22 magnum for a ccw?

Carried a NAA's revolver as backup years ago. Better options out there now.

S&W makes (or did) a nice little J-frame that held a fair amount of .22 mag ammo. That could be an option, I would make sure you get short barrel ammo for it to get all you can out of one.

I prefer a .38 in a J-frame over the 22 mag though. .22 mag isn't a horrible option if there is some factor that drives you to that but it wouldn't be my top pick (likely not in my top 5 these days). Ammo is $$ also (in sane times).

I would prefer something centerfire and with more oomph than a .22 mag but it can do the job... but so can a sharp stick and the sharp stick will probably be more effective

Short barrels - concealed revolvers - limit the performance of .22 magnum.

Psychological deterrent? Well , any gun might accomplish that.
Immediate incapacitation? That's where I have my doubts.

A summarial comment from American Rifleman : "The .22 Magnum is drastically handicapped by power and energy—energy that’s needed to push through clothing, ribs and muscle."

If the guns are of similar size and style, I also would prefer a .38 or a .327 as well. The .22 mag has a LOT of bark for its bite, but all in all I’m not confident the horsepower is there.

Now of it’s a .22 Mag or nothing, then load me up with critical defense ammo and off I’ll go.

Stay safe.

I have owned a .22 Mag Mini for twenty years. Probably the most "time on duty" of any CCW gun I have carried since then.

I carry an S&W Airweight 7 shot 22 magnum as a CCW and don't feel undergunned with it. I've seen 2 legged vermin that were shot with a 22 magnum, and the holes it left were quite impressive to say the least.

In regards to .22 Mag vs .22 LR in revolvers, I don't find the benefits to be worth the trade offs in cylinder capacity, decreased reliability, increased ammo price, and the issue of when panics happen .22 Mag disappears from the shelves for years.

.22 LR is cheap enough you could stock up a 10 years supply of without much difficulty. .22 Mag... not so much and when it comes to rimfire, you have to have a supply because you can't reload it.

Compared to snub .32 revolvers, I cannot fathom a reason to own a .22 Mag over the .32 instead. I don't find an extra round in the cylinder worthy of the trade off because you're getting MUCH better reliability, penetration, damage, a lighter trigger, less muzzle blast (with .32 S&W and H&R ammo), .32 revolvers being able to shoot a variety of ammo more effectively (.22 LR sucks when shot from a .22 Mag chamber, and most importantly you can reload the .32.

I've no issues with .22 Mag in a single action because they often are available with a spare .22 LR cylinder and when Heritage makes 9 shot revolvers that's a great deal of firepower in a gun that costs under $200... that is an excellent low cost gun that good people on a fixed income stuck in horrible, crime ridden cities can afford that can provide protection in their home.

A double action .22 Mag tho? No, there's much better options for either less or the same amount of money. I was at the LGS this weekend and saw a .327 LCRx and a .22 Mag LCRx next to each other and when the price and cylinder capacity and ammo price is the same, what are you losing getting a .32 revolver?

I carried a Hi-Standard derringer in .22 Mag. for a while, until a buddy pestered me enough that I sold it to him.

I have also killed cows with .22 Magnum. I had the luxury of the time to put it precisely where it needs to go. One may not have the luxury of time with an aggressive human attacker. The derringer was for bad breath, 'get off me' confrontations, and my plan was one in each eye, at contact distance.

The Keltec PMR 30 has been an incredibly popular pistol and I believe one of the reasons a lot of people buy them is for home defense. Is it the best choice for you? There's plenty of evidence to suggest it's a whole lot better than a sharp stick.

Chris Baker at Lucky Gunner gel-tested .22 WMR cartridges and published the results back in January. He wrote, "A common belief about .22 Magnum is that when fired from a short barrel, it does not achieve enough velocity to perform noticeably better than .22 LR. I used to buy into this myth myself...."

Check out their results which show that with the right ammo, you can get good penetration from even a 2" LCR. With a 4" barrel and the right ammo, you can even get good penetration and expansion.

Personally, I hate everything rimfire. I'd rather set up a .32 with wimp Trail Boss loads if for some reason I couldn't deal with the recoil of anything more forceful. But is a PMR 30 a lot worse than a Keltec P32? Well, maybe it's worse for concealment, but I think I might actually prefer a PMR 30 to fight with.

labnoti said:

The Keltec PMR 30 has been an incredibly popular pistol and I believe one of the reasons a lot of people buy them is for home defense. Is it the best choice for you? There's plenty of evidence to suggest it's a whole lot better than a sharp stick.

Chris Baker at Lucky Gunner gel-tested .22 WMR cartridges and published the results back in January. He wrote, "A common belief about .22 Magnum is that when fired from a short barrel, it does not achieve enough velocity to perform noticeably better than .22 LR. I used to buy into this myth myself...."

Check out their results which show that with the right ammo, you can get good penetration from even a 2" LCR. With a 4" barrel and the right ammo, you can even get good penetration and expansion.

Personally, I hate everything rimfire. I'd rather set up a .32 with wimp Trail Boss loads if for some reason I couldn't deal with the recoil of anything more forceful. But is a PMR 30 a lot worse than a Keltec P32? Well, maybe it's worse for concealment, but I think I might actually prefer a PMR 30 to fight with.

Click to expand...

This thread isn't about the PMR30, it's about .22 Mag. Yeah, when the round goes off and the bullet goes down the barrel, it's more effective than .22 LR, maybe .32 ACP, but there are definite weaknesses to the .22 Mag in a semi auto pistol and the cartridge itself.

In terms of revolvers, you can get good penetration from .22 Mag in a short barrel, but I agree with Paul Harrell that the target you shoot at with small calibers like .22, .25, and, if carrying FMJ, .32 ACP, is the head, not the torso. Penetration is not as critical when the head is the target.

TTv2 said:

This thread isn't about the PMR30, it's about .22 Mag.

Click to expand...

Really? The OP asked, "Anyone here ever consider using a 22 magnum for ccw /self defense as their primary or secondary gun"
The PMR 30 uses Win. .22WMR ammo, so it is a .22Mag. Certainly not a pistol I would carry but, I have little doubt some who own one would and do. While the round is "lacking" to say the least having 30 rounds on the pipe would be nice I guess.

My limited experience with the 22 mag is that they are way to loud.
May not matter in a personal defense situation. But it has always seemed to me that the decibel level is excessive.

Several years ago I wanted a NAA .22 caliber for pocket carry around the house. I was trying to decided if I wanted a .22lr or .22 mag, so I charted the average of the velocities from the "Ballistics By The Inch" site to see how the two rounds compared out of a short barrel. Seeing as how the model I wanted has a 1-1/8" barrel, I decided the .22mag offered very little advantage out of a short snubby.



Now if you're comparing the .22 mag to a centerfire cartridge, I don't think it compares well at all, unless for "reasons" you need something with little recoil but you still have the hand strength to pull a heavier rimfire DA trigger.

So many 38 Specials out there, I cannot see using a 22 mag. Not to mention I am pretty sure that cartridge was meant to be fired in a rifle so velocity and power have to be lacking out of a 2 incher.

These threads always seem to turn into "why XX caliber can be, or even should be used for self defense", when the real question is why would one PURPOSELY CHOOSE to carry a gun that they know full well is not the best choice they have available for the purpose at hand. Sure, there are some really cool .22WMR guns out there that could be pressed into a defensive role if that was required. But the key word here is "CHOOSE". In any instance I can imagine, there are better choices for concealed carry and/or home defense than a .22WMR. Given all the other options in my arsenal, I would not CHOOSE .22WMR for carry/home defense. Given all the other options in the gun store, I would not CHOOSE .22WMR for carry/home defense. Simply put, as a primary or even a secondary, I would not CHOOSE .22WMR.

Now, throw together some crazy SHTF/TEOTWAWKI scenario where the only gun and ammo available is a .22WMR. (There's a current .22LR thread with a fantasy/spy story as the justification, lmoa!) Or maybe the more realistic situation where a person already owns a .22WMR and cannot afford to buy another gun at the time. In those cases, of course I would use the .22WMR! But then we're no longer talking about a matter of choice, are we? If there really are no other options, then you don't have a choice; you use what you can get your hands on.

So when a thread starts with the OP qualifying his own statements with "...but there are better choices I know", then his real question is "would anyone here purposely choose an option that you know to be inferior, despite having better options available, for carry/home defense?" Don't choose to carry a caliber/gun just because it's fun and you think it might be sufficient, when you have a better option available and you know it. If you have to justify the purchase of a .22WMR to your spouse by claiming that your new toy just made the world a safer place, then...well... you have other issues to contend with, lol! But even so, in every self defense scenario, always make what you believe to be the best choice.

If I compare like revolvers - say Ruger LCR, the 22 mag provides 6 rounds at (empty) 16.6 ounces. The 38 +P model, 5 rounds, 13.5 ounces. My choice would be the 38 over 22 mag in a primary or backup role.

I chronographed my 22mag revolver and it was spitting out 40gr bullets at 1,450fps. Regular 40gr 22LR from a rifle is usually about 1,250fps and we know those are deadly.

There are a couple of well known and respected trainers who think a 22 mag J frame is a decent carry gun for those just wearing shorts days.

Here's one: https://www.activeresponsetraining.net/what-about-the-22-magnum

The .22 mag is what I carry when I don't carry, which is actually pretty often. Even if I do elect to carry my larger gun, the BW always tags along. Its so light, why not? I find .22 magnum to be more reliable than .22 lr and the little extra pep doesn't hurt. So sure, sign me up as one who prefers a 7 shot .357 or a full size 1911 or even a Shield of some flavor, but there are days when nothing short of invisible will do. A .22 in the pocket isn't a bad thing to have on hand. Better than nothing for sure.

bassjam said:

Several years ago I wanted a NAA .22 caliber for pocket carry around the house. I was trying to decided if I wanted a .22lr or .22 mag, so I charted the average of the velocities from the "Ballistics By The Inch" site to see how the two rounds compared out of a short barrel. Seeing as how the model I wanted has a 1-1/8" barrel, I decided the .22mag offered very little advantage out of a short snubby.

View attachment 936527

Now if you're comparing the .22 mag to a centerfire cartridge, I don't think it compares well at all, unless for "reasons" you need something with little recoil but you still have the hand strength to pull a heavier rimfire DA trigger.

Click to expand...

The problem with "Ballistics By The Inch" for revolvers is that the barrel measurement datum is different than for rifles and pistols (semi-auto / fixed-breech), and not directly comparable to their charts.

My .22 NAA Mini with the 1 5/8" barrel would measure 3" on their chart. Even with the cylinder gap loss, ballistics with a 40 gr CCI FMJ are significantly higher than a 40 gr .22 LR Mini Mag out of the same gun with it's conversion cylinder.

I am not getting into the CCL part but when I take my stainless Ruger Single Six with 6 inch barrel fishing and it rides along in the tackle box, it has the .22WMR cylinder in place and having shot plenty of both .22LR and .22WMR from the little six gun, the .22WMR is MUCH more potent. This is proven by the chronograph and the impact it has on miscellaneous critters that needed some attitude adjustment. I am sure it would adjust the attitude of nefarious two legged critters quite well. Hornady does make a Critical Defense round for .22WMR.

Yes I would, and yes I have.

My first pistol was an Automag II, and I still wouldn't hesitate to carry it today. It's proven itself exceptionally reliable in operation and accuracy.

I'd still prefer to carry a bigger bore, like my .45 ACP. But I'd happily carry my Automag II again if circumstances dictated.

entropy said:

I carried a Hi-Standard derringer in .22 Mag. for a while, until a buddy pestered me enough that I sold it to him.

Click to expand...

I used to have a Hi-Standard DM101 in 22mag. It was a cool little gun that i picked up cheap from a coworker. It had one of the heaviest trigger pulls I have ever experienced, and was a lot louder than I expected. I ended up trading it to a friend of a friend that wanted it way more than I did.

Several years ago, I picked up a Taurus 94 22 wmr with a 4" barrel. With its 8 shot capacity, I could see it being a viable home defense gun by the bedside for someone who is recoil sensitive. But for ccw, it's weight and size limit it compared to other options.

If Ruger, had made the LCR 22 wmr with a 7 or 8 shot capacity, instead of 6, I would be severely tempted to get one as an old man gun. But for now, I'll stick with the 22 lr LCR as that role.