If I could only own one .22LR, it would be a rifle - it's more practical. I have more effective pistol calibers for carrying.
If I could only own one gun, it wouldn't be a .22LR, but I wouldn't fault the person who chose one.
Which do you find more all around useful, a 22 pistol or a 22 rifle?
- Thread starter breakingcontact
- Start date
- Status
If I could only own one gun, it wouldn't be a .22LR, but I wouldn't fault the person who chose one.
Maybe he should have added "Where there is game...", but I guarantee an awful lot of game was harvested "out of season" during those lean years and during WWII when there was rationing. I've even heard a story of a family member long deceased that provided some meat for his family off the King Ranch (which was a known high-risk endeavor, as some poachers disappeared around there). A .22 was still cheap back then, quiet and plentiful.
To repel coyote or dogs in my back yard going after my chickens I'll grab the rifle, but when I'm doing chores the pistol is more likely with me. Hard to choose one!
To repel coyote or dogs in my back yard going after my chickens I'll grab the rifle, but when I'm doing chores the pistol is more likely with me. Hard to choose one!
Last edited:
Maybe so. Makes a big difference.
Especially when everybody else is also wanting to hunt to eat.
Never be afraid to learn from what has actually happened.
breakingcontact
Member
I think people would be shocked at how quickly game animals would be depleted if they were hunted year round en masse for survival.
That being said a 22 would be so much more suited for this as the big animals would be wiped out in a hurry.
That being said a 22 would be so much more suited for this as the big animals would be wiped out in a hurry.
lefteyedom
Member
With all the required tax stamps,
A target barreled Browning or Ruger pistol with a detachable shoulder stock and a suppressor.
A target barreled Browning or Ruger pistol with a detachable shoulder stock and a suppressor.
WVMountainBoy
Member
.22LR rifle 
My first gun was/is a Glenfield Model 60 and it is fun, accurate, and reliable. I've used it for bushy tails, rabbits, rats, and plinkin. I have a very cheap .22LR revolver (its a RG) that I only keep because my grandfather gave it to me. I've yet to invest in a quality .22 handgun.
My first gun was/is a Glenfield Model 60 and it is fun, accurate, and reliable. I've used it for bushy tails, rabbits, rats, and plinkin. I have a very cheap .22LR revolver (its a RG) that I only keep because my grandfather gave it to me. I've yet to invest in a quality .22 handgun.
Fast Frank
Member
The reason why pistols are different than rifles is because they are intended to do different jobs.
Asking about usefulness between the two is like asking "Which is better, a car or a truck?"
Obviously, the answer is going to be slanted toward the user's situation. Some folks don't need a truck and others can't get by without one.
And that's the answer to your question, too.
Ask yourself if portability is more important than accuracy at longer ranges.
Or if concealability is more important than velocity.
Or if quick deployment is more important than steadiness.
Are you hunting squirrels, or shooting at beer cans 10 yards away?
What are the laws in your area? Can you carry a pistol?
After you have decided what it is you want to do, choosing between a rifle and a pistol should be easy.
For what it's worth, my .22 rifle gets shot about twice as often as my .22 pistol, but your situation might be totally different.
I say buy both and be happy.
Asking about usefulness between the two is like asking "Which is better, a car or a truck?"
Obviously, the answer is going to be slanted toward the user's situation. Some folks don't need a truck and others can't get by without one.
And that's the answer to your question, too.
Ask yourself if portability is more important than accuracy at longer ranges.
Or if concealability is more important than velocity.
Or if quick deployment is more important than steadiness.
Are you hunting squirrels, or shooting at beer cans 10 yards away?
What are the laws in your area? Can you carry a pistol?
After you have decided what it is you want to do, choosing between a rifle and a pistol should be easy.
For what it's worth, my .22 rifle gets shot about twice as often as my .22 pistol, but your situation might be totally different.
I say buy both and be happy.
CaliCoastie
Member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2010
- Messages
- 497
marlin 39 mountie(rifle) with a ruger security six on the hip would be about perfect...
but to each their own.
but to each their own.
I find my S&W Model 17 revolving pistol to be much more useful than a .22 rifle. I have fired it more often than any of my other handguns, and as ailments are afflicting my formerly stronger hand, I am looking at a largely rimfire future when handgunning. We have a "household" .22 autoloading rifle in the safe, but I have fired it on only one visit to my father-in-law's rural land, about 1997 or 1998.
Yes, revolvers are pistols. Look up Sam Colt's patents.
My wife has a Ruger Mark I autopistol that has been useful multiple times, too, for both of us.
Portability is the primary factor favoring the handgun, plus I tend to shoot K-frame revolvers accurately. Another factor is that I am a peace officer, and could legally tote handguns long before Texas legalized licensed carry for private citizens. And, really, I was not much of a rifleman until rather late in life, being primarily a handgunner and shotgunner until my mid-thirties. (I am 51 now.) Handguns had a long head start.
That being said, I am looking into various rimfire rifles for future purchase, as well as rimfire conversions for centerfire rifles.
Yes, revolvers are pistols. Look up Sam Colt's patents.
My wife has a Ruger Mark I autopistol that has been useful multiple times, too, for both of us.
Portability is the primary factor favoring the handgun, plus I tend to shoot K-frame revolvers accurately. Another factor is that I am a peace officer, and could legally tote handguns long before Texas legalized licensed carry for private citizens. And, really, I was not much of a rifleman until rather late in life, being primarily a handgunner and shotgunner until my mid-thirties. (I am 51 now.) Handguns had a long head start.
That being said, I am looking into various rimfire rifles for future purchase, as well as rimfire conversions for centerfire rifles.
76shuvlinoff
Member
I am so much better with a rifle, therefore rifle.
doc2rn
Member
If gonna be just one it's gonna be my rifle the Ruger 77/22 MK II v-bolt in .22 WMR. Even over my well worn Ruger Standard, MK I, II, III and 22/45 Target which are all shooters.
MCgunner
Member
I lived off my marksmanship for about a year in college. It fed me, at least provided the meat. I had corn and melons and such from various sources. I wouldn't have starved without the .22. My food budget was about 3 bucks a week and would have been less if I hadn't started a coffee habit. I also had a 20 ft seine and access to a tank overrun with crayfish. Good eatin' right there. Used a .22 rifle on rabbits and such, very handy little Mossberg 152 I've since given to my daughter. I've kept my old Remington bolt gun and bought a 10/22 for plinking and iron sighted duties.
Today, I like hunting squirrel with an accurate .22 pistol. I carry a pocket .22 with me, lately a Ruger SR22, when fishing just to use for targets of opportunity. It's handier than keeping a rifle along while fishing. For outdoor uses, my rifles and handguns have purposes. I no longer must live off the land and,, even so, I hunt deer and trap hogs and hunt ducks and doves and such. I do this for sport, not necessity. I have many weapons and types of weapons. Can't use a .22 to shoot doves on the wing.
edit, thought I'd add, if it's either/or and you're worried about eating or starving, choose the rifle, first. I can hit a running rabbit with a rifle. I've done that ONCE with a pistol and it was a .410 Contender, not a .22.
I wouldn't have starved without the .22. My food budget was about 3 bucks a week and would have been less if I hadn't started a coffee habit. I also had a 20 ft seine and access to a tank overrun with crayfish. Good eatin' right there. Used a .22 rifle on rabbits and such, very handy little Mossberg 152 I've since given to my daughter. I've kept my old Remington bolt gun and bought a 10/22 for plinking and iron sighted duties.Today, I like hunting squirrel with an accurate .22 pistol. I carry a pocket .22 with me, lately a Ruger SR22, when fishing just to use for targets of opportunity. It's handier than keeping a rifle along while fishing. For outdoor uses, my rifles and handguns have purposes. I no longer must live off the land and,, even so, I hunt deer and trap hogs and hunt ducks and doves and such. I do this for sport, not necessity. I have many weapons and types of weapons. Can't use a .22 to shoot doves on the wing.
edit, thought I'd add, if it's either/or and you're worried about eating or starving, choose the rifle, first. I can hit a running rabbit with a rifle. I've done that ONCE with a pistol and it was a .410 Contender, not a .22.
Last edited:
DM~
Member
"IF" i could only have one 22, it would have to be a good 22 rifle!
DM
DM
henschman
Member
I have had a lot of .22 rifles, and have done a lot of things with them. I have never had a .22 pistol, and don't quite know what I'd do with one, other than punch paper at the range. That pretty much gives you my answer.
A rifle by a gigantic margin. I have seen very few .22 pistols that could hold their own shooting 75 yards or more. Just about every .22 rifle will shoot around 200 yards with consistent accuracy. They will be accurate enough to bring down certain game. A .22 handgun can't do that or at least I've never seen one that could. 75 yards is about the max for consistent shooting with a .22 pistol and the vast majority of them won't do that. A Ruger Mk II, a Browning Buckmark and certain S&W revolvers along with High Standard and a couple of other brands of revolvers make up the vast majority of .22 handguns that will get out to 75 yards. I can put a bullet in a squirrel's ear with a Marlin 60 at that distance and I can do it most of the time. I can't hit exactly in the ear every time but I can hit the head solidly enough to kill the squirrel.
Everything about a rifle is better than a pistol when it comes to .22's. I've seen centerfire handguns that would shoot reliably at long distances but very few rimfire handguns will IMO. Even at shorter distances most people can't make a .22 handgun shoot accurately enough to kill game. And between killing game and varmints there are few things a .22 is actually good for. Yes they can kill a person but for SD they are a big step down from what a rifle will do too.
Sure a person can buy a spray and pray .22 handgun and hope for the best but give me something where I don't have to rely on luck. Every LEO I've discussed this issue with agreed that a handgun is mostly good for keeping the bad guy's head down while you get to your rifle. I'm sure not all of them think that but most do IMO.
So other than not carrying the extra weight I can't see too many advantages of a .22 handgun unless you like target shooting. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
Let's put it this way. I've owned a .22 rifle for almost 40 years and I had access to a bunch of them that my dad owned before I had my own. I've shot lots of .22 handguns. I've never owned one and I don't plan on owning one.
Exactly.
Everything about a rifle is better than a pistol when it comes to .22's. I've seen centerfire handguns that would shoot reliably at long distances but very few rimfire handguns will IMO. Even at shorter distances most people can't make a .22 handgun shoot accurately enough to kill game. And between killing game and varmints there are few things a .22 is actually good for. Yes they can kill a person but for SD they are a big step down from what a rifle will do too.
Sure a person can buy a spray and pray .22 handgun and hope for the best but give me something where I don't have to rely on luck. Every LEO I've discussed this issue with agreed that a handgun is mostly good for keeping the bad guy's head down while you get to your rifle. I'm sure not all of them think that but most do IMO.
So other than not carrying the extra weight I can't see too many advantages of a .22 handgun unless you like target shooting. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
Let's put it this way. I've owned a .22 rifle for almost 40 years and I had access to a bunch of them that my dad owned before I had my own. I've shot lots of .22 handguns. I've never owned one and I don't plan on owning one.
Exactly.
sixgunner455
Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2006
- Messages
- 3,052
Punching paper at the range is what most people do with most of their firearms, from what I have observed. A .22 pistol is a great tool for that. My first firearm was a Ruger MKII standard auto.
Here's why:
I wanted to learn to shoot pistols more than I knew how to that point. My father introduced me to them with a .22 revolver, and that was fine, but I wanted my own pistol to shoot. I liked did not want to pay the money it would have taken to really get good with a centerfire pistol, so I looked at .22 pistols. I picked this one because I liked it. It is my wife's favorite firearm, my daughter's second favorite - it was displaced in her affections by a Ruger Single Six. I have introduced dozens of people to shooting with it, and burned through I don't know how many bricks of ammo.
It has been carried on car trips, hiking trips, camping, hunting, etc, etc, and one dark night, was pressed into a serious defensive role.
Yes, I can hit stuff better and further away with a rifle. I really enjoy shooting rifles, and have every intention of putting the better part of a brick through one this weekend.
But a rifle would not have been as easy to carry, as effective in some roles, nor anything like as discreet as that .22 has always been. It is versatile, the very definition of it, and when it was my only firearm (and I shot it every week, and sometimes every day), I could outshoot any member of my family and a whole bunch of other folks, let them shoot whatever they wanted. I'm not quite that good with it anymore.
It will only leave my possession when one of my kids takes it. I may have to buy another one to prevent fights over it.
Here's why:
I wanted to learn to shoot pistols more than I knew how to that point. My father introduced me to them with a .22 revolver, and that was fine, but I wanted my own pistol to shoot. I liked did not want to pay the money it would have taken to really get good with a centerfire pistol, so I looked at .22 pistols. I picked this one because I liked it. It is my wife's favorite firearm, my daughter's second favorite - it was displaced in her affections by a Ruger Single Six. I have introduced dozens of people to shooting with it, and burned through I don't know how many bricks of ammo.
It has been carried on car trips, hiking trips, camping, hunting, etc, etc, and one dark night, was pressed into a serious defensive role.
Yes, I can hit stuff better and further away with a rifle. I really enjoy shooting rifles, and have every intention of putting the better part of a brick through one this weekend.
But a rifle would not have been as easy to carry, as effective in some roles, nor anything like as discreet as that .22 has always been. It is versatile, the very definition of it, and when it was my only firearm (and I shot it every week, and sometimes every day), I could outshoot any member of my family and a whole bunch of other folks, let them shoot whatever they wanted. I'm not quite that good with it anymore.
It will only leave my possession when one of my kids takes it. I may have to buy another one to prevent fights over it.
Clark
Member
I killed a ground squirrel with my S&W K38 scoped 22 revolver in 2004.
I killed tree squirrels in 1965 with my Winchester 22 semi auto rifle.
I have killed alot of species with a 10/22 rifle.
I killed a raccoon in 2011 with a Squire Bingham 22 semi auto rifle.
So I guess I kill more and shoot more targets with the rifle.
The handgun is worth a lot more money. it is more like family jewels.
I killed tree squirrels in 1965 with my Winchester 22 semi auto rifle.
I have killed alot of species with a 10/22 rifle.
I killed a raccoon in 2011 with a Squire Bingham 22 semi auto rifle.
So I guess I kill more and shoot more targets with the rifle.
The handgun is worth a lot more money. it is more like family jewels.
chicharrones
needs more ammo
Yep. When I had lots of easy access to open land or forests, I never saw the need for a pistol. Rifles were the first and only thought concerning .22s.
Now that I've been urbanized for the last decade, my .22 rifles don't get out in the fresh air so much. Pistols (regardless or caliber) have invaded my gun safe.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
That's obvious. Because if you had spent enough time with a good .22 handgun, you wouldn't have written most of that post. Those of us who have spent most of our lifetime small game hunting and working on our handgun skills know better. Any good fixed barrel auto is good for at least an inch at 50yds. Many will do better. Some will even halve that. If you can't reliably take small game out to 75yds, it's your own fault.
Most LEO's are not shooters and only do enough shooting to keep their job.
Not really. Maybe 100-150fps.
Ever try carrying a .22 rifle while doing something else?
- Status
