.22LR vs .25ACP

And as far as the reliability of .22LR and .25ACP, the only failures to fire I have experienced with .22LR were from cheap bulk pack ammunition and lower end 50 round boxes. I never had any issues I can remember with CCI ammo except feeding issues, but that is the problem with the weapon, not the ammunition.
 
Darkgael, your Bernardelli was made in both .22 short and .22 long also!


Many comparisons between .22 & .25 use "similar" length barrels, but a 2" .25 and a 3" .22 are not really similar. The 3" bbl is 1/3 longer than the 2". The shorter the barrel, the more difference even a little length makes in velocity.
The difference in a 16" barrel and an 18" barrel may not be much, but when you get down to 2 inches, even 1/4 inch makes quite a bit of difference.
 
The wife's Taurus PLY-25 has been very reliable thus far with both PMC Bronze and Gold Dot. I have the Beretta Bobcat in .22lr in layaway so can report later on it. From what I have been reading, the Bobcat is quite reliable with CCI.
 
Thanks Glock19Fan, nice work! I appreciate the writeup since I don't own a 25 or 32 but I would like to...

You can hit the "wrap quote" button above when you reply then cut & paste what other people said into it. That's how I do it anyway.
 
but I still believe the larger size of the .25 would make a larger hole.
Click to expand...

Bigger hole in wood doesn't automatically mean bigger hole in flesh, organs and muscle. And it definitely doesn't mean a better hole.
 
Many comparisons between .22 & .25 use "similar" length barrels, but a 2" .25 and a 3" .22 are not really similar. The 3" bbl is 1/3 longer than the 2". The shorter the barrel, the more difference even a little length makes in velocity.
The difference in a 16" barrel and an 18" barrel may not be much, but when you get down to 2 inches, even 1/4 inch makes quite a bit of difference
Click to expand...

In this test the advantage was to the underdog, .25ACP. The difference in barrel length was only 1/4 inch, which IMO is close enough for this test.

Bigger hole in wood doesn't automatically mean bigger hole in flesh, organs and muscle. And it definitely doesn't mean a better hole
Click to expand...

But when you consider these projectiles are moving at almost the exact same velocity, I believe the larger of the two will have the advantage. Either way, I do believe it will make a larger hole through bone.

And thanks Andy!
 
Did the .25 acp really out perform the .22lr.?..
Seems like penetration levels from both were very similar.
Also seems like the .22lr projectiles look more deformed to the extent that the rounds probably tumbled a bit.

This deformation and tumbling suggests to me that the .22lr would've done more tissue damage, where as the .25 acp had almost zip deformation.

Just my opinion.


I think the soft lead of the .22lr promotes more chances of fragmentation with bone/ and tumbling and deformation in tissue.
 
Last edited:
Judging by the holes in the water jugs, both rounds appeared to tumble. While the .22LR bullets did deform, it wasnt enough to make a significant difference. The more rounded shape of the .25ACP certainly punched a larger initial hole in the wood and I would assume that the larger bullet would also cuase more damage throughout the penetration under the (safe) assumption that both rounds were traveling at approx the same velocity during penetration of the water jugs.

But the point of the test was to measure penetration, not damage. However, it seems that the .25ACP outperformed the .22LR in every way.
 
often carry a Bereta Model 21 in .22LR it functions perfectlly with WW solids and clocks in at 900 fps with a 40 gr slug.
If I did the math right that's only 58.8 fp of energy but with 7 rounds a nice face spray or chest spray should deter any oppoonent long enough for me to get away safe...
Yea I have a .38 Chief to carry but sometimes it's even too large to be discreetlly carried. Granted it's probablly the premier pocket gun!
To me the best gun is one that you have with you so the little Model 21 someties fits ythis catagory and being a .22 pratice ammo is cheap!
JMHO
ZVP
 
Doesn't seem too be much difference in penetration level. Nothing anyway that really puts one far ahead of the other.

They both still have similar penetration levels, and in my opinion- the soft lead .22lr bullets have more chances of tumbling/ deformation and fragmentation when shot in the human body.

To me thats more lethal than the thick copper jacket of the .25 acp that might make a slightly bigger hole- but more likely a straight hole/ and certainly won't deform or fragment.

There are many bones in the body that will stop/ deflect both .25acp and .22lr bullets at the 60 foot pound levels....However, if so- the .22lr will likely fragment or shatter upon impact with a dense bone, sending pieces in other directions. Wood isn't an accurate comparison to dense bone.

Think about how much more critical it would be for a surgeon to have to find where the bullet actually is in relation to angle of impact/ or if there are several pieces of the main projectile that have broken off and gone in other directions.

I've shot the .25acp- ...you literally have to be shooting at a boulder or steel plate to cause any deformation. This being solid point.
 
Last edited:
I would choose the .25 just for the extra reliability. I've owned a lot of .22 BUGs and they weren't anywhere near as reliable as my Beretta 950 Jetfire, the one I finally kept.
 
great test, and very surprising results. I was always under the impression that the major advantage .22LR had over .25acp (aside from availability/price)was the penetration. But you're seeing .25acp get marginally better penetration than the .22 even out of a shorter barrel.
I'm not sure what this information will do for me personally as I already have my tiny gun niche filled by a .380, but cool none the less.
There's definitely some distortion in pic#2 - best not let your lady friends know you have a camera that makes things look skinny or you'll never see it again.

As far as micro .22's that feed well, I had a Beretta 950 that never had an issue. It was .22short rather than .22lr, but the cartridges were definitely rimed. And my buddy has a Beretta tomcat that he feels is very reliable - I don't know that it's never misfired, but he felt good enough about it to give it to his wife.
 
NRG

often carry a Bereta Model 21 in .22LR it functions perfectlly with WW solids and clocks in at 900 fps with a 40 gr slug.
If I did the math right that's only 58.8 fp of energy but with 7 rounds a nice face spray or chest spray should deter any oppoonent long enough for me to get away safe...
Click to expand...
I used the Energy program over at Handloads.com. That 40 grains at 900 fps produces 71 ft.lbs ME. I am surprised at that velocity.
I had a model 21 and gave it away.....could not get it to shoot reliably and I tried hard.
Good for you.
As far as micro .22's that feed well, I had a Beretta 950 that never had an issue. It was .22short rather than .22lr, but the cartridges were definitely rimed. And my buddy has a Beretta tomcat that he feels is very reliable - I don't know that it's never misfired, but he felt good enough about it to give it to his wife.
Click to expand...
The Tomcat is a .32acp. The cartridge is "semi-rimmed".
Pete
 
Last edited:
I love these types of tests as well as the so-called "scientific" ones. And the findings are about what I expected. I agree with the OP in that if given the choice I would go with Sir JMB's little gem ;). That said, I have a Beretta 21A in .22lr because I can afford to shoot it (.25acp ammo is ridiculously expensive :rolleyes;)). I carry the 21A solely as BUG (9mm primary) but I have nice little mouse-gun collection :) including a .25acp which a family member currently possesses (lend them at your own peril :().

Not to knock the .25acp but it seems as the the .22lr is the choice of "hits" like those conducted at times by Mossad.
 
Math Police

Many comparisons between .22 & .25 use "similar" length barrels, but a 2" .25 and a 3" .22 are not really similar. The 3" bbl is 1/3 longer than the 2". The shorter the barrel, the more difference even a little length makes in velocity.
The difference in a 16" barrel and an 18" barrel may not be much, but when you get down to 2 inches, even 1/4 inch makes quite a bit of difference
Click to expand...

I know this is an old thread but I'd like to correct a math error that went unchallenged. A 3" barrel is 1/2 (50%) longer than a 2" barrel, not 33% as stated. Confusing as it is - the 2" barrel is 1/3 shorter than the 3" barrel.

Wild
 
Great little test. I would be curious to see how a .25 hollow point would compare in the test. However, I do not think I have ever seen hollow points in .25.....perhaps winchester silver tips or haydara shock??
 
Years ago I tried my .22WMR magnum 5 1/2" barrel revolver with a hollow point on a 2X4 that looked softer than the one in this thread and it did not penetrate. I think the extra expansion of the hollow point ate up the extra energy. I wish I had cut through the "wound" channel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top