The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 19, 2012, 02:49 AM   #26
Ben Towe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 6, 2009
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 1,120
Now if you want to know the difference in the lengths of the projectile then you will have to do some homework. Different designs and weights will change projectile length. Or you could pull a bullet from each and use a micrometer to measure each. Be careful pulling one from a rimfire as you could easily set it off.
__________________
'Merica: Back to back World War Champs
Ben Towe is offline  
Old February 19, 2012, 06:26 AM   #27
Walklightly
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2011
Posts: 985
Quote:
Now if you want to know the difference in the lengths of the projectile then you will have to do some homework. Different designs and weights will change projectile length. Or you could pull a bullet from each and use a micrometer to measure each. Be careful pulling one from a rimfire as you could easily set it off.
Homework?

What ever do you mean?

I have three different 22lr's round's, all three have different "cartridge" length's.

Conclusion, not all 22lr's "cartridge's" are the same length.

Last edited by Walklightly; February 19, 2012 at 06:42 AM.
Walklightly is offline  
Old November 21, 2012, 04:30 PM   #28
crstrode
Member
 
Join Date: August 13, 2008
Posts: 40
.25 ACP is ballistically superior to 22LR

.25 ACP is superior to 22LR

All over the "Interweb" you will find folks regurgitating the myth that a 22LR is equal or greater than the 25ACP in terms of muzzle energy.

What a lot of hooey!

This is most likely due to fact that most 22LR ballistics data is based upon much much longer barrels than found in pocket pistols. North American Arms has some good actual performance data on the 22LR from a short barrel. Here is the link: North American Arms Ballistics

The fact is that the 25 ACP packs 25% more poop merely because the standard 50 grain bullet is 25% larger than the typical 40 grain 22LR bullet. Both cartridges leave the end of the same length barrel at about the same velocity. Typically the 22LR is actually lower than the typical 25ACP.

Comparing a 50 grain 25ACP bullet to a 40 grain 22LR bullet at 750 fps muzzle velocity shows 62.4 vs 49.9 foot pounds.

(Mass in grains times Velocity in feet per second squared divided by 450400 = foot pounds energy)
crstrode is offline  
Old November 21, 2012, 04:39 PM   #29
aarondhgraham
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 1, 2009
Location: Stillwater, OKlahoma
Posts: 7,117
Dang, I wish I had a chronograph,,,

I could run a few tests.

I have two identical pistols,,,
One in .22 LR and the other in .25 ACP.

What I can say is that both pistols put a bullet through a 2x4.

Aarond

.
__________________
Caje: The coward dies a thousand times, the brave only once.
Kirby: That's about all it takes, ain't it?
Combat: "A Silent Cry"
Aarond is good,,, Aarond is wise,,, Always trust Aarond! (most of the time)
aarondhgraham is offline  
Old November 21, 2012, 05:27 PM   #30
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,855
This is an old thread.

But, since it's been drug out of the gutter....

There are 3 basic case lengths used for .22 LR ammunition:
.22 Short
.22 Long
.22 Stinger

The Aguila 60 gr SSS rounds use a .22 Short case (0.420") with a long bullet, to reach the same nominal OverAll Length (OAL) as .22 LR.

The .22 Long case is the same length as .22 LR (0.595" to 0.613"). This is the standard case for more than 95% of .22 LR ammunition. Because of the great variety of loads available, OAL varies. But, the max OAL still remains 1.000".

The .22 Stinger case is longer than the .22 Long case, at 0.710". When combined with a light bullet, the loaded cartridge has the same max OAL as .22 LR - 1.000".


The reason those dimensions can all be used in the same chamber, were explained by Sevens on page 1 (back in February): .22 Short, .22 Long, and .22 LR all use outside-lubricated heeled bullets. So, the body of the bullet is the same diameter as the case. It doesn't matter how long each part of the cartridge is, so long as the loaded cartridge doesn't exceed the maximum allowable OAL.

Don't worry about all this case length nonsense. It's a non-issue.
Test the loads, and go from there.
Case length doesn't matter.
Bullet length doesn't matter.
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old November 21, 2012, 09:02 PM   #31
stormin1155
Member
 
Join Date: October 22, 2012
Location: Iowa
Posts: 20
I must be missing something. The OP's question was, "What bullet is longer?" Right? There has been a lot of discussion and nobody has answered the question yet.

So I pulled a Win .25 50gr FMJ cartridge apart as well as a Rem .36 gr hollow-point.

Overall cartridge length: .25 = 0.901" .22 = 0.956

Bullet length: .25 = 0.441 .22 = 0.494

Since the diameter would have to remain constant, I would assume a 40 gr .22 would be slightly longer. If it was solid, round nose, perhaps a little shorter.



stormin1155 is offline  
Old November 21, 2012, 09:58 PM   #32
alex0535
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 2012
Location: Georgia
Posts: 781
Quote:
Probably depends on the ammo.

For instance, Aguila makes a 60 grain sub-sonic load that uses a .22 short case to compenssate for the loooong bullet, which is considered a LR load (same length as a LR).

Daryl
I have used these in my henry .22, but I guess that the speed they come out of the barrel and whatever twist rate my rifle had just didn't agree with the 60g subsonic short cased long rifle. They tumbled and I was getting keyhole impacts. Wasn't getting enough rotation to stabilize it.

Your mileage may vary.

Last edited by alex0535; November 21, 2012 at 10:04 PM.
alex0535 is offline  
Old November 21, 2012, 10:32 PM   #33
Super Sneaky Steve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 9, 2011
Posts: 750
There's a thread somewhere about a guy getting stabbed with a katana sword. The only thing he had on him was a .25 ACP pocket pistol. He shot the bad guy in the face. Some of the rounds passed through and at least one did not.
__________________
anti-state, anti-war, pro-market
Super Sneaky Steve is offline  
Old November 21, 2012, 10:43 PM   #34
Denezin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 22, 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 209
22 is longer. also the only difference is around .030, which as a machinist i can make bigger cuts on a lathe safely (.050). Point is the us not a huge difference but if i had to choose, Id choose the .22
Denezin is offline  
Old November 22, 2012, 12:09 AM   #35
jackpine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 24, 2010
Posts: 350
you are not understanding the reason for the 25 ACP! The 25 ACP came along as a centerfire cartridge that fit in a 22LR sized (vest)pocket gun in a time that 22lr was not a reliable cartridge as it is now and the 22lr was hard to get to work in any self loader back in the early part of the 1900's.
jackpine is offline  
Old November 22, 2012, 07:57 AM   #36
johnbt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 6, 1999
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
Posts: 6,004
.22 rimfire is still unreliable compared to centerfire cartridges.

And then there's the rim that's been causing problems in autoloaders since day one.

I love .22 rimfire, but it still isn't a centerfire.

John
johnbt is offline  
Old November 22, 2012, 10:43 AM   #37
jhenry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2006
Location: Ozarks
Posts: 1,813
Either one will kill a person, and both are a poor choice for the job.

The .25 has a slight edge in a vest pocket pistol, all other things being equal, but is that edge beyond the point of "just noticeable difference" in terms of effectiveness for self defense. Don't know. The edge is slight, and I suspect the edge is not great enough to make a difference. In terms of reliably operating a semi auto small pistol, the .25 acp is a better choice, assuming it is a quality pistol, most are not anyway.

Locally, a guy, an abusive estranged husband with a protection order, shot the wife with a .25 acp and then himself just a couple of days ago. She took several rounds at point blank range to the head and died at the hospital. He shot himself in the head, was transported to the hospital, and is now improved in condition. He is expected to make a good recovery. t is not yet known if his intellectual functioning will be at the same low and ineffective level it was prior to the gunshot.
__________________
"A Liberal is someone who doesn't care what you do, as long as it's mandatory". - Charles Krauthammer
jhenry is offline  
Old November 22, 2012, 11:51 AM   #38
amd6547
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2006
Posts: 1,430
I have twin Beretta Bobcats, one 25acp, one 22lr.
Once, I fired both into the same phone book. I used FMJ and Hornady JHP in the 25, and Stinger, Velocitor and MiniMag in the 25.
The 25 JHP and the various 22's penetrated about the same. The 25 FMJ penetrated about 25 pages more.
I like the 25 version for carry because, with the MecGar magazine, it holds 10 rounds...while the 22 is holding 8rds...
A little more penetration is a good thing. I don't worry about centerfire versus rimfire too much. I have shot a lot of rimfire in the last year in several different firearms. No failures to fire at all using the higher quality ammo, which is all I buy.
Both Berettas have been 100% reliable, so there is no issue there, either.
__________________
The past is gone...the future may never happen.
Be Here Now.
amd6547 is offline  
Old November 22, 2012, 01:47 PM   #39
Bill DeShivs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2006
Posts: 7,118
The .22 LR was developed as a RIFLE cartridge. The long, skinny cartridge with heeled bullet sometimes does not fare well in semi autos during the feeding cycle. Much of it's energy is also lost in very short barrels. The OAL of the .22LR is longer than the .25-requiring the gun's action to be commensurately bigger. Many of the smaller .25s were offered in .22 short or .22 long. The LR requires a bigger gun. For example: the Beretta 21 is a bastardization of the original (and much smaller) 950 series guns. The 950 was .22short/.25. They were extremely reliable guns. The model 21 is an upsized version adapted for .22LR. Much of the reliability factor was lost in the LR version, and the .25 version is an afterthought.
__________________
Bill DeShivs
www.billdeshivs.com
Bill DeShivs is offline  
Old November 22, 2012, 01:51 PM   #40
chris in va
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 26, 2004
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 12,546
A fella approached me a few years ago in a warehouse I was working in. Being from Detroit he was a little hesitant to talk freely about self defense and had to pull me aside for questions about what handgun to get.

I suggested he start with 9mm and take a training/CC. He asked about 25acp and i said they weren't known for being an effective threat stopper.

"Oh no, man...I don't wanna kill the dude, jus' scare him".
chris in va is offline  
Old November 22, 2012, 02:19 PM   #41
amd6547
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2006
Posts: 1,430
"...For example: the Beretta 21 is a bastardization of the original (and much smaller) 950 series guns. The 950 was .22short/.25. They were extremely reliable guns. The model 21 is an upsized version adapted for .22LR. Much of the reliability factor was lost in the LR version, and the .25 version is an afterthought..."-Bill DeShivs

I would hardly call the 21 a "bastardization". I owned three 950's back before the 21 was introduced, a 25, and two 22shorts (one of which had the longer barrel).
The 22short versions were reliable enough to be fun shooters, but not 100%. The 22short was noticeably less powerful than the LR (I once fired a HV 22 short into a ball shaped wax candle a little bigger than a softball...the impact started the ball rolling slowly, and the bullet moved slow enough to leave a curved track...it barely made it all the way through, bouncing off a paperback book behind it).
A well designed 22pistol is extremely reliable, feeding the LR cartridge with no issues. My four 22 pistols include the Bobcat, the Ruger SR22 and 1978 standard model, and a 1960's French Unique. All four are 100% reliable. Even the Unique, which was missing its extractor when I bought it for a song, works perfectly.
No, the reliability factor in 22 pistols is buying good ammo.
__________________
The past is gone...the future may never happen.
Be Here Now.
amd6547 is offline  
Old November 22, 2012, 03:26 PM   #42
Bill DeShivs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2006
Posts: 7,118
Exactly! The 21 is not "well-designed." It is an adaptation of the smaller 950 series, as is the .32 Tomcat. The .25 cal. 950 was extremely reliable. The .22 cal 950s were designed as tackle box guns and plinkers-although the .22 short is a much easier round to feed in a small pistol than the LR. Some of the 21s work very well. My point was that the LR presents more problems feeding in a small auto than the .25.
The Uniques were very well made guns. They made the 2nd model "Mikros" in .22 short/.25.
__________________
Bill DeShivs
www.billdeshivs.com
Bill DeShivs is offline  
Old November 24, 2012, 03:59 AM   #43
Redhawk5.5+P+
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2012
Location: NV
Posts: 743
So the 22lr (.22") bullet is longer, so is a .223 (.223"), but the .25acp (.25") is thicker, making it better than both?

TBS, doesn't the 22lr and the .223 tumble on impact? What does the .25 do, go straight?

So if the 22lr tumbles, and the .25 doesn't, which does more tissue damage as it travels through soft tissue.

Am I wrong? The 22lr is longer than the .25 is wide?
Redhawk5.5+P+ is offline  
Old November 25, 2012, 07:16 AM   #44
Redhawk5.5+P+
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2012
Location: NV
Posts: 743
stormin1155 Post #31

Thanks for the effort to show the differences of the two. Proof is in the putting.
Redhawk5.5+P+ is offline  
Old November 25, 2012, 04:19 PM   #45
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,855
Quote:
.22 rimfire is still unreliable compared to centerfire cartridges.

And then there's the rim that's been causing problems in autoloaders since day one.
Cheap ammo is unreliable. The design is not.
When you buy crap ammo (*cough* bulk packs *cough*), you get crap for reliability.
When you buy real .22 LR ammunition, reliability is not a worry.


And the rim? Really?
Of the common mouse gun cartridges, .25 Auto and .32 Auto have far more rim-lock issues than .22 LR. The centerfire cartridges are the ones with a 'rim that's been causing problems since day one'. But... it's pretty much never the fault of the cartridge or firearm.
As Bill DeShivs put it a few years ago:
Quote:
Rimlock seems to be caused more by inept loading than [cartridge] design.
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 01:30 AM   #46
michael t
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2004
Location: Out back Ky
Posts: 3,474
Bill you for got about the Beretta model 20. When Beretta was kinda experimenting with the DA/SA and yet trying to keep the 950 size . I like my 2, 950's and The model 20 is way better to me than my 21's

I wouldn't walk across the street for a tomcat To much money . P-32 does a better job for 1/2 the price, and can use hot 32 ammo.
__________________
Colt Defender ,Colt Mustang ,Dan Wesson CBOB, PPK/S, American Classic,
Bersa Thunder 380
http://bersachat.comHome of Bersa
American Classic new home www.americanclassic1911forum.com
michael t is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 02:09 AM   #47
Bill DeShivs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2006
Posts: 7,118
Michael-
The model 20 was a nice little gun, and should have been kept in production.
For those of you unfamiliar- the Model 20 was basically a double action 950 in .25 acp caliber. I have a couple myself.
I bought a 3032 Tomcat when they first came out-thinking it would be a viable alternative to my Star DK. While it was a neat gun, it was heavier than the DK, and thicker. Too big for a pocket gun. I gave it to my brother. When he passed away, I got it back. I still have it.
__________________
Bill DeShivs
www.billdeshivs.com

Last edited by Bill DeShivs; November 27, 2012 at 02:14 AM.
Bill DeShivs is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 08:51 AM   #48
johnbt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 6, 1999
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
Posts: 6,004
"When you buy crap ammo (*cough* bulk packs *cough*), you get crap for reliability."

I'll have to trust you on this because I've never once bought a bulk pack. I don't think they even had bulk packs in the '50s when I started shooting rimfires.
johnbt is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 09:27 AM   #49
L_Killkenny
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 2, 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,676
Well they didn't have bulk when I started shooting either. Cheaper ammo (i.e. Winchester Wildcats, Federal Lightnings, Remington T-bolts, etc) came in little 50 round boxes and we bought it in bricks (500 rounds). Same cheap kinda ammo, different packaging. So while we didn't call or refer to it as bulk it was essentially the same thing.

Correct me if I'm wrong but what might be called hunting or target ammo wasn't nearly as available as what we have today.
L_Killkenny is online now  
Old November 27, 2012, 05:19 PM   #50
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,855
Quote:
I'll have to trust you on this because I've never once bought a bulk pack. I don't think they even had bulk packs in the '50s when I started shooting rimfires.
Quote:
Well they didn't have bulk when I started shooting either. Cheaper ammo (i.e. Winchester Wildcats, Federal Lightnings, Remington T-bolts, etc) came in little 50 round boxes and we bought it in bricks (500 rounds). Same cheap kinda ammo, different packaging. So while we didn't call or refer to it as bulk it was essentially the same thing.

Correct me if I'm wrong but what might be called hunting or target ammo wasn't nearly as available as what we have today.
I'm well aware of how ammunition was commonly packaged in the past.

But... you're judging modern ammunition and firearms by 30 to 70 year-old experiences?

Doesn't that pretty much negate the entire point of the thread?

I haven't seen anyone talk about time travel in this thread, so it's pretty safe to assume that current production ammunition would be used - not left over .22 LR from 1970.
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13133 seconds with 7 queries