an interesting round. I look forward to our glorious future of pistol-velocity .300 BLK rifles and rifle-velocity .22 TCM pistols.

All big bore AR rounds are pretty useless, tbqh. While, for example, stuff like .50 Beowulf has niche uses in defeating windshields and car engines, but nobody wants to touch stuff like .450BMs, .458 HAMRs, .458 SOCOMS, et cetera because they all have the same drawbacks - low capacity, high recoil, slow rounds that are much more expensive than just using a more common round.

I thought from purely a ballistic standpoint .458cuckom was the best of the big bore AR calibers.

>slow rounds
1) Not terribly. You can get stuff over 2000 fps.
2) Sometimes slow is the point.
I mean, if you want quiet subsonics, you can go down to .300 BLK, but only if you're okay with also going down to .45 ACP muzzle energy. If you want to shoot quiet and hit hard, big bore is pretty much your only choice.

Of course it's niche, but it's not useless.

Rock Island Armory makes decent bargain bin 1911s, and varying degrees of acceptable bargain bin .38 revolvers

I wouldn't trust them on anything but that.

Eh, when i was in the market a few years back i heard some pretty good things about their "higher" end stuff too. 600-700 dollar 1911s that have been actually hand touched up by semi competent individuals. 1.5-2" groups when benched and fine in reliability. Certainly isn't a Dan wesson, but i can't think of another manufacturer that can touch that for under a g note.

Depends which "same platform" we're talking about. The short version is only needed for strictly 9mm/.40 pistols. For 7.62x25 pistols/SMGs, it's basically good to go. For 10mm/.45 pistols/SMGs, you may need a light recoil spring and a new mag (a 10mm design with tweaked feed lips may suffice), but it's easily adaptable. (And of course for anything in .38 Super, but that's 99% 1911s and clones.)

You know that Chinese AK-looking 7.62x25 SMG/PDW thing, Type 64? Perfect candidate. Actually a converted Type 64 as PDW, and converted CZ-52 as corresponding pistol, is a really pleasant thought. Aesthetic, mild to shoot, and armor-defeating. Or if you'd prefer a more modern handgun, the QX-04 uses one frame for 9mm, .40, .45, and 7.62x25 -- .22 TCM would fit right in.

(Note that the Chinese military's equivalent to 5.7x28, 5.8x21, is similar to .22 TCM in concept, in that it's specifically designed to fit in existing pistol-cartridge (7.62x25) magwells. While the OAL is similar to .22 TCM, the body diameter is smaller than .32 ACP and performance is correspondingly modest. The prospect of using 5.8x21 in a military version is probably responsible for the inclusion of 7.62x25 in a pistol designed this decade.)

I feel that .22tcm has a lot of potential for reloaders and wildcatters. Just think of the possibilities given all of the .224 bullets available. I've seen some supers and magnums even. Matter of fact I should really acquire one to play around with.

Attached: 224boz.jpg (466x493, 25K)

Are there AR-15 barrels for these, and do they fit in a Sten mag?

>Fo'fiddy'ate'So'Cum
"Ballistics" is a broad term.
If you are looking a pure muzzle energy per trigger pull out of a mag length cartridge, it's tough to beat.
If you are talking long-range accuracy and energy retention, there are better options.

Don't know, and no/yes.
OP's pic shows two cartridges.
Left one is .22 TCM, it's designed to fit .38 Super mags, and won't fit in anything originally designed for 9mm. Originally intended for 1911s, it's known to work well in PPSh and PPS mags, should be good in any 7.62x25 mag.
Right one is .22 TCM 9R, which is the same cartridge case, but loaded to a reduced OAL (requires a rather short ogive) to fit in 9mm mags. Main motivation was to make a Glock version for people who hate 1911s, but it should fit in any 9mm mag.

>subsonic 300BLK can only match 45ACP muzzle energy
My cast 300BLK subsonics have 675 ft lbs of muzzle energy with a B.C. of .688 out of a 7" barrel. This has a very gentle chamber pressure of around 1/2 of SAAMI spec. It's comfy to shoot and hits hard. Powder is +95% burned in the barrel, and there is very little muzzleflash. Rapid follow up shots with great ammo capacity are a given. Rapid-fire 100yd 5 shot groups under 2MOA are the norm. There is still over 550FtLbs of energy.
"Normal" 45ACP is closer to 350ftlbs, but can be pushed harder. My 230gr 45ACP's at max SAAMI pressure can hit the high 900's, and Ram Enforcer can just break 1000FPS in a 5" barrel at 100% Max pressure. We are looking at around 540-560 FtLbs of ME and a BC of around .16. These loads to push the envelope are horribly inefficient. Expect blinding muzzle flash in the dark. This is also going to give somewhat stout recoil and muzzle blast. Rapid, controlled followups are not easy for most, and don't count on more than 13+1 or so unless you want a silly looking extended mag. I don't think I have ever even heard of 45ACP shooting 5 shots under 2MOA at 100yds. Certainly not rapidfire. And we are already down to ~420FtLbs.

Everything is a tool. Some are just more specialized. It's a large misconception I have seen that 300BLK is "Basically" on par with a 45ACP. They are night and different creatures. Sometimes one is better that the other, sometimes neither is appropriate.

35% more with the 9R actually. Being a poorfag and needing AP are quite an unlikely combination, and follow up shots are even faster with the 5.7. Using FMJ for AP makes them both punch a clean .22 hole, so the 35% increase won't matter at pistol ranges.
>For 7.62x25 pistols/SMGs
Who the hell would waste their money on that conversion?
>10mm/.45
Are there any conversions available? Seems like that'd be expensive, likely need a new slide/bolt.
>Chink shit unobtainium
How is that relevant?

yes but you missed where they had to design 22TCM 9R just to fit glock magazines (and other 9mm guns) because regular 22TCM was designed for .38 super magazines in a 1911. I used to think 22TCM was cool, it is and it's still fun to shoot. But the whole idea of the cartridge and it's intended applications seem like one big afterthought. Heck, the guys at the factory shooting range told me they don't reload 22TCM because they end up splitting the necks. 22TCM is a meme cartridge because it was poorly thought out.

>Who the hell would waste their money on that conversion?
Lots of people bought something in 7.62x25 either because cheap surplus ammo (which is now gone) or because armor-defeating meme (which .22 TCM does better). Additionally, if you're building from a barrel-less parts kit, building it in .22 TCM should be just a different barrel, and different bolt dimensions. I don't know of anyone selling .22 TCM barrels for any SMG parts kit, but if there were, it shouldn't really be more expensive to build than a 7.62x25.
If you're referring to military or law enforcement, then no, it's not happening. China's the only place I know where 7.62x25 still sees any amount of use, and like I said, they have their own PDW cartridge specifically designed to replace 7.62x25; on one hand, that suggests they thought similar conversions weren't a "waste", but on the other hand, they're obviously not gonna go with TCM.

>Are there any conversions available?
Don't know of any.
>likely need a new slide/bolt.
I know people shoot (full-power or +P) 9mm out of 10mm glocks with just a barrel swap. A lighter recoil spring is recommended for standard-pressure ammo, though 147gr seems to do fine without. Point is, the 10mm slide and extractor seem to handle 9mm just fine, and .22 TCM is only ~.01" smaller.
So I can't see any reason you'd need a new slide to shoot .22 TCM in typical 10mm pistols, though you'd definitely want a lighter spring. You may also need a new extractor.
For blowback SMGs, you might well need a lighter bolt instead of just a lighter recoil spring -- if for no other reason than to keep the rate of fire reasonable.

22 Jet

Attached: 22 jet.jpg (480x480, 30K)

Can't hunt hogs or coyotes with it?

Just looked further into the Glock conversions, apparently it makes the gun less reliable. Still good for plinking, but once again we come back to the pointlessness of .22 TCM.

>shoot woodchuck
>glock jams
>ohfug.jpg
>other woodchucks form angry vengeance mob
>struggling to rack the slide
>they bite my toes off
>as I bleed out, can't stop thinking
>damn, I wish I'd listened and used a .22 jet revolver

Why does .45gap exist? It’s kinda useless at plinking when it’s more expensive than 45acp.

Attached: 62D91794-870C-4521-8A32-AE1618C69376.png (482x360, 246K)

How would it make it less reliable?

To fit in shorter Glock frames.

>le engine blocks
That's .50 Beowulf you retard, .50 bmg was created before 98 percent of Americans even knew what a car was

>My cast 300BLK subsonics have 675 ft lbs of muzzle energy with a B.C. of .688 out of a 7" barrel.
Where is proofs? It would need to have a 300 grain bullet, and I've never heard of anyone loading .300 BLK with such a slug. If you get off-the-shelf subsonic ammo for .300 BLK, you're getting the muzzle energy of .45 ACP out of a pistol. Let me guess: you're handloading your hand-cast bullets, and not actually weighing the bullets and measuring the velocity, supposing that you're getting a third more energy than anyone else based on nothing but fevered napkin math and wild optimism.

Anyway, the point is that .458 SOCOM easily gets over 1300 ft lbs subsonic, with a 600 grain slug, which is up in the league of assault rifles, without getting noisy. Whether you believe 300BLK subsonic gets 500 ft lbs or 700 ft lbs, it's still down in handgun league.

Don't get me wrong, I think 300BLK is a great and innovative round, but it doesn't hit like the big boys.

.50 Beowulf was designed to shoot through car windows and kill the driver. Engine blocks are a bit above its pay grade.

.50 BMG was conceptualized as an anti-aircraft caliber in the late stages of WWI, about a decade after the introduction of the Model T. Most Americans might not have owned cars, but they certainly were well familiar with them.

Did RemShit™ even TRY not to blatantly rebrand .22 hornet? Someone fill me in on the remjet round

>Can't hunt with it
youtube.com/watch?v=6P3uwl5HzzQ
Come on, 50cal is basicaly a fudd round designed to kill even if you miss.

>.50 Beowulf
It's designed for mass disruption during CQB, dummy.
>The round is intended to improve stopping power greatly at short- to medium-range as compared to the standard 5.56×45mm NATO round. One of its advertised uses is at vehicle checkpoints, since the heavy bullet's flight path is not easily deflected by auto glass or standard vehicle body panels.
>It is becoming more widely recognized as being usable for a wide variety of North American game, including deer, moose, and black bear.
Literally a Google search

Attached: mr-popo.png (933x601, 9K)

Subsonic 300 blk can't reach those energy levels unless you're using DU or some shit.

>miss the deer
>deer is kill
DAMN

Yeah, with 300BLK they're pushing so hard to do what they can with a compact cartridge that there simply isn't room for the lead you'd need to get 675 ft lb out of a subsonic round, even if you leave no space for powder.

This is a 220 grain subsonic that gets ~500 ft lb. The bullet can't go any faster. You can't make the cartridge any longer or any fatter. Where are you going to put more lead and powder to get a 300 grain bullet going at the same speed? You'd need to use tungsten.

Attached: 300 blackout cutaway.jpg (600x400, 26K)

Because the gun wasn't built for a smaller cartridge.

9mm Glocks are recoil operated. One of .22 TCM's main selling points is lower recoil than 9mm.

.17br (bench rest)

.22 Hornet was designed as a rifle round, and has mostly remained that way; .22 Jet was intended as a revolver round. While it's broadly similar (rimmed, bottleneck, relatively long/gentle shoulder), it's much fatter, being a necked down .357 case, while .22 Hornet is skinnier than a .32.
Supposedly, this long angle makes it grip the chamber walls more than it sets back, to prevent it from binding up revolvers as bottleneck cartridges are prone to do. But of course .22 Hornet already has a pretty shallow shoulder (along with other revolver-friendly cartridges like .44-40 and .32-20), which is why revolvers have been made for it.
I have no personal experience with revolvers in either cartridge to tell if .22 Jet really worked any better in this regard than .22 Hornet, but at least it would be loaded with pistol-appropriate powder from the factory; I have a Contender with a 10" .22 Hornet barrel, and that's a crazy little fireball machine with commercial ammo.

Attached: 22_Remington_Jet_with_.22_Hornet_and_.223_Rem.jpg (2110x1694, 523K)

A buddy of mine loads 300blk with the 240gr SMKs and a powder load to push them at ~1075 fps, which yield something like 615 ft.lbs, but that is literally the furthest you can push subsonic 300blk. I see almost no way you could hit 675 like is claiming though. My math says you would need something like a 265gr projectile at 1075 fps to hit 675 ft.lbs. and I just don't see how you'd have room for a lead projectile and powder to hit the required velocity while maintaining OAL, its hard enough with the 240gr SMKs from what I understand.

Trying to squeeze more energy out of subsonics by pushing them closer to the speed of sound is cheating. 1075 fps is supersonic on a cold day, and there's always some variation from shot to shot. Really, you should stick to ~1000 fps.

>.22 TCM 9R,
>make a Glock version
I'd like a conversion barrel for my glock 22... If I could form brass from 223 brass and get reasonably priced dies... That would be neat...

Yeah, we were toeing the line pretty close with that load, but by my math it should be subsonic at our elevation all the way down to something like 5°F, which means they should be subsonic 95+% of the year. Those loads were just for fun to see how far subsonic 300blk could be pushed, plus even hand loading them was expensive as fuck due to the 240gr SMKs being ~$0.55/bullet.

I don't have a suppressor so I just load my 208 AMAX rounds up to 1500ish fps...