22mag...Whats The Point?

I was looking at the balistics charts on Guns and Ammo's website and the 22mag dont look any better than the hyper velocity 22lr out of a pistol barrel. I can see the point to it in a rifle but not a pistol. Some mfg's are still making the 22mag revolver so am I missing something? Are the charts accurate? I did find one obvious mistake on there.

Compare the bullet weights of the two cartridges. Hyper velocity Long Rifle rounds normally have a lighter 32 grain bullet compared to the rimfire magnums ability to push a heavier 40 grain bullet to the same velocity in handgun barrel. That heavier bullet results in more energy and penetration on target.

There isn't any point if the barrel does not exceed five inches in length.
A .22 magnum is ballistically superior when fired through barrels longer than five inches.
When fired in shorter barrels the magnum is really is no better than the best of the hyper velocity long rifle cartridges and costs more per round fired.
Economically, a short barrel and a magnum cartridge are not a feasible, or practical, combination.
The longer barrel lengths, however, do allow complete powder combustion form the magnum cartridge which in turn allows the bullet to develop the thrust neccessary for improved velocity.
Heavier bullets are also used in most magnum cartridges.
Some of the cartridges feature bullets as heavy as fifty grains, and this allows for greater retained energy on target even at ranges less than twenty five meters when fired from barrels exceeding five inches in length.

Assuming my chronograph is right, I get higher velocity out of a 6.5" revolver barrel with .22WMR and 40gr JHP than I do with 18" rifle barrels and .22LR 40gr solids. The trajectory out to 100 yards is just a bit flatter for .22WMR when both are fired from rifle barrels.

jmm

.22 mag is much more powerful. Link (http://www.naaminis.com/naaveloc.html)

It also causes much more hearing damage.

I wouldn't thing the mag would be worth a toot in a mini revolver. That's why I got a .22LR NAA mini when I bought one. I didn't want it to be as loud as a +P .38, either. The difference in energy is nill if any out of a 1" mini revolver, so I don't see the point, either. But, in longer barrels, sure the mag is more powerful. It still ain't enough gun for me to carry for self defense and I mean what can it kill that the LR can't in a hunting situation? Out of a revolver or pistol, they're both basically rabbit, squirrel, small game calibers and the LR does just fine on rabbits and squirrels. In a rifle, you might use the mag for longer range shots on Jack Rabbits, ground hogs or something or shoot Coyotes with little pelt damage as shortish ranges. I could see that. But, in a handgun, I'll stick with the .22LR.

For self defense, shelve 'em both for my .380, .38, .357, 9mm, .45ACP, or larger calibers. I just carry the NAA mini because it's so danged small why NOT carry it? :D Might need the back up, never know, and I have used it on vermin, feral dogs, snakes and even a few rabbits because I had it on me at the time. I had a single action in .22 with a magnum cylinder when I was a kid. I never used the mag cylinder. Might have burned a box of ammo through it.

I like the 22WMR round, I like it the most form a rifle. It is a nice little round with ok power shoots some what flat.
The 22WMR pistol is a bit different, it is a fun gun to shoot. I liked FMJ's didn't see much point in hollow points. The 22WMR pistols really do have to have a good length barrel to use the round and it's overly slow burning powder. So at least 5 to 6 inches.
The 22WMR pistols don't rip apart small game like there long barrel counter parts. A 22LR rifle with hollow points can rip them up some too.
I have an FN 5.7x28mm pistol and with ballistics like a 22WMR round form a rifle and then some. It is tons of fun to shoot. Can't wait to hunt with it.

I agree with the 22 WMR from short barreled handguns that it is not worth the added noise and cost to shoot. From a rifle, it is entirely a different story as it stretches the 22RF range out to about 150 yds. You could pose the same question about the 17 rem or the other new 22 RF rounds that have been introduced in the last few years. I personally stick with the 22 WMR.

In terms of an SD pistol, its all about muzzle flash and retort. The terminal ballistics of either aren't much from a pistol, but the flash and bacg of 22mag from a tiny barrel just might convince your attacker that you are carrying a bigger gun than you actually are. Plus, anyone within earshot won't be wondering if that was a firecracker they heard or a handgun.

For the same cost per shot 9mm is much more powerful out of a handgun thn 22Mag.

I've the Ruger Single-Six with the dual cylinder 22LR/22Mag setup and after one box of 22Mag I quickly decided for the cost its much more fun to shoot 9mm in a different pistol. YMMV.

--wally.

For the same cost per shot 9mm is much more powerful out of a handgun thn 22Mag.

Please post link to the NAA product in 9mm :evil:

For the same cost per shot 9mm is much more powerful out of a handgun thn 22Mag.

I've the Ruger Single-Six with the dual cylinder 22LR/22Mag setup and after one box of 22Mag I quickly decided for the cost its much more fun to shoot 9mm in a different pistol. YMMV.

Also here in Arkansas shooting a Squirell or a Beaver with a 9mm will get you a big fat ticket that you wouldn't have gotten with a 22mag

Per the NAA website, SOME .22 WMR ammo offers a significant edge over the best LR ammo, even from the shortest NAA mini-revolver barrels. Also, I find the LR-framed NAAs just too small to manipulate; the magnum-frames are just barely big enough (with proper grips).

Look up the CCI +V and TNT data. If I absolutely must rely on a sidearm that small (as a BUG), I'll take the WMR over the LR every time.

For the same cost per shot 9mm is much more powerful out of a handgun thn 22Mag.

Please post link to the NAA product in 9mm

http://www.rohrbaughfirearms.com/ If you want small and powerfull and cheaper to practice with :)

--wally.