.22LR vs .25ACP

[Glock19Fan]

I decided to do a fair, even test today comparing the .22LR and the .25ACP from pocket pistol length barrels. The .22LR was fired from a 2.5 inch barrel, and the .25ACP was fired from a 2.25 inch barrel. Ammunition used was typical, full powered generic ammunition for each caliber- CCI 40 grain RN Mini Mags for the .22LR, and Aguilas 50 grain FMJ in .25ACP. Rounds were fired from a distance of 5 feet.

The test was done by firing 3 rounds of each caliber through a fresh 2x4, with water jugs stacked behind it to measure penetration.

EDIT: Here is a picture of the board. Many seem to think its a 1x6 but its a 2x4.



Here is the setup.

All rounds fired from both calibers fully penetrated the 2x4 with ease. Here are the entrances. Notice the much larger hole made by the .25ACP.

Here are the exits.

Here are the recovered bullets.


The .22LR rounds fully penetrated the first jugs, while two of them continued into the second jug, denting the back side of the second jug. The third round tumbled in the first jug, exiting near the bottom, striking the concrete table, bouncing up and denting the second jug. It was recovered on the table between the first and second jug.

The .25ACP rounds fully penetrated the first jug. Two of the bullets continued through the second jug, exiting and impacting a cloth backstop. The third bullet made a large dent on the backside of the second jug, but did not exit.

To be honest, this test surprised me. I expected to get a little more penetration out of the .22LR becuase of the higher velocity and smaller size, but it seems that the tough construction of the .25ACP bullet combined with the heavier weight seemed to be the advantage.

Conclusion: This test may or may not be scientific. It really depends on your definition, but it was equal. It is clear that the .25ACP outperformed the .22LR, and while the difference is fairly small, I do think the wise choice for self defense would be to go with the .25ACP. It is more inheritely more reliable, and from similar length barrels is more powerful.

To be clear, I DO NOT recommend either of these for self defense but for the people that cannot handle a larger caliber, I think the .25ACP would be the way to go.

[steveno]

the reliability of a centerfire primer is a lot better than a rimfire round also

[biohazurd]

Cool test. Both are extremely anemic rounds for sd but in terms of fun guns little .22s and .25s are a blast to shoot. My beretta .25 is probably my favorite itty bitty gun to shoot. Barely any recoil and just down right fun. And of course everybodys got a .22 handgun right? For self defence though ill stick with my 9mms and .45s.(Among other duty calibers of course.)

[bonefamily]

Thanks for the test and report, Glock19Fan!

[Glock19Fan]

Ive carried everything from a pocket knife to a M240B over the past few years but the .22s and .25s still find a way to sneak in my pocket.

[FrankenMauser]

the reliability of a centerfire primer is a lot better than a rimfire round also

That should be expanded with the concept of "You get what you pay for."

Quality rimfire ammunition is no less reliable than centerfire ammunition. And it is, arguably, less prone to manufacturing mistakes, due to its simpler design.

But, the cheap bulk packs at WalMart? Yea... "quality" is not the appropriate word to describe that ammunition. It is 'bargain' priced for a reason.

[claymore1500]

Please, don't take this the wrong way. I am not knocking either of the rounds (I own both, several in fact),Nor am I picking on the tester.

But, the board in the first pic looks more like a 1 x 6, than a 2 x 4.

By the way, I carry a .25 acp every day. (Just for the record.)

[Glock19Fan]

Thats becuase 2x4s arent really 2x4s.

As I understand it (which could be wrong), boards are initially cut to 1x6, 2x4, 4x4, ect. but the cuts are so rough that they are sent to a plainer. This shaves off a little bit off each side, making the demensions slightly smaller than original. For example, a 2x4 is really about 1x5x3.5.

Reguardless, if a bullet is going to blow through 1.5 inches of fairly sturdy wood, then it is definately enough to blow through a ribcage, sternum, or skull assuming odd angles arent present.

[James K]

For "fun guns" the .22 definitely gives more bangs for the buck.

Otherwise, the .25 really is superior though I don't know if anyone on the receiving end could tell the difference.

Jim

[ncpatriot]

That board is a 1x6 for sure, actual thickness is 3/4".

I have a Raven .25, 1st pistol I ever bought. Paid $65 for it. Good only for close range, no more than 10 feet. If any of you have a Raven you plan to carry, make sure the slide safety works well. Mine was not properly ground & would click on by itself when pulling from IWB holster. I fixed this by filing the safety about 1/16" or so until it seated better on the little ball bearing in the frame. Worked well then.

I don't think I ever saw .25 HP on shelves. I have seen it online. FMJ is all I have seen in stores.

[Glock19Fan]

No, its a 2x4. Im 100 percent sure.

[claymore1500]

No, its a 2x4. Im 100 percent sure.

Ok, in this pic, it is a 2x4, maybe the camera angle in the second pic is messin' with my perception.


Note: in my first post I pointed out the first pic, I was actually looking at the second one (the one with the oil bottle under the board.

[oldhunter]

I often carry a .22 mag as either primary or BUG and never feel concerned that it is not enough gun. However, I also often carry a 9mm, .38sp, .44sp or .357 mag among others and know that they present a bit more support if needed than a .22 or .25 caliber. I used to own a Taurus PT25 but the trigger pull must have been close to 20 lbs and was difficult to shoot accurately. Quickly traded it in on something else.

[darkgael]

About velocity....
Some years ago, I did a related test and chrono'd both .25 ACP and .22lr SV from two pocket pistols with similar length barrels.
Neither was a powerhouse. The .25 had a lower avg velocity but a heavier slug (50 grs.) and thus slightly more energy than the .22 (40 grs.). The difference was 8 ft.lbs. (64 to 56). The velocity of the .25 was right at published velocity of 760fps. The SV .22s chrono'd at about 800 fps.
The guns were a Bernardelli .25 (think Baby Browning) and a S&W 317.

Pete

[Magnum Wheel Man]

thanks for posting... the results were opposite of what I would have suspected... I have a couple lil 25's... need to take them out for some exercise

[spacecoast]

Good, informative test, thanks.

Also, the Mini-Mags are "gilded lead" and may not be as hard as the FMJ surface on the .25ACP bullets.

I may someday get a pocket-sized modern .25ACP that is safe to carry with one chambered. For now I have to be content with my 100-year old Colt Hammerless Vest Pocket pistol, it's amazingly accurate out to 25 yards (haven't tried shooting it farther).

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=504371

[L_Killkenny]

the reliability of a centerfire primer is a lot better than a rimfire round also

I'm with FrankenMauser on this one. Good .22lr ammo is just as good as centerfire when it comes to going bang. And before someone starts in about semi's feeding rimless (for the most part) ammo better than rimmed rimfire ammo........ it's not that dang hard to finds rimfire semi's that function pretty much 100% with good ammo it likes.

As for the test....pretty good. Still a little misleading since we have no idea of "damage" diffences between the hard and round .25 fmj vs. the softer, deformed .22lr. While pentration was less it's still possible that the .22lr might be better. We'll never have enough real test to know for sure.

[darkgael]

it's not that dang hard to finds rimfire semi's that function pretty much 100% with good ammo it likes.

Ya think not? I have two full sized semi .22s that are very reliable. But...a pocket pistol the size of a baby Browning? I owned a little Beretta. I REALLY wanted to like that gun. I must have tried more than a dozen types of .22rf ammo.
No joy. The gun could not be relied on to shoot a magazine without some problem.
I am open to ideas....tell me the secret.
BTW...the little Bernardelli has NEVER FTFd.


Pete

[FrankenMauser]

I am open to ideas....tell me the secret.

Don't buy the Beretta or Taurus.

[Glock19Fan]

I cant figure out how to quote messages on this forum..

But I agree, the pictures were a little decieving. But it was in fact a 2x4.

And while we cant see the damage cuased by the bullets, I was more concerned with penetration. Both bullets appeared to tumble judging by the holes in the jugs but I still believe the larger size of the .25 would make a larger hole.

I was originally doing to do the test with ballistic gelatin, but didnt want wood chips polluting the gelatin.

[Glock19Fan]

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.

[Bill DeShivs]

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.

[bonefamily]

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.

[AndyWest]

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.

[L_Killkenny]

but I still believe the larger size of the .25 would make a larger hole.

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