Having read the open-source data and specs on FedPunch and the NAA ballistics data for the 1 1/8 and 1 5/8 barrel lengths, I decided crunching the math to my limited ability and checking things on my favorite ballistics tool (https://www.larrywillis.com/bullet-energy.html).  Velocity measurements are okay, but foot-pounds (fp) of energy at impact are more important to me, especially when the target is something other than a piece of paper.   My limited science skills came up with the following:

1.  FedPunch advertises a 1070 feet-per-second (fps) velocity for a two-inch barrel.  That would make it approx (rough conservative estimate) 900 fps for the 1 1/8 and 980 fps for the 1 5/8.  Again, these are probably low-side estimates, but not by much.

2.  Based on the estimated velocity of 900 fps, the energy output for the NAA 1 1/8 22LR with FedPunch would be 52 foot-pounds (fp).  Using NAA's ballistic numbers (mean), CCI mini-mags come out as 40 fp for the 36-grain hollowpoint and 41 fp for 40-grain solid.

3. Based on the estimated velocity of 980 fps, the energy output for the NAA 1 5/8 22LR with FedPunch would be 62 fp.  Using NAA's ballistic numbers (mean), CCI mini-mags come out as 43 fp for 36-grain and 44 fp for 40-grain.

4.  For general interest, NAA 1 1/8 22WMR with CCI maxi-mag (40-grain solid) comes out as 55 fp and the 1 5/8 22 WMR at 64 fp.

So, this number-crunch seems to show the FedPunch in a NAA 22LR having comparable "punch" as a CCI maxi-mag in a NAA 22WMR. 

That then begs the question as to whether the NAA 22LR is structurally capable to normally use FedPunch. The NAA ballistics tables for the 22LR (both barrel lengths) also list the Remington Yellow Jacket (33 grain/834 fps) which has equal foot-pound output (51 fp & 61 fp) as the FedPunch.  It was good to see NAA had previously tested a similar round and felt comfortable to list it on its website.

For me I found the type of grip made all the difference in the world for accuracy.  I have a folding grip on my 22LR 1 1/8.  What will happen over time is that a "comfort factor" occurs with the grip and overall size of the handgun.  When that happens accuracy rises.  Not being concerned about holding the handgun or anything else other than sighting does wonders.  It's the same with any handgun, but more so for something as light and small as the NAA 22lr 1 1/8.

When remarks come from guys I have known for many years and who have comparable "foreign and interesting" experiences, I laugh it off.  Good natured yet semi-sarcastic remarks are a trademark of male humor (which appall most women).  In fact, if the remarks don't have a bit of a barb, then they usually are patronizing, which I can't stand.

When the .40 caliber snobs whose firearms experience constitute thumbing through gun monthlies at supermarket magazine racks make any down-your-nose comments, I usually ignore them.  If I say anything at all, it's something like comparing large bore carry-cannons to the (very) old joke about why fighter pilots wear oversized wrist watches.

At my tender age (closing in on four-score) remarks coming from self-proclaimed experts mean nothing.  Have already "been there" and the tee-shirt's in the drawer.

One of my minis (.22WMR 1 1/8, .22LR 1 1/8) is always in a pocket and something with more report is at reach within the home.  That's been the way for a couple decades and I haven't come across a reason to change.  That being the case, practice to maintain a reasonable level of proficiency is also the rule.  It does no good to have and potentially need in a hurry any type of firearm if one can't react quickly, confidently and efficiently.

Yep, at 73 the minis are a great "O F F."

I only hope I last as long as the ammo I have, some of which goes back decades.  Ironically, the only FTFs I ever seem to have is with new off-brand stuff.

So have I, many moons ago.  Fun-firing is fine, most of us do it.  SD is not fun-firing and requires a different mindset.  Maybe I'm too cautious, but to me it's important to acknowledge the difference, especially in discussions where folk of various skill and experience level congregate.   While I would like to believe that someone attempting five-shot rapid-fire with a mini is an experienced, safety-conscious shooter, I've seen too many dumb things done at a range to bet on it.  Worse is that the accident often  seems to affect someone other than the shooter.   

It must be me.  I don't understand the fascination about super-rapid-firing five rounds from a mini.  That's using the mini as a toy, and hopefully the toy is only loaded with blanks, if loaded at all.  A loaded mini is either a last-chance weapon when there are other choices or a primary carry based on handling experience and prudent threat assessment.  With live ammunition, the mini is as much of a potential killer as an AR-15 and IMHO should be handled as such.

Firing five at super-speed from a mini may not alleviate a threat, but will leave one holding a steel blob useable only as a rock.  When one expends all their ammunition at one obvious threat, there's nothing left for the surprise in the shadows.

I can understand (and do practice) double-taps with a mini, leaving three in the cylinder for any needed follow-up and in case there is a secondary threat which was not immediately recognized.  I was taught early in life that an empty weapon in the face of more threat than expected is just weighted junk.  Burning off all one's ammo in one blast may look cool in the movies, but in the movies no one ever runs into additional threats while out of ammo.

Quote from: tommybarrettjr on April-17-19 20:04
For those who ask why would anyone want to rapid fire their mini?

Suppose you were a 125 pound female who was suddenly attacked, you will only have seconds to fight back before you are overcome by a male attacker.  If you were teaching this female how to fight back using her NAA mini revolver, a weapon small and light enough she actually carries it, why not research and explore every method available to get the most out of her weapon...........

I agree with getting the most out of a weapon.  That being said, hard experience has taught me that gettingthe most out of weapon involves recognizing the design limitations of the weapon combined with the practiced skill of the firer.  Since self-defense situations can be high stress events, the firer needs to be able to react based on learned and practiced skill.  From what I've seen, many folk rarely practice to maintain a skill level once supposedly becoming "qualified" in it. 

If the trainee's expected threat environment requires to be able to quickly fire several shots at an attacker, then a single-action .22 revolver is the wrong weapon for that environment.  Just because the person will carry a mini doesn't mean the mini will fit all situations all of the time.  While there are firers who can get off two-to-three fast quality shots  in an SD situation with a mini, that skill took considerable time and practice to develop and the firer was dedicated to acquire that skill and maintain it. 

The mini is light and easily concealable, but that doesn't make it the best concealed carry weapon for everyone, especially those folk who won't train and practice, practice practice with it.  It's continued practicing with the mini combined with realistic threat assessment which makes it a decent carry weapon for folk who feel comfortable with it.  Instructors need to recognize the design limitations of the trainee/customer's weapon choice and make darned sure the trainee/customer understands what those limitations mean in the real world. 

Small-grip single action revolvers and speed-firing (just for time's sake)  is an accident waiting to happen.  If the goal is to obtain accuracy-on-target rapidly, then it's a matter of practice with "accuracy" being the factor, not the clock.  If the goal is simply to hear "bang" five times in the shortest time frame, please don't attempt it near me.

Quote from: LHB on May-09-19 21:05
Dang, don't you fools realize that if you shoot someone with a 22, all you are going to do is make him mad, it might make a welt where the bullet bounces off the skin, but it won't stop him.  I don't care how many thousand steers you have killed with a 22 short, it has to start with a 4 to stop human.

LOL.  Don't know how many times I've heard/read something similar to that.  If all the "experts" were right, there would be no reason to even manufacture .22 ammunition.  I sometimes wonder if all the anti-.22 clamor has something to do with the fact that .22 firearms and ammo overall comparatively cost a lot less than everything else in gun world? Nah, money doesn't influence the "experts" making a living by selling firearms, ammo and periodicals...........

I enjoy the Lucky Gunner reviews.  For the most part the reviews are informative and I appreciate the time and effort put into them.

This NAA review was interesting, as my preferred carry is the same NAA mini configuration (with an Uncle Mike's #2 pocket holster) that LG used in his review.  Ironically, my Kel-Tec P32 with belt clip (an LG favored alternative) usually stays at home.  The primary reason for this is wardrobe - Living in a tee shirt climate does not allow too many choices that don't obviousy imprint.  In-the-waist carry invites more perspiration which does the handgun no good and imprinting is too pronounced. 

Most of LG's comments are noteworthy, but the timing drills were misleading.  To use any handgun effectively requires training and practice, practice and more practice.  That includes any of the six handguns demonstrated in this review.  No matter how "expert" the reviewer is, unless there has been considerable practice - not just a familiarization - any review of a handgun's value as a response weapon is questionable.

I would agree with LG's assessment that the NAA mini is not an all-threats, all-situations weapon, but it's not designed to be.   One should have recognition of the local threat potential and match one's weapon choice accordingly, realizing that there is still a risk probability beyond one's carry choice.   I guess I'm fortunate that the NAA mini is a good fit for my situation.

Have used the holster grip on both my .22LR and .22WMR (both 1 1/8"). 

The holster grip has been on the .22LR for several years.  When in the pocket it is sheathed in a leather pouch to keep pocket lint (and whatever else) from interfering with the revolver in any way.  The mini comes out of the sheath smoothly when it needs to,  Also, with a little practice, one can become fairly proficient in "snap opening" the grip to full size.  I can't imagine a reason to return to the stock mini-grips.

Took the holster grip off the .22WMR and replaced it with the oversized rubber grips.  Did not see a reason to keep both set up the same way, and the .22WMR with the oversized grip fits fine in an Uncke Mike's #2 pocket holster.

Both minis get a lot of carry time, and which one goes today just depends on the mood. 

The holster grip or some equivalent grip (for me, anyway) is a necessity.   I just don't have the dexterity to efficiently manage mini-firing with acceptable accuracy just using the stock grips.  The holster grip turned the .22LR into a reliable carry.  Again, a lot of practice in drawing and snap-opening the grip (without the cylinder) is highly recommended to make this combo a reliable and trusted means of carry.

In the article I included in an earlier post the author measured muzzle velocity from a 1 1/8" mini at 1009 FPS with Coppers, then from the same handgun got 797.4 FPS with Stingers.

Using billmeek's formula and the article author's values, that gives from a 1 1/8" mini a "Copper" @ 47.5 foot-pounds and a "Stinger" @ 48.0 foot-pounds.  That to me is not that statistically different enough to rule out the Coppers as a viable ammunition.  In fact, it is interesting enough to feel comfortable using the Coppers instead of Stingers.

By the way, a handy muzzle-energy calculator is available online at " http://www.shooterscalculator.com/bullet-kinetic-energy.php".

Checked out all the reviews I could find online.  The most interesting I found related to NAA minis was this one: https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/11/jeremy-s/ammo-review-follow-cci-copper-22/

Have not tried this ammunition yet, but find it intriguing enough to give it a chance.  I do have to hand it to CCI to "forward-think" regarding the lead issue and what the future may have in store.

I have owned two minis for many years: a.22LR and .a 22WMR, both with 1 1/8 barrel lengths. Have changed the grips on both, as I found the stock grips being nonfunctional. The .22LR has a folding grip and the .22WMR has the oversized rubber grips.  More often than not, the .22WMR is the pocket carry, using an Uncle Mike's #2 pocket holster.

Ballistic differences aside, there are carry considerations (for me, anyway) between the two.  The .22WMR is LOUD, much louder than the .22LR.  At night there appears to be a foot of flash coming out of the .22WMR's barrel which get one's attention more dramatically than the .22LR.

There are the times (especially in shorts & t-shirt weather) that the .22LR with the folding grip and belt clip is more convenient to carry.  Being able to tuck the .22LR into the shorts' waistband and maintain total concealability has its advantages.

Just for fun (after seeing one in a James Bond movie) got a Henry AR-7 .22LR survival rifle several years ago.  it's an 8-round semi-auto.  Every once in a while I take it out of storage and prep it for firing.  It's tempramental with ammo, but it's a decent short-range .22 rifle.  I see it as a "long-barrel complement" to the NAA minis.

Quote from: Canoeal on November-03-18 17:11
Indeed it is. I wxas told by my LGs' owner "we don't really make much on $300 guns."

I can't fault LGSs for not pushing products that don't generate much profit.  Most gun stores have a lot of money tied up in inventory.  Combining that with the overhead involved in operating a gun store, it's a wonder that as many keep the doors open that do.  I don't know what the retail margin for the various NAA minis is, but i don't see too many LGS owners getting rich off of NAA retail sales.

With decent-brand .22 ammunition these days, the potential of an "exploding round" appears highly doubtful.  The better manufacturers have exceptional quality control to alleviate the problem of days/years gone by.  The discount-label foreign stuff is another matter, but you do get what you pay for.

All that being said, I primarily use CCI and Federal .22LR ammunition and have never had any problems.

Quote from: redhawk4 on October-29-18 22:10
Well as many of you know, I live less than 15 miles for the factory in Utah, I don't exactly make a point of showing everyone the gun I'm carrying, but I've only spoken to two people in UT who know of NAA and their products. One was a friend and neighbor who when we were talking guns whipped a Mini out from some recess in the dash of his car and the other is Mr22 here on the forum, if you exclude the people working at the factory or in a gun stores that stocks NAA stuff locally. So I'd have to say their profile is pretty low key in the marketplace although there have to be many more in circulation than I'm aware of because otherwise gun stores wouldn't stock them. Perhaps it's a caliber thing and people are reluctant to admit they carry one in the same way they don't want to admit to being a Trump voter

Among other gun owners in a gun-related setting, I feel comfortable talking about any firearm.  Outside of such a setting I shy away from the topic.  I have met many folk who are very anti-gun and if they knew I carried it would only lead to awkward times.  Concealed carry to me is all about invisibility.  I don't even want the question, "I know he's carrying, but where?"

The purpose of a gun magazine is to make money.  The money comes from two sources: 1) the up-front (pre-production) money comes from advertising and 2) the production funds come from subscribers and single-copy sales.  No single source can long-term sustain a gun magazine, but without the up-front money there is absolutely no chance for commercial survival.

The bulwark of the gun manufacturers sell mainly the calibers .3x and .4x.  That's where the big money is and what the manufacturers hope the majority of the buying public will purchase.  So, the "size matters" sales strategy (and advertising budget) is uniform amongst all of the .3x & .4x caliber manufacturers. 

It's no surprise that .2x caliber handguns will be treated as either novelty items for those indifferent to "size" or practice range pieces when their physical shape is similar to their .3x & .4x caliber brethren - in other words, buy both, one for carry and one for the practice range.

The NAA .2x caliber handguns are not for the "biggest is best" herd.  NAA minis require thought of purpose and use, rather than simply salivate at the biggest, sexiest thing in the magazine ads and LGS shelf.  In other words, NAA minis get plenty of respect from the thoughtful CCWer who can appreciate the minis for the first-class tools they are.  "I think, therefore I carry an NAA mini" wouldn't be a bad slogan.

Quote from: Canoeal on October-26-18 11:10
SteveZ I would almost agree your statement:
"That (to me, anyway) means all Constitutional rights require mandatory instruction on their application.  Without such instruction, the rights become twisted, abused, diluted or taken away." My problem is the limiting factor you are proposing. When you start putting requirements on what needs to be done to carry, you effectively limit the right to do so. Yes you could and should get training; but to say you must before you carry is  the same kind of violation of 2A as some of the left's bans.

Instead I would say "That at the time of purchase, the seller has a mandatory requirement to recommend the purchaser to get training, and a limited time instruction available as part of the gun purchase.  Purchaser may  choose to sign off, with that being noted on the purchase and the purchaser assuming his own responsibility.. In such cases it may be noted, for the record and be available, in any shooting case. This is no infringement, just a subtle way to make one consider training.

My point is....Today's youth (to me, most folk under 60, but especially school-age kids) have no comprehension about the Second or any of the other Amendments or the overall content of the Constitution itself.  That ignorance and the continued avoidance of public education into the why and how of the Constitution (especially the Second Amendment and why its the second and not the tenth in the Bill of Rights) is what keeps the arguments of gun control in its various manners not only alive, but becoming louder with each graduating public school class.  It's one thing to say something is a right, but another to keep that right.  With every more-civics-ignorant-than-the-last generation of public-educated kids, the closer the end of portions of our national civics foundation.  If kids keep getting "educated" about firearms the way they are now, the potential of a new Amendment occurring which repeals the Second Amendment in its current form is real indeed.  When the Founding Fathers wrote the first ten Amendments, they knew they could be changed or repealed, and our history has already seen that happened.

We are beyond the time for administrative rules covering time-of-purchase or other such bureaucratic measures.  Either American youth learn the why and how of the Second and other Amendments, or they as they become the majority will rewrite what they don't understand into what has become their academic and moral foundation thanks to civics-poor public education and a no-firearms media.  The broadcast and entertainment media routinely reinforces a non-firearms agenda, from open-carry onward.  Ignoring that there is already a no-firearms education process in effect which is geared for long-term changes and not countering that process with appropriate and effective civics training is just conceding the future.

I'm not for any more administrative rules, but instead for trying to fix the root cause of the gun control issue as it evolves with each passing public-educated generation.

Don't have an overlay, but here's a photo of  two NAA minis (1 1/8 barrel, LR & WMR) with a Baby Browning and Kel-Tec P-32.

Quote from: Bigbird48 on October-26-18 07:10
Steve I disagree with your thoughts on open carry rural vs non rural  I see open carry very often by no uniforms in stores and out in the open in Phoenix very often. I never felt threatened , Its there constitutional right to carry anyway they want. The more people that do carry the more the skeptics and Libs will get use to it and not see it as a threat. I have my ccp so I can travel mines good in 36 or more states but anyone from any other state can come to Arizona and carry open or concealed with out any permits . The day should come were we can carry everywhere in all states with out being stopped or threatened by the uniformed guys.Google how many unarmed legal citizens are gunned down each year by police. Police shoot an avg of 20 unarmed people each year and about a 1000 people get shot by police each year.Allmost all public shooting are suicides , domestic disputes or gang on gang shooting.Very few people get shot just because someone pulled out a gun and sho0t them for no reason.So I feel more safe from the general public that open carrys then from the cop who approches me wants to know why I have a gun and ileagally violates my constitutiona rights

There's a perceptive difference on openly-displayed firearms by folk who have been well-trained on their use, either as kids taught very early to respect and safely use firarms or as young adults in a military/paramilitary environment where safety and proper use become second-nature.  At one time (the "draft" days and earlier) a large segment of the male population which did not grow up as firearms-trained kids (especially urban kids) got the latter experience, but that generation is now in its Social Security years and dwindling.  Today's population below-60-years-old is dramatically void of that firearms respect and understanding which many of us take for granted based on our life experience. 

We're in general agreement on Second Amendment rights.  However, having rights brings with it a responsibility to exercise those rights without doing harm, intentional or otherwise.  One cannot exercise anything responsibly without education/training on how to do it safely and efficiently.  That (to me, anyway) means all Constitutional rights require mandatory instruction on their application.  Without such instruction, the rights become twisted, abused, diluted or taken away.

It's hilarious (again, to me) that we can have mandatory public-funded sex education in schools, but no true civics education on our Constitution, especially on the Bill of Rights and why each Amendment exists.  Today's public (especially the urban folk) seems more worried about insufficient condom education than insufficient freedom-maintenance education.  Such civics-limited education (especially on the Second Amendment, as this forum is so oriented) seems that the wrong gun has become the focus of today's society.

Open-carry in many locales is often viewed as a fearful sight because we have let the general population develop a fear based on firearms-ignorance.  There is no required training or education as to why a citizen-militia (as opposed to a standing army) needs to exist to maintain freedoms.  Today's populace overall is believing less and less in the 'We, The People" concept, but more in "It, The Government" as the true ruler, and that's due to a national ignorance in civics. 

Things are getting worse, not better, in today's schools regarding the Second Amendment.  The response to public school shooting incidents has been the increasing school-conducted indoctrination of kids from a young age to be scared to death at the sight of a firearm and to run away full-speed with their hands over their heads at the mention of a gun.  Shooter-response exercises in schools, while well-intentioned, exascerbate the situation by implanting the "fear seed" and fertilizing it without corresponding firearms safety training.  That gun-fearing continuous indoctrination at a young age within the schools can't help but make a growing population scared at the sight of an open-carried firearm.  The end result can be a school-fed population intent on disarming the citizenry and turning the USA more and more into an "It, The Government" nation ripe for exploitation by others. 

I'm not fearful as such when I see open-carry in my semi-rural world, but my radar goes on full power when I see firearms displayed by non-LEOs on the city streets of major metropolitan locales.  There's no trust in what these folk know or whether they have been adequately trained on firearms handling.  i don't want to see open-carry restricted, but at the same time having open-carry by untrained folk makes me quite wary.

The open-carry debate is always an interesting one. 

Non-LEO open-carry used to be for rural convenience.  By and large, folk open-carry in rural situations because it's easier to access a  handgun from an open holster when having to engage a fast-moving four-legged opponent.  Rural open-carry also includes not having to remove the open-holstered handgun and vehicle-secure it before entering a local store or facility on the way to/from home.  In a rural (even a semi-rural) setting, there is no impiied threat to the two-legged population as it is understood and accepted that the open-carried handgun is a common tool used to engage four-legged critters.  Open-carry folk are rarely seen as a potential threat to the rural two-legged population.  Now, if the rural four-legged population could perceive the difference between the human who open-carried and who didn't open-carry, that four-legged population might react differently to the potential human threat.

Urban open-carry has been primarily and historically limited to uniformed LEOs and some uniformed private security folk.  The key word here is "uniformed."  In an urban environment where non-uniformed open-carry is rare, open-carry by non-uniformed folk is a blatant attention-getter, identifying that open-carrier as someone ready or out to engage two-legged critters, since the availability of four-legged targets is quite rare in most urban settings.  The fact that urban folk may perceive the non-uniformed open-carrier as a potential threat should not be surprising, as the only logical and practical reason (to most folk) why a non-uniformed person would open-carry in an urban setting is because the non-uniformed person may soon engage two-legged opponents since there is a paucity of four-legged ones.   

The two-legged urban population has no reason to trust that the non-uniformed open-carrier is prudent, skilled and knowledgeable in target selection.  In this day-and-age of urban shootings of all kind against the two-legged population, seeing non-uniformed folk open-carrying any kind of firearm where only two-legged targets exist can instantly create fear to some degree. Thus, the urban population's response (best case) is to call uniformed (trusted) open-carriers to interdict the non-uniformed open-carrier or (worst case) to take some form of overt preemptive action against the non-uniformed open-carrier.  Let's face it, if someone perceives him/herself (rightly or wrongly) as a potential target, the response may escalate a situation to out-of-control despite no intended threat exists.  It's not too much of a stretch to even anticipate a marginally-skilled/trained urban concealed-carrier taking preemptive action towards a non-uniformed open-carrier.

Interestingly, to those folk who do open-carry in urban areas, what do you think when you see someone you don't recognize open-carrying across the street, in the mall, going into or out of a store, etc.?  Is the thought "hey, s/he's cool" or "no big thing, that's legal" or do the internal warning bells go off? 

Just because being able to do something is "legal" doesn't necessarily make always doing that thing a wise move.  Seeing the world only through one's own eyes distorts reality.

Quote from: miker on October-23-18 05:10
SteveZ - FMJ Fiocchi here, because it worked the best in everything. Tried Fiocchi, Herters, Aguila, Magtech, Federal, and Sell/Bell.

miker

Am also satisfied with Fiocchi.  The BB seems to eat just about everything with gusto.

Quote from: Honky Tonk Man on October-21-18 03:10
BBs were always in the back of my mind for a "someday" gun purchase.  You guys are big time enablers.  What would one in good condition cost these days?  Anything I'd need to look for, or look out for?  I'm always impressed at the knowledge you guys have about antique firearms.  Also, I'm asking for Uncle Lee, how about some pictures?  There are no BB pics on this thread.

The price for a BB is all over the scale, depending on condition and age.  I've seen them in the $200+ range clear up to $850.   Even the new Precision Small Arms copies range from $700-1,100.  Honestly, I have my BB because it's a legacy item.  I don't think I'd pay the "market rate" for one in top condition.  If one has good gunsmith skills snd parts access, buying one as a reclaimation project may be worthwhile.

Quote from: bearcatter on November-17-74 23:11
The difference between your two Fiocchi loads is 100 fps, no difference in muzzle velocity.

True, and one is 35grams and the other 50grams.  It's a personal choice.  The reasons may be more intuitive (e.g., "gut feeling") than logical, but I've found that trusting my intuition is not a bad thng.  It's kept me around for over seven decades when some logical choices would have me being a memory now. 

Quote from: bearcatter on October-17-18 16:10

Quote from: SteveZ-FL on October-17-18 14:10

Back to the thread's theme...for folk using Baby Brownings or equivalent, what ammunition are you using?  My mags are loaded alternately with Fiocchi FMJ and JHP.

If you do a little research, you'll find that with pocket guns below .380, hollow points expand very little if any, and penetrate a lot less than FMJ.  In my Guardian 32, I just carry standard FMJ, which does at least give 12-14 inch penetraion, within FBI recommendations.

The reason for the alterate-round loading is ...1) have a fair amount of FMJ and JHP, and all fire cleanly; and 2) regardless of expansion the FMJ and JHP rounds travel at different velocities, and one is never fully sure which may be the better round against a particular target until the event happens.   As the BB is a reliable semi-auto, being able to double-tap cleanly using one of each, the guesswork about which is the better choice is avoided.  I believe in research and others' gelatin and "pork roast" penetration tests, but research and field application can provide surprising differences.  If one can "cover all bases" through thoughtful application, why not?

Quote from: heyjoe on October-17-18 12:10
most of my range time i spend other than target shooting, with point shooting or minimal use of the front site and firing relatively rapidly. i also practice starting to fire just after my gun clears leather on the way up to center mass. in other words im practicing for what i would expect to have to do in a desperate real self defense situation.

HeyJoe, way to go!  Was just at the range the other day and what I saw was downright comical.  It's too bad more folks don't use their range time for more thsn creating brass litter.  I can appreciate the folk who are into precision target shooting, but what I've been seeing lately is just noise-making and paper-punching, followed by smugness on how prepared they are for "the streets." 

Back to the thread's theme...for folk using Baby Brownings or equivalent, what ammunition are you using?  My mags are loaded alternately with Fiocchi FMJ and JHP.

The question whether a .22 (NAA mini) or .25 (Baby Browning or similar) caliber is an effective SD carry seems to creep into many discussions.  Carrying a .22 or .25 requires (to me, anyway) a different approach to SD than with the larger calibers.  It goes with the realization that how one would deploy a more powerful .38 or higher won't necessarily work with any .2x caliber handgun.  With the .3+ calibers, aiming center-of-mass is the norm.  With the .2x calibers, especially versus larger and heavy-dressed folk, the .2x caliber "stopping power" may indeed be less than hoped when center-of-mass is the target.

A lot of discussion regarding the accuracy of NAA minis (and similar sized firearms) is already in the archives.  My limited experience has me "NAA comfortable" with pie-plate sized targets within 10 yards.  Recognizing that probable SD engagement with .2x caliber handguns will be within 10 yards and the limited energy that .2x caliber rounds have when fired from short-barrel handguns, the traditional center-of-mass tactic may be inappropriate (again, to me) based on who or what the threat is.  The areas above and below center-of-mass may be more effective targets for .2x caliber handguns.

My unscientific experience is that few folk actually train and practice for SD situations with their carry handguns.  Folk may go to the range, buy a sexy target and blow holes through it while standing securely and confidently in a semi-enclosed slot, calling that experience "training" and "practice."  I don't expect any SD threat to occur from the other end of the range, so it seems inappropriate to regard such range time as true SD  "training' and "practice."  The same goes for shot placement.  The range is not a simulated SD environnent, and expecting range time will fully hone SD skills is wishful thinking.

Firing a round or two .2x caliber short-barrel at center-of-mass against a bad guy leathered-up and/or overtly developed or hopped up may indeed prove ineffective.  If the shooter is skilled enough at "pie plate or better" accuracy through training in more-or-less SD situations, combined with targeting elsewhere than center-of-mass, that .2x caliber handgun may be looked at with more respect.  There's a lot of the human body not contained in the "neck-down and just-above-groin-up" range that more than fills a pie-plate-sized view within 10 yards or closer. 

I feel comfortable with either or both the NAA mini or Baby Browning for "routine" SD carry.  That's because the hardware's limitations, especially regarding center-of-mass effectivity, have been incorporated into my training and practice.  I respect these handguns and associated ammunition for what they are and what they can reasonably accomplish if operated within their designed capabilities.  I never expected my old motorcycle to have the payload of my SUV, and see the ".22 & .25 caliber` situation in the same perspective. 

Quote from: bill_deshivs on October-16-18 15:10
The PT -25 Taurus is perfectly safe with a round in the chamber and the safety OFF. It's a double action only gun with an inertial firing pin.

Probably so, but I still don't like what one must go through for reloadl  Hindsight being 20/20,  the PT-25 & 22 (have both) were not my wisest acquisitions.   

Quote from: RogueTS1 on October-15-18 08:10
I do not mind the BB but I would choose the 21a Beretta over it though. I really like the 950s even better.

I've got a Taurus PT-25, which is basically the same design as the Beretta .25acp Bobcat and .32acp Tomcat (which I used to own). To have that 8+1 requires keeping a round in the chamber and relying on the on-off safety flip switch on the left rear of the rack to remain on.  I've found (personal experience) that accidentally disengaging that safety can happen.

If the chamber on the tilt-barrel is kept empty, one usually uses the tilt-barrel function to load that first round (time consuming process which requires having a loose round available). Manually racking a round requires a lot of effort and is usually avoided.  As a result, the PT-25 is never carried and has become a nightstand fixture.

I've never had a problem with the Baby Browning's safety.  It racks easily if I want to keep the chamber empty.  If if I want to go 6+1 I feel comfortable with the safety that had never failed.  BB Reload is simpler than the PT-25 because racking that first BB reload round is much easier.

Back to the mini - It may have fewer rounds than the BB and is more difficult to reload,  but I like single-action revolvers.  Having one that is fully concealable and reliable fits almost all of my carry situations, and it's in the pocket right now.

Quote from: Warty62 on October-10-18 19:10
Well SteveZ-FL, he was asking about a Mini so it would be a revolver rather than a semi-auto pistol in 22LR....I am not a big fan of 22LR Pistols either as the round was more designed for non-semi-auto firearms.  In any case the 25 ACP round isn't  very good choice for self defense which is sort of a fact as the ballistics of the round fired from one of those little pistols is not very good and doesn't really provide a good way to stop and attacker.

Was at the range this morning, firing off some excess .22lr and .25acp ammo.  While the .25acp will never win any awards for being able to knock someone off their feet or rip a limb off with a single shot, at 15-25 feet it still punches a mighty painful hole.  A .25acp double-tap can stop most threats.  Again, it goes back to an individual's threat assessment regarding what will work against the perceived threat.

Once again the Baby Browning outperformed the NAA mini in one category - accuracy.  I'm always amazed at how accurate the BB is.  I'm not too bad with both of my minis (.22lr & .22wmr, both 1 1/8), but am considerably better with the BB, even with rapid firing the BB. 

Quote from: Warty62 on October-10-18 15:10
Well,, back to the original question, I wouldn't carry ANY 25ACP firearm unless it was all I had period.  Even then, I would be reluctant just having it.  Remember,this is my personal opinion and isn't meant to cause a stir.

I'd carry a 22 LR before a 25ACP.

To me, anyway, there is no appreciable difference in the ballistics for .22lr and .25acp.  It all boils down to the type of handgun.  For carry, .22lr in a revolver and .25acp in a semi-auto pistol.  I have had too many hang-ups in a .22lr semi-auto to want to rely on it. 

Depends where I am or going.   The NAA .22LR in a pocket carrier gets a lot of time in either the pants or shorts pocket.  The Baby Browning is carried, in a jacket pocket (in a leather carrier) when the weather requires a jacket.

Have never had a problem with the BB safety and have had it for a long time (in tte family since the '60s).