Reality Check: .22 long rifle vs .22 magnum

[cfsharry]

Ballistics by the Inch has just provided data on the .22 magnum cartridge. While they did not specifically test a mini, (I am a little suprised by that), the results do not demonstrate any advantage in carrying the magnum vs the long rifle. Thoughts?

[TwoGunJayne]

Hmm. I'm crunching numbers at the moment. More on that later.

What immediately jumped off of the page and grabbed my attention is that the magnums are more likely to be throwing a 40+ grain bullet, while the lr is throwing a lighter one. Also, I like the thought of increased muzzle flash and loudness of the magnums... it's more of an attention getter.

Admittedly, how much is how much more? I'm spreadsheeting this info as we speak. FPE, guys and gals, amirite?

[OV-1D]

  My thought is I want the round to remain in the subject not pass through , bouncing around inside is always better .

[TwoGunJayne]

I'm back, this time with hard data. Foot pounds of energy.

2" barrel fpe winners?

• Magnum CCI Maximag 40gr (not +V), 79.4 fpe
• Magnum CCI Vmax 30gr, 78.4
• Magnum Fiocchi PSD 40gr, 71.7
• Magnum Hornady FTX 45gr, 71.0
• Magnum CCI Gamepoint 40gr, 69.8
• LONG RIFLE CCI Velocitor 40gr, 69.0

2" losers? Starting with the worst
1. CCI 27gr lr cphp 44.4
2. CCI 29 lr cprn 47.6
3. CCI Maximag +V mag 30grn 52.0 (WTF!?!?!?!)
4. Federal/Speer TNT mag 30 grn 53.3
5. Remington Golden Bullet lr 36grn, 57. (no surprise here.)
6. Aguila SSS lr 60grn 58.

I cannot BELIEVE that my beloved maximag+v showed up on the fpe losers list for a 2" barrel! This round gets 17" of penetration on bare or denim covered ballistics gel! I'm equally surprised that plain jane CCI Maximag was the 2 inch foot pounds of energy winner in a 2" barrel! Unbelievable!

Obviously, FPE isn't everything! Also, it isn't a clear cut FPE advantage of lr or mag out of a 2" barrel, since a mag round showed up on the loser list and a lr round showed on the winner list. The energies are mixed! But read on, things work out like you think they will once we get bigger barrels.

LR is getting roughly 50 fpe from a 2", Mag is roughly getting 60. It's also mixed up, like my brain right now. 2" rimfire ballistics are WEIRD!

Okay, so now we're shooting a 4" NAA Earl conversion:

Winners:
1. CCI Maximag mag again 162.5 fpe. Wow, talk about a performance jump!
2. Hornady FTX mag 45gr, 153.3 No surprise here. I've chronoed this round personally from a 4" minimaster and got mid 1000s, so that's the cylinder gap. BBI shows 1239 from their straight barrel.
3. CCI MM +V mag 151.8 (phew! That's a relief! This isn't a Black Widow round, it's an 4" Earl/Minimaster round! Good to know!)
4. CCI Vmax 30 grain mag 150.6
5. Fiocchi PSD 40 grn mag 147.1
6. Fiocchi JHP 40 grn mag 143.

Note: Every mag round beat every single LR round from a 4" solid test barrel, according to Ballistics by the Inch.
The best LR rounds from a 4":
1. CCI Velocitor 111
2. CCI Stinger 100.7
3. Rem Viper 97
4. Win SuperX 96.6
5. CCI Minimag 91.3

"Regular" LR rounds are getting 90 fpe + or - 20 fpe.
Mag rounds are 140 fpe + or - 20 fpe. I'd say magnums have a definite edge in the 4" barrel.

Okay, now we're shooting a 6" NAA Hogleg. Once again, every mag beat every lr.
Winners:
1. Federal TNT 220.8 (wow!)
2. CCI Maximag 220.3
3. CCI Vmax 216.7
4. Fiocchi JHP 211.7
5. Hornady FTX 211.2

Worst magnum rounds:
1 Hornady 25gr NTX 184.6
2. Winchester Vmax 191
2. CCI Gamepoint 195.

So you see there's not a WHOLE LOT of spread in a 6" barrel, but there are definitely some winners there.

6" best LR rounds:
1.CCI Stinger 123.9 (I freaking KNEW it!!)
2.Rem Yellow Jacket 114.2
3.Winchester SuperX 110

6" barrel worst LR rounds:
1. CCI 29 grn cprn 63.4
2. CCI 27 grn cphp 65.9
3. Remington Golden Bullet (No surprise. I hate these rounds.)

6" Summary: Top end, 220.8 fpe, worst 63 fpe. No lr round beat a mag round. This is a HUGE spread. Even a "regular" lr round is only getting low 100s of fpe. DOUBLE THAT for mags. Without a doubt, LR cannot compare to magnum from a 6"

Magnum only in a 2" versus a 6":
Not even close. 220.8 fpe versus 79.4 fpe for the top rounds.

Worst mag round in a 6" versus best LR round in a 2":  best lr 2" 69 fpe, worst mag 6" 184.6 fpe.

Over all best ammo 2"-6"
LR: CCI Velocitor (shorter barrels) and Stinger (longer barrels)
Mag: CCI regular Maximag (all-around champion)

Once you get a longer barrel than 2", the Hornady Critical Defense FTX and CCI Maximag +v really start to shine. The Federal TNT round starts to become really ferocious in 6" and longer barrels.

There are a few spikes and flukes here and there, you could pick the top round... or you could go with what's generally the best. Also keep in mind that this information is pure foot pounds of energy and says ZERO about what happens versus bone and ballistic gel.

[Dinadan]

Since I always carry CCI 40 gr ammo in both my LR and Mag minis, I am pleased to see that the Ballistics by the Inch data tends to support that. I am surprised that Hornady's 45gr mags do not rank higher. Too bad that they did not test Gold-Dots. Looking at TwoGunJayne's foot pounds data for 2" barrels, it would seem that the LR Velocitor, with 69 FPE, is very close to the Hornady's 71 FPE. Hey, I have always liked Velocitors!

Another point to consider: if you shoot Mags and Velocitors out of the same magnum revolver, that will probably make the LR rounds compare even better than Ballistics by the Inch indicates. Since the LR is shorter than the mag rounds, the LR has 3/8" extra effective barrel in the front of the mag cylinder. The longer the barrel the less that matters, but for a 2" barrel it gives the LR about 17% more barrel.

[TwoGunJayne]

That's an excellent point about the extra barrel length in a real-world gun.

So a shorter barrel doesn't push the Hornady Critical Defense FTX bullet as well as it could, but don't forget it's a heavier projectile and should stand up better to bone. Since this information is pure foot-pounds, we cannot infer that these are the best or worst performing rounds. They are just the ones with the most energy from a solid test barrel. The cylinder gap will cost some performance and it varies from gun to gun and even by how clean the gun is.

To throw some gel test info in here, a 2" Black Widow CCI Maximag +V gets 17" of gel penetration with zero expansion and usually the round flips inside the gel and ends up traveling base first. The Fed TNT round out of the same gun expands or even fragments and only does 6", this means a massive energy dump as this round actually expands unlike many .22 magnum rounds from a short barrel.

It begs the question: What defines the terminal performance of a round? Penetration, energy transfer? Expansion or rounds tumbling inside the target? I pose that shot placement makes these things less important while still getting the job done.

Also keep in mind that the energies of the top rounds were tending to be less than 10 foot pounds in difference, while the worst rounds could be nearly half of that number. The Hornady FTX round really isn't that bad from a supershort, it's just that I noted a trend of energy approaching the same value as the barrel is shorter and shorter. The FPE didn't quite converge to the same number, but oh well. That's what makes this stuff interesting.

Today we learned that you're probably better off shooting magnums from a shorty.

[Dinadan]

SNIP
It begs the question: What defines the terminal performance of a round? Penetration, energy transfer? Expansion or rounds tumbling inside the target? I pose that shot placement makes these things less important while still getting the job done.
SNIP

I think there will usually be a trade off between penetration and expansion. Certainly I see that when I shoot different rounds into the same target (usually a book) using the same gun. For example, CCI TMG Maximag penetrate further than CCI/Speer Gold-Dots. When I load my cylinder for carry I alternate the two rounds. Here are a couple of Maximags and Gold-Dots fired from my Sidewinder. I like the expansion - but I like the penetration!

[OV-1D]

  Myself I want to dangle a thousand bucks with a packet of coke over a running wood shredder orifice but they have to reach up from a greased 2 by 4 over the opening . I'll drag that around and get plenty of takers . Lets start taking the problems off the streets instead of worrying about ballistics . What do ya think , we could even set it up at all the local carnivals .   

[TwoGunJayne]

Criminals dont worry about ballistics. According to a recent study, 87% of all ammo found in a gun seized from a criminal is the cheapest stuff they had at Budget Mart. As law abiding citizens with good brains and the God-given ability to think and reason, I think it's our duty to the 2nd Amendment to carry and do it properly.

Now that we've got some hard data to play with, it's time for experimentation to get the "soft data." We have a list of rounds to test and try.

The Scientific Method says that we should
    Ask a Question
    Do Background Research
    Construct a Hypothesis
    Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment
    Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
    Communicate Your Results

Question: Are the top FPE rounds also the best performing on a variety of targets?
Background research: This thread
Construct a hypothesis: If the top FPE rounds are the best performing, then the lower FPE rounds should not be able to outperform them.
Test: Time to shoot various objects. (pork chop bones and beef ribs wrapped in wet newspaper, etc)
Analyze: We can do that together.
Communicate: We have a thread about this.

[cfsharry]

The data is the data. You can interprate it to meet your preexisting beliefs or assumptions if you like but, in the end, the real world difference between the .22 mag and the .22 long rifle, (when comparing the two hottest 40 gr. mag rounds to the two 40 gr. long rifle rounds), is almost insignificant, (75.6 ft/lbs vs 65.1 ft/lbs).  If you like the extra flash/bang and the extra cost of the magnum, cool. If you are looking for real world efficacy, the .22 long rifle should not be disregarded.

By comparison, the 90 gr. Speer Gold Dot .380 fired from a two inch barrel produces 145.1 ft/lbs. of energy while the 124 gr. Speer Gold Dot in 9mm fired from a two inch barrel produces 317.8  ft/lbs. Of energy.

[TwoGunJayne]

75.6 versus 65.1 is a 14% increase. With proper shot placement, it shouldn't matter as long as proper penetration is there. Once proper penetration is established THEN we talk about expansion.

Anyway, I'm not dismissing the .22 lr in the slightest. There are plenty of .22 lr rounds that offer 12+ inches of gel penetration from a 2" barrel. The FBI even has to say it's kosher.

To properly match your ammo to gun is important, just as long as you test for desired performance and don't make a decision based upon a number alone.

[cfsharry]

14% is diddly squat when dealing with energy levels which are, at best, marginal to the task.  If all of the 40 gr. mags had been averaged, not just the two hottest, the difference would have been less than 10%.

It goes without saying that shot placement is important. The caveat is that if you need to draw and fire your gun, stress and the kinetics of the event will make excellent shot placement less than likely. If this is the case, the amount of energy actually transmitted by the round, regardless of where the target is hit, becomes evan more important. As to the issue of penetration, I have never hunted ballistic gell. I have, however, killed a bunch of game, (both small and large), in my lifetime. I have seen animals shot where the bullet over penetrated and the animal was able to travel a good distance before it realized it was dead. To have maximum effectiveness, a bullet must expend its' energy within the target

The bottom line for me is to have the ability to transmit the maximum amount of energy to a target to render it inoperable, even with less than a perfectly place shot.  The .22 magnum, it appears, is only marginally better than the .22 long rifle at so doing.

[TwoGunJayne]

Since this thread is only about .22 lr versus .22 mag, here's some food for thought. I crunched the numbers for an 18" barrel so perhaps we can gain some more insight into the true nature of .22 lr versus .22 mag.

No lr beat a mag in muzzle energy from an 18" barrel. No surprise here, we saw that trend beginning at 4".

Understanding LR in a 18" rifle versus a pistol:

As the barrel grows past 1", the muzzle energy goes up (of course.) Not every round increases at the same rate!

Of the BBI information, the least performing round tested with the least gains from a long barrel is the 29 grain CCI, with 79 fpe at 18"

Even at 60 grains, the Aguila SSS is only developing 108 fpe from a long barrel.

The CCI Velocitor and Stinger go to almost a dead FPE tie at 18", low 160 fpe, with the other rounds lagging behind by 30 fpe or so. I suspect the velocitor offers better penetration due to the heavier round. At these velocities, the Stinger likes to turn into a "lead pancake." It is a difficult question as to which is superior.

.22 magnum in a 18" barrel:

The top 5 are all 30 grains, except for #5 at 40:
1. Federal TNT, 359.7 fpe
2. CCI Maximag +V, 359.1
3. Hornady Vmax, 356.3
4. CCI Vmax, 351.7
5. CCI Maximag, 349.9

Honorable mention: Hornady Critical Defence 45 grn, 310.8 fpe. It's the heaviest mag bullet in the lineup.

The 3 losers?
1. Hornady NTX 25 grn, 172.7 fpe
2. Winchester Vmax 30 grn, 296.5
3. CCI Gamepoint 40 grn, 299.6

Now we see which rounds offer the best fpe for rifles. We've seen which did for pistols. People use .22 magnums to kill 800 pound alligators.
http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Gator-bagged-4519182.php

I love studying ballistics! 

[cfsharry]

Jane,

As you appear to have an excessive need to preach and prattle on, let me be succinct. This is a handgun site; a short barreled handgun site. The premis of the origional post was to make a comparison of the .22 magnum cartridge to the .22 long rifle cartridge when fired from a short barrel not an 18" rifle barrel. My personal conclusion is that there is not enough additional value, from a performance standpoint, to warrant owning a .22 magnum mini as compared to the .22 long rifle version. But, to each his own.

[OV-1D]

  I must agree with my friend here on this one , the cheapest most reliable ignition ammo is best for any of these belly guns , after all that's what these little gems were first made for . I know its fun to fantasize about this and that but in reality shoot the s.o.b. where it hurts preferably in the crotch , all these so-called bad as*es consider their privates there brains anyhow . Even King Kong protected his groin with those planes shooting at him , 

[Dinadan]

SNIP
My personal conclusion is that there is not enough additional value, from a performance standpoint, to warrant owning a .22 magnum mini as compared to the .22 long rifle version. But, to each his own.

I have spent a good deal of time trying to decide whether the mags are worth the extra noise and cost. For self defense, I think the answer is a tentative "yes."

A question in my mind is the actual process. Ballistics by the Inch states that for revolver ammo the barrel length is measured from the front of the cylinder gap, while semi auto ammo barrel length is measured from the breech face. However, .22 LR and WMR are used in both types of gun, and Ballistics by the Inch does not say which method was used.  If they used the same method for LR and for WMR, well and good for comparison purposes. If they used different methods, meassuring from the breech face in one and the front of the front of the cylinder gap in the other, then the comparison is meaningless for extremely short barrels. Until adjusted for the differing methodology, anyway. Or did I just miss seeing a statement of process used?

[OV-1D]

  Everyone wants shock and awe shoot nothing but tracer rounds , send one of those down some thugs drawers when wrestling with them , very exciting .

[cfsharry]

Dinadan,

I believe their methodology is to start with a rifle length barrel then to incrementally cut the barrel down. The results would then be consistent for all comparative purposes. For each testing process they also use real world guns, both revolver and semiauto. The results are interesting and one can readily observe the effect of cylinder gap and barrel length on performance. Good site.

[Dinadan]

Dinadan,

I believe their methodology is to start with a rifle length barrel then to incrementally cut the barrel down. The results would then be consistent for all comparative purposes. For each testing process they also use real world guns, both revolver and semiauto. The results are interesting and one can readily observe the effect of cylinder gap and barrel length on performance. Good site.

Okay - after rereading the the Ballistics by the Inch statement, I think you are right. At first reading I took it to mean that revolver ammo was measured differently.

[SteveZ-FL]

Owning a NAA .22LR and .22WMR, both 1 1/8th inch barrel, this discussion has been interesting.  Since NAA already provides ballistic information regarding velocities for quite a lot of popular ammo choices versus various barrel lengths, I converted a few of these (using the mean velocity value) to FP using the ballistics calculator at www.inberg.ca/ballistics_calculator.  The results are:

WMR CCI Maxi Mag 40g (v=810), FP = 58.3
LR CCI Mini Mag 40g (v=675), FP = 40.5
LR CCI Mini Mag 36g (v=698), FP = 39.0
LR CCI Stinger 32g (v=790), FP = 44.4

To my uneducated view, in .22LR the Stinger gets the edge.  Between LR and WMR, the WMR has more punch, but the significance of 44FP to 58FP is arguable .  The WMR is definitely louder (a lot!) and has an impressive flash plume from  a 1 1/8th barrel, but does that have any SD importance?  Some will say it does, and some won't agree.

It seems there's a lot of choice reliance on "one shot stopping power" in the "which caliber is best" argument, but is that realistic?  When it hits the fan, taking one shot and then admiring the work  is not what's going to happen.  A minimum of a double-tap (and probably a lot more) can be expected to occur no matter what kind of handgun is involved, and that impacts the "stopping power" argument.  So, from an SD standpoint does two WMR shots equal three LR shots - is that what matters? 

SD and manhunting are two different things.  if we are talking SD, then the questions should be how much power is necessary to negate the threat, and is it realistic to believe that only one shot will be fired?  If we are talking manhunting, then single-shot takedown power is indeed the prime consideration.  I don't know anyone who has only a concealed-carry permit who is lawfully involved in manhunting.

I tend to alternate between carrying the LR and the WMR, with no good reason to explain why one or the other.   The ballistic numbers don't really justify a particular choice, but I suppose if a louder "bang" and a brighter flash plume might be more threat-negating, then the WMR should get the edge in certain environments.

NOTE:  The June 2013 "American Rifleman" has a very good article titled "The .22 Magnum For Self-Defense?" which includes the author's ballistics tests (including photos) involving an NAA 1 inch barrel among the test firearms.

[Kentucky Kevin]

side note, I have MUCH MORE lr than mag, because it's cheaper and more readily avilable

[zippovarga]

Jane...I may have missed it, but was wondering if you ran the Federal TNT through the 2 and 6 inch barrels in your comparisons. I carry my 1 5/8" mini with the Federal TNT and am curious if they are as effective through the shorter barrels as the Maxi-Mags are. Great info by the way!! Especially with the gun grab and profiteers scalping all ammo at two to three times normal $$. If everyone would stop paying these rediculous prices, we could get reasonable priced ammo back on the shelves and out of the scalpers greedy hands!!  just my .02 worth...lol

[flatnose]

NRA's American Rifleman has a great write-up this month on this very topic. Very interesting. They used NAA 1" and several other revolvers. The best ammo for 1" barrel in terms of penetration and expansion was (drum roll) Hornady 45gr. FTX. CCI 30gr. MaxiMags were about equal in velocity, but I'd rather have 50% more weight. Their tests were shot into a geletin block bare and with one layer of denim, which is a nonfactor for me, because I'm going for face shots if possible. There's too much there to type here. Find a copy if you can or maybe go on NRA's website to get it. This was magnum ammo test, not LR, so I guess I really didn't answer your question. I only carry magnum. I practice with LR on occasion.

[TwoGunJayne]

Jane...I may have missed it, but was wondering if you ran the Federal TNT through the 2 and 6 inch barrels in your comparisons. I carry my 1 5/8" mini with the Federal TNT and am curious if they are as effective through the shorter barrels as the Maxi-Mags are. Great info by the way!! Especially with the gun grab and profiteers scalping all ammo at two to three times normal $$. If everyone would stop paying these rediculous prices, we could get reasonable priced ammo back on the shelves and out of the scalpers greedy hands!!  just my .02 worth...lol

Yes, the Federal TNT was in the lineup.

From everything I've read, the hard energy transfer should be a serious dose of medicine for your personal protection issues. Even from a short barrel, the TNT round seems to dump hard and fast. I've no complaints from the various flavors of TNT HP rounds.

A summary of everything I've read to date: My main concern is penetration; I'm a bit worried that it doesn't have the penetration needed for torso mass. It should work on a head shot.

...and yes, this is a handgun site. We shoot the same ammo as rifles. To try to understand the pistol ballistics with no basis in rifle ballistics seems foolish to me. What's the harm of knowing the difference of the same ammo in pistol versus rifle? It seems on topic and info worth knowing for an informed user.

[SteveZ-FL]

The ballistic penetration question is a good "Goldilocks" one.  How much is too little, too much or just enough? 

Back in the "wearing the green" days the concern of too much penetration didn't exist.  If it was down-range, it was a good target, and down-range was anything beyond the intended target.  That is a common military concept, but a darned dangerous one for civilian CCW.  The potential of innocents being behind the intended target is quite high in the CCW environment.  Too much penetration means everyone/thing behind the intended target (despite walls, windows or other impediments) is at risk if/when the bullet exits the intended target and continues until stopped.

This brings us back to "risk assessment" and what works to mitigate that risk without creating additional risk.  For me, the risk environment includes  innocents all around me when in the open (public streets, at windows, etc.) and inside my home and other buildings (drywall makes a lousy bullet barrier).  For these reasons I don't want anything with a >12" penetration factor.  I want that on-target bullet not to exit that intended target.  I anticipate that more than one shot will probably be fired at the intended target, and multiple hits of any caliber bullet fills the CCW intent (for my potential risks) adequately.

This is not to say that my risk assessment is correct for everyone.  My point is that blasting a hole completely through a target is not necessary to fulfill "threat mitigation" in all circumstances.  I'm a firm believer in the Law of Unintended Consequences, and over-penetration can indeed have consequences far beyond mitigation of the initial threat. 

[grayelky]

The neat thing about ballistics is its a lot like arguing Chevy vs Ford, Glock vs Springfield or Colt vs S&W. I have learned, for me, the Mag is a little easier to hold and shoot more than once. Granted, the numbers do not seem to make a huge difference, and maybe not even a noticeable difference, in the real world. For my $.02 worth, I will continue with the mag. Those folks who like the LR, you have my blessings. Heres hoping you and I never get to find out if there is in fact a difference.

One thing is certain:






(Made you look, didn't I!!!!)

[Kentucky Kevin]

Those folks who like the LR, you have my blessings. Heres hoping you and I never get to find out if there is in fact a difference.

One thing is certain:

It sure beats a sharp stick or a rock