PDA

View Full Version : .22 short in .22lr revolver?


psyfly
February 23, 2011, 11:09 AM
Can this be safely done with any/most/all .22 revolvers?

I have four .22 revolvers; S&W 317, NAA mini .22lr, NAA mini .22magnum covertible (has a .22lr cylinder) and a Pieta Single Action.

And, if it can, would it still be a bad idea?

I'm sure theres' somebody out there who's tried it.

Come on, 'fess up and give me some knowledge.

I usually don't like to be first :o.

Best,

Will

Magnum Wheel Man
February 23, 2011, 11:11 AM
yes... you can shoot CB caps, BB caps, 22 short, 22 long... in revolvers chambered for 22 lr... just not in the magnum guns...

derekb
February 23, 2011, 01:09 PM
.22mag has different case dimensions (diameter wise) than .22lr and its compatriots (shorts, longs, etc).

Pahoo
February 23, 2011, 01:46 PM
There is really no reason why it can't be done and most important is that it is safe to do so. However not for extended periods of time or excessive use. I'm talking about thousands of rounds. I would ask why you would as shorts and longs are more expensive than LR's. That is unless you have an old inventory that you need or want to use up, as I have. A few years back, I bought about eight bricks of shorts, longs and some Yellow Jacket LRs'. I usually save the longs and shorts for my Contenders.


Be Safe !!!

Kreyzhorse
February 23, 2011, 02:34 PM
It can be done, like shooting a .38 out of a .357 chambered revolver, just not sure why you would want too. Shorts are more expensive.

BigJimP
February 23, 2011, 03:43 PM
Yes, it can be done ( .22 shorts in a gun chambered for .22 LR ) in a revolver ...or in most .22 rifles ... but not many, if any, semi-auto handguns ...and I did it when I was a kid ....

but these days, .22 shorts seem to be more expensive than .22lr ... ( I just paid $ 46 / 1,000 for some .22 lr high velocity yesterday ...which seemed pretty good). The same shop had some .22 shorts that were at least 10% more ....

jtb1967
February 23, 2011, 03:45 PM
but these days, .22 shorts seem to be more expensive than .22lr

That's for sure. LR's are a lot cheaper.

aarondhgraham
February 23, 2011, 04:03 PM
but these days, .22 shorts seem to be more expensive than .22lr
That's for sure. LR's are a lot cheaper.

Back during the Obama inspired ammo shortage,,,
I hit every place in Stillwater looking for .22 Ammunition.

All I could find was 3 boxes of shorts at one Wal Mart,,,
$3.89 for each box of 50 cartridges.

Fortunately I have an H&R Sportster,,,
It takes the shorts just fine,,,
Dang they were quiet.

Pop.

Aarond

Oneida Steve
February 23, 2011, 07:59 PM
I have fired thousands of .22 shorts in revolvers. They cost a bit more than LR ammo and they are less common on the shelves, but the low noise and lack of recoil make them fun to shoot.
I do a lot of shooting with the CCI Target shorts. These are quiet and accurate and will kill soda cans at 25 yards just as well at the long rifle ammo. Shorts are also easier to extract when the guns get dirty.

psyfly
February 24, 2011, 09:25 AM
Thanks for all the replies.

I am well-aware that I couldn't shoot the things in a mag (that's why I mentioned the .22lr cylinder).

I had purchased a box of .22 shorts to see how well they would cycle/shoot through four diffferent rifles, three of which were labeled .22 s,l,lr. and one marked for .22lr only (Winchester 150).

It was a real education and I think I'll post the results on the rifle forum.

The Winchester 150 (lever action and marked for .22lr only) and the Winchester 62a (pump) would cycle the shorts whether mixed with lr or not and did not give any problems. The Marlin 39a would not feed the shorts at all, even though, as I said, it's marked for all three. I also had 2 older Sears (one branded Ted Williams) semi autos, neither of which would feed the shorts even though both were marked as s,l,lr.

Go know.

Then, I simply got to wondering (since I already had them) if it was okay to shoot them in the revolvers and wondering if they will be any quieter. I had noticed that the powederless aguilas aren't a whole lot quieter than a lr in a revolver.

So, I'll try it and see.

Thanks again,

Best,

Will
Will

Magnum Wheel Man
February 24, 2011, 09:33 AM
I actually shoot alot of Super Colibris in my antique 22 revolvers, they are pretty fun, & in my old Stevens Crackshot are about the only thing I'll put through that one... ( they also have just "Colibris" which are even less priming compound ) but since I shoot them in both the rifle & revolvers I don't want a bullet stuck in the barrel, so I buy the supers...

BTW... there are also still some regular ( not high velocity ) shorts & longs still around... the high velocity shorts & longs are likely around the same pressure as the lr stuff

tdrizzle
February 24, 2011, 04:12 PM
They work great in my old Charter Pathfinder, and sound like a cap gun.

P-990
February 24, 2011, 07:15 PM
My experience is with the above, in a revolver perfectly safe and functional. I like using CCI CB Longs in my S&W M-18 when bumming around up at the camp. The lower noise signature seems to be friendlier to the entire area; it's really about the same as an air gun going off. The only issue I've noticed is they don't seem to be as consistent as the LR rounds accuracy-wise.

bedbugbilly
February 24, 2011, 07:54 PM
Years ago, when I was a kid - and I'm talking close to 50 years ago - that's all we shot was the 22 short. We used them for squirrel hunting, rabbit hunting and target practice - but - they were cheap then. I shot shorts in my Dad's old Stevens Favorite as well as a Winchester bolt action and a Remington pump 22. The only one we didn't use them in was (I'm not sure of the model number) the Remington "nylon" automatic which would only eat long rifles. I actually think that one of the reason we used the shorts was my Dad was concerned on how far the slug would travel. We took a lot of squirrels and rabbits with the shorts. I have a H & R 929 Sidekick that I often shoot shorts in as well as a Ruger Super Bearcat - primarily because I still have quite a few old boxes of shorts on hand. I've never had a problem with either revolver but I always clean all of my revolvers well when I'm done shooting them. I've never noticed any lead build up in the cylinder chambers. I'm also one of those that shoots 38 spls. in his 357. In fact, I've never even shot a 357 cartridge - primarily because I use my Ruger New Vaquero for target practice and plinking only. Now, when I'm somewhere that the price is good on 22s, I will pick up a brick but in LR.

Vt.birdhunter
February 24, 2011, 08:18 PM
Here is a warning:
Shorts will dirty a .22 cylinder further from the barrel resulting in more resistance when trying to insert a .22LR after firing a few hundred shorts. Its similar to .38s gumming up a .357 cylinder. Takes a lot of rounds, but it does make full length rounds more difficult to insert.

In my NAA black widow and mini, ive experienced FTFs with .22LR after shooting shorts. At times, I dont think the .22LR round is able to be fully inserted due to the residue from the shorts. (They do not stick out preventing the revolver from functioning) When the hammer strikes, it drives the round further into the cylinder, absorbing some of its force. When I cycle through to the same round that FTF and drop the hammer on it a second time, it usually fires.

ROGER4314
February 24, 2011, 11:18 PM
The .22 shorts CAN leave a ring in the .22LR chamber but the main reason it's a bad idea is that the .22 shorts are a major expense compared to the cheap .22LR's. Why would you want to do that?

Flash