22lr ammo for close range

5126 Views 26 Replies 20 Participants Last post by Bozz10mm, Aug 13, 2016

falconfan58

Discussion Starter · Aug 7, 2016

Now ,I'm not trying to start up anything,but why hasn't anyone come up with ammo for a 22lr pistol for self defense for those of us who getting physical isn't an option anymore?
thanks

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

WrongRecroom

· #2 · Aug 7, 2016 (Edited)

22mag is what you would want for that .....They make short barrel HP loads for it ..

22lr I would use Stinger or mini mag that would be your best bet .. if your gun will take it

I would want to use 22mag over 22lr though as mag is a wee bit more reliably and has short barrel low flash loads made for carry guns for it ..Speer and Hornday make it

edit also to add I would go a wheel gun over a semi auto if that is your plan ..Something like a LCR or one of the no lock 351c from S&W ..Simply worst case just keep pulling trigger till it goes bang

And for 22lr most of the wheel guns will in a pinch take 22short and 22 long

Reactions: 3

dangerranger

· #3 · Aug 7, 2016

CCI stinger was introduced in the 70"s to make up for the loss of velocity being shot from a pistol. It does not have a great reputation for accuracy beyond 70 yards but from a pistol that should not matter to most. If I were defending myself with a 22 pistol I would want CCI Stinger or CCI velocitors. Both have been good for small game getters! DR

Reactions: 3

jumperj

· #4 · Aug 7, 2016

I've used stingers.. They pack a lot of punch for a 22lr. You'll want to keep punching holes until the threat stops. Adrenalin can keep a BG going for a long time unless you hit him in the right spot. Even with a larger caliber..

ghost tracker

· #5 · Aug 7, 2016

To answer the OP question - it's a matter of physics. The .22 case (even the magnum) isn't capacious enough to hold the amount of propellant required to create an even marginally effective one-shot-stop cartridge. Particularly with pistol length barrel velocities. Yes, it can be eventually deadly. No, I don't wish to be shot with one. Yes, I'm sure Native Americans have dropped moose & elk from 150 yards. No, I won't pick one for SD. Yes, it's better than a slingshot (just barely, ask Goliath).

Reactions: 2

Poppy42

· #6 · Aug 8, 2016

Making a one-shot stop can be hard enough with any caliber. Once while wild turkey hunting I had to dispatch a rabid fox that was charging me. The fox got within 10 feet of me before I let loose a full blast number 4 shot from a 12 gauge three inch Magnum shell. That Fox continued running in for about 75 feet with one front paw completely blown off and part of it's chest missing. That being said I personally do not want to put my life on the line depending on a 22 or even a 22 mag stopping some PCP crazed scum bag that's trying to do me serious bodily harm. Even with The bigger and better defense calibers available there is still a very real possibility of not being able to stop and attacking bad guy. Personally I would much rather take my chances with a larger more powerful round. I'm not saying that if a 22 was the only thing available to me I wouldn't carry it. It is better than nothing .

See less See more

Puros_bran

· #7 · Aug 8, 2016

I really don't want to put my life on the line, period.
But for bathroom trips in the pjs a NAA in the pocket is okay by me.

I too use the CCI Stinger. It's as close to a 'defensive round' as we are probably ever going to get. As previously mentioned, there is only so much powder you can stuff in the tiny case, and only so much lead you can stick on the end of the case. Even if they developed a better powder, a better case, and a better bullet we would still be limited to the lowest common denominator firearm that's been sold in the last 100 years like the 45lc and 45-70.

ghost tracker

· #8 · Aug 8, 2016

There is no substitute for...cubic inches. That's why they're not called The Suggestions of Physics. It's the LAW. :biggrin2:

Reactions: 2

Nmuskier

· #9 · Aug 8, 2016

falconfan58 said:
Now ,I'm not trying to start up anything,but why hasn't anyone come up with ammo for a 22lr pistol for self defense for those of us who getting physical isn't an option anymore?
thanks

Because .22 just isn't a self defense round. It's a small case with a rimfire primer. Manufacturers have maxed out what they can do with powder. It's a tiny projectile. Considering you only have roughly 30-40 grains, there are limited options as to what a company can produce: Lead, copper plated, round nose, hollow point, and shot.

If you want bonded jackets, ballistic tip, fast burning powder, etc., you'll have to move up to a larger/heavier round. There are better options, even for those with physical disabilities limiting their ability to manage recoil. For the vast majority of people who say they have problems managing recoil, I find it is just a lack of experience or training. If a person has the strength to open and close an oven door, they can handle more recoil than a .22. If not, other attack stoppers such as OC spray should be considered as an additional defensive layer.

See less See more

BadgerJ

· #10 · Aug 8, 2016

ghost tracker said:
There is no substitute for...cubic inches. That's why they're not called The Suggestions of Physics. It's the LAW. :biggrin2:

Well there are 'Theoretical Physicists', and 'Experimental Physicists'.

Consider the Phlogiston Theory of the 17th and 18th centuries:

This held that burnable substances consisted of the true substance, called the calx, and phlogiston. Burning was the escape of phlogiston, and the calx was the dephlogisticated material. Air, though, could hold only so much phlogiston, so burning in an enclosed space saturated the air, and with the phlogiston no longer able to escape, the flame went out.

I guess one might say some people still use 'seat-of-the-pants' ballistics theory...such as the Mafia. :wink:

ghost tracker

· #11 · Aug 8, 2016

BadgerJ said:
Well there are 'Theoretical Physicists', and 'Experimental Physicists'

Yes Badger3, you're, of course, correct. Yet until the theoretical & experimental physicists write papers, confirmed by fancy math, that allow their peers to publish, vet, evaluate and confirm their postulations, they are considered...nut cases. And those postulations are NOT considered among the LAWS of Physics. You can call it seat-of-the-pants ballistic theory if you care to, yet until YOUR ballistic theory is evaluated and confirmed, it's holds no more validity than your example of "phlogiston(ism?). :rofl:

Boomstick75

· #12 · Aug 8, 2016

If it was all I had, I'd carry it, but I wouldn't be comfortable with it. I'd much, MUCH rather at least a 9mm with quality defense rounds like Speer Gold Dot, Federal HST, or Winchester Ranger.

Stevew

· #13 · Aug 9, 2016

The 22lr is actually better suited for longer range, and a smaller target.

falconfan58

Discussion Starter · #14 · Aug 9, 2016

I asked about the 22lr because of physical limitations,and I figure something is better than nothing:smile:

Mark_in_wi

· #15 · Aug 10, 2016

22lr is better than nothing! You will get more reliably from from anything center fire, so in 22lr I would want a revolver. If you are able to operate a revolver stepping up in caliber might be your best bet. The 327 can also shoot the lighter 32 mag or the even milder 32 S&W long and would be better options. I would bet people here would be able to help with more options if you could share your limitations.

NavyVet1959

· #16 · Aug 10, 2016

Is your limitations recoil related or weight of firearm related?

If it is recoil related, there are a few different calibers that will have minimal recoil, but still be better than a .22LR. As previously mentioned, the .327 mag might be an option. Another option might be the RIA .22TCM -- it's basically the equivalent to the 5.7x28, but in a more acceptable M1911 configuration. The double-stack M1911 in mid-size gives you 18 rounds that are somewhat loud and produce a bit of muzzle flash in low light situations.

Now, having said that, even a standard velocity .22LR will kill someone if your shot placement is perfect. Back on the ranch, we would sometimes have to put down sick cows and a .22LR aimed from between the eyes to the spot where the brain connected to the spinal cord would result in a very quick no-reflex kill.

I've heard it said that if you are carrying a .22LR handgun for self-defense, to treat it like the equivalent of the single shot shotgun loaded with buckshot and empty the entire mag / cylinder at once into your attacker. I figure a .22LR is like carrying an ice pick for self-defense -- poke a bunch of holes and then try to put some distance between you and them and hope they bleed out before they get to you.

See less See more

Reactions: 1

Bandit99

· #17 · Aug 10, 2016

If the .22lr was your only option due to a physical limitation then carrying the .22 would always be better than carrying nothing at all.

falconfan58

Discussion Starter · #18 · Aug 11, 2016

My problem is physical.And I don't want so much recoil,it knocks me on my butt:embarassed:

NavyVet1959

· #19 · Aug 11, 2016

falconfan58 said:
My problem is physical.And I don't want so much recoil,it knocks me on my butt:embarassed:

Well, if you go with a revolver and reload your own ammo, you can tailor it to exactly how much recoil you are willing to experience. Just remember though, Newton's Third Law of Motion and that momentum is conserved, but not kinetic energy. Whatever the momentum is for the bullet is what the momentum is going to be for the gun. The calculations are not that difficult and with an accurate weight for the gun in question, you can calculate the amount of recoil (either as momentum of the gun or as kinetic energy of the gun).

5lima30ret

· #20 · Aug 11, 2016

.22 mag is definitely a step up from .22lr with no appreciable increase in recoil. .22 mag in a short barrel does throw some pretty impressive fireballs at night!:blink:

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.