22 LR vs 22 WMR in revolvers

[KevininPa]

GeoDudeFlorida beat me to it.

Now, I do have an old H&R 686 that does okay in .22 LR but is really accurate in .22 LR

Pat, no offense brother, but I'm somewhat confused by this last statement.

 

[Pat Riot]

Pat, no offense brother, but I'm somewhat confused by this last statement.

Oops...gotta go edit

 

[skfullen]

I think we are seeing pretty good evidence that a 22 WMR fired from a revolver will complete with a 22LR launched from a rifle.
To me, that is significant (especially in regard to M. E.).
Thanks to all who posted!

 

[chicharrones]

Just because I thought about it . . .

With my 9.5" Single Six, I've had some .22 LR shoot just as tightly as .22 WMR out of that gun. The poor shooting .22 LR results in my gun are likely due to shooting plinking grade loose ammo. Whereas almost all .22 WMR ammo I've used is a more of a hunting type of ammo with more consistent everything compared to plinking grade .22 LR ammo.

 

[Rock185]

I don't shoot a lot of .22, but when I do it has routinely been .22 Magnum. This over many years. I just liked the WMR's bit more Umph. The WMR is a bit better than the .22LR in revolvers, but really comes into it's own in rifles, even the shorter 16" etc. guns. I've had other .22 WMR revolvers and rifles, but currently a couple Rugers. About the only .22LR I shoot is in my .22-45 with a red dot, just because using the red dot is kinda fun...


BTW, velocities of .22 WMR in the 5.5" Freedom Arms revolver are considerably higher than in the 4 5/8" Ruger revolvers I've owned. Those tight FA tolerances

 

[Confederate]

The NAA .22WMR revolver combines the worst elements of every defensive firearm ever designed. It's 1) too small; it's 2) a single action design; 3) the recoil is horrible (making recovery difficult); 4) the velocity is minimal for the WMR round; 5) it's use in a dark environment is hampered by all the above; 6) it's expensive, and 7) the caliber is too small, making stopping power minimal as well.

Don't get me wrong. I've had people tell me to my face that my advocacy of the .22LR as a defensive round is unconscionable. And everyone is entitled to his or her opinion; however, my defense is with larger guns, longer barrels, and more rapid deployments. In short, if one uses a Ruger Mark-series automatic, and can put 10 bullets into the chest of a bad guy, or two into the head (a fairly easy feat if one shoots often). The autos also allow one to shoot with rapidity, something the NAA WMRs are incapable of doing.

I love the Ruger .22LR autos, and back when I was in school, I could only afford a .22LR Standard Auto. But I had perfect confidence I could defend myself very well against up to three people. It was worth every cent of the $92 I spent for it, too. Plus it was fun to shoot. The velocity was peppy and the pointability was great. There were better calibers out there for defense, but the Ruger autos were great drawer guns, and I still believe that, but the one thing the NAA shines at is that it's a superb novelty gun. You have some friends over for dinner and before the desert's served, you go upstairs and return with a tiny, zippered case. "You've got to see this," you say, unzipping it.

"Wow," your friend says. "Is that thing for real?"

"Yeah," you reply, carefully unloading it. And thus you have a great conversation piece.

Is there anything wrong with this? No, 'cause I want an NAA, too. But I wouldn't pay more than $225 for it, and therein lies the difference. It is a real gun, but there its usefulness ends. The only way one could select a worse gun for self defense is if the gun failed to function. I'm sure there are people who have successfully defended themselves with them; it's just that it's just a poor choice in my view. So velocity is a moot discussion.

They are cool, though.










This also is a real gun, and one that's also a great conversation
piece. It fires actual cartridges that are more expensive than
your .44 magnums!


This Beretta is a great conversation piece and it's a functional
weapon, too. And it's saved many of its owners.

.

 

[sixgunner455]

.22 LR is the first cartridge gun I ever shot, rifle or pistol, and still what I usually shoot the most, rifle or pistol.

My mini Vaquero is fun plinking or letting kids shoot the .22 LR, and fun to break things with the .22 WMR. It is the only .22 WMR I’ve ever had. I’ve never sat down and tested for accuracy between the cylinders. Might be interesting to do, and to compare to the M18 S&W.

 

[ThomasT]

For those who are worried about bore sizes and Saami specs I measured a bunch of 22lr rounds and not a one of them measured anything close to .223 in diameter. They all vary and they are all over sized so they will fit about about any bore you care to shoot them in. If you are having trouble getting good groups try other brands of ammo. I did that once with 12 different 22s and it was a real eye opener as to how different brands grouped. And the most expensive was not ale=ways the best grouper. And yes I like shooting 22 mags out of my single six revolvers. I don't care for CCI with their soft plated bullets. I like something like Winchester or Armscor with a real jacketed bullet.

Here is a picture of some of my 22lr rounds I have on hand showing how much they vary in size.

 

[CraigC]

Exactly. IMHO, all the uproar over bore sizes and the theoretical .001" difference between the .22LR and .22Mag is much ado about nothing.

 

[Palladan44]

Powder is everything.
Ive seen speer Gold Dot 22 WMR made for short barrel performance, which id expect uses a faster burning pistol style powder, and probably gets better velocity out of a short barrel
I believe 22 WMR standard loads (which are designed for rifles) utilize a medium-slow powder like 2400, W296, or similar. (Just a stab)

In no world can you get optimum performance with the same powder with a 40 grain projectile out of a 20" barrel and a 4 or 6" at the same time.

Since 22 WMR is a rimfire that cannot be handloaded, were at the mercy of what manufacturers give us.

Unless you have ammunition thats optimized for shorter barrels, youre not getting the performance edge that can justify the noise and flash. This is just my opinion. 22 WMR out of a handgun should nip at the heels of 5.7x25 if optimized, but I dont believe that it does. (Case capacity and projectiles are in the same ballpark of volume and mass)
Just my .02

 

[ThomasT]

Good post Palladan. But just so you know some do pull the bullets on 22 mag and install their own powder and new bullets. I can't tell you where to find reading material on it but it is done. Seems like just getting a 22 hornet would be a better idea. A test of the handgun version vs the rifle version would be to shoot both in a rifle and see what the velocity difference is. I am guessing the handgun version would be slower from the rifle.

My bud got a new steel 55 gallon burn barrel and told me to shoot a few holes in it so it would get air in at the bottom. I was shooting my Ruger SS and had both cylinders with me. So I shot it with 22 mags first and the bullets, Winchester 40gr went through both sides with power to spare. The 22lr rounds would go in one side but would never make it through the second side. And even then they didn't make it through with any real power.

Folks can say there is no gain from a 22 mag in a handgun but they are wrong. You can look on the NAA site and they have speeds listed for the 22 and 22 mag from their tiny little guns and the 22 mag always shows more speed. Is it worth it in such a small gun? I don't know. You would have to make that choice. Those guns are too small for me.

 

[Palladan44]

[QUOTE="ThomasT, post: 11783961, member: ]But just so you know some do pull the bullets on 22 mag and install their own powder and new bullets.[/QUOTE]
Fair enough. And swap out for a more ideal powder for barrel length. Any published data for this?
Interesting, I always wanted to pull 22 mags. as a kid and re install a nosler spitzer or something like that.....never did of course.

 

[chicharrones]

Even though .22 magnum was originally designed for rifle length barrels, I like to imagine .22 magnum being a smaller bore .357 magnum.

.357 magnum certainly is made for handgun length barrels, but it really gets moving in carbine length barrels. .22 magnum acts similarly, so I have no issue using .22 mag in a handgun.

 

[JCooperfan1911]

I prefer to double that number to .44 for a carry revolver.

.22 rimfire is not good for carry for defense, but is excellent on small game. I have never heard a convincing argument to trust my life to the measily .22. I’ve met no frail woman yet that was overwhelmed with a .38 wadcutter and that is miles better than any .22.

If for sporting use they are dandy. My choice would be a .22 Long Rifle for ammo availability and with a long enough barrel would make an ideal small gamer. .22 magnum is obnoxiously loud in handguns and the additional power is not needed for small animals, and anything bigger than a rabbit or squirrel deserves a bigger bullet (and now the .38 wadcutter comes back in).

 

[Palladan44]

I used 22 Magnum rifle as a kid, and loved it for long range (long range for me at the time) rabbit hunting. My parents back field from the stand where I took post was about 125 yds.
Having the 22 magnum upped my success to nearly 100% i really dont recall one ever getting away.
Its a .22 magnum, it is what it is. Its a flatter shooting longer range .22.
At the time (not sure about now) the ammunition was about 5 times more expensive than that of .22 LR with bricks running .99cents (.22LR) to $4.99 (.22WMR) respectively which was a really big deal for my kid budget.

 

[ThomasT]

Start with post #13. It talks about replacing the 22 mag bullet. I personally think it would be a waste of time. Just busy work for a bored experimenter.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/hand-loading-22-magnum.848276/

I like my 22 mags just the way they are. I have around 5,000 22 mags on hand. Around 4,000 are Armscor solid and HP. I bought them when Sportsman Guide had them on sale for $5.56 a box. I got free shipping from the Buyers Club. Armscor also loads the 22 mag for Fiocchi and everyone likes their ammo.

The Armscor 40gr shoots to the same POI as my Winchester 40gr loads I like so much. CCI is not loaded as hot and lands 2-3" below where I am aiming at 100 yards with the gun sighted in for Winchester ammo. CCI is good ammo but I do not like the bullet they use in the 22 mag ammo. Its too soft for the round. In one YT video it doesn't even make it through a one gallon jug of water but blows into fragments.

And yes 22 mag is more expensive. Its not a plinking round. It was designed from the ground up to be a hunting round and it works very well for that. You want a cheap plinker buy an air rifle. I have around 10 air guns, rifles and pistols. I love shooting them. I have killed the most edible game with my Crosman and Sheridan air rifles than any other guns I own.

 

[TTv2]

Grain for grain, you aren't going to be getting 300-400 more fps with .22 Mag over .22 LR in any revolver, period. I've chrono'd CCI Velocitor and Winchester Hyper Speed, the fastest 40 grain .22 LR ammo available, out of a 6.5" Heritage and the Winchester was the fastest averaging 1050 fps. I was shooting and measuring Hornady Critical Defense and Speer Gold Dot from the same gun last week and the Hornady 45gr load got an average of 1145 fps and the Speer 1173, 1190 if I throw out the one low one that came in at 1060.

So, we're looking at maybe 150 fps and 25-35 ft/lbs more over the fastest .22 LR ammo and that's with a fairly long barrel, I would imagine the .22 Mag loses more velocity than .22 LR does from a shorter barrel.

Other than premium hollow points designed to expand at .22 Mag handgun velocities, I don't see the minuscule increase in velocity and energy making .22 Mag that much better over .22 LR. One thing that the Mag does seem to do better is penetrate, Lucky Gunner's tests showed that, but with a long enough barrel .22 LR and 40gr projectiles are capable of regularly reaching 12 inches of penetration in gel.

I'll be upfront and say I'm not a fan of .22 Magnum in handguns, even tho I do think it's a capable caliber for self defense with the right gun. The 9 shot Heritage revolvers make for very inexpensive, yet decent firepower for home defense when paired with the right ammo and the NAA mini revolvers maximize the firepower for their size by using .22 Mag.

Other than those specific single actions, I don't see any reason to own a .22 Mag revolver, especially a double action. In a DA revolver, you will be well served with .22 LR at a fraction of the cost and muzzle blast while a .32 or .38 is even more capable in the same price range and size as what a .22 Mag DA revolver would cost.

And don't even get me started on the unreliability of .22 Mag ammo.

 

[TTv2]

There is very little gain in velocity with the short barrel NAA mini-revolver in .22 WMR vs .22 LR. My impression is the advantage in the NAA Mini is not any gain in velocity, but in the fact almost all .22 WMR cartridges will go bang, but .22 LR cartridges are more likely to have priming issues.

I've found .22 LR to be more reliable than .22 Mag in regards to priming.

My data is the thousands of rounds of .22 LR vs the hundreds of rounds of .22 Mag I've shot and have had more dead primers on Mag than LR.

 

[ThomasT]

.357 magnum certainly is made for handgun length barrels, but it really gets moving in carbine length barrels. .22 magnum acts similarly, so I have no issue using .22 mag in a handgun.

I have read but admittedly never tested for myself that 22 mags from a Ruger SS with a 5.5" barrel will get around 1500fps with Winchester 40gr bullets. Its enough of a gain in power for me to use them and have them available. And I saw the difference in power when shooting holes in a steel barrel like I mention in my earlier post. They were way more powerful than the 22lr rounds I was shooting. Thats real world experience.

 

[chicharrones]

Grain for grain, you aren't going to be getting 300-400 more fps with .22 Mag over .22 LR in any revolver, period. I've chrono'd CCI Velocitor and Winchester Hyper Speed, the fastest 40 grain .22 LR ammo available, out of a 6.5" Heritage and the Winchester was the fastest averaging 1050 fps. I was shooting and measuring Hornady Critical Defense and Speer Gold Dot from the same gun last week and the Hornady 45gr load got an average of 1145 fps and the Speer 1173, 1190 if I throw out the one low one that came in at 1060.

Like I said in this thread before, it depends on the revolver and the ammo how much more speed you get out of .22 WMR.

Ammo like Hornady Critical Defense is designed to work better in shorter barrels. Even that 4.6" barreled Single Six noted in post #31 is besting your 6.5" Heritage's .22 WMR numbers with the two self defense cartridges at the bottom of the chart.

Then you look at the speeds non-self defense .22 WMR is showing out of revolvers in many other posts in this thread. 1350 fps for 40 grain ammo is not uncommon. 1650 fps for 30 grain ammo is not uncommon.

 

[TTv2]

Like I said in this thread before, it depends on the revolver and the ammo how much more speed you get out of .22 WMR.

Ammo like Hornady Critical Defense is designed to work better in shorter barrels. Even that 4.6" barreled Single Six noted in post #31 is besting your 6.5" Heritage's .22 WMR numbers with the two self defense cartridges at the bottom of the chart.

Then you look at the speeds non-self defense .22 WMR is showing out of revolvers in many other posts in this thread. 1350 fps for 40 grain ammo is not uncommon. 1650 fps for 30 grain ammo is not uncommon.

Yeah, but what are we shooting with our .22 WMR handguns? Those two ammo choices I used are effective self defense loads. IDK who is using their .22 WMR revolver for hunting and for any other kind of shooting the velocity is meaningless.

 

[CraigC]

In no world can you get optimum performance with the same powder with a 40 grain projectile out of a 20" barrel and a 4 or 6" at the same time.

A lot of people seem to believe that but it's completely untrue. The same powders that yield the highest velocities in rifle barrels will do the same in handguns. Powders are chosen for pressure range and capacity, not barrel length. Those "short barrel" loads use more tender bullets and low flash powders, i.e., those that use flash suppressants. Not because they yield higher velocity. Fact, not opinion.

Grain for grain, you aren't going to be getting 300-400 more fps with .22 Mag over .22 LR in any revolver, period. I've chrono'd CCI Velocitor and Winchester Hyper Speed, the fastest 40 grain .22 LR ammo available, out of a 6.5" Heritage and the Winchester was the fastest averaging 1050 fps.

Except, I do.

So, we're looking at maybe 150 fps and 25-35 ft/lbs more over the fastest .22 LR ammo and that's with a fairly long barrel, I would imagine the .22 Mag loses more velocity than .22 LR does from a shorter barrel.

Pretty sure I already posted a 350fps, difference out of the same gun.

I'll be upfront and say I'm not a fan of .22 Magnum in handguns....

I guess you never hunted with one.

Other than those specific single actions, I don't see any reason to own a .22 Mag revolver, especially a double action.

Sad, really. Again, the .22Mag out of a handgun is more potent than the .22LR out of rifles and more effective on larger varmints.

And don't even get me started on the unreliability of .22 Mag ammo.

First I've heard this. In 30yrs and untold thousands of rounds of .22Mag and .17HMR, I don't recall EVER having a misfire. Perhaps what you have is an unreliable firearm and are blaming the cartridge.

 

[Bottom Gun]

I've been shooting various brands of .22 WMR for decades and have never had a dud round.

 

[3Crows]

I've been shooting various brands of .22 WMR for decades and have never had a dud round.

I cannot recall a FTF either with a .22 Magnum. But I have had some with .17HMR and being as it is the same case as .22 Magnum I suspect FTFs do happen.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

I cannot recall a FTF either with a .22 Magnum. But I have had some with .17HMR and being as it is the same case as .22 Magnum I suspect FTFs do happen.

I had problems with various Automag II pistols but I think that was more of a design flaw in the magazine than the ammo.