Definitely a .22! Cheaper at about a dollar a box for fifty rounds, the .25 on the other hand close to ten dollars for fifty rounds. Crazy if you ask me when there is a ten grain difference in bullet weight and a .3 caliber difference, and a .22 is just as reliable in a autoloader than a .25. The .22 is easier to find, more ammo options as well.
.22 VS .25
- Thread starter David N
- Start date
- Status
Manedwolf
member
IMO, the Kel-Tec in 380 is better balistically, but the Beretta 950 in .25ACP is the better gun of the two, mechanically and in terms of reliability. Have you ever seen how fast someone can unload a 950's nine rounds? It literally almost sounds like full-auto. The trigger on that little thing is absolutely wonderful. For some reason, the Tomcat in .32 was never as good as the original Jetfire. If Beretta managed to design a Rohrbach-sized Jetfire in 9mm, I'd be all OVER that.
I would NOT ever choose 22, because rimfire is more susceptible to a bad strike, and is also more likely to be spoiled by moisture, etc...from being in your pocket. JMB designed the .25ACP specifically to provide a reliable centerfire near the size of the .22 for pocket pistols, hence its other name of 6.35mm Browning.
I would NOT ever choose 22, because rimfire is more susceptible to a bad strike, and is also more likely to be spoiled by moisture, etc...from being in your pocket. JMB designed the .25ACP specifically to provide a reliable centerfire near the size of the .22 for pocket pistols, hence its other name of 6.35mm Browning.
telomerase
Member
Everything Manedwolf said, also .25 Glasers have roughly as much energy out of short barrels as Stingers. Of course they are expensive.
Sven
Senior Member
My vote is the P32.
Left to right: Colt Vestpocket 25, Kel-Tec P32, Baby Browning 25. P-32 is the lightest of them all, as you might guess.
Left to right: Colt Vestpocket 25, Kel-Tec P32, Baby Browning 25. P-32 is the lightest of them all, as you might guess.
10-Ring
Member
I've bought both...still h
ave the 25 cal Beretta
ave the 25 cal Beretta
Stevie-Ray
Member
Must be, or else I got a perfect one. Of the 2, I would opt for the .22. My Taurus PT-22 was totally reliable in every way including using exclusively Yellow Jackets; something Taurus tells you not to use. The design of the bullet does not lend itself to proper feeding. Out of perhaps a thousand rounds, I had zero failures. It was replaced in my pocket, though, with a P32.
Geez, I didn't even notice the thread date.
MCgunner
Member
There is no basic difference in the effectiveness ballistically of the .22 vs .25, however, the .25 is more apt to function 100 percent. I don't think I've EVER seen the .22 (okay, revolvers come close) that was 100 percent. I wouldn't carry either of these on a mouse hunt, but the .25 is hands down better if you want to shoot back. At least you know it's going to go bang. I can't say that for .22. The .25 was made to function in pocket autos. No fault of the guns in the caliber, but you WILL eventually get a misfire with .22 and they often don't feed and eject all that reliably in small autos.
The P3AT is my choice of mouse guns, though I don't yet own one. I pocket a 9mm most of the time.
The P3AT is my choice of mouse guns, though I don't yet own one. I pocket a 9mm most of the time.
Tropical Z
Member
.25acp is a joke.
Manedwolf
member
Gotta love those informative posts.
Tell you what. You volunteer to stand ten feet in front of me, and I'll shoot you nine times in the face with my .25ACP Jetfire, since it's a joke.
No? Why not, if it's a joke?
NO round is a joke. All can hurt, all can kill, it depends on placement.
The .25 acp cartridge was made with the pocket gun inmind , thus the ballistics given for this caliber are with 2-2 1/2" barrels. .22 lr ballistics are about the same as the .25 acp when fired from the same barrel lenght.
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs27.htm
your welcome.
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs27.htm
your welcome.
Ala Dan
Member in memoriam
Between The Two
I will take a .22LR any day of the week~!
I will take a .22LR any day of the week~!
Confederate
Member
The .22LR would be preferred if it would fire; however, there are two problems. The first rests in the ammunition itself. Even in very fine guns you'll hit some duds. Most ranges, in fact, have a box where you can drop .22s that don't fire. Second, the small pistols don't function well with .22s. I have a cheap Jennings J-22 which I bought for about $65. It fires reliably up through four clips. After that, I start getting jams because it gets dirty. My Beretta 21 jams unpredictably, on the other hand.
The .25ACP is better in a small pistol because it feeds and ejects more reliably, and it's a centerfire, so the rounds are better quality. The Beretta Jetfires are astoundingly reliable and, contrary to naysayers, has a long list of successful service to users. Still, you're pushing your luck with them.
The .32s are a big leap forward, but suffer because firearms that take it tend to be about as big as firearms that take bigger and better ammunition. So people generally skip it and jump to .380. The Beretta Tomcats have poor reputations as do many other .32s. Most pistols that take .32 ammo just aren't as reliable as many .25 pistols.
I love my Beretta .25 Jetfire and my Jennings J-22. My faith in their reliability is high. And for the .22LR as a round, I would feel very comfortable any day with a larger Ruger Mark II. Twelve shots slamming into someone in less than four seconds can make an impression.
The .25ACP is better in a small pistol because it feeds and ejects more reliably, and it's a centerfire, so the rounds are better quality. The Beretta Jetfires are astoundingly reliable and, contrary to naysayers, has a long list of successful service to users. Still, you're pushing your luck with them.
The .32s are a big leap forward, but suffer because firearms that take it tend to be about as big as firearms that take bigger and better ammunition. So people generally skip it and jump to .380. The Beretta Tomcats have poor reputations as do many other .32s. Most pistols that take .32 ammo just aren't as reliable as many .25 pistols.
I love my Beretta .25 Jetfire and my Jennings J-22. My faith in their reliability is high. And for the .22LR as a round, I would feel very comfortable any day with a larger Ruger Mark II. Twelve shots slamming into someone in less than four seconds can make an impression.
Shawn Dodson
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2002
- Messages
- 3,213
The Beretta M21A, chambered to fire .22 LR, is not a good choice for a personal defense handgun. The reason is because the .22 LR Beretta does not have an extractor. When a .22 LR cartridge misfires, the firing pin swages the rim of the cartridge to the breech, and the faulty cartridge must be either pried from the chamber with the blade of a knife or removed by inserting a cleaning rod down the bore. If you're considering the Beretta M21A pistol as a personal defense weapon, you'd be better served choosing one chambered to fire .25 ACP.
When fired from a short, 2 1/2-inch barrel, even CCI Stinger does not expand (see: http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs27.htm )
Don't waste your time with .25 ACP Glaser or MagSafe. The primary problem with .22 LR and .25 ACP bullets is they're small, and they create a small wound channel. .25 ACP Glaser and MagSafe are small bullets filled with a tiny amount of tiny birdshot. A 2 1/2-inch bbl .25 ACP handgun is best loaded with FMJ ammunition.
When fired from a short, 2 1/2-inch barrel, even CCI Stinger does not expand (see: http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs27.htm )
Don't waste your time with .25 ACP Glaser or MagSafe. The primary problem with .22 LR and .25 ACP bullets is they're small, and they create a small wound channel. .25 ACP Glaser and MagSafe are small bullets filled with a tiny amount of tiny birdshot. A 2 1/2-inch bbl .25 ACP handgun is best loaded with FMJ ammunition.
MachIVshooter
Member
Which isn't saying much. Many a .22, .25 and .32 caliber bullet have been stopped or deflected by a human skull.
That said, the .25 is a better choice. More reliable and bullet construction is far superior. The .25 JHP's are actually jacketed bullets like their bigger counterparts, while the .22 LR will use copper coated, heeled lead bullets.
There is a reason .25 ammo is much more expensive than .22 LR.
I love my Beretta 950 BS. Of course, I would much sooner carry my KT P3AT
Given what that model/style of gun is for, I'd opt for the .25. Don't mess with wonderbullets, just stoke it with the fastest ball ammo you can find.
Shawn Dodson
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2002
- Messages
- 3,213
Yup!
Husker1911
Member
.25acp feeds and functions remarkably better than .22lr. This from a gent who carries a .32acp Keltec P32 with FMJs.
Face it, a .32acp HP is likely NOT to mushroom. Hence, I'll take the extra reliability of FMJs, thank you.
Face it, a .32acp HP is likely NOT to mushroom. Hence, I'll take the extra reliability of FMJs, thank you.
Waywatcher
Member
.22 Definitely! Ammunition availability and cost are big factors to me though, so YMMV
MCgunner
Member
Dead men don't really worry about cost of ammo. As unreliable as .22s are in little guns and as many duds as I've had with 'em in my life even in rifles, no thanks, not for serious work. The .22 is a wonderful range and outdoor caliber, but it's not a self defense cartridge. Buy a .22 for practice and get a .25 for carry.
I don't carry anything smaller than .380 anymore, but I once carried the cheapest of the cheap RG25 in .25ACP and while that POS was anything, but accurate, it fired and fed and ejected every round 100 percent. If I seriously wanted to carry such a weapon now days, I'd chose a high quality gun like a Taurus or such in the caliber, not pot metal junk, but hey, that old RG saved my bacon once so I can't knock it. I didn't have to shoot it, just the sight of the gun was enough, but it very likely kept me or my wife from being stabbed. It is the only time I've ever needed a gun for self defense and I thank God I had it with me.
Now days, with choices like the P32 and P3AT Kel Tech, I think the .25 has been made much less desirable. But, it is still better than an ice pick.
As unreliable as .22s are in little guns and as many duds as I've had with 'em in my life even in rifles, no thanks, not for serious work. The .22 is a wonderful range and outdoor caliber, but it's not a self defense cartridge. Buy a .22 for practice and get a .25 for carry.I don't carry anything smaller than .380 anymore, but I once carried the cheapest of the cheap RG25 in .25ACP and while that POS was anything, but accurate, it fired and fed and ejected every round 100 percent. If I seriously wanted to carry such a weapon now days, I'd chose a high quality gun like a Taurus or such in the caliber, not pot metal junk, but hey, that old RG saved my bacon once so I can't knock it. I didn't have to shoot it, just the sight of the gun was enough, but it very likely kept me or my wife from being stabbed. It is the only time I've ever needed a gun for self defense and I thank God I had it with me.
Now days, with choices like the P32 and P3AT Kel Tech, I think the .25 has been made much less desirable. But, it is still better than an ice pick.
Like others have said, Rimfires are not reliable. .22 for pratice, .25acp for self defense. Newer .32 and .380 pistols almost makes the .25 obsolete, unless you cannot handle the recoil of a .32. For the elderly and handicap then a good .25 pistol may be the only thing they can use to defend themselves.
All this talk is making me want to buy an old .25 pocket pistol
All this talk is making me want to buy an old .25 pocket pistol
Last edited:
22-rimfire
Member
As you might guess, I love 22 rimfires. In a pocket-sized auto, they are not as reliable as a centerfire cartridge both from a pistol fuctioning perspective and the ignition of the cartridge. If faced with this choice, I'd either buy a S&W pocket revolver in 22LR, or a Kel Tech 380. I would not buy a pocket 22 auto for self defense. The 25 auto is essentially a 22 for auto pistols at a higher ammunition cost. If you get the Kel Tech, I would shoot it a lot to convince myself that it is totally reliable. I have been considering one of the Kel Tech pocket autos myself for a little variety.
The revolvers are nice in that they don't have the jamming issue and if they don't fire, you just squeeze the trigger again. I carry a S&W 442 (38spl) (or the 642 if you like the stainless look) which is my general recommendation for a pocket revolver and you get a bit more umph out of the 38spl cartridge without the huge fireball and recoil of a 357. I pretty much think of emptying the gun on a single perp if a self-defense situation comes up unless there are multiple perps. I carry a reload. My first choice is to run though and avoid the situation completely. My ego will not be too damaged.
The revolvers are nice in that they don't have the jamming issue and if they don't fire, you just squeeze the trigger again. I carry a S&W 442 (38spl) (or the 642 if you like the stainless look) which is my general recommendation for a pocket revolver and you get a bit more umph out of the 38spl cartridge without the huge fireball and recoil of a 357. I pretty much think of emptying the gun on a single perp if a self-defense situation comes up unless there are multiple perps. I carry a reload. My first choice is to run though and avoid the situation completely. My ego will not be too damaged.
cloudcroft
Member
The Beretta 21A is nice carry gun. Go with it in .22LR...and CCI "Siingers" would be a top choice for ammo.
NAAs are crap...look nice on the outside, true, but are way too fragile/third-world "craftsmanship" on the inside. Avoid them. Highly unreliable for carry and not durable for long-term practicing.
No, .22LR ammo is just as reliable as centerfire ammo...if you use a quality 22LR ammo. If there even is a theoretical difference, it's negligible in real life.
Don't be misled by all the parrots who cite negative things -- like unreliable ammo -- about 22s. Ignorance is rampant even in the world of so-called "gun-owners."
-- John D.
NAAs are crap...look nice on the outside, true, but are way too fragile/third-world "craftsmanship" on the inside. Avoid them. Highly unreliable for carry and not durable for long-term practicing.
No, .22LR ammo is just as reliable as centerfire ammo...if you use a quality 22LR ammo. If there even is a theoretical difference, it's negligible in real life.
Don't be misled by all the parrots who cite negative things -- like unreliable ammo -- about 22s. Ignorance is rampant even in the world of so-called "gun-owners."
-- John D.
fastbolt
Member
Notwithstanding the increased functioning issues I've observed (as well as some of my fellow instructors) with many of the diminutive platforms which are chambered in these calibers ... (compared to larger center-fire handguns, and watching folks try to qualify with them on a CCW range over the years) ... I finally decided that they simply didn't offer the level of potential incapacitation I desired to have at hand in a defensive handgun. I realize that opinions vary, though ...
I know a fellow, now retired, who survived an armed encounter with a suspect who shot at him with a 9mm pistol, while he returned fire with a .25 pocket pistol. The distance involved was across an average city street, and it was late at night, so neither of them hit each other (or anyone else, fortunately).
That incident was reportedly one of several factors considered when policies were later revised limiting the minimum caliber of off-duty weapons to be .32 ACP ... which at least seems to lend itself to pistols offering better consistent functional reliability, and better ignition reliability comparing it to .22 ammunition, of course.
Myself? I decided that .38 Spl was the minimum caliber that met my personal desires and needs from that point onward. Yes, I know some folks that choose to carry .32 & .380 ACP off-duty weapons, and while I don't denigrate their choices, I choose otherwise for myself. Different strokes. There are, however, some quality pistols chambered in these calibers, and some quality defensive ammunition being offered.
FWIW, people wiser than I (meaning above my rank) are apparently in the process of changing our CCW policies to restrict permitted calibers to a .32 ACP minimum. I was told that qualification range interuptions for functioning problems with a lot of the smaller caliber pistols was a consideration in this regard.
Naturally, proper maintenance, or a lack thereof, can also be an important factor when folks bring their firearms to a CCW class, but if the smaller guns still seem to exhibit an overall tendency to a greater frequency of malfunctions, what are you going to do?
This is the sort of thing that unless otherwise restricted, remains to be determined by each individual, having spent a reasonably sufficient time studying and reviewing the issue for themselves, and then making their own informed decision. It's their lives, and perhaps the lives of their loved ones, that may someday hang in the balance.
I still think the caliber/platform issue often unjustly over-shadows the subjects of awareness, knowledge, skills & training, though ...
Just my thoughts ...
I know a fellow, now retired, who survived an armed encounter with a suspect who shot at him with a 9mm pistol, while he returned fire with a .25 pocket pistol. The distance involved was across an average city street, and it was late at night, so neither of them hit each other (or anyone else, fortunately).
That incident was reportedly one of several factors considered when policies were later revised limiting the minimum caliber of off-duty weapons to be .32 ACP ... which at least seems to lend itself to pistols offering better consistent functional reliability, and better ignition reliability comparing it to .22 ammunition, of course.
Myself? I decided that .38 Spl was the minimum caliber that met my personal desires and needs from that point onward. Yes, I know some folks that choose to carry .32 & .380 ACP off-duty weapons, and while I don't denigrate their choices, I choose otherwise for myself. Different strokes. There are, however, some quality pistols chambered in these calibers, and some quality defensive ammunition being offered.
FWIW, people wiser than I (meaning above my rank) are apparently in the process of changing our CCW policies to restrict permitted calibers to a .32 ACP minimum. I was told that qualification range interuptions for functioning problems with a lot of the smaller caliber pistols was a consideration in this regard.
Naturally, proper maintenance, or a lack thereof, can also be an important factor when folks bring their firearms to a CCW class, but if the smaller guns still seem to exhibit an overall tendency to a greater frequency of malfunctions, what are you going to do?
This is the sort of thing that unless otherwise restricted, remains to be determined by each individual, having spent a reasonably sufficient time studying and reviewing the issue for themselves, and then making their own informed decision. It's their lives, and perhaps the lives of their loved ones, that may someday hang in the balance.
I still think the caliber/platform issue often unjustly over-shadows the subjects of awareness, knowledge, skills & training, though ...
Just my thoughts ...
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
