.22 VS .25


PDA






NeveraVictimAgain
December 6, 2004, 05:42 PM
I'm looking at pocket pistols. My dealer has a Beretta model 21A in .25 ACP and a similarly sized Taurus in .22LR. I've been told the .22 is faster.
What would you reccomend as far as caliber or gun between these two?
THANKS!

Safe Shooting,
Shane

If you enjoyed reading about ".22 VS .25" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ducktapehero
December 6, 2004, 06:28 PM
While neither is ideal for defense the 22 is the better stopper, OTOH it is also notorius for not working well in semi-auto pistols.

J.M.
December 6, 2004, 06:34 PM
Of the two calibers, .22lr is the "deadlier".
The .25acp is absolutely pathetic!

Perhaps you should re-evaluate your selection critera to allow a larger cal. - JM.

wdlsguy
December 6, 2004, 06:43 PM
No point carrying a .22 or a .25 when .32s and .380s are available in the same size package (Kel-Tec, North American Arms, etc.).

NeveraVictimAgain
December 6, 2004, 08:51 PM
OK, so the .25 is a loser.
How about the .32 ACP cartridge?

I'm looking at the P32. Any comments?

THANKS!

Shane

The_Shootist
December 6, 2004, 10:02 PM
I really like my Kel-Tec P-32. It goes everywhere and at the range is easy on the hands and I've NEVER had a FTF/FTE from it (despite all the reputed problems with "rimlock" with JHP). Lots of fun to practice with (unlike its bigger calibre cousin in .380 the P3AT, from what I've heard.)

Its easy to maintain / strip / clean.

You just have to beware the limitations of the .32 ACP - its probably best described as an "in your face, last ditch" type gun. Mind you, according to FBI stats, 99% of confrontations will end if you (as a CCW holder) just produce a gun. Crooks aren't hero's interested in getting shot "on the job" so to speak.

Yes, there are better guns out there. Obviously its better to carry when you can a .38 or 9mm or .45 and today due to the wonders of design you have lots of concealable options in those calibers. All of which more effective than the .32 ACP.

But of interest, I think I read on this board that John Browning never saw the need for self-defense purposes of going above the .32 ACP and thats what he carried in his later years.

The winter seems long in coming here in Texas - its still in the mid 70's today. So its going to be awhile before my P-32 get relegated to "sometimes" carry from "always" carry :D

MrMurphy
December 6, 2004, 10:06 PM
The P32 and P3AT make all the little .22s and .25s pretty much obsolete. However, I knew a cop shot by a pair of .25s that nearly killed him... don't discount their lethality.


I carried a P32 as a "to work and back" gun and as a backup to my .45, then upgraded to a S&W 649 .38 Special for pocket duty.

I'd get the P3AT.

Glock19Fan
December 6, 2004, 10:24 PM
Most people who compared the .22 and .25 are comparing the muzzle energys of a .22 rifle with the 2 inch ballistics of a .25.

The fact is that out of a 2 1/2 inch barrel, the .25 can be the better choice.

The .22, being a rimfire, and having a rimmed cartridge, doesnt work as well as the .25s centerfire design.

From a 2 1/2 inch barrel, the 35 grain XTP bullet averages a hair under 1000 FPS, which is almost the exact same velocity for the lighter 32 grain Stinger .22LR.

If you have to pick between .22 and .25, I would go with the .25. Energy levels are less than 5 FPE apart, and the .25 is the more reliable one.

I would look into the .32 though.

russlate
December 6, 2004, 11:20 PM
G19fan nailed it, but some folks are of the kind that you can tell them, just not very much.

I had one of my 950's barrels replaced with a 4" one, with negligable difference in concealment. But when one is around, it always goes with me magazine fully loaded (8) in the gun, topped off with one in the chamber, and with 2 loaded spare mags. Not that I'm so optomistic, but why not have them in case you need them to finish the job?

tbeb
December 7, 2004, 08:15 AM
I also agree with Glock19Fan. If you consider .32 or .380 ACP then go with the .380. Over the years I've used .22, .25, .32, and .380 pocket pistols. FWIW, I now use a .38 special snubby.

Gunnutz13
December 7, 2004, 09:09 AM
...what's it worth !? I suggest nothing smaller than a .380, and that's marginal. But having said that, it also depends on shot placement. A 22 in the eye is better than a 45 in the arm...ya know what I mean... :evil:

Onmilo
December 7, 2004, 09:34 AM
A .25 acp will penetrate the frontal plates of a human skull much more reliably than any .22 rimfire bullet when fired from a short barrel handgun.
When you decide to choose one of these two calibers for personal defense you have made the decision to shoot no farther than 10 feet and always for the head or eyes.
I totally agree with some previous posters, the Kel-Tec, Seecamp, and Beretta Tomcat pistols in .32 acp and .380 acp have pretty well made the .25/.22 caliber guns in this class all but obsolete.

halvey
December 7, 2004, 09:38 AM
If its between the .22 and .25, get the .25. At least it will go bang everytime unlike the .22.

That said, the .32 in the Kel Tec is better, or the .380 is better yet. I've never had a problem with mine. But, some people have problems handling the .380 in a 7 oz gun. I overload the .380 to near 9mm levels and I can hit my target with one hand. That said, you really need to practice with it to get good.

Kramer Krazy
December 7, 2004, 11:22 AM
I actually have a Taurus PT-22, so I can comment on that one.....get the Beretta equivalent, if you want a 22 between the two manufacturers. Hopefully, it is better quality. I've shot the Taurus a few times, and free-hand, I've gotten around 3-4" groups at 20 feet when trying to be more accurate. The problem I have with the gun is that the magazine follower is a screwed up design that will actually twist and ramps the bullets in a weird fashion. Anything over 6 rounds in the mag, and it has a tendancy to not feed very well. The bullets get at a weird angle in the mag. Also, I was shooting the same Remington ammo in my Ruger MKII and the Taurus, and with the Taurus, some of the bullets had to be hit with the firing pin twice for them to go off. I don't recall any primer igniting problems with the Ruger. I'm wanting to purchase another, backup, magazine for the Taurus. Maybe it will work better thn the one that came with the gun. The ammo was trash, though, as the bullets were not very well seated in the casings and were cocking at angles and causing feeding problems with my Ruger 10/22 rifles and jamming up inside the magazines. I've NEVER had a problem like this with any other ammo, so I'm figuring I got a bad batch of Remington .22 ammo.

Quickdraw Limpsalot
December 7, 2004, 12:03 PM
I agree with the above review of the PT-22.

I own a Raging Bull in .454 and love it, so I won't make overgeneralizations about "crappy Taurus" firearms... however...
The PT-22 is junk, plain and simple. Rarely did I ever get through a clip of ammo without at least two jams. It was "neat" and tiny, but I'd take a Maglite over it in a defense situation, after having owned one. I swapped it for an old 30-30 and I'm very happy now.

[edit] I bought a 2nd clip for it and the only change was that I had twice as many jams to get through before reloading.

telomerase
December 11, 2004, 02:29 PM
Don't forget MagSafe and Glaser. If they happen to work in your gun, MagSafe is faster than Stinger.

.25 is much more powerful than all those guns in the safe, or in the police evidence locker after your ".45 bulge" wanders into a school zone or Federal building sidewalk by mistake.

cls12vg30
December 12, 2004, 02:06 AM
I have a Beretta 21A in .25 that is always in my left (weak side) front pocket as a backup, it's loaded with one Magsafe in the pipe, Magsafes in the top 3 spots in the mag. The bottom 5 are FMJ's, as is the spare mag. In my experience the .25 version of the 21A feeds much more reliably than the .22 version.

When I got the .25 and held one of the cartridges up next to a .22LR, I was surprised by how visibly obvious the difference in diameter was. You wouldn't think such a small difference would be easily visible, but it's quite noticeable.

telomerase
December 12, 2004, 09:05 AM
>In my experience the .25 version of the 21A feeds much more reliably than the .22 version.

Yeah. 8+1 tiny bullets is only good if they work.

The flaw in both Berettas is that the mag release button is too high; it's easy for it to release even in a pocket holster. Everyone I know that has one ended up grinding it down.

Doug S
December 12, 2004, 09:26 AM
I went through much the same decision making process as you. Initially I went with a Beretta Bobcat 22, but it was NEVER reliable. I traded for a Beretta Jetfire in 25. This was a awesome little pistol. Never malfunctioned, & it was a little smaller than the 22. Then one day I had to shootout with a domesticated duck. I live on a waterway & it seems that someone left a bunch of domesticated (Muscovi?) ducks go free. Shortly thereafter the ducks decided to start roosting on my (& neighbors) porches. After weeks of chasing them off, calling the humane society, game commission, exterminators & being told that there was nothing they could do, I was at wits end. Finally one exterminator told me that all they would do is shoot the ducks & that if I had a 22 that I could save myself a lot of money. I checked with the Game Commission who acknowledged that this would not be illegal. Then one morning on my way to work I happened to step into about my 15th pile of crap (they they seemed to like to locate it just outside my front door as I was rushing out to work), & that was the last straw. The ducks, not being the timid type allowed me time to pull my Beretta 25 & get off one shot. It appeared that I hit one of the ducks in the back (ruffled feathers) as it walked away. After watching it continue walking toward the water & sit down just next to the water, I tried to get closer. At that point it jumped into the water and swam away apparently unwounded. About 3 days later I found it dead. Although I really liked the Jetfire pistol, I had lost all confidence in the caliber. I reckoned that if it was so ineffective against a fairly small female duck, that it probably wouldn't be all that great as self-defense round against humans ;) . I'm not knocking the round, I think it could do in a pinch with excellent shot placement. I traded the Jetfire & bought a new P32 which makes an even better CCW pocket gun. Haven't shot anything with the 32, but would nevertheless be a little more confident with the 32 than I was with the 25 after this experience. Also in comparison, I can tell you that the 22 Stinger out of a Marlin rifle is quite effective on duck.

Wilson 17&26
December 12, 2004, 10:11 PM
For a semiautomatic, I would go with the center fire ammo. If you can fire something that weights only 7.2oz (10oz loaded) without limpwristing, go for the P-3AT. It can also handle the hottest ammo you can buy.
http://www.wilson-genealogy.com/pics/p-3atwmags.gif

Ex-MA Hole
December 13, 2004, 08:01 PM
Have you thought about a .38 snubbie?

MICHAEL T
December 13, 2004, 11:36 PM
Gey a Bersa 380 or a snub 38

gazpacho
December 15, 2004, 01:40 PM
If you are going for ultimate concealment, I would recommend the Kel-Tec P-32. Their extermely flat profile makes them very concealable in everything except a coin pocket. If you are looking for something more powerful, I would bump up to the group of subcompact 9mm pistols. If you are looking for ultimate reliability, then a snubby with 158gr +p LHPSWCs.

I like the P-32 so much that I now own 3 of them. I don't bother with carrying extra magazines, I go with the "New York Reload".

GEM
December 15, 2004, 01:50 PM
I had a PT-22, terribly unreliable. I also shot a similar Beretta - same problem. I think the 32s are the way to go if you want the smallest gun.

If you really want a 22 - then go for a NAA or Casull pocket revolver. Incredibly small but SA.

Lots of folks carry 38 SPL revolvers in their pants. Really light weights are readily available but they will cost you more.

Chris H
December 15, 2004, 08:50 PM
honestly i don't think their is enough of a difference to matter. With my luck I could use the most hightech round in the world and it would fail. In small calibers I dont believe in expanding ammo, I want the penetration.

To answer your question, buy two. Practice with .22 (lots cheaper) if it malfunctions, then you get more practice. If you shoot it as much as you should then the cost of ammo will pay for the .25 after a while. I do think the .25 is inherantly more reliable. The bullet is jacketed and will not deform like a soft .22, hence better penetration. I have had a great deal of FTF with .22s and I can't recall 1 with a .25. Of course I probably shoot 20k of .22 to every one round of .25.

.45 AUTO
November 12, 2006, 06:59 AM
Definitely a .22! Cheaper at about a dollar a box for fifty rounds, the .25 on the other hand close to ten dollars for fifty rounds. Crazy if you ask me when there is a ten grain difference in bullet weight and a .3 caliber difference, and a .22 is just as reliable in a autoloader than a .25. The .22 is easier to find, more ammo options as well.

Manedwolf
November 12, 2006, 09:57 AM
IMO, the Kel-Tec in 380 is better balistically, but the Beretta 950 in .25ACP is the better gun of the two, mechanically and in terms of reliability. Have you ever seen how fast someone can unload a 950's nine rounds? It literally almost sounds like full-auto. The trigger on that little thing is absolutely wonderful. For some reason, the Tomcat in .32 was never as good as the original Jetfire. If Beretta managed to design a Rohrbach-sized Jetfire in 9mm, I'd be all OVER that.

I would NOT ever choose 22, because rimfire is more susceptible to a bad strike, and is also more likely to be spoiled by moisture, etc...from being in your pocket. JMB designed the .25ACP specifically to provide a reliable centerfire near the size of the .22 for pocket pistols, hence its other name of 6.35mm Browning.

telomerase
November 12, 2006, 10:44 AM
Everything Manedwolf said, also .25 Glasers have roughly as much energy out of short barrels as Stingers. Of course they are expensive.

jakk55
November 12, 2006, 09:17 PM
wow you three are the first to post in this thread since late 2004.:eek:
I think that he has decided on one or the other by now.:cool:

Sven
November 12, 2006, 09:33 PM
My vote is the P32.

http://www.imageseek.com/sven/gallery/albums/firearms/trio.sized.jpg

Left to right: Colt Vestpocket 25, Kel-Tec P32, Baby Browning 25. P-32 is the lightest of them all, as you might guess.

10-Ring
November 13, 2006, 12:32 AM
I've bought both...still h:cool: :cool: ave the 25 cal Beretta

Stevie-Ray
November 13, 2006, 12:53 AM
I've NEVER had a problem like this with any other ammo, so I'm figuring I got a bad batch of Remington .22 ammo.Must be, or else I got a perfect one. Of the 2, I would opt for the .22. My Taurus PT-22 was totally reliable in every way including using exclusively Yellow Jackets; something Taurus tells you not to use. The design of the bullet does not lend itself to proper feeding. Out of perhaps a thousand rounds, I had zero failures. It was replaced in my pocket, though, with a P32.


Geez, I didn't even notice the thread date.

MCgunner
November 13, 2006, 08:03 AM
There is no basic difference in the effectiveness ballistically of the .22 vs .25, however, the .25 is more apt to function 100 percent. I don't think I've EVER seen the .22 (okay, revolvers come close) that was 100 percent. I wouldn't carry either of these on a mouse hunt, but the .25 is hands down better if you want to shoot back. At least you know it's going to go bang. I can't say that for .22. The .25 was made to function in pocket autos. No fault of the guns in the caliber, but you WILL eventually get a misfire with .22 and they often don't feed and eject all that reliably in small autos.

The P3AT is my choice of mouse guns, though I don't yet own one. I pocket a 9mm most of the time.

Tropical Z
November 13, 2006, 10:08 AM
.25acp is a joke.:barf:

Manedwolf
November 13, 2006, 11:24 AM
.25acp is a joke.

Gotta love those informative posts. :rolleyes:

Tell you what. You volunteer to stand ten feet in front of me, and I'll shoot you nine times in the face with my .25ACP Jetfire, since it's a joke.

No? Why not, if it's a joke?

NO round is a joke. All can hurt, all can kill, it depends on placement.

joneb
November 13, 2006, 10:10 PM
The .25 acp cartridge was made with the pocket gun inmind , thus the ballistics given for this caliber are with 2-2 1/2" barrels. .22 lr ballistics are about the same as the .25 acp when fired from the same barrel lenght.
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs27.htm
your welcome.

Ala Dan
November 13, 2006, 10:16 PM
I will take a .22LR any day of the week~!;) :D

Confederate
November 13, 2006, 10:28 PM
The .22LR would be preferred if it would fire; however, there are two problems. The first rests in the ammunition itself. Even in very fine guns you'll hit some duds. Most ranges, in fact, have a box where you can drop .22s that don't fire. Second, the small pistols don't function well with .22s. I have a cheap Jennings J-22 which I bought for about $65. It fires reliably up through four clips. After that, I start getting jams because it gets dirty. My Beretta 21 jams unpredictably, on the other hand.

The .25ACP is better in a small pistol because it feeds and ejects more reliably, and it's a centerfire, so the rounds are better quality. The Beretta Jetfires are astoundingly reliable and, contrary to naysayers, has a long list of successful service to users. Still, you're pushing your luck with them.

The .32s are a big leap forward, but suffer because firearms that take it tend to be about as big as firearms that take bigger and better ammunition. So people generally skip it and jump to .380. The Beretta Tomcats have poor reputations as do many other .32s. Most pistols that take .32 ammo just aren't as reliable as many .25 pistols.

I love my Beretta .25 Jetfire and my Jennings J-22. My faith in their reliability is high. And for the .22LR as a round, I would feel very comfortable any day with a larger Ruger Mark II. Twelve shots slamming into someone in less than four seconds can make an impression.

Shawn Dodson
November 13, 2006, 11:51 PM
The Beretta M21A, chambered to fire .22 LR, is not a good choice for a personal defense handgun. The reason is because the .22 LR Beretta does not have an extractor. When a .22 LR cartridge misfires, the firing pin swages the rim of the cartridge to the breech, and the faulty cartridge must be either pried from the chamber with the blade of a knife or removed by inserting a cleaning rod down the bore. If you're considering the Beretta M21A pistol as a personal defense weapon, you'd be better served choosing one chambered to fire .25 ACP.

When fired from a short, 2 1/2-inch barrel, even CCI Stinger does not expand (see: http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs27.htm )

Don't waste your time with .25 ACP Glaser or MagSafe. The primary problem with .22 LR and .25 ACP bullets is they're small, and they create a small wound channel. .25 ACP Glaser and MagSafe are small bullets filled with a tiny amount of tiny birdshot. A 2 1/2-inch bbl .25 ACP handgun is best loaded with FMJ ammunition.

MachIVshooter
November 13, 2006, 11:55 PM
A .25 acp will penetrate the frontal plates of a human skull much more reliably than any .22 rimfire bullet when fired from a short barrel handgun.

Which isn't saying much. Many a .22, .25 and .32 caliber bullet have been stopped or deflected by a human skull.

That said, the .25 is a better choice. More reliable and bullet construction is far superior. The .25 JHP's are actually jacketed bullets like their bigger counterparts, while the .22 LR will use copper coated, heeled lead bullets.

There is a reason .25 ammo is much more expensive than .22 LR.

I love my Beretta 950 BS. Of course, I would much sooner carry my KT P3AT;)

joneb
November 14, 2006, 12:11 AM
When fired from a short, 2 1/2-inch barrel, even CCI Stinger does not expand (see: http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs27.htm )

Hi Shawn, the only reason the Stinger penatrated 12" of Gel was that it did'nt expand :neener:
Believe it or not , this can be a good thing :scrutiny:

Dr.Rob
November 14, 2006, 02:00 AM
Given what that model/style of gun is for, I'd opt for the .25. Don't mess with wonderbullets, just stoke it with the fastest ball ammo you can find.

Shawn Dodson
November 14, 2006, 02:09 AM
Hi Shawn, the only reason the Stinger penatrated 12" of Gel was that it did'nt expand Yup!

Husker1911
November 14, 2006, 02:10 AM
.25acp feeds and functions remarkably better than .22lr. This from a gent who carries a .32acp Keltec P32 with FMJs.

Face it, a .32acp HP is likely NOT to mushroom. Hence, I'll take the extra reliability of FMJs, thank you.

Waywatcher
November 14, 2006, 04:52 AM
.22 Definitely! Ammunition availability and cost are big factors to me though, so YMMV

MCgunner
November 14, 2006, 09:34 AM
Dead men don't really worry about cost of ammo.:rolleyes: As unreliable as .22s are in little guns and as many duds as I've had with 'em in my life even in rifles, no thanks, not for serious work. The .22 is a wonderful range and outdoor caliber, but it's not a self defense cartridge. Buy a .22 for practice and get a .25 for carry.

I don't carry anything smaller than .380 anymore, but I once carried the cheapest of the cheap RG25 in .25ACP and while that POS was anything, but accurate, it fired and fed and ejected every round 100 percent. If I seriously wanted to carry such a weapon now days, I'd chose a high quality gun like a Taurus or such in the caliber, not pot metal junk, but hey, that old RG saved my bacon once so I can't knock it. I didn't have to shoot it, just the sight of the gun was enough, but it very likely kept me or my wife from being stabbed. It is the only time I've ever needed a gun for self defense and I thank God I had it with me.

Now days, with choices like the P32 and P3AT Kel Tech, I think the .25 has been made much less desirable. But, it is still better than an ice pick.

Lonestar
November 14, 2006, 10:12 AM
Like others have said, Rimfires are not reliable. .22 for pratice, .25acp for self defense. Newer .32 and .380 pistols almost makes the .25 obsolete, unless you cannot handle the recoil of a .32. For the elderly and handicap then a good .25 pistol may be the only thing they can use to defend themselves.

All this talk is making me want to buy an old .25 pocket pistol ;)

22-rimfire
November 14, 2006, 11:04 AM
As you might guess, I love 22 rimfires. In a pocket-sized auto, they are not as reliable as a centerfire cartridge both from a pistol fuctioning perspective and the ignition of the cartridge. If faced with this choice, I'd either buy a S&W pocket revolver in 22LR, or a Kel Tech 380. I would not buy a pocket 22 auto for self defense. The 25 auto is essentially a 22 for auto pistols at a higher ammunition cost. If you get the Kel Tech, I would shoot it a lot to convince myself that it is totally reliable. I have been considering one of the Kel Tech pocket autos myself for a little variety.

The revolvers are nice in that they don't have the jamming issue and if they don't fire, you just squeeze the trigger again. I carry a S&W 442 (38spl) (or the 642 if you like the stainless look) which is my general recommendation for a pocket revolver and you get a bit more umph out of the 38spl cartridge without the huge fireball and recoil of a 357. I pretty much think of emptying the gun on a single perp if a self-defense situation comes up unless there are multiple perps. I carry a reload. My first choice is to run though and avoid the situation completely. My ego will not be too damaged.

cloudcroft
November 14, 2006, 01:35 PM
The Beretta 21A is nice carry gun. Go with it in .22LR...and CCI "Siingers" would be a top choice for ammo.

NAAs are crap...look nice on the outside, true, but are way too fragile/third-world "craftsmanship" on the inside. Avoid them. Highly unreliable for carry and not durable for long-term practicing.

No, .22LR ammo is just as reliable as centerfire ammo...if you use a quality 22LR ammo. If there even is a theoretical difference, it's negligible in real life.

Don't be misled by all the parrots who cite negative things -- like unreliable ammo -- about 22s. Ignorance is rampant even in the world of so-called "gun-owners."

-- John D.

fastbolt
November 14, 2006, 02:17 PM
Notwithstanding the increased functioning issues I've observed (as well as some of my fellow instructors) with many of the diminutive platforms which are chambered in these calibers ... (compared to larger center-fire handguns, and watching folks try to qualify with them on a CCW range over the years) ... I finally decided that they simply didn't offer the level of potential incapacitation I desired to have at hand in a defensive handgun. I realize that opinions vary, though ...

I know a fellow, now retired, who survived an armed encounter with a suspect who shot at him with a 9mm pistol, while he returned fire with a .25 pocket pistol. The distance involved was across an average city street, and it was late at night, so neither of them hit each other (or anyone else, fortunately).

That incident was reportedly one of several factors considered when policies were later revised limiting the minimum caliber of off-duty weapons to be .32 ACP ... which at least seems to lend itself to pistols offering better consistent functional reliability, and better ignition reliability comparing it to .22 ammunition, of course.

Myself? I decided that .38 Spl was the minimum caliber that met my personal desires and needs from that point onward. Yes, I know some folks that choose to carry .32 & .380 ACP off-duty weapons, and while I don't denigrate their choices, I choose otherwise for myself. Different strokes. There are, however, some quality pistols chambered in these calibers, and some quality defensive ammunition being offered.

FWIW, people wiser than I (meaning above my rank) are apparently in the process of changing our CCW policies to restrict permitted calibers to a .32 ACP minimum. I was told that qualification range interuptions for functioning problems with a lot of the smaller caliber pistols was a consideration in this regard.

Naturally, proper maintenance, or a lack thereof, can also be an important factor when folks bring their firearms to a CCW class, but if the smaller guns still seem to exhibit an overall tendency to a greater frequency of malfunctions, what are you going to do?

This is the sort of thing that unless otherwise restricted, remains to be determined by each individual, having spent a reasonably sufficient time studying and reviewing the issue for themselves, and then making their own informed decision. It's their lives, and perhaps the lives of their loved ones, that may someday hang in the balance.

I still think the caliber/platform issue often unjustly over-shadows the subjects of awareness, knowledge, skills & training, though ...

Just my thoughts ...

UglyGlock
November 14, 2006, 06:03 PM
wow you three are the first to post in this thread since late 2004.
so, it's not just me.

Lonestar
November 15, 2006, 01:51 PM
The Beretta 21A is nice carry gun. Go with it in .22LR...and CCI "Siingers" would be a top choice for ammo.

NAAs are crap...look nice on the outside, true, but are way too fragile/third-world "craftsmanship" on the inside. Avoid them. Highly unreliable for carry and not durable for long-term practicing.

No, .22LR ammo is just as reliable as centerfire ammo...if you use a quality 22LR ammo. If there even is a theoretical difference, it's negligible in real life.

Don't be misled by all the parrots who cite negative things -- like unreliable ammo -- about 22s. Ignorance is rampant even in the world of so-called "gun-owners."

3rd world craftsmanship??? last I look at a NAA mini revolver it said it was made in Provo Utah USA

Ironballs
November 15, 2006, 04:28 PM
for the gun, if you are looking beretta 21 i would definately lean towards the 950 instead. The solid trigger and overall feel is way better.

i would and do take the .25 over the .22- centerfire is the only thing my life will be behind. Personally, my beretta jetfire .25 in deep pocket, or Glock 36 iwb-
heck, i love my 950 so much, i am lookin for a stainless brother for it...

tubeshooter
November 15, 2006, 07:22 PM
I owned a 21A in .22LR before.... lots of good points have been made already.

I would second the considerations made about no extractor and the relatively high rate of duds with .22LR. Even if your gun is working perfectly, that combo could cost you dearly. The importance cannot be overstated.

Also, you have to keep them VERY clean. I was pretty used to the "grab-n-go" revolver MO, which is the exact opposite.


It was a well-made gun, and if you're not asking/expecting too much of it then it can play a narrow role for you I guess. Of course, there are lots of other choices that aren't that much more trouble to carry and are much more effective on average (like .38 Spl). And that's my $0.02 on the gravedig. :)

telomerase
November 15, 2006, 07:34 PM
25 ACP Glaser and MagSafe are small bullets filled with a tiny amount of tiny birdshot. A 2 1/2-inch bbl .25 ACP handgun is best loaded with FMJ ammunition.

The Glaser, at least, doesn't expand... so it's just a much faster FMJ with a blunter metal tip (under the plastic). Much more energy and less likely to glance.

They do cost, though...

Shawnee
November 15, 2006, 07:37 PM
Since you've gotten a ton of good thought here I'll just add an additional vote for getting a .380 or .38 Special - for all the reasons already mentioned.:)

MCgunner
November 15, 2006, 08:45 PM
FWIW, people wiser than I (meaning above my rank)

Don't know where you work, but at the plant I worked at, the higher the rank, the dumber the person was the rule. ROFLMAO!

NAAs are crap...look nice on the outside, true, but are way too fragile/third-world "craftsmanship" on the inside. Avoid them. Highly unreliable for carry and not durable for long-term practicing.

No, .22LR ammo is just as reliable as centerfire ammo...if you use a quality 22LR ammo. If there even is a theoretical difference, it's negligible in real life.

1) I wonder if you've fired much .22.

2) I wonder if you've ever even seen a NAA mini. I have owned one for 20 years plus and it's been fired extensively. It's built of stainless, well finished, and the quality is like a little Rolex. Ain't like the .22 is very stressful, either. And, Utah is a third world country???? :rolleyes:

My NAA is NOT my primary. It's a single action that's very slow to reload as it requires pulling the cylinder pin which, if you drop it, you're out of action. However, I always have this little gun on me. It's so easy to carry, I never leave home without it. I've used it for all sorts of vermin, both edible and not. Literally tens of thousands of rounds have been fired through this tiny little revolver.

One of the biggest POSs I ever owned was a Beretta in .22 short.. I could NOT make that thing feed with anything I tried. I bought it from a friend who got it new and couldn't make it work. He was not very gun knowledgeable so I figured maybe he wasn't using good ammo or something, but I couldn't do anything with it, either, and sold it for a 25 dollar profit at a gun show to a dealer......sucker. I ain't sayin' all Berettas are junk. But, just based on my experience, I'll take the NAA, thanks!

If you enjoyed reading about ".22 VS .25" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!