What about 22 magnum?

[keithdog]

Maybe it's more common that I realize, but I simply don't see much mention of 22 magnum whether we are talking rifle or handgun, self defense or hunting small game. I see TONS of discussion involving 22LR, and plenty of guns that are advertised for 22LR, just not much in the way of 22magnum. I would think it would be more popular and effective than 22LR. I've seen a few guns that fire the 22 magnum, especially in revolvers. Just not many.

[Aguila Blanca]

The problem is (IMHO) that .22 Magnum is still a rimfire, with all the disadvantages such as unreliable ignition, but it costs as much as many centerfire cartridges. In theory I like the .22 Magnum, but I have two Ruger Single Sixes with both cylinders, and I have never fired .22 Magnum through either of them.

[osbornk]

I have a 22 magnum bolt action rifle as well as magnum cylinders for my Rough Rider and Single Six. I have had them for years and seldom use them because of the cost of the ammo. I shoot a lot of 22LR but if I want something more powerful, I use the much cheaper 9mm in my handguns or my PCC rifle. The cost of 22 magnum is similar to the cost of the 380 and 38 specials I use. I don't feel the need to pay nearly 50% more to shoot 22 magnum than 9mm.

[JERRYS.]

in a rifle it is great for pests. in a long bbl. revolver it can be ok for defensive purposes, in a snub revolver you are better served with a centerfire.

[Pahoo]

The problem is (IMHO) that .22 Magnum is still a rimfire, with all the disadvantages such as unreliable ignition, but it costs as much as many centerfire cartridges.

Sure glad you qualified this ignition problem as your opinion.....
However, the cost is certainly a factor and fact …..

Granted, I have had my share of ignition problems with LRs and I do shoot quite a few of them. For every ten rounds of LRs I shoot magnums.
I have never had an ignition problem with a magnum. ……

Be Safe !!!

[44 AMP]

Going from shooting a 40gr slug at 1200 to shooting one at 1900fps is a significant increase. BUT...

Is it enough to justify the cost? The cost of a non-reloadable round? Even back some 30 years ago when ammo was "cheaper", the .22 Mag wasn't.

Actually, the .22 WMR seems cheaper today than it used to be. Take a quick look at online prices today. The cheapest .22WMR seem a between 2x and 3x the cost of cheapest .22LR.

I remember buying .22LR back then for less than $1 a box, and at that same time, .22WMR was $6 a box.

Even back then, it was a price vs. performance issue, and when you can shoot something else that provides even more than the .22wmr does, for the same or even LESS cost, the WMR doesn't have a lot going for it anymore.

How many situations are there where the .22LR isn't enough, and something more than the WMR is too much??? I can't think of any, really.

[osbornk]

Originally Posted by Pahoo

Sure glad you qualified this ignition problem as your opinion.....
However, the cost is certainly a factor and fact …..

Granted, I have had my share of ignition problems with LRs and I do shoot quite a few of them. For every ten rounds of LRs I shoot magnums.
I have never had an ignition problem with a magnum. ……

Be Safe !!!

I have never had a 22 magnum fail to fire but I have a couple of 22LR fail to fire a couple of times per hundred with cheap bulk ammo. However, in the last 20 years, I have shot maybe a hundred rounds of magnum and many thousands of rounds of LR. I have shot thousands of rounds of center fire and never had a failure to fire.

The reason I don't shoot 22 magnum in my rifle or revolvers is the expense. I originally bought my 22 magnum rifle for groundhog hunting but since that time, I have acquired an AR15 and a PCC 9MM carbine and I really have no reason to keep it but I will.

[jmr40]

223 ammo isn't that much more expensive. If I need more punch than 22 LR I'll go straight to 223.

[fourbore]

I like 22mag for hunting. It has been talked over and put down by the 17 fans. And for good reason, the gun buyer is super fickle. And newbies are not born with experience. They turn to the web. We all know a round goes up or down for absolutely no fathomable reason at all. There are always too many choices and new but better for the weak minded. So, all these topic are cartridge WARS. Life and death for the old and new cartridges

For my needs 22Mag has the best mix of versatility and performance in a rim fire. It is a lot safer and low key than 223 for small game. The 223 has a place for me and its not cheap ammo in a black blaster. it is a varmint rifle with 1:12 barrel for 'quality' varmint ammo.

Th 22mag may be loosing popularity as did the 30/30. It lacks newbe appeal. Solid working choice, but not extreme or crazy superlative. No 1,000 yard blah blah.

Ammo is cheap enough. But again, everyone has an opinion. Nothing is cheap if you blow off ammo just to make noise. If every shot counts, cost is low. I do all my target and plinking/steel rimfire shooting with 22lr. I do all my rimfire hunting with 22mag. All of it.

[MTT TL]

I have observed a FTI rate on all rimfire of around .05%. This is very high when compared to CF ammo of about .00003%. At the end of the day you will get better terminal ballistic performance out of most CF handgun rounds as well.

It's not really a question of what is wrong with 22 magnum, its just that other rounds are better and the price is not that much different.

[rock185]

I don't shoot much .22 anything, but I have always liked the .22 Magnum round and have owned a few guns chambered in .22 Magnum. Currently have a Ruger revolver and Ruger rifle in.22 WMR. When I do shoot .22, it is most often the .22 Magnum. I may be the only shooter on the planet who shoots more .22 Magnum than .22LR

FWIW, In Ruger and Winchester .22 WMR rifles, and Ruger and Colt .22 WMR revolvers, I've never had a .22 WMR fail to fire......ymmv

[zukiphile]

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca

The problem is (IMHO) that .22 Magnum is still a rimfire, with all the disadvantages such as unreliable ignition, but it costs as much as many centerfire cartridges.

This is what had me selling my last 22magnum 25 years ago.

I wanted a little more range than 22lr and wanted it to have a little more energy out to a couple hundred yards. I bought a Ruger laminated 77/22 with the 24 inch barrel. The weight was perfect and it provided good enough accuracy to shoot pests out to 100 yards. It was louder than a 22lr, but quite a bit quieter than a 5.56; that can be important if you have people living within a half mile of where ever you shoot.

Back then 22magnum was about the same price as cheap 5.56. Steel cased 5.56 may be cheaper than any 22 magnum now. Even given the cost, it still can make sense if a little more power but not a lot more noise are the goals; if those goals aren't present, either 22lr or 5.56 are better.

[keithdog]

This all makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the feed back.

[44 AMP]

I took an alternate route. The only .22WMR I have is a Ruger Super Single Six with the WMR cylinder. Had to for over 3 decades and still have two partial boxes of ammo I never finished.

I took a different route, since I have the road available. I have a couple .22 Hornets (and a .222 and a .223, and a .22-250), AND, I'm a handloader.

I can load .22 Hornet anywhere from .22 LR speeds up to WMR levels and beyond up to full Hornet speed. SO, rather than use the WMR, on those rare occasions when I need it, I just use some downloaded .22 Hornet.

The brass costs a bit, but since I'm already paying for it to used, and reused in the Hornet, creating WMR level loads in the Hornet is actually cheaper than buying WMR for one time use.

[ballardw]

I've had fail to fire with 22WMR but that was because of a broken firing pin that rotated in in the bold and some times didn't strike the rim as intended. They would fire when reloaded and received a properly oriented strike, which has not been the case with some of the 22LR cases.

The attractive bit for 22magnum in the self-defense area is with something like the Kel-Tec PMR or it's predecessor Grendel P-30: 30 rounds, low recoil and enough muzzle flash (in low light) to make the bad guy think twice in a package that doesn't way much.
But cost of ammo at typically a bit more to 50% more than 9mm is a drawback, though cheaper than .32.

[ms6852]

I have a Kel-Tec PMR 30 and a CZ in 22 mag. Have yet to experience a failure to fire in either firearm.

[TruthTellers]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

Going from shooting a 40gr slug at 1200 to shooting one at 1900fps is a significant increase. BUT...

Is it enough to justify the cost? The cost of a non-reloadable round? Even back some 30 years ago when ammo was "cheaper", the .22 Mag wasn't.

Actually, the .22 WMR seems cheaper today than it used to be. Take a quick look at online prices today. The cheapest .22WMR seem a between 2x and 3x the cost of cheapest .22LR.

I remember buying .22LR back then for less than $1 a box, and at that same time, .22WMR was $6 a box.

Even back then, it was a price vs. performance issue, and when you can shoot something else that provides even more than the .22wmr does, for the same or even LESS cost, the WMR doesn't have a lot going for it anymore.

How many situations are there where the .22LR isn't enough, and something more than the WMR is too much??? I can't think of any, really.

There really aren't and that's one of the reasons I don't have a .22 Mag rifle. I have single actions with the .22 Mag cylinder, a 1.5" NAA, 4" NAA, and 6.5" Heritage and it's nice to have the extra power for those guns if need be. Even then, the point of the NAA's is their small size/low weight and the Heritage is a 9 shot and 9 rds of .22 Mag is no slouch, but there are better options out there in centerfire.

The gap of where .22 LR isn't enough and anything over .22 Mag is too much is so small, it's not worth considering. My .327 Henry has the ability to shoot .32 Long at .22 power levels, .32 Mag at .22 Mag levels, and with .327 near that of .357 Mag levels.

You only get that kind of versatility in centerfire.

Most probably have a .357 rifle and they have the option of .38 Special, which while it won't have the range, it'll have similar power to the .22 Mag.

Stuff like the PMR30 is not reliable enough IMO with the long .22 Mag case and rimfire priming. I can accept at .22 handgun with an exposed hammer giving the ability of a second strike, but a striker .22 is no good for self defense IMO.

Even something like the CMR30... a 9mm carbine is still better and more powerful, not too mention be cheaper to shoot.

[Hal]

.22 mag?

Inuit hunt polar bears with .22 mag rifles.

Inuit's have big ones that clang as they walk across the ice....

[Doyle]

I've hunted my entire life and have never seen the need for a .22mag. There just isn't anything I hunt that it's suited for. It is way overkill for squirrels, rabbits, etc and way under powered for larger game. It is in that "in between" category that just doesn't fit.

[Pahoo]

I've hunted my entire life and have never seen the need for a .22mag.

I hunt early season Squirrels with a .22LR and late season Squirrels with a .22MAG. I hunt an area loaded with Coyotes and this gives me the option of taking both. I usually take about two or three Coyotes a season. …..

Be Safe !!!

[FrankenMauser]

Maybe it's more common that I realize, but I simply don't see much mention of 22 magnum whether we are talking rifle or handgun, self defense or hunting small game.

Those of us that use .22 WMR just don't talk about it much.
New shooters often don't run across the cartridge or firearms chambered for it; or, if they do, have it immediately disparaged by an uneducated counter monkey at their local gun store. Or, a person's only experience with .22 WMR was in something where it didn't work well or was not able to live up to is capabilities (like in a derringer, Ruger Single Six, NAA Mini, etc.). So, there just aren't many new people interested.
I see it a little bit like: Those that know, know. Those that tried it in the wrong firearm got the wrong experience. Those that don't know, don't know that they don't know.


Personally... My primary .22 WMR - a 'lowly', cheap Marlin 882SS - is one of my favorite rifles and goes on almost every small game hunt. Occasionally, I'll take it out for grouse, too. Decapitation is more consistent with .22 WMR than .22 LR, but it's still a notable step down in recoil, report, and muzzle blast from almost any unsuppressed center fire. (And, YES, taking grouse with a rimfire is legal where I hunt.)

The biggest selling point for a .22 WMR, in my opinion, is the use of proper jacketed bullets. Far less fouling than .22 LR, better accuracy, and the ability to better align bullet choice for the intended game species. (Everything from FMJs to explosive HPs, and from plastic tipped bullets to frangible NTX stuff is available. There's an option for plated lead, too. But... meh.)

The problem is (IMHO) that .22 Magnum is still a rimfire, with all the disadvantages such as unreliable ignition

I see that you've further addressed this statement in subsequent posts, but I just wanted to add my own experience.

I have not shot anywhere near as much .22 WMR as .22 LR; but I have run a couple thousand rounds through my Marlin 882SS and a couple hundred rounds through a few handguns.
From '60s production to current production .22 WMR, all malfunctions and failures to fire were caused by the firearm ... with only ONE exception.
That single case that failed to fire was from a box of Winchester Dynapoints (manufactured circa ~2007); which I consider to be garbage ammo, anyway.

Everything else has been 100% reliable - in feeding, firing, extraction, and down-range performance.

Winchester Dynapoints are horribly inconsistent dimensionally, in performance (bullet deformation and powder charge variation are big here), and in reliability (inconsistent priming compound dispersion -- I've inspected several hundred unfired cases, as well as hundreds more fired cases). Winchester Dynapoint ammo is so bad that, after a few years of testing and inspection, I pulled down the remaining cartridges that I had, scrapped the powder, melted down the bullets, and put the hulls in my jug of brass for the recycler (after heating them to initiate the priming compound).

Everything else has been good, though. ArmsCor, CCI, Fiocchi, Fiocchi (ArmsCor), Fiocchi (CCI), Black Hills (I think CCI loaded this), Hornady (CCI), Remington, Remington (CCI), Aguila, Winchester Supreme, and more...

I've had a higher rate of failure with factory 9mm ammo than with .22 WMR.
.22 WMR may be rimfire, but it is not on the same quality level as .22 LR. It is notably better, across the board.

[T. O'Heir]

Yep the biggest issue with the .22 Mag is the price of the ammo. Had a Savage M65 many years ago. Cost of ammo was at least twice that of Long Rifle. And a decided lack of choice . It was Winchester(currently running $22.99Cdn per 50 at Cabela's. Vs $4.99Cdn per 50 for LR.) or nothing, as I recall. Never had any issues with it going bang though.

[TruthTellers]

Originally Posted by FrankenMauser

Those of us that use .22 WMR just don't talk about it much.
New shooters often don't run across the cartridge or firearms chambered for it; or, if they do, have it immediately disparaged by an uneducated counter monkey at their local gun store. Or, a person's only experience with .22 WMR was in something where it didn't work well or was not able to live up to is capabilities (like in a derringer, Ruger Single Six, NAA Mini, etc.). So, there just aren't many new people interested.
I see it a little bit like: Those that know, know. Those that tried it in the wrong firearm got the wrong experience. Those that don't know, don't know that they don't know.


Personally... My primary .22 WMR - a 'lowly', cheap Marlin 882SS - is one of my favorite rifles and goes on almost every small game hunt. Occasionally, I'll take it out for grouse, too. Decapitation is more consistent with .22 WMR than .22 LR, but it's still a notable step down in recoil, report, and muzzle blast from almost any unsuppressed center fire. (And, YES, taking grouse with a rimfire is legal where I hunt.)

The biggest selling point for a .22 WMR, in my opinion, is the use of proper jacketed bullets. Far less fouling than .22 LR, better accuracy, and the ability to better align bullet choice for the intended game species. (Everything from FMJs to explosive HPs, and from plastic tipped bullets to frangible NTX stuff is available. There's an option for plated lead, too. But... meh.)


I see that you've further addressed this statement in subsequent posts, but I just wanted to add my own experience.

I have not shot anywhere near as much .22 WMR as .22 LR; but I have run a couple thousand rounds through my Marlin 882SS and a couple hundred rounds through a few handguns.
From '60s production to current production .22 WMR, all malfunctions and failures to fire were caused by the firearm ... with only ONE exception.
That single case that failed to fire was from a box of Winchester Dynapoints (manufactured circa ~2007); which I consider to be garbage ammo, anyway.

Everything else has been 100% reliable - in feeding, firing, extraction, and down-range performance.

Winchester Dynapoints are horribly inconsistent dimensionally, in performance (bullet deformation and powder charge variation are big here), and in reliability (inconsistent priming compound dispersion -- I've inspected several hundred unfired cases, as well as hundreds more fired cases). Winchester Dynapoint ammo is so bad that, after a few years of testing and inspection, I pulled down the remaining cartridges that I had, scrapped the powder, melted down the bullets, and put the hulls in my jug of brass for the recycler (after heating them to initiate the priming compound).

Everything else has been good, though. ArmsCor, CCI, Fiocchi, Fiocchi (ArmsCor), Fiocchi (CCI), Black Hills (I think CCI loaded this), Hornady (CCI), Remington, Remington (CCI), Aguila, Winchester Supreme, and more...

I've had a higher rate of failure with factory 9mm ammo than with .22 WMR.
.22 WMR may be rimfire, but it is not on the same quality level as .22 LR. It is notably better, across the board.

I have not found that to be the case, at least not in my single action revolvers. I will frequently get failures to fire with .22 Mag, but when I switch the cylinder to .22 LR, I have much less failures.

This is in three different revolvers, so unless all the .22 Mag cylinders for those guns are junk (which is nigh impossible) .22 Mag is just less reliable in a handgun vs .22 LR.

I do think that there is a difference in reliably igniting .22 Mag in a rifle and a handgun.

[fourbore]

Originally Posted by TruthTellers

I have not found that to be the case, at least not in my single action revolvers. I will frequently get failures to fire with .22 Mag, but when I switch the cylinder to .22 LR, I have much less failures.

This is in three different revolvers, so unless all the .22 Mag cylinders for those guns are junk (which is nigh impossible) .22 Mag is just less reliable in a handgun vs .22 LR.

I do think that there is a difference in reliably igniting .22 Mag in a rifle and a handgun.

I find any fail to fire with any of my guns in 22LR or 22MAG, is EXTREMELY rare event. In 22mag I shoot ruger revolvers and several bolt action rifles.

I have seen and help others with marginal function rimfire guns. Typically it is the main spring on an older gun.

Having less failures in a 22LR is totally messed up. A good gun with good ammo should almost never fail. Thats the Truth!

[ammo.crafter]

Can anyone tell me WHY the mag cost so much more than the LR?