.22 Mag... Light/Fast or Heavy/Slow

[Wildernesshunter]

I recently snagged a S&W M&P .22 Mag Pistol.

I have shot several different rounds of various bullet weights through it and is cycles everything like butter. I am 500 rounds in and have had one malfunction... and that was on the very first clip.

Anyway, I want to purchase a bushel of ammo for the gun and I have the opportunity to by some Federal 50 grain that pushes about 1,500 fps for a smoking deal.

In my 22 mag rifle, I love the Hornady 30 grain, but it also shoots the Federal 50 gr really, really well. But the Hornady is pushing 2,200 fps.

So for home defense, which is the primary reason for this pistol, what is your opinion...

50 grain at 1,500 fps

or

30 grain at 2,200 fps


Love to hear your opinion and why.......


PS... No reason to debate me on choosing a 22 mag for home defense. I have a pistol in my hands that has 30 rounds in the mag.... that's good enough for me.

[Screwball]

50 grain… prefer heavier slugs.

[Recycled bullet]

"50 grain at 1,500 fps
or
30 grain at 2,200 fps"

Are those velocities measured from rifle length Barrel or from the Pistol barrel? I would choose whichever one is more accurate out of my gun in my hands.

[LeverGunFan]

The velocity for the 30 gr and 50 gr 22WMR rounds are out of a rifle length barrel, we won't see that out of a pistol barrel. The dedicated 22 WMR handgun rounds have 40 gr bullets (Speer) or 45 gr bullets (Federal & Hornady) at about 1000 FPS out of the shorter barrels, so they favor the heavier bullets. I'd go with the 50 gr Federal, it works very well in my Walther WMP. On the other hand, the fireball out of the 30 gr should be impressive.

[FrankenMauser]

SAAMI standard uses a 24" barrel.
But most ammo companies deviate from SAAMI standard for .22 WMR, choosing 16", 18", or 6-10" for their velocities. So this is one cartridge where you really need to know what they're claiming. But I cannot find anything online for that load.


Personally - I'd probably run the 50 gr Federal JHP.
The Hornady 30 gr Vmax load shoots very well in my rifle, but I don't need to be splitting hairs over 3/8" vs 3/4" groups for HD use in a handgun.

That being said - I have not tried the Federal 50 gr JHP load. So I don't have any direct experience with it. (Yet. -- I hope to try it soon.)

[mk70ss]

My opinion is with such a small diameter bullet, the heavier, the better. I am a huge fan of the .22 mag. Great, under appreciated round.

[smee78]

I also would go with the heaver 50-grain load, if they both shoot the same. I would not be as worried about the velocity at home defense distances as long as the load was accurate and functioned properly for my gun. I like to run the Hornady loads through my PMR-30.

[Wildernesshunter]

Thanks for all the excellent replies.

50 grain it is....

......

[HiBC]

I support your choice.

I think a chronograph would rearrange those velocity claims considerably.

I've done no testing, so this is subjective opinion. I'd prefer the penetration of the 50 gr.

If you have 30 rounds in your fist,if I were the bad guy, I think I'd find the sewing machine string of hits very distracting.I Might even change my plans.

Or drop dead.

I like the 22 WMR round. I have a CZ/Brno semi-auto rifle that has a 6x Burris Compact on it. My local Gunsmith "knew somebody" at Burris, so my scope has the Ballistic Plex reticle. I've rolled a few PDs with it!

I also have a little Chipmunk single shot in 22 WMR. Fun gun.

[MarkCO]

Federal Punch is my answer for the 22 Mag.

[rc]

A smoking deal for ammo that shoots well is never a bad decision.

[TruthTellers]

You choose what the gun runs more reliably with regardless of if it's a 30, 40, or 50 grain bullet or a hollow point or not.

That aside, let's say the pistol is good with everything and it comes down to a choice, I would choose the Speer Gold Dot or Hornady Critical Defense ammo, they're good hollow points that seem to expand with a full size pistol barrel.

It doesn't really matter what weight you choose, the .22 Mag has the velocity and a jacketed bullet that leads to getting decent penetration.

[Lurch37]

I recently read an article in one of my gun mags about using 22lr and 22mag for self defense, if I can find it I'll get more info. I do remember in 22mag, that Federal Punch and Hornady Critical Defense was rated very highly.

As an aside, I too have one of the S&W MP 22 Mag Pistols and it's been nothing but perfect thru 400 rounds.

[bamaranger]

One will be lucky to get anywhere near listed velocities with a handgun in the .22 mag ctg. I would opt for the heavier projectile, hoping that penetration would be sufficient to reach vitals and incapacitate the threat.

[Webleymkv]

Before you buy a bushel of any sort of ammo for your gun, I'd recommend trying a variety of different ammo to see what your gun shoots well and is reliable with. I don't know about S&W, but I do know that the Walther WMP .22 Magnum has a list of recommended ammo and that, in the reviews I've seen, the Walther can be finicky about ammo with bullets lighter than 40 gr particularly when an optic is mounted. I suspect that, since most if not all of the semi-auto .22 Magnum pistols on the market use some sort of recoil-operation, that the lighter 30 gr loads might not produce enough recoil to be reliable in all pistols.

As far as the velocity you'll get from your pistol, as others have said you're not going to get anywhere near the advertised velocity from either of the two loadings you mentioned because the advertised velocities for both are from rifle-length barrels (Hornady lists a 24" test barrel and while Federal doesn't list a length, I'd expect no less than an 18" barrel and likely longer). From the 4.35" barrel of your S&W, I'd expect velocities in the 1100-1200 fps range from the 50 gr Federal loading and 1300-1400 fps from the 30 gr Hornady.

If you have the opportunity to stock up on the 50 gr Federal loading for a good price and it's reliable in your pistol, I see no reason not to do so for practice and "put away for a rainy day" purposes. For dedicated self-defense ammunition, however, there are a few .22 Magnum loadings specifically designed for self-defense from handguns that you may want to consider including Speer's 40 gr Gold Dot, Hornady's 45 gr Critical Defense, and Federal's 45 gr Punch.

https://www.speer.com/ammunition/gol...re/19-954.html

https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/r...cal-defense#!/

https://www.federalpremium.com/rimfi...-PD22WMR1.html

While the advertised velocities on all three of these are probably substantially slower that what you might expect from a .22 Magnum, it's because these are using 2" test barrels. These loadings also use bullets specifically designed to expand at handgun velocities and faster powders which will give more optimum velocity from shorter handgun barrels. I don't know what kind of price you're able to get on the 50 gr Federal loading you mentioned, but I've been able to find all three of the above loadings for $20-25/50 rounds locally which, when compared to other calibers, really isn't a bad price for premium defensive ammo (target FMJ can cost that much or more depending on the caliber).

[FrankenMauser]

Things may not be so today, manufacturers may have changed their loads.
But as of about 10 years ago, the majority of .22 WMR on the market was optimized for 10-14" barrels.

In general, Winchester was on the long end, ArmsCor/Fiocchi and Remington were in the middle, and CCI favored the short end.
Historically, Winchester loaded 22 WMR for rifles, CCI loaded it for better performance in handguns, and everyone else was typically somewhere in the middle.

Today, it seems like 90% of what is on the market is being loaded by CCI (including Fiocchi, when not loaded by ArmsCor). But is the contract stuff a rebrand of their own products? Or is it loaded to contract spec?
I don't know, or know of anyone that has tested or researched to find out.

And, of course, there are specialty loads now that don't fit the general profiles -- like the "Short Barrel" loads.

It used to be that you bought by barrel length if trying to optimize velocity, from handgun to rifle:
CCI -> Everything else -> Winchester

Today?....

[TruthTellers]

Originally Posted by FrankenMauser

Things may not be so today, manufacturers may have changed their loads.
But as of about 10 years ago, the majority of .22 WMR on the market was optimized for 10-14" barrels.

In general, Winchester was on the long end, ArmsCor/Fiocchi and Remington were in the middle, and CCI favored the short end.
Historically, Winchester loaded 22 WMR for rifles, CCI loaded it for better performance in handguns, and everyone else was typically somewhere in the middle.

Today, it seems like 90% of what is on the market is being loaded by CCI (including Fiocchi, when not loaded by ArmsCor). But is the contract stuff a rebrand of their own products? Or is it loaded to contract spec?
I don't know, or know of anyone that has tested or researched to find out.

And, of course, there are specialty loads now that don't fit the general profiles -- like the "Short Barrel" loads.

It used to be that you bought by barrel length if trying to optimize velocity, from handgun to rifle:
CCI -> Everything else -> Winchester

Today?....

It's my belief for .22 Mag that unless there's something in the box that says "short barrel" "self defense" or "optimized for handguns" that it's ammo designed for rifles. What that means is the powder is meant for a long barrel and the bullet, if a hollow point, designed to expand at the velocities the rifle achieves, loading that same ammo in a pistol won't reach the same velocity and thus no expansion.

There's no extra QC or inspection done to the self defense handgun ammo, the only differences are powder and bullet.

[FrankenMauser]

That is the basic assumption made by most shooters with any experience dealing with rimfire ammo.

But automatically throwing aside free advice (with earnest intent) from someone that has been shooting, testing, handloading, and enjoying 22 WMR since the day after he turned 18, and bought his first rifle on his own, would be arrogant and unwise.

If you buy from a company that optimized for shorter barrels, you may see higher muzzle velocities from a 4.5-6" handgun barrel.
Yet, if you buy from a company that always saw it as a rifle cartridge and optimized for rifle barrels, you are very likely to see lower muzzle velocities from the same handgun(s).
"Everything was meant for a rifle," is just a good way to waste money on loads that disappoint.

That was the nature of .22 WMR at least as of 10 years ago, and is likely the case today. Loads may have changed. Powders may have been updated, tweaked, or blended. But I would expect the general performance to be the same - I haven't seen a departure from that paradigm with loads that I've been testing this year (but the number of loads has been limited, and, until last year, I had not bought new .22 WMR ammo in about 8 years).

*Add a cylinder gap, and all bets are off. Some powders can't handle a major pressure leak, even if meant for shorter barrels.

**Something you can look up on your own, if you feel like it: If you look at semi-auto handguns that have a list of "recommended" .22 WMR ammo, it is nearly always dominated by CCI -- and, in recent years, the contract ammo made by CCI (Hornady [all], Remington Accutip, Fiocchi w/ 33 gr V-max, etc.). In contrast, if you look for ammo they suggest avoiding, Winchester is always on the list - even though those same loads give great muzzle velocities in rifles.

[MarkCO]

Originally Posted by TruthTellers

It's my belief for .22 Mag that unless there's something in the box that says "short barrel" "self defense" or "optimized for handguns" that it's ammo designed for rifles. What that means is the powder is meant for a long barrel and the bullet, if a hollow point, designed to expand at the velocities the rifle achieves, loading that same ammo in a pistol won't reach the same velocity and thus no expansion.

There's no extra QC or inspection done to the self defense handgun ammo, the only differences are powder and bullet.

That might seem reasonable to you, but it is just uninformed.