.22 LR/Mag comparisons


PDA






4evernewbie
January 20, 2013, 12:15 PM
I am looking for opinions based on experience, for a .22 revolver with both LR and WMR cylinders. It will be used for my own plinking and carrying for small game while I bowhunt, as well as teaching grandkids. I prefer a barrel shorter than 6".

I have a Heritage RoughRider that I consider to be very poor quality (trigger & accuracy mostly, no FTF problems so far), so I am looking for a better quality revolver.

Any comparison comments on the Taurus 992B Tracker and Ruger's (Single Six, Single Ten) or others would be welcome. Ruger's reputation goes a long way, while the Taurus reputation has been spotty, with some models being very good and others not so much.

If you enjoyed reading about ".22 LR/Mag comparisons" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
sixgunner455
January 20, 2013, 05:51 PM
Have a Ruger Single Six convertible. Functioning and performance is flawless, seems quite accurate, feels balanced and comfortable, 16yo daughter claims it as her favorite gun.

What more do you want?

xring
January 20, 2013, 06:05 PM
I had a single six 5.5" barrel. Neither cylinder was nearly as accurate as either my S&W 48 (22 mag) or my 617 (.22). It's a compromise to have the ability to shoot both. The Single Six barrel dimension must concede to 22mag specs - .224 I believe, whereas the .22LR bullet is a couple thousanths smaller, resulting in less accuracy than a strictly LR barrel. That's what I've read anyway. It is still a reliable, fine handgun for plinking. It will never be a target revolver.

Jaymo
January 20, 2013, 06:08 PM
I wonder if one of the old, 1970s, non-convertible (.22 LR only) single six barrels is made strictly for .22 LR ammo, or if it's a compromise barrel?

I almost bought a Taurus .22 rimfire, but .22 DA revolvers don't really excite me, unless it's an old Colt or Smith target revolver, or an old Smith kit gun.

Forget how much, but .22 mag loses a good bit of velocity, when shot from a handgun, vs a rifle.

xring
January 20, 2013, 06:19 PM
I doubt if Ruger would have 2 different barrels ready to be produced, unless the early guns had no .22mag option yet on the books.
I have a very non scientific proof in my experience that the .22m from a revolver still hits harder than the LR from a rifle. So I'm plinking in the woods. There is a soggy mud bank. I fired a Win. .22LR HP from the rifle (10-22) into the mud from around 5 feet. Then I fired a CCI 22mag HP from the revolver right next to it. The mag blew a much deeper, and wider crater. That was proof enough for me. As I said, no science behind it, for whatever it's worth.

Vern Humphrey
January 20, 2013, 06:21 PM
The .22/.22 Mag guns are necessarily compromises. The .22 Mag is a larger bullet (.224 versus .223) and that makes a difference when shooting .22 LR.

Being a crusty, opinionated old codger, I don't own a .22 Mag hangun. When I want more than .22 LR I go to .38 Special/.357 Mag and get a big boost in performance, along with stellar accuracy in my guns.

Jaymo
January 20, 2013, 06:35 PM
I have no doubt that .22 Mag is a good bit more powerful from a pistol than a .22 LR is from a rifle, depending on the .22 LR round you're using.
Problem is, it's awfully expensive compared to LR, and loses a good bit of it's power from the shorter barrel.
Not slamming the .22 mag. I'm a fan of the round. I want a Kel Tec PMR 30 and a Ruger Single 9.

I don't always want to step up to .38/.357, just to get more power than a .22.
I like those two rounds a lot, also. But I'm a big fan of the .32s. Sometimes the .32s provide just the right amount of power. Plus, they tend to be very accurate.

My .32 H&R Mag Single Six fits in the same holster as my .22 LR Single Six and makes a lot of sense to me.

I don't know in which year Ruger started producing the convertible Single Six. IIRC, mine is a 78 model. Or a 76. I forget which.

kbbailey
January 21, 2013, 09:33 AM
I have been a Single Six owner/shooter for nearly 30yrs. Mine is holster-worn, barbed wire scratched, rain soaked, time tested, often abused, and has never failed. You and the grandkids won't wear it out. Squirrel hunt accurate.

Everyone should own a .22 handgun of some sort. The SS is my pick. Cheap practice with the .22lr. A good learning tool for the grandkids in so many ways.

>22 short if you need to be quiet; .22lr for plinking/hunting; .22 mag if you need to put something down, or just want to blow a fist-sized hole in the riverbank or make an impressive fireball at night.

I can hardly bare to see the .22 mag criticized, esp by someone that does,t own one. The .22mag is a big step-up in horsepower from .22lr.
.

Remllez
January 21, 2013, 10:30 AM
Forevernewbie,

I've owned and shot many Single Sixes over the years and if your not shooting for score, they are hard to beat. Smith makes a conversion .22 but it's double action and overpriced for me.

The magnum round is a hard hitter but ammo cost is comparable to 9mm so keep that in mind. I still own a late sixties and a mid seventies model that are better than average shooters and will pass them on.

The .22 magnum really shines when shot from a rifle, but I've used the magnum revolver to dispatch garden variety vermin around my uncles farm and our cabin with excellent results. The Rugers make fine holster guns and carry all day without trouble for me.

Given the choice between a Tarus and Ruger .22 conversion I would go home with the Ruger. That is just my preference, not trying to flame Tarus. I'm not sure but I think you can mount a scope and use the magnums flat shooting round to extend your reach.

Good luck on your search and just for giggles, Uberti is releasing a 12 shot Rimfire but I believe it may just be a .22 LR......:)

MedWheeler
January 21, 2013, 12:47 PM
Yet another nod to the Single-Six. Sorry you don't like your Rough Rider; I got one of the good ones, and I love it.

gbran
January 22, 2013, 12:25 AM
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y145/gbran/Single6.jpg

Bought this new in 1984. Rarely if ever use the LR cylinder. The wmr cyl has been very accurate for me. (More accurate than me).

rikman
January 22, 2013, 01:00 AM
Have a Ruger Single Six convertible. Functioning and performance is flawless, seems quite accurate, feels balanced and comfortable, 16yo daughter claims it as her favorite gun.

What more do you want?
Ditto

Jaymo
January 22, 2013, 01:36 AM
I like .22 mag a lot. I'm thinking about the Single Nine since I already have a Single Six in .22 LR. I have a Rossi .22 mag pump that is loads of fun.

Stainz
January 22, 2013, 11:04 AM
I've shot Ruger SS & SSS models - even owned, albeit briefly, their blued fixed sight NRA commemorative (~'04-'05) with a 4.6" barrel and gorgeous cocobolo stocks. Sadly, it's sights were off - hitting 1-2" left and 1.5-2" low from 12-25 yd, no matter the hold. I do have some chrono results, with Fed .22 LR 'GameShok' and Rem .22 WMR, both 40gr and in their respective cylinders:

.22 LR - 1,023fps; SD +/-20fps
.22WMR 1,470fps; SD +/-39fps

The GameShok is better than that SD implies. I am sure the over-sized barrel bore (for the .22WMR) and individual cylinder chambers add to this. By the same token, the lesser production numbers of .22 WMR in general tend to lower inherent accuracy for the price paid. Also, much of the propellant is used illuminating the area beyond the muzzle when using the long-barrel designed .22 WMR ammo. Today, several short barrel .22WMR ammos exist - and should do better than increase the velocity over a .22 LR by 43+%, which more than doubles the delivered KE, considering, as in my test casr above, the same bullet weight. That is significant.

To the OP: I'd get a Ruger 5.5" Super Single Six in SS and with adjustable sights. In my case, I ultimately got a few DA-capable S&W's - and am as happy as can be!

Stainz

CraigC
January 22, 2013, 11:41 AM
I wonder if one of the old, 1970s, non-convertible (.22 LR only) single six barrels is made strictly for .22 LR ammo, or if it's a compromise barrel?
The compromise bore began in 1968 for all Single Sixes. Personally, I don't think it makes as much difference as people think. I believe the way Ruger has always cut their chambers is a more significant factor than the barrels. The only way to build a tack driving Single Six is with a scratch-built linebored cylinder.

My chronographing mirrors Stainz' report. The .22Mag in a handgun is good for at least 400fps more velocity than a comparable .22LR load. Or 200fps more than a .22LR rifle. That's enough to make a significant difference on game. No, it will never be the cheap plinking round that the .22LR is but it is a wonderful field cartridge. It also shoots flatter and is more accurate at long range than the .38Spl will ever be.

scotjute
January 22, 2013, 04:28 PM
.22 lr is good for teaching newbies to shoot. However the .22 mag is what the .22lr wants to be when it grows up. Its what I carry around the farm, both in pistol and rifle. Ruger Single Six, 5.5" barrell is what I use/ recommend.

Ifishsum
January 25, 2013, 12:39 AM
I own 5 Taurus handguns and I've been quite happy with them - but for a 22LR/22WMR convertible revolver I'd have to wholeheartedly recommend the Single Six. There isn't anything similar that is comparable IMO, buy one and your grandchildren's grandchildren may be shooting it one day.

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