[dave3006]

Would either of these two rounds be acceptable for an urban carbine use? I wouldn't want to be shot with either. However, I do not know if they would be too weak to stop a bad guy reliably for 0-100 yard use.

Dave

[Third_Rail]

If you can place shots well, either will kill. Neck/head would be the best shots, although, as you said, no one wants to be shot with either! Even .22lr out of a rifle kills.

[rbernie]

A flu virus can kill a person, but not as reliably or as quickly as other pathogens. So just because something *can* kill doesn't necessarily mean that you wanna count on it to do so when needed - especially if you're confronting someone with ill intent.

[Onmilo]

Ditto on that.
Two or three hits with a .22 magnum always beats one miss with a .44 magnum.
CCI produces some very good, heavy jacket, hollowpoints that should work excellent for defense.
They kill larger furbearing animals quite well and do not exit, that means all the energy the bullet has is transferring into the target.
I am not too keen on the .17 rimfire guns as defensive weapons, I feel the bullet is too light and fragile.
I have now seen three coyote hit with .17 HMR and the bullets exploded on the fur.
Nasty surface wound, some fragments in the flesh, dogs started running and were finished off with shotgun, and centerfire rifles.
If the .17 bullets blow up on coyote fur I can only imagine what they might do if they hit a leather or heavy jean jacket.
Then again another man claims to have killed a deer with a neck shot using the .17HMR.
That said, I still would not want to be the test subject who finds out exactly how well, or poorly the .17HMR performs.

[Harry Tuttle]

With the right payload, a .17 SBR P90 would be a nifty piece of kit for mutant ninja zombie Goa'uld hunting.

A cleverman might be able to fit a couple hundred 17 HM2 rounds in a P90 size magazine and re-enact the 22LR American 180 chewing through the blockwall effect.

http://www.moviebadgirls.com/gulfcoastarmorythumb/s_hkat-p90-03.jpg

[rbernie]

I think perhaps my last post on this was too obscure - lemme try this again.

Most folks that are shot in a conflict are NOT shot dead-on thru the chest. From everything that I've come to understand, more often than not the only path to their vitals is through an arm or shoulder or other such 'peripheral' body part. In sum, the folks that you're likely to have to shoot at in self-defense will in general be doing everything possible OTHER than standing there presenting a nice wide-but-not-too-thick target.

There have been lots of people killed with a 22LR, much less a 22WMR. The round clearly has enough power to kill people, especially out of a rifle at point blank range. But I also seem to recall a statistic from somewhere (FBI?) that most folks killed with small-bore low power weapons were killed by surprise (in their sleep or some other scenario). They were killed when they were 'cooperative' victims, in other words.

If you're planning on head shots at point blank range in a static setting - either of these two 'varmint' rounds will probably do fine. But if you're thinking that you might have to use them outside of this envelope, I'd probably recommend that you look into more reliably penetrating alternatives. IMO, the 17HMR and 22WMR bullets don't have the weight and structure to reliably penetrate thru clothing and flesh and bone to hit a vital area of the target unless the target is cooperating (close range, standing still, face-to-face).

[cracked butt]

I would not feel undergunned with something like a Ruger 10/22 in even .22 LR. You can now buy 25 or 50 round clips for them, and the carbine can be fired very rapidly while holding it on target. If I were firing on a moving target at <100 yards, I would take I would feel that the the low recoil would be a definate advantage when it comes to making more hits.

.22 bullets have a lot more penetration than people think. I wouldn't want to get shot in the chest with one no matter how many layers of clothing I have on under my parka.

At the very least, if you are in a situation where you need to take shots over 25 yards, if hits from a .22 aren't fatal or life threatening, it will quickly convince badguy to find an easier target.

[Hawkmoon]

An interesting question. It got me to wondering.

So I logged onto Remington's web site and looked at the ammunition section. Quite a surprise.

The .22WMR, with a 40-grain bullet in either round nose or hollow point, develops 324 ft-lbs of muzzle energy. That's way more than a .380ACP. Most of Remington's standard 9mm rounds, with bullet weghts from 115 grains and up, only develop around 340 ft-lbs at the muzzle.

There's obviously a lot more involved than just muzzle energy, but based on this I don't think I'd care to get shot by a .22WMR round.
Log on and check it out. You can also find down-range energy numbers, and they have updated their ballistics calculator (which you can download, so it's worth visiting the site just for that).

[El Rojo]

Would either of these two rounds be acceptable for an urban carbine use? I wouldn't want to be shot with either. However, I do not know if they would be too weak to stop a bad guy reliably for 0-100 yard use.My answer is no. We are talking about an urban carbine whose sole intent and purpose is to stop an attacker or attackers. The energy of a .17 HMR or .22WMR round is very low compared to many other potential calibers you could be using. I was trying to do some Googling to find some energy specs, but instead I found a ballistic software program that will do this for me.

.17 HMR. Lets figure we are shooting a .17 grain .17 caliber bullet out of a 16 inch barrel at 2500 FPS (source (http://www.bullberry.com/HMRdata.html)). According to Projektil 2 ballistics program that would make the following data.

0 yards 2500 FPS 235 Ft/Lbs
25 yards 2306 FPS 200 Ft/Lbs
50 yards 2121 FPS 169 Ft/Lbs
75 yards 1944 FPS 142 Ft/Lbs
100 yards 1778 FPS 119 Ft/Lbs

.22 WMR. Ok, a .40 grain .22 caliber bullet out of a 22" barrel is going to be roughly 1900 FPS. Here is what Projektil2 says.

0 yards 1900 FPS 320 Ft/Lbs
25 yards 1789 FPS 284 Ft/Lbs
50 yards 1684 FPS 252 Ft/Lbs
75 yards 1584 FPS 223 Ft/Lbs
100 yards 1486 FPS 197 Ft/Lbs

9mm Carbine. Lets start the real comparison. 115 grain 9mm bullet out of a 16" barrel would be about 1300 FPS (source (http://www.aboutguns.net/reviews/9mmtests.html)). What does Projektil2 say?

0 yards 1300 FPS 431 Ft/Lbs
25 yards 1223 FPS 382 Ft/Lbs
50 yards 1158 FPS 342 Ft/Lbs
75 yards 1103 FPS 311 Ft/Lbs
100 yards 1057 FPS 286 Ft/Lbs

.223 carbine. I am running out of time so lets just skip any other pistol calibers and go to the .223/5.56mm. 55 grain .223 bullet out of a 16" barrel would be roughly 2800 FPS (I couldn't find any great stats and figured I would figure lower than higher). Projektil2, take it away.

0 yards 2800 FPS 957 Ft/Lbs
25 yards 2680 FPS 877 Ft/Lbs
50 yards 2564 FPS 803 Ft/Lbs
75 yards 2451 FPS 733 Ft/Lbs
100 yards 2340 FPS 669 Ft/Lbs

Now take in mind I was just using the ballistic coefficient generator in the program and I didn't factor in muzzle drop (that shouldn't be a problem for the .17, .22, and .223, but maybe for the 9mm). Anyway, the .17 HMR should most certainly be out. The .22 HMR gives you some better numbers and the 9mm is about twice as powerful at all ranges compared to the .17 HMR. However, look how much more you get out of the .223 at all ranges. About 6 times the power of the .17 HMR, 3 times the .22 WMR, and twice as much as the 9mm.

I don't know about you guys, but if I were going to have an urban carbine, I would want low recoil, light weight, but with the most power possible. I am out of time or I would do one on the 7.62x39mm too.

Stick to the pistol calibers at least and .223 if possible. As many have said, any rifle will work better than no rifle, but if you are going to get a carbine for the sole purpose of defending yourself, make the best choice possible. There is no second place in a gunfight.

[duckslayer]

I shot some turkeys at 60-100 yards with the 17HMR, and they flew away. I wouldn't suggest using it on a zombie.

[landon74]

My grandfather's youngest brother was killed with a .22LR to the head at about 125 yards, he died instantaneously.

As morbid as it sounds, but shot placement is paramount...

[Glock19Fan]

CCIs 50 grain Gold Dot gives excellent expansion, and unlike most other .22 WMRs and.17s, deep penitration.

CCIs 40 grain Velocitor gives pretty good expansion, and deep penitration.

In fact, a round nose bullet from a .22LR can penitrate around 20 inches in ballistic gelatin. Im not sure about .22WMR, but from what ive seen, all .22WMR FMJs tumble, so penitration wouldnt be that deep.

I would prefer nothing less than a .223 for combat, but if I was stuck with it, .22WMR wouldnt be too bad, as long as I was given the load of my choice (which would be the 50 grain Gold Dot).

[RandyB]

Given the choice between the two I'd opt for the .22 Mag. The .17 is just too light to penetrate reliably.

[Clean97GTI]

make the .17 or .22 mag out of depleted uranium.

betcha see more penetration an expansion if you bump up the powder load.

[artherd]

Would either of these two rounds be acceptable for an urban carbine use?

No. Thinking about the rimfire exemption for the CA AWB are we?

We need a .223 rebated rim rimfire cartridge! :D

[ice]

There are much better choices for self defense.

[esldude]

http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound%20Profiles/22LR%2040gr%20RNL.jpg

http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound%20Profiles/22LR%2037gr%20HP%20Wound%20Profile.jpg

Image of results firing into calibrated 20% ballistic gelatin. With a couple of 22LR rounds. Penetration is useful, but wound channel is small.

I think some fmj 22 WMR's would do like the 40 gr. bullet, just turn 180 degrees, penetrate deeply and leave a small wound. Could take 7, 8 or 9 to create a wound as large as one good 9mm HP. Still, even one in just the right spot will do the job.

As for the 17 hmr, almost anything fragments them. Good for smaller game, they might work on humans, but in general I wouldn't hold out for them being much effective.

[Chadjuneau]

I only read the first page of this subject so if I repeat, sorry. I got that it wouldn't really kill, but if it's pointblank it would and so fourth. I, myself, would NOT have any trouble believing a secenario where some guy went nutts, got set up, and shot people(kinda like the 1960? thing with the ex-marine on the belltower at a college) laying them down cold. Esp for head and neck shots.

I read another article and it was about a guy asking what to do about all the calibers that are not being made anymore or being made but hard to find. Those were smaller calibers(mostly). Before Thompson machine guns, that Remington I think that Bonney and Clyde used. If it wasn't a spin off of the latest and easiest "muzzleload" type pistols with the big caliber, there was an increase in smaller, lighter, and much more affordable pistols and rifles that did the job. .22's, .25's, all the "little" guns that could be counted in this question. ALOT of people were killed with these, exacution style and gunfights.

When I got my first pistol I got a .22Lr bc ammo CHEAP, .50 cents a box then! It got laughs. So I asked if it's so "nothing" of a gun, let me shoot you in the head! Or the arm! They shut up! Leaving the Army. I had to test my helmet before I turned it in. I laid on the ground. Then shot it with a high power 12 guage shell, then a 12 guage slug. Then nervously with a 30-06(if it broke it a Kevlar helmet was WAY too expensive to replace for my amusement). But, all three just scratched it. Yes, it was laid down on the ground. So it wasn't stationary to receive the full blow, before that's brought up. Then, at last, I shot it with a .22LR. I did want to hold it and let it be shot very close bc the way it stood up to the other test, and some liquid courage, but I didn't. I shot it. Guess what did the MOST damage?? Yep! The .22LR! Each shot, the bullet lodged itself in it, it struck, went in some, traveled in a direction cracking it as it did, and stopped, lodged in it, almost making it all the way through.

So, for the past 10 years, I NEVER looked at a rimfire, varmint type weapon, as a weak little "toygun" again no matter how small it is. They will ALL kill! It's the 'where shot', 'how many times', and 'how long it took before the last breath'.

[benzy2]

They all will kill but that doesn't make them ideal. I wouldn't want to be on the down range end of a .22WMR or 17hmr but if I had to pick between that and a 9mm, 40 s&w, or 45acp out of a carbine, or even a .223 I would far rather take a bullet in the same spot from a .22wmr or 17hmr. I would feel much more comfortable that even if I didn't make a perfect shot I would stop the threat with a bigger more powerful round. There is a point where it becomes too much but I think .22wmr or .17hmr are too small for that specific purpose. I sure wouldn't hesitate to use one if thats what I had but it isn't what I would go out and buy for 100 yard personal defense.

[Daizee]

I've always thought that a semi-auto .22WMR carbine would make a wicked little civilian defensive skirmish weapon. Not for going INTO trouble, but you could do some damage right-quick with those little nasties, and the rifles are innocuous too.

Not really as a "here's my bada** rifle", but more like "woah, didn't expect THAT" kinda thing.

-Daizee

[buttrap]

My guess is the .22 mag sucks as a defence round but slap a mag full of them up a perps air intake at 20 feet I bet he does not walk it off.

[vicdotcom]

Would either of these two rounds be acceptable for an urban carbine use? I wouldn't want to be shot with either. However, I do not know if they would be too weak to stop a bad guy reliably for 0-100 yard use.

Dave
My answer for this is yes it is acceptable but a bit weak. The key here is the urban setting that you are refering to. In an urban setting your shots will probably be a lot closer to 25 yards than 100 yards. Especially in a city.

That being said, in an urban area, if you shoot someone, they arent going to think "Hey I just got shot at, but only with a .22! Is it a lr or wsm?" They are going to think "hey I just got shot! This guy is armed, and I just got shot and injured, i better get out of here"

When you shoot at someone, it should be to preserve your life, but if the shot doesnt happen to kill on impact, there are stil effects. Are there better choices than a 22? Sure. Are there more dependable rounds? Sure. But if you have it should you use it? You Bet.

[Art Eatman]

I certainly wouldn't choose either cartridge with home defense in mind. If that was part of my deal, though, it would have to be in a semi-auto for one simple reason: You shoot until the threat is ended, and my opinion about those cartridges is that one shot would likely not be enough. Whether Bad Guy or Cape Buffalo, the deal is to stop. Stop the threat ASAP. Killing is sorta beside the point, really. Stopping on account of he's dead, hey, okay, that's cool. But stopping on account of broken bones and other physical impairment? Just as good.

[FreuderLocks]

Ive never failed to stop anything with my .17hmr, that having been said, I'd rather pick up my AR or my Mosin for the job your talking about.
-FL

[627PCFan]

Ill go against the grain and say that a 17hmr 20grain non-vmax within 100 yards would drop someone with a head shot but never would bother with a body shot.

[rangerruck]

dont' kid yourself; a solid point 17 will penetrate body armor. 17's regularly penetrate steel plates, pivots and such. most 17's are now over 2600 fps, and most get near 2700 fps; that is 30.06 speed.
If you adjust for this, a 22 mag reigns energy wise out to about 80 yards, after that, the hmr takes over in energy, for the rest of the trip. Also a hmr is still doing about 2000 fps at 100 yds; that is as fast as a 22 mag at the muzzle.
Also if firing for single shots, a hmr is way more accurate, and less wind sensitive, all the way out to 200 yds, than a 22 mag is.
that being said, 22 mag ammo is cheaper. This is a tough choice, now that i think about it, a solid point hmr will also penetrate a door, I don't know about the 22 mag for this. I think the hmr has better amount of points, but the 22 mag has a lot of energy inside of 50 yards, is less expensive, and more easily found.

[Redneck with a 40]

I have a 22 mag rifle, its a potent little number, I certainly would not want to be shot with one, out to 100 yards.

[BlackHand1917]

Neither of the two rounds mentioned would be an optimum combat round. On the other hand, in a pinch all sorts of things might work.

[jimbeam]

Heard of a deer farm in northern Wisconsin using .17 HMR for herd reduction, of course they can pick the best opportunity for a neck shot, but did the job.

[ShnogDog]

essentially, unless you manage a 1st shot fatal shot, you wont stop anyone. Do you really want to kill someone? I grew up in the highlands of Papua New Guinea, it was a dangerous place to be living in... but you didnt want to necessarily kill someone. We kept a double barrel 12 guage. 1st barrel was loaded with a cartidge full of rock salt, second barrel was buckshot. Think about it, if you got blasted with a 12 guage, loaded with rock salt, you'd **** yourself then run like a bastard in the other direction. Now if for some insane reason, you didnt back off, indoors, at a range of 10-15ft max a single load of buckshot would put you down and out for good. That was the theory, and it worked perfectly in practice, because nobody got killed, they just ran screaming with their ears ringing and a load of rocksalt in their arse !!! The art of gentle persuasion !!!

[alaskanativeson]

Neither round would make a good defense choice. Would they work? Possibly. Do I want to bet my life on it? Hell no. Since I'm not hampered by silly gun laws, my choice of bedside defense is a .45 USP Tactical, but behind my bedroom door is a lever action .454 Casull Puma 92 carbine. I don't worry about zombies, but there is always the possibility of a drunken intruder or a large bear looking for a real Eskimo Pie.

I remember when I read Jeff Cooper advocating the Marlin lever rifle in 44 or 357 as a great urban defense carbine. I have to say, I agree with him. Short, fast, light, powerful, and a large enough capacity to cover everything. You can't pop off rounds with just a squeeze of the trigger, but two well placed shots are much more effective than a twenty or even a fifty round clip emptied on spray-and-pray.

[IndianaBoy]

betcha see more penetration an expansion if you bump up the powder load.


Yeah.. let's get right on that. It's just that simple.

Nevermind the weakness of rimfire cases and the fact that the engineers are already running the round at peak safe pressure.

[Lucky]

Lol Rbernie, 'which caliber for muuuuurdeeer...' :) [/hitchcock]

P.S.

There's a 5mm rimfire coming back now, better than either posted option.
http://www.varminter.com/articles.php
http://www.varminter.com/img/5mmrrm/5mmpromofr.jpg

[woof]

The OP doesn't say why he would be choosing between just these two, but if there is a good reason I think the .22mag is a whole lot better than a pointy stick. I have tried getting my wife to shoot various guns but she doesn't like any of them and won't get very proficient with any but one - a Ruger Single Six. She likes shooting it, is comfortable with it and hits what she shoots at. If I'm out of town I leave it loaded with .22mag. I think 90+% of potential bad guys bug out at the sight of a gun and of the remainder, 90+% won't keep coming if shot with anything.

By the way, I'm amazed at the talk about 100 yards. You would have a very hard time persuading a jury it was self defense at even 20 yards let alone 100.

[benzy2]

I agree any bullet is better than no bullet. The original question was urban man shooting at 0-100 yards. 100 yards seems pretty out of the question to me but if thats the question thats what my answer would be for.

[Archery Ham]

Of the two choices, I would pick the 22 mag. I like a heavier bullet.

Even Goliath laughed at smaller calibers. It was his last.

[noob_shooter]

with enough in the magazine, I think it's a good and cost effective round to use. I own a GSG-5 with 22 round mag and I have faith I'll drop anyone without body armor before the magazine is empty. 22 rounds in my GSG-5 can go pretty damn quick...


i wouldn't use my GSG-5 as a first choice since I got my G27, XD9 and saiga .308, but if I had to use the GSG-5, I'm pretty confident it will get the job done. 22 rounds of cci-mini mags into someone's center mass is gonna do some real damage

[noob_shooter]

Onmilo,

you mentioned about 17hmr bullets exploding on contact with coyote's skin... It's the kind of round that matters. if you use fmj or cci game point, it will penetrate the coyote's skin and possible kill it too. The hornady vmax is probably the round you were referring to that explodes on contact.

I did a test myself while in the woods. I fired at a small live tree that was about 4-5" in diameter using 17hmr fmj and cci game point and both went through it. I then used the hornady vmax and it only made a small dent in the tree.

[noob_shooter]

rbernie,

You said the 17 hmr cannot penetrate through clothes? Stand back 50yd and let me use my savage 17 hmr with 20 grain FMJ and see what happens.. That's the only way to prove if you're right, right?

Like a friend said, I cannot kill him at 100 yds using my 17 hmr.. underestimating any gun will land you 6ft deep.

[woof]

The best gun is the one you are most comfortable with and can place shots with no matter what it is. Some people can shoot a .22mag when they can't do well with anything larger. For them it is best and it "is" the one they should choose.

[1858rem]

i would like to know whereabout the 223 overtakes .204 in terms of stopping power or if a 204 ruger is ever ahead. by my figuring with loads i ran over the chrono, my 32g load develops 1194 ft/lb at the muzzle with a BC of .185, and my 40g load develops 1151 ft/lb at the muzzle with a BC of .275.....which is clearly above the .223 to start, but how effective would a high velocity round like the 204 be at stopping a threat? maybe ill start a 204/223 thread if this is too far off topic? sorry:uhoh:

[gvnwst]

i would like to know whereabout the 223 overtakes .204 in terms of stopping power...... my 40g load develops 1151 ft/lb at the muzzle......which is clearly above the .223 to start


The .223 has higher MEs (about 1300FPE), and higher energy levels across the board. Plus a bigger bullet, and not only ones designed for exploding:D Here is hornadys ballistics table for their 40gr V-Max load in .223:
https://www.hornady.com/shop/?page=ballistics/popup&product_sku=8325
And in .204:
https://www.hornady.com/shop/?page=ballistics/popup&product_sku=83206

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Of the two choices, I would pick the 22 mag. I like a heavier bullet.

Even Goliath laughed at smaller calibers. It was his last.

+1, definitely!

[1858rem]

i was going by this table, sorry

0 yards 2800 FPS 957 Ft/Lbs
25 yards 2680 FPS 877 Ft/Lbs
50 yards 2564 FPS 803 Ft/Lbs
75 yards 2451 FPS 733 Ft/Lbs
100 yards 2340 FPS 669 Ft/Lbs

[gvnwst]

Dude, where did you get that?! Must be for a low power load or something.

[woof]

If you have a .22 and can shoot it well you are better prepared for home defense than 99% of people.

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Barrow's BAR was converted from .30-06 to .308 - are you sure? :scrutiny:

[achildofthesky]

I reckon the old "shoot a melon" test is a good enough indicator of the performance ability of the 17HMR or for that matter the 22 mag. Inside of a 150 yards or so the explosive destruction of the tiny bullet is impressive. Accuracy tendencies of either cartridge would lead me to believe that sniping with either and especially the 17HMR could do plenty well. No recoil means VERY precise shooting and head shots with either would simply ruin anyones will to press an attack.

Best for the job? Nope...
Adequacy for the OP's question? Absolutely.

A pocket full of either of these rimfire rounds has an impressive potential of destruction.

[JShirley]

Goliath actually laughed at a rock thrown by a boy with a sling.

No, Goliath actually laughed at the stick the "boy" (a fully grown man who fought with the king in battle) was holding. (That's in 1st Samuel 17, verse 43, if you'd like to look it up.)

I have frequently said that any centerfire rifle more powerful than .22 Magnum is powerful enough for a "combat" rifle. I currently have a Winchester .45 Colt doing HD duty, but I wouldn't feel terribly undergunned with my Marlin 1894M, either.

I don't want to be shot with even a pellet rifle. Doesn't mean you're likely to quickly stop a deadly threat with one. Attempting to prove any caliber is combat effective by offering to shoot fellow posters is just stupid.

John

[innerpiece]

.17hmr is not as low powerd as some folks make it out to be. everything Ive shot I have killed. I think 5 yotes now, and definetly countless bunnies.

I would NOT recommend .17HMR as a SD choice. but yes, if its all you had, it would do what you need it to.

Id say get a .223 or 7.62x39 platform. an AR is good. SKS will be cheap and more power than youd need at 100yds. barriars n all in an urban setting.

[Marlin 45 carbine]

I personally know 2 men that have some knowledge of guns in general that have .22Mag rifles for hd use. their wives can shoot them well too.
one big + for it is you could carry 100 cartridges easy.
there are better choices for sure I'll take my Marlin Camp 9 loaded with +P handloads in a 20rd mag.

[innerpiece]

JShirley, that quote was from someone who also said:

"I can put 11 rounds into a 8 inch target at 25 yards in 10 seconds with my .45 handgun."

you get my point ;)

ip.

[Daizee]

As I said, I think a semi .22wmr would be a good HELLO, but really I wish Ruger had made the ranch rifle in .357.... I think the case head is about the same diameter as the 7.62x39...
That would basically have corrected the flaw of the M1 Carbine: ammo.

-Daizee

[usmc1371]

I don't think a BG will stop and think "that sounds like a 17 I should be fine." If all you have is a 22wmr or 17 by all means use it. If you are buying one just for HD and not because you want a varmint rifle/HD rifle think bigger. If for some reason I had to grab a rifle instead of the glock 35 by my bed my varmint rifle would be my first choice. I wouldn't feel undergunned with my AR .204. That and the 300wm and 375 HnH next to it might endanger the rest of the genral public beyond the BG.
If you want a light fast handling rifle for shooting rabbits and coyotes and the like and god forbid maybe a meth crazed zombie robber .17hmr and 22wmr are affordable to shoot and practice with and fun.

[lefteyedom]

In a WORD
NO

[benzy2]

I personally know 2 men that have some knowledge of guns in general that have .22Mag rifles for hd use. their wives can shoot them well too.
one big + for it is you could carry 100 cartridges easy.
there are better choices for sure I'll take my Marlin Camp 9 loaded with +P handloads in a 20rd mag. What do you want to carry 100 rounds with you for HD? For urban use maybe but .223 isn't very bulky. 100 rounds of .223 in 4 mags certainly wouldn't be weighing you down.

As I said, I think a semi .22wmr would be a good HELLO, but really I wish Ruger had made the ranch rifle in .357.... I think the case head is about the same diameter as the 7.62x39...
That would basically have corrected the flaw of the M1 Carbine: ammo.

-Daizee Really? They aren't that far off from an energy point. The .357 is a bigger hole and does have some extra energy out of a rifle length but it isn't mind blowing in the difference from .30 carbine to .357 mag.

[SaMx]

I think he was referring to ammo availability, rather than power. the m1 is the only gun that uses the .30 carbine, so it's not too common, and good expanding defensive ammo is even less common.

[jerkface11]

Barrow's BAR was converted from .30-06 to .308 - are you sure?

Yup he went to the future to get it and everything.

[eye5600]

There sure are a lot of opinions.

I just spent a few minutes compiling data from Wikipedia on 63 different rounds from .17 to 30-06. Sorted by energy, the 22WMRs were 18th and 19th from the bottom beating out some handgun cartridges such as .32 ACP, .380 ACP, and .38 Special.

The bottom of the list was the 22LR, no surprise, but even with a puny energy load, the 22 has a surprising reputation for drilling holes. It may be BECAUSE of the low energy, so the bullet stays in one piece. The holes are not big, however.

Innerpiece said "I'd say get a .223 or 7.62x39 platform." I'm not so sure. I don't see how a civilian can justify a round with so much range and penetration for HD.

[Ghost Tracker]

To me, it's more of a issue of stop & drop than of simply killing the threat. Serious, armed men (much wiser than I) suggest the biggest, fastest caliber that you can shoot well. If that's a rimfire rocket, then there you are!

[woof]

I'll bet the number of times a .22 mag shot "didn't" stop someone where a, say, 9mm (exact same hit) would have is a very small number.

[30mag]

Two or three hits with a .22 magnum always beats one miss with a .44 magnum.
A hit with anything beats a miss with anything.

[30mag]

The bottom of the list was the 22LR
I take it you didn't include the .25acp?

[30mag]

.22 WMR or .17 HMR as an anti-personnel round?
Why?
Because it's what you got?

If you're looking at a new gun, why not get something like 9mm carbine?

[Waldo Pepper]

I have wanted a 22 magnum auto pistol for PD & HD use for several years, but the fail to fire percentage of a rimfire is very high when compared to a center fire ctg, and as with most straight case auto pistol rounds are prone to feeding problems.

Then came the 5.7x28 FNH with it is bottle neck case, and center-fire 224 bullet, with a bit better ballistics then the 22 WMRF and very high price tag. In my book it is well worth the money. It is accurate, has explosive effect on large feral dogs that drops them instantly from the AR57 and it has no recoil so it is female friendly. The FNH does have one drawback and that is a rather large grip, but I have seen two women use the gun with very good success.

[hardluk1]

Duckslayer good way to get a ticket from a fish and game officer ,shooting turkey with a rifle. And while you talk about that a turkey like most anything wild will take some damage before going down that would stop a man in its tracks. Try bow hunting for turkey ,It's legal . A 2" broadhead in one and it will still more than likely get off the ground fly'n. And you should be shooting at the head with a shotgun.
I would feel fine with a 10/22 to use around my house as i keep one now with both a 2.5 to 10 scope and laser. I know i can put real quick rounds on target the size of 2" at 100 yards all day. It won't knock you down but it will kill you with serveral quick rounds bunce'n around in your body and that is what 22's are known for doing. Beside that there fun to shoot cheaply and that just makes you better. Now if good enough with a 10/22 and want more power then buy a ruger 44 mag carbine. Can't knock that one.

[scythefwd]

Hardluk1,
I, for one, would love to see a video at 100y putting shots into a 2" group rapid fire. Just a 5 shot set would make me a believer. I have seen match shooters with target .22lr's, and doing single shot that would expect a 2" group, but wouldn't be disappointed to get a 2.2 inch group. That is the difference between a score of 100 and a score of 90.

I'm not saying you can't do it, but oh would I love to see it.

[sarduy]

Would either of these two rounds be acceptable for an urban carbine use? I wouldn't want to be shot with either. However, I do not know if they would be too weak to stop a bad guy reliably for 0-100 yard use.

Dave

get something in 9mm or 45 that allow you to use a conversion kit to shoot .22lr for practice ;)

[sarduy]

or this ;)

http://inlinethumb64.webshots.com/35839/2962691780095461090S500x500Q85.jpg (http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/2962691780095461090cdDPMD)

or this...

http://inlinethumb05.webshots.com/9284/2233953930095461090S500x500Q85.jpg (http://news.webshots.com/photo/2233953930095461090WeQoRw)

[hardluk1]

scythefwd I quess rapid is relative. I can do ten shots in about 20 seconds. may not be machine gun rapid but it is head down rapid. Also most any older mossberg 141 series or older rem 510 series bolt guns will shoot that well ,just takes a little longer with that remington. Even today production 22's can shot well inside 2" so practice. But find the ammo your gun likes,that does make the biggest difference.

[30mag]

Now if good enough with a 10/22 and want more power then buy a ruger 44 mag carbine.
That's hardly the next step after a .22.
I think a 9mm carbine or .357 would be the next logical step.
I don't disagree that it would be a good manstopper.

I do not know if they would be too weak to stop a bad guy reliably for 0-100 yard use.
They would almost certainly not RELIABLY stop a man.
They would probably do much damage, and probably could kill a man in not an incredibly long amount of time. I would not count on such a small bullet to STOP a man however.
No one wants to be shot with anything. It would certainly deter a person, but I think that if you wanted someone to go down, you would use a larger bullet.
I would compare it to shooting someone with birdshot.
Birdshot is for the birds, and varmint rounds, are for varmints.
The wounds would likely be gruesome, but also superficial, shallow, and lacking the infamous 'stopping power'.

[howlingwolf]

"Even Goliath laughed at smaller calibers. It was his last."
This alone was worth the price of admission.

[PO2Hammer]

Of the two choices, I'll go with the .22WMR and the 50 grain Federal load.
Considering how an attacker can withstand multiple hits of 9mm/.40/.45acp to the torso, the ability to precisely place one good 50 grainer into the command module with a carbine can't be overlooked.
I wouldn't drop my Winchester 9422M in favor of a sharp stick.

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Certainly not the first choice for most people, and certainly, if you MUST, .22 mag is far superior of a choice to .17 HMR. But.... for an eldery or feeble person, a semi-auto .22 maggie (Remington, Volquartsen) might be just the ticket for self-defense. Very quick follow-up, very little recoil, easily controllable, and not a horribly bad incapacitator (though a BAD one, yes, relative to other choices).

[Jubjub]

Getting a little far afield here, but Remington has recalled the 597 .17 HMR.

To the OP, at one point most of my guns were stored, and my HD gun was a Marlin 57M full of 40 grain hollow points. After seeing the gaping holes that they left in groundhogs, I was pretty confident in it.

[MichaelK]

Here's a very real scenario that you'd better be prepared for. Let's say you're using a .17 in an urban environment during the next bout of rioting and you shoot a gang member that's looking for trouble. As he slumps to the ground after being shot he sics his 90lb pit bull on you. As that 90lbs of jaws and muscle charges toward you, will that .17 be enough to stop it? I don't think so. I'd rather be packing something that shoots at least a .357 if I have to deal with something 4 legged instead of 2!

[kingmt]

Wow! This is a old post but a good question. I couldn't read it all because I wanted to do quote on most of these people that look at these guns with blind eyes. I seen one comment that carrying 100 rounds would be nice but 4 mags of .223 wouldn't be that heavy. If I had to take on a army I would rather have the .17 & carry 500 rounds in a few mags then only 4 mags of .223. These guns are very efficient at killing & at long ranges while a quick recovery from recoil is possible even for the beginner.

Here's a very real scenario that you'd better be prepared for. Let's say you're using a .17 in an urban environment during the next bout of rioting and you shoot a gang member that's looking for trouble. As he slumps to the ground after being shot he sics his 90lb pit bull on you. As that 90lbs of jaws and muscle charges toward you, will that .17 be enough to stop it? I don't think so. I'd rather be packing something that shoots at least a .357 if I have to deal with something 4 legged instead of 2!

Let me tell a few stories since you brought this up.

When I was a kid about 14 I carried a colt .357 with .38spc in it whenever I could. Because I wanted all of the guns I could carry I took it along with a 12 ga. squirrel hunting. I left the 12 ga. beside a tree to go over this short cliff to check out what looked like a cave. When I got to the bottom in the branch along came a fox so I pulled out the revolver & put one in its head. She fell & went into fetes. As I was walking to her another came at me at a pretty fast jog so I shoot it in the shoulder & It got up & after me again So I shoot it again this time in the head & it keep getting up & coming after me until the 3 shoot in the head. After the first shoot it was slow to move but it was within 10 yards after the first shoot & keep coming. When I skinned them the female had a hole in her head but not exit hole the male had a entry hole in its ribs but no exit hole & the three shoots in the head only broke the skin but did not penetrate the skull.

Next story I had a wild dog approach me & threaten on my property & since I only had my .38 in my pocket I worked my way back to the house for my .22 rifle & he keep his distance from the .38. After I returned from the house the dog was nowhere to be found but I found a pale of bones in the woods right behind the house where it another dog (female) & here 2 pups had been for a while. I have two boys 4 & 6 that spend a lot of time in those woods so I armed with my 9mm & jumped in the car to talk to neighbors on the other ridge & track it down. After finding it I got out of the car with the 9 drawn but the dog seemed to know what it was & ran. The next day I found it in the same place & got out of the car holding the gun down behind the car. It came after me & when it was within 10 yards I shoot it. The shoot quartered through the front of the shoulder & he ran & holed up I left him for 2 hours but when I returned I had to snag him with a poll & fight him out to finish him with a head shoot.

The .38 were sold lead WC & the 9mm was a self loaded Hornady hallow point. I have a few more stories like this but I need to get to a point & these were the most extreme that I have experienced.

I have seen several deer dropped in there tracks with a shoot to the head with a .22LR & even 1 killed with a .22CB but I have also seen one get away from a .22CB.

I did a little test today with my new .17 HMR & was impressed with the results. I shoot through a dryer with a jacketed (plated) CCI 20 gr. that went through a wall, about 4" of air, the tub (which is coated with porcelain), ~24" air, tub, 4" air, & exited the wall. I shoot a 17 gr. Horady V Max poly tip which went through the wall & tub then separated leaving frags in the tub but three frags continued through the other side of the tub leaving two dents & a exit hole the size of a .22 round. I shoot th CCI into a 5 gal. bucket of water & there was full penetration. I shoot the V Max into the water & it separated leaving two pieces of the jacket, the bottom of the core (which I was surprised to find letters on) & a bunch of spray which frags ranged from under .5mm to 5mm. Even if this hit someone in the stomach & didn't kill them they would ether die from infection or be fitted with a galostamy bag (probably spelled wrong) for the rest of there life.

If I was in the place of needing a gun to defend against a large number of people. I would think it would be for more reasons then just to defend my house & I would want to put a hole in as many as I could as fast as I could & be able to run as fast as I could shoot as far away as I could & carry as many rounds as I could.

Sorry this got so long but in short my answer is yes it would make a good defense round.

[Daniel]

Of course.

A basic .22LR RN from a pistol will do about the same "real world" damage as a common defensive handgun caliber firing the latest and greatest JHP. All calibers discussed can fire ammunition that penetrates enough, or conversely, doesn't penetrate enough; since the main mechanism of wounding with low-velocity missiles is direct tissue damage, there's not going to be all that much difference in the wound channel of a .22LR RN or a 9mm JHP--the actual placement of the projectile is far more important than the small increase in the size of the wound track (either through the lungs won't stop the threat instantly unless it's a psychosomatic reaction), but both will stop it instantly if they lodge into/break the spine (both can penetrate far enough).

Now, weapons chambered in .17 and .22 rimfire magnum often aren't made for "fighting"; many lack open sights and most have small capacities. A short semi-auto or bolt-action rifle with open sights will work if you will.

The common weapons in .17 and .22 rimfire magnum would be far more useful in a "civil disturbance" type of deal, as with optics, you can make lethal shots out to 200 meters without creating too much of an audible ruckus, whereas centerfire calibers will give away your general direction with the muzzle blast.

My father killed far tougher animals than humans with single hits from his .22 Magnum at short and long range with a simple bolt-action and a decent scope (50 to 150 meters), and yes, many were moving.

[IamTheSurvivalist]

the .22lr bounces inside the body and rides along the bones especially the 60 grain sss from agulia. The .17 hmr jacketed bullet will penetrate much more than the v-max style bullets and kill large animals at distances under 50 yards with a well placed shot every time. the .22 mag has more energy by a margin that is substancial enough to make it a better choice out to 50 yards with 40 grain bullets. I would rather have a 10/22 with 60 grain sss than the others. out to 50 yars it shoots a large group but the bullet flips and it really is devestating. you can get a barrel to stabilize the heavyier bullets from tactical solutions. its cheap to shoot so you can practice for you hit the fan scenarios. and the rifle is cheap wal-mart was selling them for 180 i think they have gone up to about 225 here. That said a head shot from both the .17hmr with 17 grain fmj and my 10/22 with 36 grain high-velocity rounds have the same effects on cats in my garbage. Dead on the spot. The .17 grainers have a better wound and drop dead effect. but i dont think it would work on a person. They explod on wet cardboard. a semi auto would be the ticket with what ever caliber you decide, and the heavier bullets also will deliver the results you want. They use the .60 sss with suppressors in brazil for urban scenarios.

[TexasPatriot.308]

if that's all you got, it may do, otherwise....get a loan and buy a real self defense gun..

[Dusk]

Is it the ideal urban defense weapon no but i agree with that a semi auto 17 hmr has the potential to be a lethal urban defense carbine with a distinct advantage over some of its competition and its the same thing everyone has against it, penetration. Yes the round does lose penetration power quickly but that keeps it from carrying further and injuring someone you dont want to. Also it more likely not over penetrate, a man was threatening officers in my town once and went far enough that the officers were forced to fire at him in a very populated area of the city near a school of all things. The rounds from his AR struck the man and carried through the mans garage and two rooms one imbedded itself in a wall the other a dresser and the third wasn't recovered.

So i would say using the 20gr would make a good home/ urban carbine, you should just exploit all its advantages low recoil allows good accuracy at higher rates of fire. Less noise makes it a bit more comfortable to fire in a confined space (like it would matter at the time anyway), light weight allows easy movement, short action allows for a shorter overall weapon, and the added accuracy of the round makes good shot placement easier

In all it can work and I have wanted to put such a weapon together with that purpose. And remember round size is nothing if you cant hit the target, and when a situation arises its not 1 or 2 shots you shoot till the threat is eliminated end of story .223, 9mm, 17hmr either way its a gun in your hands so use it to the best of its and your ability.

[shiftyer1]

If it's the only thing ya got it'll work if you get a good shot or enough bad ones. If I was preparing for something I would stock it for small game hunting along with .22lr but also keep something a little bigger. If I was buying for home defense......i'd look elsewhere!

[Kachok]

Sure you can use a little rimfire for dropping angry badguys, you just need a full auto with a VERY high rate of fire and a crazy big magazine, but it turns out that it is just a heck of alot easier to shoot them with one good bullet then a swarm of puney ones especialy if you cannot get your hands on a full auto. If you want to launch hundreds of smaller caliber projectiles at you foe it is alot easier to do that with a 12ga then a high capasity 22LR. People have this magical idea of 22s that they bounce back and forth and back and forth inside your body puncturing all your vital organs, this is simply silly, the basic laws of inertia will tell you that is BS, I have seen many a 22 cal gunshot wound and none of them did anything like that, though I have seen them make some pretty sharp turns when they encounter heavy bone. Even if 22 cal bullets were made of something very elastic (aka not lead) they only penatrate about 13" with no expansion on a streight wound tract, imagine the energy they would loose on impact with bone and then have to penatrate backwards, simply not logical, I don't know who started spreading that myth. That is almost as silly as the Kennedy "magic bullet" theory.

[Dusk]

Well since I have been wanting to see what the different little rounds do, I'll make a gel block according to the recipe found here http://www.myscienceproject.org/gelatin.html

then i will test the 3 17hmr rounds 17gr jhp, 17gr vmax, and 20 fmj. And for comparison i will fire 9mm 115gr fmj, and 115 gr jhp, also some .223 62gr fmj and a 45 gr jhp along with some 22lr 36gr jhp

that should give some good comparisons also i have some messed up old jeans that i will sacrifice so it can show that 17 hmr can easily penetrate clothing and still do damage, I will measure how deep the bullet penetrates, show how much the round moves the block via measurements pictures and video hopefully the frame rate on my camera allows it to be seen. I'll post it on youtube in a week or two and leave a link on here

[rbernie]

If you want to make the test realistic - add a barrier in front of the gel (e.g. bone simulant). You aren't going to be shooting the vitals on any critter of size without first penetrating a ribcage.

[Dusk]

ill see what i can find for a reasonable stand in

[627PCFan]

Thread started in 2005?:banghead:

[BUCKrub91]

I took down a coyote 100 yards away with my .17hmr... but it was no 90lb pitbul i bet it could do it though

[Hocka Louis]

The American 180 fired the .22 Short Magnum -- it was a .22 LR size but with the power of the Mag (twice that if a .22 LR).

The .22 Mag is superior over the 17 where range and penetrative capability are demanded. In this discussion it is the .22 Mag. In fact, in any where the ".22 LR" is the overall do-everything gun, the .22 Mag is also much preferable.

[Kachok]

In fact, in any where the ".22 LR" is the overall do-everything gun, the .22 Mag is also much preferable.
I would not say that, the thing that is so great about the 22LR is that it is such a low speed cartrage that it won't blow up your rabbit like a 17HMR or 22 Mag will. It does just enough damage for small game without being excessive. That is just my .02 Now if we are still talking about dropping an angry bad guy the more the better. More energy, more mass, more caliber, more expansion = more wounding= bad guy dies faster. My higher level math is rusty but I think that formula still works :D

[chad1043]

I love discussions like this. Of the two, I would choose the 22WMR. I wold like to hear from an ER doctor about how many 22 victims they see and how much actual damage it causes. I think it would be very surprising to some to find out. Wasn't it said that the .22 was the mobsters favorite gun...

[Madcap_Magician]

Modern self-defense .22 magnum ammunition seems to be at about the .380 ACP level of effectiveness, if that's good enough for you, based solely on gel testing. Hornaday has an FTX 45-gr. load, and Speer has a .22 mag Gold Dot now. And the gel tests I saw were out of an NAA mini-revolver, so that's pretty good, I think.

I saw a .22 mag Flex Tip do I think 9-10" of penetration through the FBI heavy clothing gel test.

Would it be my first choice? No. But I wouldn't want to be standing in front of one, either.

EDIT: Random thought, it's probably about as effective as a long, sharp stick. Which most forumites consider a denigrating comment, but people have been killing each other with long, sharp sticks for a hell of a long time, so...

[Dusk]

well my biggest downfall in doing my own personal testing is that i lack a 22 magnum but my test between 17hmr and 22lr have been going good fired from 35 yards. The 22lr with federal 36 gr jhp the cheap 550 box stuff when clean through and i was unable to find the round in the dirt backdrop however the damage it did to the gel block was 8 inches long 4.5 inches wide and 4 inches tall. The radius of damage at its widest point was only .5 inches from the path of the bullet and that was in 5 inches of gel.

The 17 hmr firing federal 17gr v-shok, the bullet only penetrated 6.5 inches and had a radius of 1.5 inches at 3.5 inches depth and had fragments as deep as 5 inches.

Ill try to keep getting more information and i'll find a better way to organize it but as of right now i think ill still stick with my hmr. Personally I would rather have the bullet remain inside the perp where it can cause further injury instead of hitting a bystander. I still plan on testing other firearms but I going to need a bigger gel block I'll probably keep it between 8-10 inches of depth because that about the depth of the average human chest.

[Kachok]

Recomended penatration for human sized targets according to the FBIs ballistics lab is a minimum of 12", no 17 HMR round that I am aware of will penatrate to that depth, 40gr 22LR RN and non-expanding HPs (most of them don't) will usualy penatrate to aprox 13" yawing at aprox 5-7". If the 22LR is capable of 13" with non-expanding bullets I am sure it is possable to acheive similar penatration with an expanding 22 Mag seeing as the energy is over twice as much on avarage. This would be suitable for stopping human sized targets but would pale in comparison to a good 9mm or .40 cal JHP which are very efficient killers, hence their sucess in sub-guns.

[NG VI]

Innerpiece said "I'd say get a .223 or 7.62x39 platform." I'm not so sure. I don't see how a civilian can justify a round with so much range and penetration for HD.

Range doesn't have much impact on terminal ballistics. As far as penetration goes, penetration in what, with what loads?

Almost anything but heavy-jacketed FMJ in .223 is going to stop after fewer layers of building material than any service-type handgun load or shotgun projectile, and penetration in tissue ranges from extremely shallow with the small varmint bullets to ordinary pistol JHP depths with most of the purpose-built defense and fighting .223 loads.

The only thing .223 unquestionably delivers more penetration of, regardless of load, is hard barriers like steel plate. My house isn't built out of metal plates, so a .223 rifle would be about the most ideal defense gun as far as my neighbors safety is concerned. It's an ideal choice for lots of other reasons as well, but as far as rifle=massive penetration, that's not really the case.

[JohnBT]

"Thread started in 2005?"

You know those guys they shot with .22s in 2005? They're still waiting on them to fall down. :p

[NWCP]

While either is capable of killing an individual neither would be my choice especially at 100 yards. A .22 short will work, that doesn't mean it would be my go to weapon. A .223 would be my choice of .22 caliber rounds for self defense at a minimum.

[Robert]

Bad zombie thread. 7 years old and the OP has not been on since 2005.