[tankman1989]

I've seen a lot of posts saying that the 22lr is the best gun in a survival, non-combat situation and people state that they could kill larger animals with proper shot placement, such as deer. I would guess that the size of ammo would be factored in and the amount that can be carried and stored, making the 22 a hands down winner in capacity.

My question is why do people not think the 22 magnum is better than the 22lr? I would think it could take down much larger game and it could basically double the effective range all while keeping a fairly small cartridge.

I'd like to do some research into the ballistics of a 22lr vs 22mag and post it back later. Are the bullet diameters the same on the two? IS the only difference the casing size?

 

[Red79]

Thats why I have both. I have killed alot of game with the 22mag. Bought it when I was a teenager. Cheap Marlin that has been beat sensless. You can get a lot of different rounds for both. I think a normal 22lr is arounf 1200fps and the 22 mag is somewhere around 1800 give or take

 

[Rascals]

The main reason for that line of thinking is that for 16.00 you can buy 550 rounds for the .22 LR. And 89.00 for the same amount of .22 mag. Vs. 150.00 for .223. So its a cost thing not a power thing.

 

[Wolfe]

All your points are valid. When you make the round bigger, you get better range, power etc. This is true.

I am sure that 22wmr has better range and power. Then again .223rem has better range and power (and reliability) yet. And then you could surely argue that 6.8spc or .308 are even better than all of the previous.

The 22LR has been around a long time, and at some point there was concensus that this round was sufficient to get most jobs done. This is probably the reason why .22 is the most used caliber in the world (outside of military use) and why so many guns are made in this caliber.

And to answer your question. Yes the bullet diameter of the .22WMR is equal to that of .22LR, but the cartrige diameter (and length, obviously) is different. It is not advisable to shoot .22LR from a gun chambered for .22WMR. However there are revolvers on the market (like the Ruger single six) that come with two cylinders, one for .22LR and one for .22WMR. Both bullets can be shot from the same barrel, but need different chambers to accomodate the varying cartridge dimensions.

 

[CrypticCRICKET]

At least one .22lr round gets up to 1650 FPS (CCI Stinger 32 gr bullet)

Another gets to 1450 FPS (CCI Velocitor 40 gr bullet)

Of the two I like Velocitors. They're slightly more accurate.

1250 FPS and a 36 grain bullet is a sweet spot (accuracy) for most .22lr barrels with 1/16 twist.

 

[Sooner_Will_Survive]

i think its cause the 22lr has been around allot longer. i love the 22mag. just wish more rifles were chambered in them. lucky nordic is developing a 22mag upper which will be hella fun.

 

[Al Diehl]

Don't beat me up but, I have found very little that the magnum can do that can't be done with the .22 Long rifle. The magnum is over rated and over priced. I have owned enough in rifles and pistols to realize this. But, if it makes a person think they are getting something more than by all means go for it.
I like my .22 Hornet and the .223 but, those are in a different class all together.

Be good guys

 

[DanR7985]

Most people have covered why people enjoy .22LR over .22WMR so I won't go there. However I will correct some misinformation. The diameter of the .22LR bullet is .222 and the diameter of the .22WMR is .224 so the diameters are not the same. Also the general 40gr .22WMR bullet travels at 1960 fps. I for one love the .22WMR, but price wise yes the .22LR is much better.

My opinion is to stock up on .22LR until you have enough then stock up .22WMR. That's what I do/did.

 

[wtr100]

1. cost
2. cost
3. cost

oh and it costs more

 

[Jida]

My personal favorite is the .22mag however it is because I grew up with a model 1906 that was chambered for it.

What I have found is that my love for the round outweighs the logic to carry it in a SHTF situation.

1) It is louder, this is not really an attribute you want in a smaller round.
2) It is 'slightly' more bulky, not enough to matter really, it just is.
3) It has maybe 25-50 more yards of effective range on the same kind of targets .22lr does but those targets really won't be shot at over 100 yards to begin with.
4) It is overkill at close range on small targets whereas the .22lr is just right.

Really the ".22mag to .22lr" argument is just like the ".22lr to air rifle" one. You are stepping down in bulk, power, range and noise however you are still effective.

The difference for me is that if you are stepping up to the .22mag you increase those attributes while not really gaining much practical effectiveness.

Cost to me is not an issue at all. If you are a bullet hoarder that likes to strip down and roll around in your armory it might be. If you are packing out 100-250 rounds in a BoB/GHB the cost difference is minimal enough to not make a difference.

When I crunched the numbers the .22lr was the better choice for SHTF, not bulk "it might fire" rounds, CCI's and other premium style rounds in good containers.

For fun though, that 1906 whipping out .22mags at ground squirrels around 150 yards is just damn fun.

 

[stinkybriches]

you get a better trajectory with the mag.
you get more range with the mag.

but, the bullets are just under the cost of 9mm ball.

i feel now as i have always felt, if you could get a semi auto rifle in .223 and .223 ammo was 18 bucks for 550 rounds, the ".22lr/ 1022 is best for shtf" crowd would be cut by 80%.

i think a .22 rifle and pistol are vital preps, but definatly shouldnt be the only weapon preps.

 

[Forsaken]

Its all in the cost of ammo.

 

[Magman77]

22Mags are great, they are fun to shoot from a rifle, and a waste of powder from a handgun. They aren't real rare, but they aren't common either. The point of survival though is survival. In an EOTWAWKI Situ., with no production of new ammo, the only rimfire ammo will be what you stockpile yourself or find. If you get to a point you need to "find" some ammo, are you more likely to find 22Mag. or 22LR?

Bottom line is that everyone who thinks a survival situ may be likely in your future is crazy not to have at least a full case (5000rds) of 22LR stockpiled. To my mind that is just a start, with several cases safely stored being your eventual goal. Cheap insurance.

Some here may agree (or may not) that to qualify as a survival round commonality may take some precedence over performance. Clearly 22LR, 9mm, 38/.357, 45acp, 223/556, and .308 each can be out performed by several other types of ammo, but if you are stockpiling for a long term event, those are the ones most will choose. Remember if an event goes on for a long time, in the end only the most common rounds will remain in any supply at all.

While I think the 22Mag is nice idea, I just don't think it qualifies as a "survival" round. In the end though the choice will have been yours.

 

[LuniticFringeInc]

I've seen a lot of posts saying that the 22lr is the best gun in a survival, non-combat situation and people state that they could kill larger animals with proper shot placement, such as deer. I would guess that the size of ammo would be factored in and the amount that can be carried and stored, making the 22 a hands down winner in capacity.

My question is why do people not think the 22 magnum is better than the 22lr? I would think it could take down much larger game and it could basically double the effective range all while keeping a fairly small cartridge.

I'd like to do some research into the ballistics of a 22lr vs 22mag and post it back later. Are the bullet diameters the same on the two? IS the only difference the casing size?

Why isnt the 22 WRM considered...?

Well for starters, a 50 round box of 22 WRM cost at least 20 cents around compared to the less than 3 cents a shot that 22 long rifle cost. When you consider that the much more powerful .223 can be had for 24-26 cents a round why even consider the 22 WRM? If you reload the 223 can easily and cheaply be loaded to 22 WRM power levels all the way up to full throttle .223 loads with bullets from 45 grains to 69. You cant reload the 22 WRM, so at such a modest increase in price that the .223 cost why even consider the 22 WRM if you need something more potent than the 22 long rifle? Its basically a question of economics.

 

[Jida]

IN the event where money ceases to have any kind of value what so ever would you rather of had the right equipment on you when you need it or remember that steak you had once?

Money is only a consideration after you have properly set yourself up.

 

[SnakeRanch]

Because I don't have 20k rounds of .22mag. And a couple of 10-22s with 2 taped back to back hi cap mags make a hell of a suppressive fire weapon my 10 year old can use. Then when they pop up, they meet mr. .308... Try it. You'll like it.

 

[Prepping]

.22 LR Aguila Super Max HP and SP are at 1750 fps and they're cheap.

 

[daveeds]

I'm not arguing for or against either the 22lr or the 22 mag as I own both.
But in a post-shtf/teotwawki , just what will your life and the life of your love ones be worth. Other words DON'T Be Cheap, One of the main consideration that I have seen expressed on this thread has been cost and amount of rounds you can store.On another thread,I sort of in a smart-ss way said that I was going to get rid of all my 30+cal. weapons and replace them with a 22 on steroids aka .223/5.56mmx45. I have no intentions of doing that.I was trying to get someone/body to carry the thought process to a more logical conclusion. If you think that a weapon from the 22 caliber family makes a better MBR/survival weapon then get the most powerful/popular one as parts/ammo will be more readily available in a post-it world.In a SHTF fire fight of less than a 100 meters, I don't want to have to shoot the same target multiple times just to slow it down. Say what you will but my 9mm-.357 diameter carbine shooting +p/+p+ ammo at 75 yards or less ,or my M1 .30 cal carbine at 100-125 yards will do a lot more damage than a 22lr or magnum will. Understand this folks if you are HAVING to protect you home and LOVED ONES, then you had better D-mn welll end the fight fast and with as few rounds as possible going into the targets.that way you will have more time to engage more targets.And One more thing in a POST-SHTF world, Do Not, I repeat DO NOT allow any raiders to survive if at all possible.As they will only band together with other raider/zombies and come back at you. That is right I said Shoot them in the back. No mercy,
They will not give you any.

 

[Han Soloflex]

.22 LR Aguila Super Max HP and SP are at 1750 fps and they're cheap.

Those are awesome. I've shot several rockchucks with them, good heavens they make a nasty hole...

 

[ksmedman]

22mag is like the 17hmr to me. Cool, but kind of a boutique round.

If I had to choose between the two I'd have to ask what I'm gaining from the 22mag?
I lose all the great attributes of the 22LR - low cost, universal availability, platforms even a preteen can use effectively, low noise signatures, less weight and space, more bullet choices, etc... etc... yet gain nothing that stepping up to .223 would acheive.
Not saying 22mag is useless, just not sure I'd focus on it for SHTF. YMMV.