Winchester 21 Sharp cartridge

[Billo]

I see Winchester are continuing on with there great tradition of releasing a new do nothing special rimfire cartridge.

Should be a raging sales success too

21 Sharp

[JohnV]

A bit like reinventing the wheel . It's another corporate attempt to sell a firearm and corner the ammunition market for that gun . A few others have tried it and had mixed results . Remington tried it with their 5mm Rem mag rimfire but it was not a great big hit .
I can't see that Winchester will fare any better .

[bladeracer]

I see Winchester are continuing on with there great tradition of releasing a new do nothing special rimfire cartridge.

Should be a raging sales success too

21 Sharp

I think to make that work they'll have to sell the ammo for well under their manufacturing cost. The only real advantage rimfire has is low cost, and only .22LR offers that these days, all the other rimfires are too expensive to be viable for most people. The low pressure they operate at is another advantage in manufacture and design of firearms to use, but in this case those are already designed and built as this would just be a barrel conversion as far as I can see. My guess is that a handful of people will find it exceedingly useful, some will enjoy some novelty out of it, most won't waste their time or money buying into it.

It seems like Winchester gave up making firearms a couple decades ago, I wouldn't even know what models they still offer without having to look it up. More recently their other products have become rubbish to be avoided. I don't know where they went wrong but if they went under I'm not sure most people would even notice.

[JohnV]

I have never had any trouble with Winchester primers or ball powders . Winchester ball powders may be not as temp tolerant as ADI but they are very chemically stable and will last in the container for a very long time . Winchester shotgun mono wads are also very good .

[bigpete]

Looked it up.
What a complete waste of time

[bladeracer]

I have never had any trouble with Winchester primers or ball powders . Winchester ball powders may be not as temp tolerant as ADI but they are very chemically stable and will last in the container for a very long time . Winchester shotgun mono wads are also very good .

After the trouble I had getting W748 to burn in the .303 last year I wouldn't recommend it to anybody unless it was the only powder you could find.

[JohnV]

That's strange because I have used 748 many years ago in 222 and 760 in 270/303 and not had any ignition problems that I can remember . Maybe the primer was too cool for the powder coatings . I have used one jug of 760 in my 30-06 some years back just to see how it would go with Winchester primers not Federal which may be too weak . It functioned ok and shot about the same as AR2209 .
However I would not load up too much for summer shooting . I did get the feeling that a magnum primer would be better again with ball powders . The powder balls are small and tightly packed so that might inhibit the flame path and the coatings seem more resistant .
Maybe the newer batches of Win 748 are even harder to ignite now . There is quite a few popular ball powders being used .

[bladeracer]

That's strange because I have used 748 many years ago in 222 and 760 in 270/303 and not had any ignition problems that I can remember . Maybe the primer was too cool for the powder coatings . I have used one jug of 760 in my 30-06 some years back just to see how it would go with Winchester primers not Federal which may be too weak . It functioned ok and shot about the same as AR2209 .
However I would not load up too much for summer shooting . I did get the feeling that a magnum primer would be better again with ball powders . The powder balls are small and tightly packed so that might inhibit the flame path and the coatings seem more resistant .
Maybe the newer batches of Win 748 are even harder to ignite now . There is quite a few popular ball powders being used .

Yes, magnum primers and tissue paper filler seemed to fix it.

[lee_enfield223]

I think that there's so many rifles in 22lr that people are not going to go out and buy another 22lr as you are all saying it's reinventing the wheel. I actually prefer the idea of reloading the 22lr like the guys in the USA are doing for long range.
https://cuttingedgebullets.com/products ... lr-die-set

[bladeracer]

I think that there's so many rifles in 22lr that people are not going to go out and buy another 22lr as you are all saying it's reinventing the wheel. I actually prefer the idea of reloading the 22lr like the guys in the USA are doing for long range.
https://cuttingedgebullets.com/products ... lr-die-set

I think those guys are buying new primed brass though, which I've never seen in Australia, and it's a very expensive exercise with no practical usage. Otherwise you buy the factory ammo, pull the bullets, and load the copper bullets.

I'm sure we'd have plenty of interest in reloading .22LR though, if only we could import the priming compound.

[deye243]

A bit like reinventing the wheel . It's another corporate attempt to sell a firearm and corner the ammunition market for that gun . A few others have tried it and had mixed results . Remington tried it with their 5mm Rem mag rimfire but it was not a great big hit .
I can't see that Winchester will fare any better .

Yep just another rifle and cartridge for the prc and needmore users to buy

[Billo]

A bit like reinventing the wheel . It's another corporate attempt to sell a firearm and corner the ammunition market for that gun . A few others have tried it and had mixed results . Remington tried it with their 5mm Rem mag rimfire but it was not a great big hit .
I can't see that Winchester will fare any better .

Yep just another rifle and cartridge for the prc and needmore users to buy

You must hunt with a 310 Cadet

[deye243]

A bit like reinventing the wheel . It's another corporate attempt to sell a firearm and corner the ammunition market for that gun . A few others have tried it and had mixed results . Remington tried it with their 5mm Rem mag rimfire but it was not a great big hit .
I can't see that Winchester will fare any better .

Yep just another rifle and cartridge for the prc and needmore users to buy

You must hunt with a 310 Cadet

Close enough just a 12g with slugs but will be getting a 270w just to stir the pot .
Yep for sambar

[Oldbloke]

"Close enough just a 12g with slugs but will be getting a 270w just to stir the pot .
Yep for sambar"

Nothing wrong with 270 for sambar.

[Wapiti]

About this new 21 cartridge...
First thing I thought was, what a great idea. It's basically copying the way the 22 magnum cartridge was designed. But one thing I don't get is, why not just mimic the dimensions of this cartridge?
By that I mean, if you need a new barrel for it's internal dimensions being different from 22LR, why not just slightly increase the diameter of the case to accept the same .224 projectiles now available for the 22WMR? And just use those cases, just "drawn" out shorter? Maybe even use a Stinger case length even?
They say it's cos this allows them to use the same old 22LR case that's made by the gazillions. I can see that's a bonus, especially as to manufacture new tooling and an entirely new case could be for nought as consumer opinion is a fickle thing.

Anyway, this probably addresses the shortcomings of the old lubricated lead 22LR projectiles... that is, ultimate velocity (leading), and feeding issues with the wobbly projectile in autoloading rifles and pistols, including the gummy greasy fouling causing stoppages. All considerations.
The old 22LR lead cartridge is definately old tech, still popular because nobody has ever had the nuts to see if the market is prepared to pay for a modern alternative.
Like pointless self-destructive voting habits reinstalling the same old monsters then whinging about it - despite alternatives being a great idea and a big improvement, I reckon this great idea will suffer from the same self-inflicted uppercut.

If new barrels are offered for 10/22 and 77/22 (easily removed to change with an allen key) I reckon I'd definitely try it, because nowadays I don't shoot hundreds of rounds at cans or paper, all my shooting is at troublemaking game. Will it kill better? Probably not. Will it extend the range of the LR? Like all the new centrefires that don't do anything better for hunting that the great cartridges before them, will this just be the next "gotta have it or I'm a failure" one?

[bladeracer]

Tested last week, in one test rifle also supplied by Winchester - perhaps the only rifle chambered for this round that exists?
https://www.petersenshunting.com/editorial/winchester-21-sharp-rimfire-cartridge/506361

Screenshot 2024-09-29 094703.jpg (134.35 KiB) Viewed 4142 times

One of their rounds is claimed to be sub-1.5-minute at 50yd, or 20mm at 46m - that is unlikely to extend its range over current .22LR that can probably do one-minute at 100m.
Although I'm sure they would've shot some groups (they "sent a few 100rd boxes downrange") before taking it out into the field, there is no mention of the accuracy they actually saw, which seems odd if it's so good. If their cartridge design work is being done in conjunction with this specific rifle you would expect it be astonishingly good. If it's only giving 20mm groups at 50yd I would've thought they'd have improved it before putting it out for public testing.

I'm not seeing anything so far that entices me. The single biggest draw of .22LR is its price, both for the ammo and the firearms chambered for it. If .17HMR/Mach2/WSM and WMR ammo was the same price as .22LR I'd own one of each. The cheapest HMR I can find is CCI's A17 bulk 200rd pack at 60-cents a round. My 55gn SGK 1750fps .223 loads cost me 32 cents a shot. CCI Standard Velocity has been costing me 14 cents a shot and I'm picking up two cases of Remington Cyclones next week for 11 cents a shot. I tested the Cyclones eight years ago and they were very poor. I've got 200rds of Eley Standard left, which is also very poor quality ammo, and very expensive for that low quality, so I'm not buying it again. From memory, I think I paid $900-ish per case for Eley Standard around 2018, and $1130 in 2021, now it's over $1700. I found the Henry shoots the Eley standard very well, except for the one or two rounds in every mag that drop short of the steels. But my mate bought some of the new Cyclones and we've been testing them the last two weeks with decent results. It groups about 100mm higher at 40m but does hold a decent spread, certainly good enough for our weekly offhand gong bashing practices.

[Wapiti]

If it improves the 22LR over the old lead projectiles, it might have a following.
If they get (change) the rifling twist right for the copper projectiles, accuracy won't be an issue within the limited range. I can't see it will up the hitting power over the 22LR though.
I just look to the incredible improvement of the 22WMR with the new, precision-made modern projectiles and loadings available now. That cartridge is nothing like the lacklustre results we got 30-40 years ago with the ancient inconsistent stuff available them.
I guess we'll see.

[bladeracer]

Twist rate for .21 Sharp is 12" so should be fine with copper bullets up to about .810" long.
The only velocity increase is due to the slightly reduced bore volume and the lighter bullets as far as I can see. The case is the same .613" case of the Long Rifle so volume is unchanged and both still operate to a max of 24,000psi.

I agree that the WMR is so much better with modern bullets and powders, but still just as worthless as it was when I was a kid due to its exorbitant cost. I prefer to load a centrefire down to those levels for less cost and better results, and keep the option of dropping in a full-power round when required.

If it improves the 22LR over the old lead projectiles, it might have a following.
If they get (change) the rifling twist right for the copper projectiles, accuracy won't be an issue within the limited range. I can't see it will up the hitting power over the 22LR though.
I just look to the incredible improvement of the 22WMR with the new, precision-made modern projectiles and loadings available now. That cartridge is nothing like the lacklustre results we got 30-40 years ago with the ancient inconsistent stuff available them.
I guess we'll see.

[Wapiti]

Cockies always loved the 22WMR for around the farm culling, because you always shoot a limited number of cartridges, making the extra cost of around $15 a packet (only 2-3 years ago now they were anyw, now $30) and the marked extra penetration and shock over the 22LR made it really popular.
Unlike target shooting, getting the job done didn't really come down to cost after all's said and done, because if the job wasn't done straight away then the result was always 100's, even 1000's of times the cost of that packet of ammo. Still is, so different priorities...
Most popular cartridge was the CCI Maxi-Mag 40gn hollow point, there was no use for the 30gn speedy fragile loads. Actually the CCI 50gn load was really popular when people tried it.
In fact it was the most popular chambering in Cat H primary-production licence handguns, almost always a Ruger single-six with the 22LR and 22WMR cylinders... you could bet the Melbourne Cup winner on the 22LR cylinder being lost in a drawer somewhere because it was never used...
Probably the next most (or same) useful cartridge for this purpose is the 38 special target loadings.
That was, before the Police decided that farmers using handguns is offensive to their egos, despite farmers actually having more opportunities to use them than they ever will.

But yeah I can see why plinking with 22mag isn't high on the list of people's priorities. But people are quick to complain if the extra-cheap plinking 22LR ammo sprays everywhere, or misfires. And people hesitate to buy the $30/packet target 22LR ammo too, but the serious target shooters apparently don't.

[bladeracer]

Cockies always loved the 22WMR for around the farm culling, because you always shoot a limited number of cartridges, making the extra cost of around $15 a packet (only 2-3 years ago now they were anyw, now $30) and the marked extra penetration and shock over the 22LR made it really popular.
Unlike target shooting, getting the job done didn't really come down to cost after all's said and done, because if the job wasn't done straight away then the result was always 100's, even 1000's of times the cost of that packet of ammo. Still is, so different priorities...
Most popular cartridge was the CCI Maxi-Mag 40gn hollow point, there was no use for the 30gn speedy fragile loads. Actually the CCI 50gn load was really popular when people tried it.
In fact it was the most popular chambering in Cat H primary-production licence handguns, almost always a Ruger single-six with the 22LR and 22WMR cylinders... you could bet the Melbourne Cup winner on the 22LR cylinder being lost in a drawer somewhere because it was never used...
Probably the next most (or same) useful cartridge for this purpose is the 38 special target loadings.
That was, before the Police decided that farmers using handguns is offensive to their egos, despite farmers actually having more opportunities to use them than they ever will.

But yeah I can see why plinking with 22mag isn't high on the list of people's priorities. But people are quick to complain if the extra-cheap plinking 22LR ammo sprays everywhere, or misfires. And people hesitate to buy the $30/packet target 22LR ammo too, but the serious target shooters apparently don't.

For me, the reduced WMR-level loads in the .222Rem, with the same 40gn Winchester semi-jacketed hollow-point bullet was more accurate than my WMR. I've seen some very accurate WMR's now though which closes that window, but it's still cheaper to use reduced loads in other things.

I had a Single-Six more than thirty years ago, I only recall using it twice, and never even put the WMR cylinder in it, but I was only shooting steels with it.

I bought 10,000rds of Remington Cyclones last week for $1100, eleven cents a round. A mate and I have been testing them the last few weeks in our Henry lever-actions and I have to say that they are significantly better than they were eight years ago. More than accurate enough for shooting 120mm gongs offhand out to 45m or so. I fired 300rds the other day and he fired 150 in his rifle. In a little over 1000rds we've had zero misfires, but it does have a percentage of underloaded rounds - out of that 300 I counted 13 (about 4%) that went "phut", spat gas in my face, and didn't crack the sound barrier, but they did still hit the gongs. I've been using Eley Standard for my lever-action practice for the past few years and I generally get one "phut" round in every magazine, so about the same percentage. In 2018 a case of Eley Standard was $920-ish, in 2022 I bought a case for $1130, but now it's $1700, which is ridiculous for such poor-quality ammo. I shot a 15rd group on paper off the back of the ute at 40m with the Cyclones and the Eley's, and both groups were on-par around 60mm. Then I shot a 15rd offhand group with the Eley's that was 70mm. One Cyclone was damaged (when they seated the bullet it tore the case mouth) and didn't want to chamber easily. I inspected it, scraped a piece of lead dag off the bullet, loaded it back into the tube, and it cycled and fired just fine. For the price I have no complaints about the ammo for the purposes I'm using it for. I will get around to testing it again in my Rugers and see if it shoots better than it did eight years ago (in 2016 it gave me 68mm 10rd groups at 100m, and 50m 30.5mm and 22mm 5rd groups in the logbook).

[Bugman]

Looked it up.
What a complete waste of time

Yes.I certainly agree.

[bladeracer]

An American on Facebook posted the other day that he has bought one of these, now he's waiting on ammo to come to market. I hope he keeps us updated.

[bladeracer]

I think that there's so many rifles in 22lr that people are not going to go out and buy another 22lr as you are all saying it's reinventing the wheel. I actually prefer the idea of reloading the 22lr like the guys in the USA are doing for long range.
https://cuttingedgebullets.com/products ... lr-die-set

I was talking with a guy that handloads .17HMR in the US (Russell Reed). Primed brass is not available so he buys ammo direct from Hornady, pulls the bullets, and returns the bullets to Hornady for a discount. He strips out the priming compound, replacing it with his own compound and uses Lil'Gun for loading. Pushing them hot for 500yds splits the brass, but he practices with slightly lighter loads and gets about five loads before failing. It's certainly not an exercise in saving money

[wrenchman]

if they didn't make new stuff there would be no one thinking about the fact that they missed could be because they didn't check zero or practice a little bit and now they need some thing bigger or better.
I remember all the short mags and I think the only one that is doing any good is the 300 and what about the ultra mags based off the 404 Jeffery.

[Billo]

if they didn't make new stuff there would be no one thinking about the fact that they missed could be because they didn't check zero or practice a little bit and now they need some thing bigger or better.
I remember all the short mags and I think the only one that is doing any good is the 300 and what about the ultra mags based off the 404 Jeffery.

Yeah the short magnums did OK but its really only the 300 WSM that sold in any decent numbers. It currently sits in 16th place in terms of sales this year with less than 2% of market, I'd expect it will be hard to get one in the future with the 300 Winchester magnum out selling it by 400%

Its early days for the 6.5 PRC but it seems to be doing OK and currently sits 4th in sales with 5.7% of the market.

https://backfire.tv/popular-cartridges/

[bladeracer]

If you're on FB there is a very new .21 Sharp/.21 Sharp Precision Magnum page, but no content there as yet.
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61565936890699

[alexjones]

22LR is the only rimfire for me. Can use stingers, minimags, standard or those cci quiets where you don't even need earmuffs because it sounds like a slug gun around 600fps. Such a versatile calibre.

If you have the licence though I saw that wedgetail are bringing out an AR15 in 22mag. I would of preferred if they brought it out in LR instead. But still good to see Australian companies expanding.

[Wapiti]

Seen on Ron Spomer outdoors where he did some testing of this idea and convinced me it is a great idea.

The old heeled bullet design from way back post mid-late 1800's can be improved and it's obvious that it has.
And the mid 30gn HP's and 40gn loadings will eclipse the Stingers. I've chrony'd them and only got around 1450fps in 16" barrels, advertised velocity of those is complete BS. Don't believe me? You Paul Harrell fans, check out his findings on Velocitors and Stingers. Same results I got.

Sure, those people who'll shoot a whole brick of ammo in an afternoon will have cause to not jump to this new cartridge, but for the price of each cartridge to those hunting, or fixing $$$$ causing feral issues, we couldn't care less.

It's always obvious that there are many that will always look at something new, and look for any/every downside rather than the upsides like others will, fair enough. That's people.
However, I reckon pretty soon there will be 10/22 replacement barrels available, and I'll be getting one.

[bladeracer]

Seen on Ron Spomer outdoors where he did some testing of this idea and convinced me it is a great idea.

The old heeled bullet design from way back post mid-late 1800's can be improved and it's obvious that it has.
And the mid 30gn HP's and 40gn loadings will eclipse the Stingers. I've chrony'd them and only got around 1450fps in 16" barrels, advertised velocity of those is complete BS. Don't believe me? You Paul Harrell fans, check out his findings on Velocitors and Stingers. Same results I got.

Sure, those people who'll shoot a whole brick of ammo in an afternoon will have cause to not jump to this new cartridge, but for the price of each cartridge to those hunting, or fixing $$$$ causing feral issues, we couldn't care less.

It's always obvious that there are many that will always look at something new, and look for any/every downside rather than the upsides like others will, fair enough. That's people.
However, I reckon pretty soon there will be 10/22 replacement barrels available, and I'll be getting one.

If you want velocity from the .22LR hyper ammunitions use longer barrels.
Stinger gives me 1590fps in the 18.5" Ruger American, the Copper-22 gave me 1646fps in the 18.5" Ruger and 1824fps in a 25" BSA when I chronoed it. Neither the Stinger or the Copper-22 is accurate enough for me to consider it for hunting beyond 50m anyway.

I consider accuracy to outweigh velocity by a wide margin, and if it's only capable of 1.5MoA at 50yds it's well behind .22LR which should give you 1MoA at 110yds, and far behind the HMR.

Do you reload your centrefire ammo? If you do, will you happily spend $2 a shot for this stuff or just load the .204/.22Hornet/.223/.243 down to this level with cheap accurate bullets for 50-cents a shot or less?

I haven't seen any upside to this cartridge at all so far. Expensive with poor accuracy, and probably hard to find does not make it sound very useful to me. Like the old .25 Stevens, there are still lots of fans of that cartridge. I think the old .17HMR offers much better accuracy, velocity and cost.

If you simply want it for novelty value I say dive in.

[Wapiti]

Well, good points. Here's some thoughts. This is how I look at it, the way I think.
We are all products of our (differing, by the looks) circumstances.

First, this stuff probably isn't going to stay that expensive for long. But yes, it'll be more expensive than 22LR because of the more quality projectile. An automated machine isn't stamping gazillions of inconsistent lumps from lead wire coils per hour.
One of the reasons why the stupid flyers that consistently happen in everything but super expensive rimfire target ammo. Even then.
Case in point, when that Aguila rimfire stuff came out here a few years ago, subs were a fair bit over $10/pkt. This morning, I see in my inbox an email from Cleavers selling it with a $5 as the first number for a box/50.

As for reloading, yep, all important jobs for firearms here is with tailored ammo. Big animals, big ammo, small is small. The one thing I want is performance for the round I've picked for the job, because I've said it before, killing something is only done for a reason and ultimately if a cartridge is 10c or 50c for rimfire around the sheds, or $1 or $3 each in the paddocks the cost is a drop in the bucket of not doing it. Arguing about cost is not even a consideration.
Is a bigger animal deserving of a more expensive cartridge? Or a smaller one deserving the elcheapo option? Either can cause just as much losses in different ways.
Now of course, someone shredding a target over an afternoon with a brick of ammo is going to see cost against fun factor, but they don't have to buy the dearest option.

It is a laugh though, reading arguments about all these new "gotta have it or you're not going to achieve" cartridges like the 6.5 and 300 PRC where any tiny, mostly imagined advantages are now immediately essential, even though the cost is double these now "superceded" cartridges are suddenly now 2nd class, but somehow this .21 cartridge is a dumb idea.

As a field shooter only, I wouldn't consider around $40/50 plus (and the rest for some) for 22LR target ammo, but target shooters do, because it suits them.
The reason isn't cost, it's because it's not the best option.

Finally, if I can get a barrel for a 77/22 or a 10/22, I will get one. Because I don't just want shooting to be a field chore, done with the most economical option. I want to have some fun in this past-time too.