.22 MAG vs 9mm

NAVIGATOR

New member
What is the advantage to a .22 mag pistol? The ammo costs as much or more than 9mm and is not as powerful.

Have been looking at a Colt .22 mag TROOPER, but???
 
The only advantage I could see is that .22mag can be chambered in an extremely small gun.. making it useful for extremely small hands...

other than that I'd imagine a 9mm is much much better....
 
continuing braindead0's post (1st part)

such as in the NAA "mini" .22 magnum.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
Exactly what I was thinking..

The only real drawback with 22mag is I suspect the potential for serious overpenetration may be a problem.
 
... did some research lately on wound ballistics and penetration data of .22MAG ... according to "Firearmstactical" and similar sites/institutes, the Remington Gold Dot and CCI Maxi Mag +V seem to present the optimum performance re. speed, penetration and good expansion/parachuting in order to prevent over penetration ...

cheers and beers
LetsFetz
 
The cartridges have totally different intentions.

The 9x19 is close to 100 years old and is designed for shooting in an auto loading pistol.

The .22WMR is relatively young (1960's?) and is a good cartridge for both handguns and rifles - when .22LR is just not quite enough.

Also, in some places, .22 rimfire cartridges are less restricted than other cartridges - especially "military" cartridges like the 9mm.

I have a Ruger Single Six revolver with a 9 inch barrel and I have a .22LR cylinder and a .22WMR cylinder.

95% of the time I shoot .22LR - but if I was going to shoot a coyote or a rabbit or something any bigger than a squirrel, I would use the magnum.

In a way, its like the .357/.38spcl thing only in .22 caliber....
 
.22 mag is fun for target shooting past 25 yards. I can't imagine the 9mm being fun for 50 and 100 yard practice. That also has a lot to do with the platforms though. I plan on getting an SA revolver with both the .22LR and .22mag cylinders soon. And my next rifle purchase will be a nice .22 WMR bolt action for 100 yard target shooting. Gives you that .30 caliber hunting rifle or .357 revolver sillowette practice and feel, without the recoil and flinch developement. IMO
 
I am trying to see how the .22 mag fits in with my other handguns. Among others , I have a Beretta 9mm, a Beretta .40 cal, a S&W .45 cal, a S&W .38 cal, two S&W .357/.38 cal and a S&W .44 mag and also a Ruger .22 LR semi-auto.

Not sure the .22 mag fills a need in this line-up. What do you think? Does it fill a gap?
 
Last edited:
um... the .22 mag is alot older than just the 1960's...

it is ALMOST the same exact cartridge as the old .22WRF, which was available in the late 1800's... (as witnessed in the factory chamberings in the Winchester 1890 pump-action rimfire...)

the .22 mag has it's place in personal defense, (ultra-small handguns) but the 9MM is better, if you have the room for the gun that uses it.
 
In defense of the 22 Mag

I own two S&W model 650's. I may have the world market cornered. (How many people do you know that even own ONE?? Found one used at a gun show...got it cheap...a few months later found a mint one...Everybody here knows how it happens, no need to explain)

Neat little stainless J-frame 3" bar. Round butt. Its a great back up, going into harms way or out in the woods for an extended period of time gun. The .22 Mag has decent ballistice out of even a 3" barrel. Very few other guns are as easy to carry along with 100 rounds of extra ammo. To me, thats the selling point, wieght of extra ammo. One reason the military went with the .223 is because a troop can carry alot more of it than he can carry .308. The .22 Mag is certainly not a perfect round...nor is the 650 the perfect gun. But, in my opinion, a neat compromise...Big enough to shoot well and compact enough to carry . I had the factory fit a .22LR cylinder on one of them...So its cheap to play with..
 
22 mag

The 22 mag is a great cartridge out of a rifle barrel.

Out of a short barrel it is in the energy class of a .32 acp.
 
Back
Top