Why Not 22 Mag.?


PDA






Wolfpackin
December 11, 2006, 03:36 PM
I'm a new member but have been following many discussions of caliber importance here and elsewhere. I recently applied for my CCW permit and I'm considering a .22 Mag for lighter carry situations when my .40 S&W is too heavy.
According to my NRA instructor the .22 Mag has greater muzzle energy (324 ft/lbs) than .38 Spcl, .380, .32 & .25 yet many posters prefer the .38 Spcl. or others.
Stopping power is often dependant upon a vital body part being hit and the .22 Mag has great penetration. My thinking is that if you miss a vital part by more than 1/4 inch you would miss with a .45 too.
So I'm curious to read what you guys think about this.

Also, caliber aside do any of you have any info on the Taurus 941? I understand there have been some misfire problems.

Thanks!

If you enjoyed reading about "Why Not 22 Mag.?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Ala Dan
December 11, 2006, 04:03 PM
The only weapon I own that is chambered in .22 magnum is a North American
Arms "min" revolver with 1-1/8" barrel; but its as loud as my 2.5" barrel S&W
.357 magnum~!:uhoh: :)

Pistol Toter
December 11, 2006, 04:08 PM
Carry what you're comfortable with. But it comes down to a Little hole vs Big hole. Light bullet .22 40gr +/- vs a 125 - 158gr +/- .357 or 230gr - .45 acp. or a multitude of calibre projectile weights. The .22 may or may not give the penetration desired where the more "potent" round most likely will. There are arguments and examples to prove or disporve both ideologies. This thread will most likely turn into another calibre war and maybe that's what you want. If you do some serious research you will fnd these discussinons. Personally, I would not consider a .22 mag as a serious carry round. Again, carry what fits your personally needs. Just my opinion.

AlaDan the only .22 I've got is a single shot rifle.

strat81
December 11, 2006, 04:12 PM
Would you rather be stabbed with a sewing needle, a ballpoint pen, an ice pick, or a claymore? It's the big hole vs. little hole debate. And sometimes 1/4" is all that you need to hit a major organ or blood vessel.

That being said, any gun is better than no gun. If the hole was all that mattered, we'd all be carrying Desert Eagles in .50AE. Buy what you will carry.

stormwaltz
December 11, 2006, 04:18 PM
I've handled a friend's Taurus Tracker 22M, seemed like a great, solid gun...he had it for sale, but it just wasn't what I was looking for. I love the Tracker grips, too. Didn't get a chance to shoot it, but I imagine it'd be pretty accurate and hold up well for years.

http://www.taurususa.com/products/product-details.cfm?id=393&category=Revolver

Jim March
December 11, 2006, 05:36 PM
22Mag from a handgun won't hit those energy numbers. Not unless it's a 9" barrel Ruger SA in 22Mag (which has been produced in small quantities).

There have been some 8-shot 22Mag revolvers built on J-class frames. One of these with a 4" tube would make a respectable weapon for those unable to cope with 38+P or above recoil levels. But there's no speedloaders available...

ugaarguy
December 11, 2006, 06:22 PM
According to my NRA instructor the .22 Mag has greater muzzle energy (324 ft/lbs) than .38 Spcl, .380, .32 & .25 yet many posters prefer the .38 Spcl. or others.
Stopping power is often dependant upon a vital body part being hit and the .22 Mag has great penetration.

First, welcome to THR. There was thread here a while back titled "Statistical Analysis of Energy Transfer". What I learned from it is that damage from energy transer - the wound cavity opening radially around the path of the bullet from hydrostatic shock - does not occur until over 1000 FPE, somewhere in the 1200 FPE area if I remember correctly. Essentially pistol caliber rounds (excluding very hot 44 Mag & up hunting loads) are punching holes by crushing tissue in their path. In trying to incapacate a threat you must either make a CNS/major organ hit, or create rapid blood loss. Deep penetration from a large diameter bullet will create the largest wound channel, thereby promoting rapid blood loss.

As to the .22 Mag. put me firmly in the I'll take any gun that shoots over no gun camp. I prefer my Kel-Tec .380 when I cant carry a larger gun. I think the S&W J frames and similar guns from others makers in .38 Special, .32 H&R, and the like are excellent as well. I'd not like to shoot 357 Mag out of a gun that size. Now sometimes folks get arthritis, wrist/arm injuries, or what not, and they just can't shoot a .38 or .32 auto or revolver. For those folks a .22 Mag, or even a .22 LR, is a great option. Head out to an outdoor range and get good at shooting some ping pong balls with it. A little .22 wheelgun or auto will arm you just fine with the right practice and mindset when that's all you've got.

MCgunner
December 11, 2006, 06:37 PM
According to my NRA instructor the .22 Mag has greater muzzle energy (324 ft/lbs) than .38 Spcl

That energy is out of a rifle, not a handgun. It'd do real good to get 150 ft lbs out of a 6" barrel, let alone the little sub 2" barrels typical. My 2" .38 gets about 265 ft lbs out of its 2" barrel, well more than the .22 mag. 140-158 grain bullets don't hurt for penetration either vs 50 grains max for the .22.

My personal minimum is the .380. A P3 AT can go anywhere you can pack a .22 mag. I'd suggest a larger caliber. Sure, anything's better than nothing, but so what. If you are getting a minimum caliber/maximum concealment gun, the P3 AT is a good choice. I wouldn't look at less caliber. You're probably about as well off with a .22 mag as a .32ACP, but that ain't sayin' a whole bunch.

CZ.22
December 11, 2006, 07:52 PM
Would you rather be hit by a Lotus Elise going 100, or a Yukon XL going 65?

VA27
December 11, 2006, 09:10 PM
If I had to carry my S&W Model 51, for whatever reason, I wouldn't be afraid to. I'd rather have something bigger, but 6 rounds of 22 mag at across-the-room ranges is nothing to sneeze at.

Ala Dan
December 11, 2006, 09:22 PM
a '98 edition of the North American "mini"~!;) :cool: :D

Brian Williams
December 11, 2006, 09:23 PM
For me Expense is about the only reason.

Bob79
December 11, 2006, 09:30 PM
The S&W 351PD is a J-frame with 7 rounds of .22 magnum that would be a good choice. Weighs less than 12 ozs, 7 shots, and virtually no recoil.

According to NAA mini website, the CCI Maxi Mag +V 30 grain bullet does an avg of 1150 FPS from a 1 5/8" barrel, and the S&W is 1 7/8" barrel. Not bad.

MCgunner
December 11, 2006, 09:38 PM
According to NAA mini website, the CCI Maxi Mag +V 30 grain bullet does an avg of 1150 FPS from a 1 5/8" barrel, and the S&W is 1 7/8" barrel. Not bad.

A quick calculation gives me 88 ft lbs. Far cry from a .38 special, eh? I didn't even bother with a momentum calculation, just call it zero...:D In this caliber, I'd want a 50 grain bullet regardless of velocity.

enfield
December 11, 2006, 09:47 PM
What kind of penetration can you get with .22 mag from a 2 to 4 inch barrel in calibrated ballistic gel? I suspect it's well under 12 inches. Anybody have any data?

MCgunner
December 11, 2006, 09:51 PM
There was a thread about that a while back. That's why I'd want the heaviest bullet in the caliber, to maximize penetration. I don't know if that 30 grain hollow point would make 5".

chipp
December 11, 2006, 09:56 PM
I think its a great back up as long as you know its limitations. in the summer shorts and no shirt its small and comfortable. I have alot of easy carry guns..for me there is always a day here and there in the summer that even my bauer 25 feels to heavey and I wouldn't carry anything if it werent for the mini. Mine has a 2 3/4" barrell. (cut down from 4)
actually I was having a problem with it misfiring. its got to be at least 10 years old.
I sent it to NAA and they rebuilt it and sent it back. only charging for shipping.
They replaced all the small parts. (i know their all small parts)

Confederate
December 12, 2006, 12:08 AM
I'd greatly prefer a good .38 +P to a .22 mag, but I defend the latter as an adequate weapon. Even a Ruger Mark II would be formidible in .22LR because of its amazing rapid fire. Despite what I was carrying, I would hate to go up against someone with a Ruger.

The magnum packs substantially more punch, but still lacks sufficient energy to put down a determined attack. Because the gun is lighter, you're more likely to carry it and for that reason it may be just what you need.

Where it really shines is out of a rifle.

22-rimfire
December 12, 2006, 12:47 AM
While I would love to have a 22 WMR revolver for concealed carry, I would just stick with a 38spl +P Smith (Model 442 or 642). 22 mags are real noisy and the bullet is pretty small. I lean toward a slightly larger hole size (caliber). If you research the various threads on the 22 LR or 22 WMR for carry, you always end up with the higher probabilty for a misfire with a rimfire caliber issue and the hole size argument. What is big enough? Your choice. It is your life.

Wolfpackin
December 12, 2006, 02:16 AM
Thanks to all that replied. I will continue to watch the responses as I make my decision. Please note my new post in this forum "Taurus .38 Spcl" I started a new thread to entice others.

mike101
December 12, 2006, 05:46 AM
I don't know that the 50 grain Federal Game-Shock would give you more penetration. Compared to their 40 and 30 grain rounds, the 50 grain produces less velocity AND quite a bit less energy. I was surprised by this, because one would assume that the heavier bullet would pack more punch.

Some ammo makers are using a 40 grain FMJ bullet. Wouldn't that give you the most penetration? I am also thinking about RWS .40 grain rounds, FMJ and SJHP. These have the highest velocity of any 40 grain rounds I've seen (for $25/50 they should), but I can't find the energy figures.

I bought a .22 Mag. Mini recently, but it's still out at the smiths, being improved (forged barrel), so I haven't fired it yet.

I have a box of CCI + V, CCI 40 grain FMJ, and a box of the RWS SJHP's, so I'm curious about all of this.

Stainz
December 12, 2006, 09:35 AM
I have an arthritic friend with a 642. My favorite PD round for a .38 snubby, if it is +P rated, is the Remington R38S12 158gr LHPSWC +P round, which I chrono-ed at 840 fps from my 2" 10 for 247 ft-lb. It has a proven record - and is more effective in one shot stops than .45 ACP ball ammo. This round is too much for my friend. A great low recoil round is the simple 148gr full wadcutter, with the largest meplate of all .38 caliber bullets. That will make a large wound channel for the caliber chosen, albeit not offer the energy to shatter many bones - or to over-penetrate. It has a very mild recoil, even in the Airweight. It makes a 'boom', not the supersonic/earsplitting crack of a .22 Magnum or .357 Magnum. Just a thought...

Stainz

PS Price a 442 or 642 - then that 351! Now price/find the ammo - .38 Special ammo is about the same as .22 Magnum.

Onmilo
December 12, 2006, 10:18 AM
I still hold the opinion that for a .22 Magnum pistol to really exploit the true potential of the cartridge one need to have a minimum of five inches of barrel length.
Any shorter and you are not getting any better performance than a .22 CCI Stinger out of the same length barre and this pretty well eliminates the .22 Magnum as a serious candidate for serious defense carry.l.

If Smith and Wesson offered the 351 with adjustable sights, a five or six inch barrel and called it the 'Magnum Kit Gun" I for one would buy one.
As such as it is offered now, a two inch barrel seven shooter is nothing more than an offer to the gullible and a waste of $5 to $8 a box ammunition.

MCgunner
December 12, 2006, 11:05 AM
I think its a great back up as long as you know its limitations. in the summer shorts and no shirt its small and comfortable. I have alot of easy carry guns..for me there is always a day here and there in the summer that even my bauer 25 feels to heavey and I wouldn't carry anything if it werent for the mini.

I think that's the whole point of the mini revolver, they can go when nothing else can. They are so easy to carry, I mean, WHY NOT own one and carry it even if you're carrying two other guns?

Mine is in .22LR. Out of a 1" barrel, there's not much difference in the LR and the mag except the mag is a LOT louder as 90 percent of the charge is burning outside the barrel. I have mine in a "holster grip" so I can actually HIT something with it.:D I can't even hold the danged thing to fire without the holster grip, but the gun folds up in it like a little pocket knife.

They're handy, excellent little guns, but I sure wouldn't wanna have to depend on one as a primary. But, there are a very few times when I can't carry anything bigger, and I don't do shorts. You don't wanna see these chicken legs in shorts, trust me. :eek: The mini revolver beats nothin', but fortunately mine mostly rides as back up or third gun. It's easier to carry than some of the knives I see guys posting that they carry and I'm sorta scared of knives. I don't like contact weapons. The NAA is ALMOST a contact weapon, but not quite.:D

Jamie C.
December 12, 2006, 02:07 PM
If Smith and Wesson offered the 351 with adjustable sights, a five or six inch barrel and called it the 'Magnum Kit Gun" I for one would buy one.

Well, it ain't a Smith & Wesson, but it's got a 5 inch barrel and carries 8 rounds...
http://www.taurususa.com/images/imagesMain/941SS5.jpg
TAURUS MODEL 941 .22 Mag. REVOLVER (http://www.taurususa.com/products/product-details.cfm?id=373&category=Revolver)


J.C.

ronto
December 12, 2006, 02:22 PM
Firing a 22 Magnum from a short barrel is just taking good money and turning it into loud noise...at least you'll get more practice with a 22LR...neither one is a SD choice.

Jorg Nysgerrig
December 12, 2006, 05:03 PM
Where is every one getting this information that the .22 mag from a short barrel is a complete wasted?

I posted this information in another thread months ago, but I think it still applies.


http://www.naaminis.com/naaveloc.html

If you use the NAA information for all the 40 gr rounds out of a 1 1/8" barrel, they list the mean .22 LR velocities at 8 feet as: 586, 624, 681, 712, 725, 679, 715, 727, 677, 685, 718, and 653. For .22 WMR in 40 gr, again at 8 feet, they list 788, 811, 802, 879, and 878.

If you take the fastest LR (727) vs the slowest WMR (788), you still have a 61 fps difference. If you average the velocities (LR = 682, WMR = 832) you get a difference of 150 fps.

From the 1 5/8" barrel, the average difference grows to 181 fps using 40 gr ammo. The 4" barrel, which the original poster is asking about has the average velocity of 874 for LR and 1026 for WMR.

So what does this mean as far as energy?
From the 1 1/8" barrel, the average .22 LR delivers 41.3 ft/lbs at 8 feet. The .22 Mag steps that up to 61.5 ft/lbs.

From the 1 5/8" barrel, the .22 LR produces 41.8 ft/lbs, while the .22 mag weighs in at 66.8 ft/lbs.

From the 4" barrel, the LR has 67.8 ft/lbs and the mag is up to 93.5 ft/lbs.

It appears there is a substantial difference between .22 LR and .22 Mag (WMR), even out of barrels as short as 1 1/8".


Again, according to these numbers, the .22 WMR substanially outperforms the .22 LR, even in short barrels.

Shear_stress
December 12, 2006, 05:35 PM
Again, according to these numbers, the .22 WMR substanially outperforms the .22 LR, even in short barrels.

Yes, the .22 WMR has a numerical advantage in muzzle energy over a .22 LR from a barrel of the same length. This is true. However, this is not proof that the Magnum offers any real world advantage in wounding potential. We are still talking about rounds with less than 100 ft-lbs of muzzle energy. We could argue that the extra energy doesn't hurt (the shooter, that is), but is it enough of a benefit to outweigh the increased flash, noise, and ammo cost (which may translate to practice time)?

On the other hand, if .22 Magnum is the only thing you feel comfortable with shooting and carrying, than don't sweat it! The usual cliche of "it's better than no gun" applies. There isn't a mouse gun out there that I would volunteer to stand in front of.

MCgunner
December 12, 2006, 06:51 PM
From the 1 1/8" barrel, the average .22 LR delivers 41.3 ft/lbs at 8 feet. The .22 Mag steps that up to 61.5 ft/lbs.

From the 1 5/8" barrel, the .22 LR produces 41.8 ft/lbs, while the .22 mag weighs in at 66.8 ft/lbs.

If you figure percentage of extra energy, makes it sound like a bunch. But, I don't think 66.8 ft lbs is a whole big deal. :rolleyes: I'd carry neither for primary and the .22LR is more useful to me an cheaper to operate and a LOT quieter.

If 66 ft lbs floats your boat, go for it. Just remember, not matter if it's 41 ft lbs or 66, you gotta aim for the eyes with such a mouse caliber. Forget about center mass, doesn't exist.

Jorg Nysgerrig
December 12, 2006, 07:25 PM
Don't get me wrong. I'm not endorsing it as a self-defense cartridge. It just seems that many people insist there is no difference between the two cartridges out of these little guns, when in fact, there seems to be a considerable difference between the two.

That said, having shot the NAA in both .22 LR and .22 MAG, I wouldn't describe either as pleasant to shoot. But I was going to carry something that small, I would want it to pack as much of a punch as possible.

However, plinking is more fun with a full-sized .22 and my .40 makes more sense for defense. While these guns may be acceptable to some when a larger gun can't be taken along, they barely rank higher than a novelty to me.

ravencon
December 12, 2006, 08:11 PM
I believe the legendary Bill Jordan thought highly of the snubby in .22 mag as a CCW.

That said, it wouldn't be my first (or second) choice--I don't have Bill Jordan's speed, accuracy and experience. ;)

MCgunner
December 13, 2006, 12:19 PM
I read an article in a gun rag once that called the NAA minis "onion field guns", after the movie. They promoted it as a third gun. I can see that because it's so bloomin' easy to take along. I do think it needs the holster grip. It's quite shootable and accurate with the bigger grip. I can't shoot the thing without it.

The .22 mag grip is a little larger and might be more shootable. Having one on a necklace under your shirt would be a possibility for a FOURTH gun. :D If I was in law enforcement, I might have these things all over me when I'm working. :D

chipp
December 20, 2006, 08:18 AM
In responce to 22mag in a mini revolver being more expensive, meaning less practice. The main practice IMO should be in tactics.
Something that happened to me in fun but could have been for real....
A 450lb man (a friend)came up behind me as I was sitting in a chair he put his left hand on my shoulder and his right hand on my side carry revolver. Needless to say..pushind down he folded me till my chest was on the table and easily removed my revolver. while I was folded, my left hand was able to get my mini from my right front pocket. he sat in front of me with my revolver in his hand aimed down. When he looked at me guess where my mini was.
(from 3 ft away) Of course I don't play like this anymore.

ArchAngelCD
December 20, 2006, 02:20 PM
I would carry a .22 LR pistol only if there was no way to conceal a more potent gun. If you are out at the beach with only swimming trunks and a T shirt then a palm size .22 LR is better than a knife but I wouldn't choose it for a regular carry piece.

You should look into a .38 Spl or .32 Mag snub nose IMO.

achildofthesky
December 22, 2006, 08:58 AM
If you like 22 mag because of size considerations how about one of these???

Comfy to hold and shoot as you can see this is a 4" barrel model they exist in 2 1/2" or so and 6" as well. Granted not the first choice in power but quite flat and reasonably light and yes a bit loud and it has a good deal of flash from the bore...

Patty

suemarkp
December 24, 2006, 07:40 PM
That AMT was the first gun I ever bought. I did similar trade offs in my head, since I didnt' handload then and wanted more power than a 22LR. This was also the first gun I've ever sold. Penetration and performance in wet newspapers was impressive.

The 22 WMR works OK, but the AMT was a little finicky about ammo. It didn't like the 50gr rounds at all, or most Federal ammo. Win and CCI were the best.

I think most everyone has touched on the disadvantages of the 22 WMR. I agree with those and summarize them again:

Its expensive and not reloadable.
You have a small level of ammo choices, but its better now than ever in the past.
It makes a huge muzzle flash. This could be an advantage if you wish to burn your opponent though.
It is extremely loud.

With the advances in 22LR loadings, including some of the exotic ones like the 60gr Aguila SS and the fast 40gr CCI Velicitor, I'd go with a 22LR. Way more choices in ammo and you can find dirt cheap 22LR whereas you cannot with 22 WMR.

special ops
July 5, 2008, 09:08 PM
I recently purchased a 941 and fired 42 rounds. There was one misfire. I guess it's OK as long as you have 7 more to fire (assuming the first misfire did not cause your demise.

metrotps
July 5, 2008, 11:52 PM
Many LEO's in the Seattle area carry a Taurus 941UL 22mag snubbie as a backup gun. In fact they are hard to come by out here because of this popularity. I have one that likes CCI 40 grain best as anything lighter doesn't stablize well in the 1 in 15 twist. I am going to try some 45 and 50 grain bullets and will report on the results. The muzzle blast is severe and the penetration is documented here:
http://www.brassfetcher.com/22WMR.html
In real world shootings many survivors have reported not seeing or hearing the shots but only felt an impact. The muzzleblast would be a bonus shock factor in a self defence encounter but a detriment to the shooter in a nightime secenario.

ArchAngelCD
July 6, 2008, 01:36 AM
WOW, this thread is more than a year and a half old and it's back!!!

REALLY???

DavidVS
July 6, 2008, 01:45 AM
No one has yet talked about ammunition quality!

I have a NAA "Black Widow" with both the .22LR and .22 Magnum cylinders. I enjoy shooting the .22 Magnum a lot more. I have yet to find a brand of .22LR that is not incredibly smoky, and I dislike standing in smoke and lead dust. The CCI .22 Magnum costs a bit more but burns cleanly even out of that tiny barrel.

If I only had the .22LR cylinder I would not practice as much!

James Clifton
July 15, 2008, 07:25 PM
I really get a kick out of guys bad mouthing the 22mag...then they say they the carry a NAA. Give me a break...I have & carry a 351PD quite a bit.The 351 is NOT for target shooting...it's for up close.I have 7rounds & my first shot is going to the groin!!Now... I have 6 more !!I repeat it's for CLOSE contact....the 351 is light easy to hide & I PRACTICE with her quite a bit.Bottom line is WE all have diff.taste in guns.Just my two cents,
Jim:D

bigdavep
March 26, 2009, 07:26 PM
this whole thread makes me wonder... now that Taurus makes this gun (and sells plenty, btw) will some ammo company make this cartridge in a faster burning powder? and is there any difference in that area between one manuf. and another? What might be the best .22 mag round for a revolver?

I have one, of course. Not sure about that 90% number.. it sure as heck kicks harder than any .22LR handgun I've ever used.. WAY harder.. and if that much of the charge was burning outside the barrel, the kick should be less...

just thoughts.

sbd45acp
October 14, 2009, 02:13 AM
Wolfpackin- I have been a student of the martial art of self defense with firearms and, a student of, ahem-"Violent interpersonal social conflicts" for 25 plus years. Figure out a way to carry the 40. It won't seem heavy or big enough if you ever need it. Sacrifice some fashion, get a quality belt and holster and try some different carry methods.The instructor may have quoted rifle bbl. length energy which you will never get from a short revolver bbl. 22 Mag uses slow burning powder to attain high velocity from a RIFLE bbl. Much of it will burn OUTSIDE a short bbl. The muzzle blast and flash will be great show but the little 45 grn 22 pill may not impress the bad guy(s) excepting a brain hit.
As for the NAA mini revolver I consider them novelty only. If carried in the pocket, lint, trash ,dirt and debris build up under the grip panels and render it inoperable. Think about trying to draw one of those tiny things under stress,thumb cock it SA while trying to keep digits off the unprotected trigger, a 6 in. fire ball in low light and, if you DO manage to get off a round- you have struck you assailant with a 22 mag from a 1 in. bbl. One student on the range (big fellow) was trying to prove he could overcome all those obstacles and when the little NAA fired, it recoiled right out of his fingers! I would rather have a good knife. I personally consider 9mm/ 38 Spl. the minimum unless there in some physical limitation. Most 9mm, 40, 45 acp are easier to manipulate, HIT with, and have less FELT recoil that the smaller hide out /pocket carry blow back operated pistols.

ArchAngelCD
October 14, 2009, 05:07 AM
Why in the world did anyone bring this thread back not once, but twice? This thread is just about 3 year old now. I'm sure the OP already made up his mind on the .22 Mag. :rolleyes:

Mainsail
October 14, 2009, 12:28 PM
I'm considering a .22 Mag for lighter carry situations when my .40 S&W is too heavy.

I can only think of one scenario where the gun's weight makes much of a difference; swimming. (Wouldn't want to sink to the bottom!)

Why is the weight of the gun so important?

EDIT: Just read the previous post. D'oh!

Daizee
October 14, 2009, 12:48 PM
How about a 5.7x28mm revolver? :-D
You'd get nearly .22WMR rifle performance out of a 4" barrel.
Shades of the .22Jet, and it would put all this to rest (but for ammo expense).

-Daizee

couldbeanyone
October 15, 2009, 02:02 AM
You can't use NAA mini-revolver ballistics for other revolvers. The back of their barrels are so narrow that they lose a huge amount of pressure out of the barrel to cylinder gap. My 4" Taurus 941 gets 1647fps with CCI Maxi-mag+V vs 1396fps fps for a 4" NAA with the same load. I get 1384fps with Winchester super-X vs 1101 for a NAA with the same load. There is also a large gain in 2" barrels.

vikz
March 15, 2010, 02:56 AM
I almost traded for one yesterday its the S&W 351pd with wooden grips, its just so light and seems very easy to carry, it has the hiviz sights also, I just wasn't very familiar with 22mag performance in HD situations..

golden
March 15, 2010, 08:06 AM
I think the shooting instructor exagerated the ballistics of the .22 magnum. I really like the cartridge in a rifle which is the only type of gun that will get those ballistics.
It has a real power and trajectory advantage of the .22 long rifle when fired in a rifle.


In a handgun, the .22 magnum will not have enough barrel length to achieve this. Martin D. TOPPER tested a pair of .22 rimfire revolvers for GUNWORLD magazine and found little velocity advadtage to the .22 magnum from a snubnose revolver.

The ammo will cost quite a bit more and not do much more damage from a snubnose. If you are going to use a longer barreled gun, then you might want to get a more powerful caliber.
In a revolver, I would go with a .38 Special and use +P ammo if the recoil was within your toleration limits. Stick with a light load like the 125 grain NYCLAD hollowpoints if not.

Jim

Stainz
March 15, 2010, 08:59 AM
Five years ago, I had a commemorative 4.6" Single Six - briefly. I chrono-ed everything then - and tried Federal Game Shok .22LRs and Remington WMRs, yielding 1,023 +/-20 fps and 1,470 +/-39 fps. That's less than 10% off the velocity of those .22 LRs from a 25.4" CZ rifle, but 30+% off a 21" Savage .22 WMR velocity. My bet is the latter drops more quickly as the snubby barrel is approached.

Now, the real problem - the J-frame rimfire lockwork. While the K-frame rimfire, ie, 617, lockwork is similar to the centerfire versions, not so with the J-frame. My SS 63, a .22 LR, came with a 14 lb hammer coil - a 642 comes with a 9 lb. Add a 13+ lb trigger recoil spring, and it's a miserable trigger pull. Go to the 351PD in .22 WMR, and it's worse (Perhaps the WMR is tougher to ignite?). The problem here with the 351PD for folks with weak wrists is simple - they will have real problems pulling that trigger! S&W only offers a trigger 'enhancement' for $85 - no traditional trigger job - and no trigger/hammer spring replacements for the J-frame rimfires.

A 642/442 with 148gr wadcutter target loads will be easier on the wrists/hands - and punch a much larger hole with 3+ times the throw weight.

Stainz

PS Knowing all of this, I'd still likely grab a 351PD if I found one at a good price!

snooperman
March 15, 2010, 09:29 AM
There is not going to be adequate energy in Ft/lbs to make it worth your while as a carry gun. Carry at least a 38 special in a snubby , preferably a +P load or a good lightweight 9mm such as the KelTec P11 and you will have a higher probability of stopping the "bad guy" than some puny 22 cal. BRING ENOUGH GUN. I carry a Colt detective IWB everyday ,and for backup , sometimes I carry a 9mm KelTec P11 or a pocket 380.

mgkdrgn
March 15, 2010, 04:35 PM
22Mag is a particularly nasty little round that never really gets it's due. It's much more than a 22lr on steroids.

My daily carry is a NAA Black Widow in 22mag. Why, because it's small enough and light enough for me to actually CARRY, comfortably, and without any one else knowing about it, here in SC where I am in T shirt and shorts 8+ months of the year.

Is it what I would want to take on the Zombie invasion or a horde of Zulu warriors? No ... but I can't fit a drum magazine shotgun in my pocket ...

HB
March 15, 2010, 04:55 PM
I think a 22 mag round with a more appropriate powder would work wonders in a pistol

HB

BUFF
March 15, 2010, 08:03 PM
I agree with what Confederate is sayin (may be adequate but not optimal)..and I agree that the Ruger MK would be fierce to go against in the right hands. I could absolutely envision someone with a snubbie .38 fumbling and failing to hit in a crisis situation and the MK could drop 7 or 8 yellowjackets with pinpoint accuracy. Nothing has ever felt so right in my hands as a MK and a BHP.

easyg
March 15, 2010, 11:40 PM
If the .22 magnum (from a handgun) was an effective caliber to use against hostile humans, then police and military would be carrying them.

Can2boy
March 16, 2010, 12:13 AM
remember guys, A 22 in your pocket or hip is far more effective than a 45 in your gun safe. as archangel said any gun is better than no gun at all.

MCgunner
March 16, 2010, 12:35 AM
I think a 22 mag round with a more appropriate powder would work wonders in a pistol

HB



I recently bought a NAA super companion, the cap and ball version of the .22 mag. With 2 grains B'eye, it'll push those little 30 grain NAA conicals over 1200 fps.:what: I gotta admit, I'm impressed. That's better than NAA shows the 30 grain CCI magnum in the same barrel length. Pretty accurate out to 15 yards, too. The neat thing about this version is you can buy spare cylinders for 40 bucks. I'm getting ready to order one. Gives you a quicker reload than trying to reload the cartridge version. This may be one time that the cap and ball is better than the modern cartridge revolver!

I'd been wanting to try the super companion for quite a while. I knew NAA and Freedom Arms used to advertise using bullseye in these guns. It met my best hopes. :D I will use it when carrying the .380 or 9 is just not possible, which ain't often, but happens. I'm really liking the thing.

nitro105
March 16, 2010, 10:59 AM
Are you allowed to shoot hollow points for defence down there? I can't even take my ruger bisley hunting to keep a bear from chewing my leg off.

MCgunner
March 16, 2010, 01:27 PM
We can uses whatever we can buy. I don't worry about problems with handloads, either, not in Texas. I'm not sure hollow points is wise in .22 mag, anyway. I'd worry about getting enough penetration if i got any expansion. It ain't like you're going to get any massive energy transfer from 110 ft lbs or so. Your best bet is to open two holes and try to hit something vital. With such mouse calibers, head shots are preferred.

BUFF
March 16, 2010, 05:50 PM
I love that little NAA setup McGunner!! That looks perfect as a summer CCW..when nothing else has a place to ride..

woad_yurt
March 16, 2010, 05:58 PM
I like a .22 WMR in a longish barrel. It's a little weak in a pocket gun. I wish they'd load a revolver-friendly round for the caliber.

How about a P3AT or another little .380? It's quite a bit more oomph in the same sized package.

BUFF
March 16, 2010, 06:06 PM
Does the Kel-Tec run a little smaller than the LCP? I'm a big Ruger guy

NG VI
March 16, 2010, 06:25 PM
According to my NRA instructor the .22 Mag has greater muzzle energy (324 ft/lbs) than .38 Spcl, .380, .32 & .25 yet many posters prefer the .38 Spcl. or others.
Stopping power is often dependant upon a vital body part being hit and the .22 Mag has great penetration. My thinking is that if you miss a vital part by more than 1/4 inch you would miss with a .45 too.


The problem is that for a few ounces more (you never said what model your .40 was, and that makes a big difference, they run the gamut from 15 ounce poly-framed Kahrs and 19 ounce Glock 27s to forty or more ounce unloaded high capacity 1911 variants, which kind yours is will help us give you some leads to investigate.) you can get something in 9mm, .40, whatever. For the same weight unless you have an NAA mini you can get a .38 that is exactly the same size.

And that 324 foot-pounds at the muzzle is out of a rifle barrel, plus the .22 Magnum is generally loaded for varmint hunting, not self-defense. They have different goals and performance standards for the bullet they launch. Out of a snub-nosed revolver, you'll be lucky to get half that muzzle energy. A .38 out of a short revolver is a known quantity, loads (many of them) are designed specifically for the platform, and it isn't dependent on a 20" barrel for that performance.

NG VI
March 16, 2010, 06:38 PM
Oh and I know this is a necro thread where the poster changed course immediately.

MCgunner
March 16, 2010, 06:45 PM
Does the Kel-Tec run a little smaller than the LCP? I'm a big Ruger guy

The Ruger is very slightly heavier, but both guns are about the same size.

pezo
March 16, 2010, 10:41 PM
"If the .22 magnum (from a handgun) was an effective caliber to use against hostile humans, then police and military would be carrying them". but the military and police dont need to carry ultra concealed weapons necessarily either. Nobody's saying it as balllistically effective as a standard sized defense caliber, but try finding a 9mm that can fit in the extra small pocket on the right side of a pair of levi's unnoticalble pal. Whats good for the military is not always good for the LEO' is not always good for NON LEO. Military can only use hard ball anyways because of geneva convention, that kinda sucks. Doesnt mean I'm gonna pack hard ball ammo.

woad_yurt
March 17, 2010, 05:08 AM
Does the Kel-Tec run a little smaller than the LCP?

The Kel-Tec is lighter and thinner. The slide is a little thinner but the grip, quite a bit. Makes for less of a presence. My friend has an LCP and there was a noticeable difference when I put it in my pocket. It's a choice: Not-as-small-but-prettier or smaller-but-not-as-pretty.

Walkalong
March 17, 2010, 08:11 AM
Serving me well since 1978. I've seen what it will do to things. I don't believe anyone wants to get shot 2 or 3 times up close and personal with this thing. It beats the bigger caliber that was left behind because we were too lazy to pack it. Back in the day the other options this small were little .25's and .22 LR's. I still carry this NAA .22 Mag at times instead of my .32 Seecamp or 1911 .45. I don't figure I'll be in a fire fight any time soon.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=114632&stc=1&d=1265035586

Sam1911
March 17, 2010, 08:49 AM
Note of correction:

Military can only use hard ball anyways because of Geneva convention, that kinda sucks.

Not the Geneva convention. The Hague Convention of 1899, which also forbade the launching of projectiles and explosives from balloons or other aerial platforms.

MCgunner
March 17, 2010, 10:04 AM
Serving me well since 1978. I've seen what it will do to things. I don't believe anyone wants to get shot 2 or 3 times up close and personal with this thing. It beats the bigger caliber that was left behind because we were too lazy to pack it. Back in the day the other options this small were little .25's and .22 LR's. I still carry this NAA .22 Mag at times instead of my .32 Seecamp or 1911 .45. I don't figure I'll be in a fire fight any time soon.

I don't think even the baby Browning was as small, actually, nor as light. It fills a niche in a carry battery. I don't understand these folks that have one carry, a 1911, and that's all they claim to carry. That's simply not possible for me. I have to have a range and I carry the biggest, best I can. 90 percent of the time that's either a Kel Tec P11 in 9x19+P or Taurus 85UL loaded with 158 grain .38 +P in a pocket, 8 percent of the time it's a bigger belt gun either in .357 magnum or .45ACP, but then 2 percent of the time, I need my NAAs. The NAAs make great back ups or third guns, too, so small there's no reason NOT to carry them.

The Kel-Tec is lighter and thinner. The slide is a little thinner but the grip, quite a bit. Makes for less of a presence. My friend has an LCP and there was a noticeable difference when I put it in my pocket. It's a choice: Not-as-small-but-prettier or smaller-but-not-as-pretty.

My Grendel is the same length and height as the LCP. I have a wallet holster I made for it that I can carry in my back pocket of any pants I've ever worn and it just looks like a wallet there. I don't get excited about a couple of tenths of an inch in thickness and it holds 12 rounds in its 12 ounce frame which is welcome in a marginal caliber. This is why I've decided I don't need one of the new generation .pocket .380s, at least at this time.

snooperman
March 17, 2010, 12:54 PM
According to Ed Lovette in his book, 50% of confrontations start with a physical attack by the bad guy in which the individual is knocked down from behind and beaten, stabbed or shot before he has a chance to respond. If you can get to your gun , many times you can't , you may not be able to get the shot placement needed to end it in your favor. Also, he recommends a second carry gun on the opposite side, so you may be able to respond. Ed Lovette has researched such attacks frrom 1958-2002 and recommends at least a 38 special +P or a 9mm handgun for your primary carry gun. WHY? Because the probability of you winning goes down quickly with the size of the caliber. The 22 magnum is just not an adequate choice. Oh yes, I hear the proverbial "It is better than nothing" which defies good judgement when there is so much data to refute this nonsensical statement, to say the least. BRING ENOUGH GUN-- Like Bil l Jordan said 50 years ago, "there are no second place winners" My 2 cents

MCgunner
March 17, 2010, 06:19 PM
What if your only option to your 500 S&W magnum is the .22 mag or go unarmed? I'll give you a for instance. I was just in the hospital 2 hours ago visiting my wife. You are not legal carrying in a hospital. Do you really wanna risk being "made"? I just pulled my 9mm off my belt (Rosen IWB) and locked it out of sight in the car and walked in carrying two NAA minis, one in each pocket.

Gun writers rarely live in the real world. Many are cops and don't have to worry about "being made" in a no fly zone. If I had the option, I'd carry a 12 gauge everywhere, but that's simply not possible in the real world.

snooperman
March 17, 2010, 07:47 PM
In fact most of the research that has been done in this area has been done by them and I would gladly take their advice .Probability with stopping power is real and it cannot be ignored , The problem with these small calibers is they might work but is it the best to have on your body when a larger caliber would have a higher probability of stopping an attack. AS a second gun or third gun , I would not have one. These are personal choices. One can find a light weight 380 to put it their pocket with a much better probability and better outcome than a 22 magnum. By the way Bill Jordan, Ed Lovette, John Taffin , and Masad Ayoob live in the real world as writers and a prudent person would take their advice as well.

MCgunner
March 17, 2010, 08:41 PM
AS a second gun or third gun , I would not have one.

So, your third gun is.......Desert Eagle .50AE? :rolleyes: Yeah, I agree with you about normal carry as a primary or even second gun should be a service caliber. But, I have the little NAAs for the abnormal. I always have my .22 in my left pocket/weak side pocket. I usually carry either a 9 or an ultralite .38 in the strong side pocket. Then, occasionally, if I deem it prudent, I'll wear a long, baggy Hawaiian type shirt or in cooler weather when I can, I'll wear a long vest as a cover garment and wear a belt gun. When I wear a belt gun, much of the time lately I carry my 3" Taurus 66 .357 magnum in a JIT slide with a Taurus 85UL in the strong pocket as back up. That way I can carry two speed strips loaded with .38 158 +P which will reload either gun. Now, that's when I'm paranoid. :D I run a paper route twice a week and collect once a week and have enough money on me then that I do get kinda paranoid. I'll usually carry a belt gun if I'm going to a big city, too. I occasionally go with the 9 in a pocket and my .45 in a summer special, but I really like that .357 and the OWB belt slide, comfy and compact.

In the above cases, I always have a NAA .22 in my weak side pocket. It's better than not carrying it and I figure if I'm struggling with someone and only have my weak arm free, I can screw that thing in his ear and let him have it. You can't tell me a .22LR, much less a magnum, to the head point blank ain't gonna hurt. :rolleyes: I mean, I'm no gun writer, but I have killed a lot of things with .22s, even pistols. They will do more'n you think or seem to give 'em credit for. I know I don't wanna get shot in the ear with a .22 mini, LR or magnum.

I do have the little super companion as a primary option when nothing bigger will do. I do not wish to be unarmed and there are times when it is that or being unarmed, few, but there are times. Besides, I had run out of things to buy and thought it'd be cool and fill a niche. :D

Sam1911
March 17, 2010, 08:49 PM
I'm no gun writer... HA! HA! That's an awesome catchphrase! I think tossing that out earns anyone an instant +2 credibility points.

Sort of like back in the day when the soap opera actors would hock cold medicine and open the advertisement with, "I'm not a doctor, but I play one on TV..." :D

Jim: "In my experience..."
Bob: "What? That doesn't sound right!"
Jim: "Well, I'm no gunwriter!"
Bob: "Oh, sorry, I didn't mean any offense, I'm sure you're right!"

Jonah71
March 17, 2010, 08:51 PM
Whatever you do.....stay away from the Taurus Ultra lite .22 mag. You do NOT want that piece of junk.

MCgunner
March 17, 2010, 08:56 PM
I always liked Jan Libourel. He does articles on mouse guns as well as serious calibers and will give them credit for filling a niche a gun owner might have a need for. I don't care much for Jeff Cooper, narrow minded my way or the highway type writers.

Whatever you do.....stay away from the Taurus Ultra lite .22 mag. You do NOT want that piece of junk.

Do tell...:rolleyes: I'd buy one if I wanted something like that. But, as I think snoop said earlier, it's as big as a .38, so why would ya want to carry it? My Taurus 85SSUL is quite as carriable, accurate, and more powerful. The little NAAs are the only .22 mags that make sense to me and that only for special carry options, not a chosen daily carry.

Jonah71
March 24, 2010, 08:41 PM
I always liked Jan Libourel. He does articles on mouse guns as well as serious calibers and will give them credit for filling a niche a gun owner might have a need for. I don't care much for Jeff Cooper, narrow minded my way or the highway type writers.



Do tell...:rolleyes: I'd buy one if I wanted something like that. But, as I think snoop said earlier, it's as big as a .38, so why would ya want to carry it? My Taurus 85SSUL is quite as carriable, accurate, and more powerful. The little NAAs are the only .22 mags that make sense to me and that only for special carry options, not a chosen daily carry.
I like .22 mags a lot. I even liked shooting the Taurus UL. The problem I had with it was removing the brass after firing. If not for that I wouldn't have sold it. Very picky about the ammo as far as fps.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why Not 22 Mag.?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!