Posted on 01/29/2022 6:38:49 AM PST by marktwain
A suppressor will provide more back-pressure.
Lower velocity loads generate less force than higher velocity loads using the same weight bullet. So a 40-gr load that gets 900 fps MV creates less force for the action to harvest than one that gets 1400 fps MV from the same bullet 40-gr bullet. It’s called “physics.”
Blowback-operated guns come from the factory with a combination of bolt weight and recoil spring strength calibrated to provide just the right amount of resistance to movement so the spent casing doesn’t begin to get extracted until chamber pressure has fallen off enough that the brass doesn’t split when its expansion is no longer confined by the firing chamber. Manufacturers don’t necessarily take into consideration that the user might choose to shoot subsonic loads because that could compromise the ability to cycle safely with “high-velocity” loads, and far more shooters are looking for the words “High Velocity” on the box than are looking to buy “Subsonic” ammunition.
So it isn’t unheard of to have to switch to a lighter-weight recoil spring to get a semi-automatic .22 to cycle reliably when you’re shooting subsonics. You could also grind some weight off the bolt to get the same effect but that would be an irreversible change.
My 10/22 doesn’t have an issue. Walter p22 doesn’t like them.
Lots of discussion on this issue. Yet another reason to use revolvers or lever action rifles.
>IMO, Thunderbolt is cheap, dirty trashy ammo.
Agreed, hugely inconsistent. Only works sort of reliable in a bolt action, fewer moving parts. Use in semi-auto rifle it’s nothing but trouble, semi-auto pistol even worse. Only thing it ever had going for it was the cheap part
I like my ammo the way I like my women . . .
Hot,
Black and
Bitter.
.
I’m there,Brudda!
Personal choice like anything else.
Maybe that’s a criteria to explore the next time someone posts what kind of gun they should buy.
The cheapskate approach is just as valid as the M249 with grenade launcher option approach. When the ammo is cheaper it is likely the user will practice more.
Lighter recoil spring doesn’t solve the problem?
Good for them. I’m sure they’ll be many happy customers.
Nothing to dispel a rioting mob better than dropping a few of them from 200 meters away.
Heard as much from IDF and Mossad forces.
Well, I hate to sound ruthless, but with a rioting mob at 200 yards, the backdrop of every missed shot, say all 30 of them, is more rioting mobsters. And, at 200 yards a head shot is a basketball. Not a bullseye.
Remington Thunderbolt works good in my 10/22. No issues feeding, firing or extracting.
Then you’re lucky. I have one I use with a can and it is hit or miss. I had 5000 rounds of that stuff and finally sold it....
I am totally soured on Remington Rimfire ammo and will not buy it. Anyone who experienced as many misfires as I has got to have the same reluctance to purchase their Rimfire products. This explains why they aren’t receiving complaints. Those who shoot a lot and regularly have simply moved on to other manufacturers products. Now I have some bricks of early 90’s GI issue Remington .22 from CMP that seem to shoot just fine despite the age of the ammo. But newer Remington is no longer on my list, even though the availability of big buckets make it tempting.
The problem with your reasoning is the high demand for ammunition, particularly .22 ammunition, means all they can produce is being purchased as fast as they can deliver it.
To be true, your analysis depends on less of their ammunition being sold.
But every bit of ammunition which is being manufactured, is being sold.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.