phoenix arms hp22

[Meowhead]

I really like mine. Nicely reliable, adequately accurate, fun to shoot. Surprisingly comfortable in the hand, especially with the extended-base magazine. Too damn many safeties, but that's not a huge problem, and disassembly is easy if you use the base of the magazine to push forward on the barrel release lever catch thingy.

That said..it's a cheap automatic made from cheap materials. I've been lucky with mine, but people are having problems..so, for practice/plinking/etc I'd spend a little more money and get a used Ruger Mk.I or II.

 

[Joe Demko]

Makarovnik,
I had one for a couple years and I don't think they are made out of aluminum. I think they are made out of zinc casting alloy AKA Zamak. That, in and of itself, may not necessarily mean much. Some Ruger Bearcats have Zamak frames. The slide on the Walther P22 is, I'm pretty sure, Zamak as well. Not every gun made from Zamak is junk, but lots of junky low-end guns have been made from it.

 

[Okiecruffler]

Well I had a few thousand rounds thu mine. Carried it around in the bottom of a tackle box. Abused the heck out of it. And it always performed. Still kicking myself for trading it away. I bought it back when they were $59 and the "target" barrel and mag ran another $24.99.

 

[Chortdraw]

I have one with the 3in and 5in. barrels. Never had a problem and found it to be quite accurate and found a good place to get parts and mags. Did a fix on all the goofy safty problems and it works like all the other autos I have. It is not made for a range gun but I find it does a good job there also. I have a blast shooting mine.

 

[makarovnik]

Zamak is a zinc/aluminum alloy. Yes, if your gun has a SLIDE (upper receiver) made from zinc/aluminum alloy, it is using a manufacturing process that is used by the makers of "Saturday Night Specials".

Years ago slides were only made from milled billets. Later to save money some manufacturer's started using forged or cast slides. Usually these had to be heat treated after casting. Now some very reputable gun manufacturer's have learned from the likes of Bryco/Jennings that SLIDES and sometimes entire receivers can be made from investment castings (zamak, zinc or aluminum alloys).

Don't expect me to run down the entire list but the M16/AR15 also uses a non-steel alloy receiver, it always has. Many quality firearms are made with these materials.

I think if you read my threads its obvious my point is that these materials work fine if the engineering is done properly. It seems to be more common with the higher end pistols to use aluminum alloys for the frames but not so frequently for the slides because of chamber pressures and the beating the slide takes. Lots of 9mm pistols with aluminum alloy frames but not so many with aluminum alloy slides. .22 caliber pistols with aluminum alloy slides are more acceptable. Again, if you make your receiver out of aluminum or zinc alloy you had better make sure it is robust and has enough "beef" where it counts. Also, I question the hardness of the HP22/25 slides. It seems softer than the material used on Hi-Points.

 

[Joe Demko]

Zamak alloys, there are several, are 4% aluminum. They are mostly zinc. The M-16 does not have a zamak receiver and never has.

 

[makarovnik]

I knew the M16 receiver was made out of some kind of aluminum alloy. Is the Zamak used on some of the low budget guns stronger or weaker than the aluminum used on the M16?

 

[Joe Demko]

Zamak isn't an aluminum alloy. It is an alloy consisting mainly of zinc. Depending on which specific form of zamak we are talking about, it will contain from 3.5 to 4.3 percent aluminum, 2.6 to 3.1 percent copper, and .025 to .06 percent magnesium. Zamak is a zinc alloy, not an aluminum alloy.
7075-T6 aluminum is a common alloy used in making AR-15 lower receivers. It consists of from 87.1 to 91.4 percent aluminum. It contains from 5.1 to 6.1 percent zinc. The other "major" metals in the alloy are chromium, copper, and magnesium...all in pretty small amounts. See the difference now?

 

[gidaeon]

I'll just echo what several others said. My Hp22a will certainly never replace my ruger mkIII. Its over-safetied, cheap construction w/ weak frame, and far, far less accurate. I overpaid for mine at a gunshow ($140 ouch...) I won't buy again from a company I didn't research first, but learned something. Its not a bad looking gun IMO, and just has to be kept in its respective realistic ability\purpose compartment.

I know higher velocity is supposed to make is blow up quicker, but it sure does cycle nicely with CCI stuff as others said. Someone looking for a .22 plinker should up to $200 and hunt for a traditional ruger.

Good honest review here: http://www.themartialist.com/0306/phoenixhp22review.pdf

Has anyone had the nickel plating wearing off up front yet, (not mine) but I hear this is common?