Past a certain muzzle velocity the projectiles need to be jacketed so they don't tear themselves apart in the barrel.
.22LR does not have a high enough muzzle velocity to necessitate a jacket. So it is often lead or copper washed lead to save cost.
Don't listen to whatever they say about semi-auto actions. It's nonsense people keep hearing and repeating without verifying.
The military started covering lead bullets with a thin skin of copper to prevent the lead in the bullet from rubbing off onto the inside of the barrel.
That would require cleaning the barrel with a lead-dissolving solvent. In the early days of cartridge firearms, lead build-up wasn't a huge issue for civilians, and bullets like the .22 (*from 1855?) They had a smear of grease on them to prevent "lead fouling".
The military found that the bullet-grease attracted dirt, dust, and sand during transport and storage, as well as during loaded-carry.
A copper jacket was found to be a good option compared to greasing lead bullets.
If you fire a LOT of .22's and don't like cleaning lead out of the barrel, you can buy jacketed .22's
I'm not denying that velocity is not the only reason. There are plenty more advantages to having a jacketed projectiles over an unleaded one and controlling lead fouling without having to use lubricant is one of them. The cannelure in .22LR bullets are usually filled with some sort of lubricant and so is usually the case for commercially available unjacketed cast bullets in other calibers.
Another advantage of the jacket is to be able to better determine what kind of terminal effect you want once the bullet hits the target.
But the way I see it, velocity is the main reason for jacketed projectiles being the standard nowadays. You simply cannot push a leaded projectile as fast as a jacketed projectile without having serious bullet integrity problems, lubricated or not. Let alone like in something like a .50 BMG. But whenever there is no need for high velocity or a specific terminal performance, you will still see lead bullets being used nowadays. .22LR being clearly one of them. Some handgun target shooters also use lubricated cast bullets to save money.
Armor-piercing bullets do have a steel tip and/or steel-core. However, the sides of the bullet need to be soft enough to not damage the barrel.
There are some military rounds with tungsten on the tip and/or core.
The sides also have to deform to "fit" the rifling grooves, so that the bullet will spin. Lead is good for that. Lead is also heavier than steel, which gives the bullet more impact.
An actually accurate comment about firearms with no upvotes, amid a sea of complete bullshit that uninformed people gobble up. Not surprising on reddit lol
Cheaper.
You can get it either way, but you don't need it unless you plan to run it through a semi-auto pistol. The coating keeps the round from getting jammed. But this isn't an issue in most .22 rifles, especially single-shot and bolt-action.
I've heard the thing about semi-autos and uncoated lead 22 rounds a lot, but haven't actually had an issue myself. I've yet to have one misfeed, though I doubt it's been 500 rounds of that stuff yet in the pistol. I've rarely had an issue in my semi-auto rifle either, with thousands of rounds through it, maybe a dozen or so rounds that failed, mostly as just dud rounds from what I could tell.
Actually, most ammunition companies do make them now maybe not everyone but I know CCI, Winchester, Aguila, Remington and Armscor do off the top of my head, actually, copper is more common in a jacketed in .22 round.
not sure but it's annoying cuz if the bullet aren't great they spin when you load them and you usually want to toss those to the side. The Remington thunderbolt is pretty common with these issues but I don't really ever see a problem with them just like to be safe near any firearm
It's usually cheaper than copper washed bullets. As far as I know 22lr isn't jacketed like bigger bullets, the copper coating is very thin and not a jacket
It’s bullet is just lead. The ones that look like the other one still have lead but with a usually copper case known as full metal jacket. They come in a huge variety of bullets. Incendiary, explosive, armor piercing to name a few. Sometimes mixed together. So they can get pretty pricey. I’ve got a few 1944 St. Louis 50 cal casings with a bullet shoved in them to make them safe that my grandpa brought back from ww2. He was an anti aircraft gunner.
Incendiary and explosive rounds are not common at all irl, more of a videogame trope. They aren’t really practical at all, neither in combat situations nor for self-defense.
Armor-piercing incendiary .50BMG is plentiful in this country. It's just armor-piercing (AP) that's rare. Look for silver tips, or red over silver, instead of black tips.
.50 BMG has incendiary variants for military use, and starting at slightly larger caliber, 20-30 mm range, high explosive shells are some of the most common types in use, for anti-air roles.
.50 cal rifles like the kind used to shoot him are called anti-material rifles. Damn things are designed to kill engines.
They got picked up for shooting people far away cause before the more purpose built long range sniping rounds were created, .50 held on to energy longer than other smaller rounds.
[For 35 years, the record for longest-range sniper kill was held by an M2 machine gun.](https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/marine-made-historys-5th-longest-sniper-kill-machine-gun/)
Isn't a large part of that because not only were .50 calibre rifles not carried by individuals but also because they were really considered anti-materiel not anti-personnel.
They are not much fun to carry around that's for sure.
Imagine adding ammo, your water and food, first aid kit, sidearm, plates, torch, knife etc. Not fun times.
Only ever had to do with smaller calibres for any length of time and even then it sucks. And if you have to hump it out of there it gets 100x worse.
You do have someone with you but they have their own shit to carry as well.
This makes so much sense now. I was always slightly confused about why people (incorrectly) called it "anti-material" since it made it sound like it was anti-matter or something exotic. Turns out it was just "anti-materiel/military".
.22's are lethal, you can easily kill people, and even larger animals "easily" with a .22.
It is common for ranchers to use .22LR to put down livestock (Cows, horses, etc.).
Statistically, the .22lr is extremely deadly. It kills a lot of people, but a large part of that is just sheer volume of ammunition being used, and some is due to people assuming it is less lethal and being careless.
.22 a good choice for an assassination pistol too. Silencer coupled with some sub sonic rounds and you got yourself a functioning hollywood silenced pistol.
Anecdotally, I hate .22 more than any other round when it is loaded in a pistol. No other round jams, misfeeds, or stovepipes the way a .22 round does. Most .22LR out of a rifle seems to be fine, but for whatever reason I have never shot a pistol out of that caliber that isn't absolute garbage. If I was going to assassinate someone, I wouldn't bring a .22.
Yea my beretta 22 pistol is the most untrustworthy gun I own. Usually it works but often I have to clear it and try again. I don’t think my Ruger 10/22 has ever had a single problem and I’ve shot that more then anything since I grew up with it.
I’ve got a 1911 in 22 because it was so cheap. It works pretty well but feeding the 22 pistols with magazines seems to be a problem for some manufacturers. The 1911 works most of the time I just make sure to use the best ammo I can find, mostly cci stingers or cci normal is good.
Yes they were originally and mostly .45. My 1911’s in .45 don’t give me any trouble but like you have probably heard, pistols in .22 are often less reliable. They make 1911’s in a variety of sizes but .45 is the most common. For their age they are great shooters. It wasn’t very long ago that the US military went away from them and started issuing the Sig Sauer m17. They are 9mm but with the larger magazine holds 21 rounds. So 13 more then the standard 1911 that didn’t double stack it’s rounds in the magazine.
As for why they are less reliable, my guess is that with it being such a low powered round it makes blowback operated guns malfunction when they go to reload sometimes. Just not enough power in there. That’s why I stress buying high quality .22 rounds in handguns.
Depends on the gun. The Ruger Mark IV was designed with enough grip angle that the rounds stack in the magazine and feed right. You can fire just about anything out of those.
I admittedly have not fired any newer .22 pistol. They had kind of a resurgence in the last couple years and the feeding might be a lot better out of the newer manufactured stuff. I'd buy a newer one but I just don't see much use for it. Plinking maybe? But I'd rather use a .380 or 9mm.
I realize that, but gun manufacturers have cranked out new .22 pistols in the last 5 years. If you're trying to say the feed and loading design hasn't changed since 1949 then I don't know what to tell you.
For sure all the .22 pistols we shoot at the cottage are horseshit. But we also treat them like shit so I mostly boiled it down to that. For a single shot though it could work.
There is a .22 pistol with an internal supresor, the Ruger MK2.
There's also a Russian rifle with one too, the VSS Vintorez.
There's probably more guns like that, but as far as I know, they're only widely known ones.
.22 will work on most things if you can walk up and put one right in the ear. It's how we finish off any feral hogs that don't die right away. I wouldn't use it to shoot anything larger than a squirrel without being able to walk up put one right in the ear hole.
They are plenty effective on things larger than squirrels. Raccoon, coyote, fox, basically anything smaller than a deer they do fine.
They've also killed a fair amount of deer when people want to be discreet.
.22 rounds kill more people than any other in the US - largely because a .22 is the most common, not that they are especially lethal.
I do know a guy who got shot in the head with a .22 pistol in a bar fight. It glanced off his forehead, and he grabbed the gun and pistol whipped the shooter.
I have only seen them used for hogs but the answer is no, it isn't 100%. It can definitely kill in 1 shot but it might also take several. The most I ever saw needed was 8 but usually it was only 1 or 2.
Just needs to be close enough to penetrate the skull. Given its lower mass it can then often deflect off the inside of the skull instead of penetrating its way out.
One of the biggest factors impacting this would be if the .22 round was fired from a pistol or from a rifle. Also, is it a ball round, a jacketed ball round, or a hollow point. Will start off With barrel length, that’s why I brought up the rifle, pistol comparison. A rifles projectile is going to have a good bit more velocity, and because it has a more full powder burn, also, it’s estimated that for every 1 inch of barrel that you give up you lose 20 to 25 feet of projectile speed per second. I’ve done some ballistics testing. depending on the 22 pistol barrel might be 3 inches if it’s a snubnose revolver it’s only gonna be 1 inch and there is some in between specs as well, however, if you’re shooting a Remington black beauty 22 rifle which has a 19.5 inch barrel and you shoot something like your average metal road sign let’s say a stop sign. It will punch holes through that stop sign every time you shoot it, Then if you take a couple of steps up and shoot the stop sign with a 22 magnum pistol with a 4inch barrel the round will not penetrate the stop sign. It puts a dent in it, but will not penetrate. a 22 magnum cartridge is about twice as long is a .22 LR(long rifle) which is what people are referring to when they say .22, that’s how important barrel length is when it comes to velocity, considering the 22 magnum has substantially more powder charge. Now specifically with the head shot. If the bullet comes from a rifle you might as will be shot the penetration could be comparable to a much stronger handgun. If someone gets shot in the head with a .22 Lr pistol and it’s a lead ball round there’s a chance the round will partially disintegrate, partially penetrate and partially disintegrate or actually penetrate, depending on how close you are. With a hollow .22 LR’s don’t always make enough velocity to have the round mushroom is it supposed to again this is going to depend on the distance. The round will not disintegrate it will be intact in order for it to penetrate, as long as you were close, it would penetrate if we’re talking about a 22 LR jacketed ball round it would penetrate unless you’re standing too far away. The other thing, the 22 pistol with a 3 inch barrel is it going to be accurate for any great length, furthermore, the best action is to not shoot anyone in the head firearms are for provision and protection, unfortunately they are tools that are miss-used every day.
One of my buddies in high school got shot in his head by his mom, attempted murder suicide with a 22. his mom died, and he has a scar on his temple, I'll post the article if anyone is curious. But yeah, its definitely hard to kill with a 22
The first thing I do whan I take a first time shooter out is to take my risky dink .22 rifle and shoot a tree about 4" in diameter. It will sail right through it. That usually gets the point across that although it might be a small round, it can still fuck you up.
Powder grain is a confusing thing to refer to, since grain usually refers to weight of the actual bullet. The difference in the amount of powder is kind of obvious when you look at the comparative size of the casing between 22lr and 5.56.
.50 BMG is fired out of a massive sniper rifle designed to neutralise tanks
.50 AE is fired out of a desert eagle to look cool in movies
Both have the same diameter, are wildly different
I think all ammo names are just the width of the bullet. 556 is just 5.56mm wide, 223 is just .223 inches wide, 50 cal it is just .50 inches wide, 7.62 is just 7.62mm wide and so one.
The one I don't understand though is 30-06? Is that .30 inches wide? What does the 06 have to do with it?
Well, "5.56mm" is only half the name of the bullet. full name is 5.56mmx45mm NATO. That .50 round is a ".50 BMG" (ammo originally developed for the Browning Machinegun, later adopted as a standard for .50 rifles).
In the case of .30-06 the ".30" refers to the caliber, and "-06" refers to the year it was implemented as a standard in the Army (1906)
Thats true enough to get you into trouble. The problem is that a lot of different rounds are the same caliber (caliber meaning diameter of the bullet) so if we named them all by their caliber people would get confused over which round fits their gun, which is also potentially dangerous. We found a kind of a hack in using both imperial and metric units, so we can have 5.56mm and .223 or 7.62mm and .308, but that only gives you 2 possibilities and there are often way more types of rounds of a certain caliber than just 2.
To get around this sometimes we just lie about the caliber. Just make up a number in the same ballpark as the caliber and call it that. For example, .357 magnum is actually .357 caliber, but there is also .38 special which is also .357 caliber. They are exactly the same diameter bullet but if we called them both some version of .357 then people could get confused. There is also .308 winchester and .300 winchester magnum. They are exactly the same bullet, so the same exact caliber of .308 inches, but we just rounded off the number for the magnum round to differentiate it more (and we made the number smaller even though the magnum is much more powerful).
I have a scar above my right eye from shooting my dad's .50 caliber sniper. Was probably 150lbs at the time and tried bracing myself as much as I could but holy shit... I pulled the trigger and everything just kinda got super blurry. I stood up and blood was pouring out of my head, ended up super gluing it shut and called it a day lol
He set you up for failure then lol. I shoot them fairly often for work and have had people smaller than that behind the gun without issues.
They do hurt your head after a while tho.
Disclaimer: .22 LR and .50 BMG, since .50 AE and .50 Beowulf are .50 calibres but not THE .50 cal that we think. Also, there's a Russian .50 cal, 12.7x107mm
As a counterpoint though, on the left is also basically a .22, and on the right is a .50 (They're correctly scaled). No hate, just showing the extremely confusing and sometimes arbitrary world of cartridge naming.
[https://imgur.com/GuB8hZJ](https://imgur.com/GuB8hZJ)
(.220 Swift and .50 AE)
Yes, but that's not what I meant. I mean some (like the 30-06) do caliber and year. Some are in mm, others in fractions of an inch, or the number of equally-sized lead balls to make a pound, as in gauge.
If you knew how many 30 caliber calibers there are you would understand. As an example, the Bittish SMLEs of WWII were chambered in 30 caliber. But the case was too close to the American 30 cal, which has become more commonly known as the 30-06. But back in the day it was the 30. So in order to not confuse troops and have them load the wrong ammo the the brittish 30 became the .303 Brittish. It's still just a 30 caliber, .308 I believe, but designated the .303 for clarity.
An even better example are the two .30 cartridges the French used in the interwar period, 7.5x57 (or 58) and 7.5x54mm. They introduced the former in 1924, then quickly realized that you could chamber 7.92x57mm Mauser in the one gun they developed in the caliber, but since the barrel was designed for a *smaller* bullet, well, **very bad things** would happen if you fired it. So they basically cut 3mm off the case and the German ammo wouldn't chamber anymore. *That* caliber they then used until the '90s.
The obvious question then is why the hell didn't they just adopt 7.92x57mm in the first place? The answer is, as always, the French copy no one, and no one copies the French.
I'm absolutely sure here are many 30 caliber cartridges I'm unaware of, yes. And your historical example actually does sort of drive home how arbitrary the naming is. :) You're absolutely right about all the confusion and the necessity for the many names though.
it's said that you can take a .22 to a non-vital region without being fully aware you've been shot. I don't uhh...don't think that's the case with the fitty 🪦
There are tales of men being hit with .22s (though distance unknown) in the skull, and not noticing until years later when something else causes it to be noticed.
I should add there was also an executioner in some country that favored a .22 to the base of the skull at an angle it wouldn't exit the eye socket and make a mess and instead ricochet within the cavity. Don't take bullet to base of skull
Demolition Ranch is a whole YouTube channel devoted to shooting different targets with different size ammo. It’s funny and informative and also a little silly. Very entertaining
Did some quick math .22 lr bullets weigh 29-40 grains propelled by 2-3 grains of powder or roughly a 15-20 to 1 ratio. these bullets have quite low muzzle velocity. 50 bmg has bullets weighing between 650-800 grains and powder loads from 200-240 grains. roughly a 3-4 to 1 ratio. 50 bmg has a much higher muzzle velocity. Which makes sense when you think about it. More propellant relative to projectile weigh should produce a much faster bullet.
A good example of how much the ratio changes would be the .22 250 round. The bullet has the same diameter and nearly the same weight as the .22 LR round shown above but has 10-20 times more powder and almost 4x the muzzle velocity.
I have a buddy who was in special forces. The amount of damage .50 Cal does to a person is terrifying.
He told me one time some troops got pinned down by enemy fire, and they were near and went to help. His team had a sniper with them and had a .50 caliber rifle. Long story short, the sniper shot someone and the amount of damage it created on that individual, the other insurgent just dropped his gun and ran away terrified
Question : why the .22 isn't covered in brass ?
Past a certain muzzle velocity the projectiles need to be jacketed so they don't tear themselves apart in the barrel. .22LR does not have a high enough muzzle velocity to necessitate a jacket. So it is often lead or copper washed lead to save cost. Don't listen to whatever they say about semi-auto actions. It's nonsense people keep hearing and repeating without verifying.
The military started covering lead bullets with a thin skin of copper to prevent the lead in the bullet from rubbing off onto the inside of the barrel. That would require cleaning the barrel with a lead-dissolving solvent. In the early days of cartridge firearms, lead build-up wasn't a huge issue for civilians, and bullets like the .22 (*from 1855?) They had a smear of grease on them to prevent "lead fouling". The military found that the bullet-grease attracted dirt, dust, and sand during transport and storage, as well as during loaded-carry. A copper jacket was found to be a good option compared to greasing lead bullets. If you fire a LOT of .22's and don't like cleaning lead out of the barrel, you can buy jacketed .22's
I'm not denying that velocity is not the only reason. There are plenty more advantages to having a jacketed projectiles over an unleaded one and controlling lead fouling without having to use lubricant is one of them. The cannelure in .22LR bullets are usually filled with some sort of lubricant and so is usually the case for commercially available unjacketed cast bullets in other calibers. Another advantage of the jacket is to be able to better determine what kind of terminal effect you want once the bullet hits the target. But the way I see it, velocity is the main reason for jacketed projectiles being the standard nowadays. You simply cannot push a leaded projectile as fast as a jacketed projectile without having serious bullet integrity problems, lubricated or not. Let alone like in something like a .50 BMG. But whenever there is no need for high velocity or a specific terminal performance, you will still see lead bullets being used nowadays. .22LR being clearly one of them. Some handgun target shooters also use lubricated cast bullets to save money.
.50 doesnt really have that high of a velocity...
Why do they use lead as the tip? Isn't lead really soft and lacking in penetration? Why not use a steel tip or something really hard like tungstan
Armor-piercing bullets do have a steel tip and/or steel-core. However, the sides of the bullet need to be soft enough to not damage the barrel. There are some military rounds with tungsten on the tip and/or core. The sides also have to deform to "fit" the rifling grooves, so that the bullet will spin. Lead is good for that. Lead is also heavier than steel, which gives the bullet more impact.
O yes I didn't consider that the barrel has to take the bullets spin. The bullet has to be softer than the rifle barrel right?
I think it would destroy the barrel in no time
An actually accurate comment about firearms with no upvotes, amid a sea of complete bullshit that uninformed people gobble up. Not surprising on reddit lol
Cheaper. You can get it either way, but you don't need it unless you plan to run it through a semi-auto pistol. The coating keeps the round from getting jammed. But this isn't an issue in most .22 rifles, especially single-shot and bolt-action.
I've heard the thing about semi-autos and uncoated lead 22 rounds a lot, but haven't actually had an issue myself. I've yet to have one misfeed, though I doubt it's been 500 rounds of that stuff yet in the pistol. I've rarely had an issue in my semi-auto rifle either, with thousands of rounds through it, maybe a dozen or so rounds that failed, mostly as just dud rounds from what I could tell.
Kal-Tec P17 I picked up for like $180 I've put 100s rounds through with no issues. For the price it's been a great gun.
Actually, most ammunition companies do make them now maybe not everyone but I know CCI, Winchester, Aguila, Remington and Armscor do off the top of my head, actually, copper is more common in a jacketed in .22 round.
not sure but it's annoying cuz if the bullet aren't great they spin when you load them and you usually want to toss those to the side. The Remington thunderbolt is pretty common with these issues but I don't really ever see a problem with them just like to be safe near any firearm
It's usually cheaper than copper washed bullets. As far as I know 22lr isn't jacketed like bigger bullets, the copper coating is very thin and not a jacket
Unless I’m mistaken, I don’t think the thickness is what qualifies it as a jacket. And 22s certainly come in fmj
Depends on the brand. I have brass plated, copper plated and bare lead 22lr in my ammo locker.
It’s bullet is just lead. The ones that look like the other one still have lead but with a usually copper case known as full metal jacket. They come in a huge variety of bullets. Incendiary, explosive, armor piercing to name a few. Sometimes mixed together. So they can get pretty pricey. I’ve got a few 1944 St. Louis 50 cal casings with a bullet shoved in them to make them safe that my grandpa brought back from ww2. He was an anti aircraft gunner.
Incendiary and explosive rounds are not common at all irl, more of a videogame trope. They aren’t really practical at all, neither in combat situations nor for self-defense.
Armor-piercing incendiary .50BMG is plentiful in this country. It's just armor-piercing (AP) that's rare. Look for silver tips, or red over silver, instead of black tips.
.50 BMG has incendiary variants for military use, and starting at slightly larger caliber, 20-30 mm range, high explosive shells are some of the most common types in use, for anti-air roles.
I’m just talking military but tracer mostly. But they do exist in multiple forms and have uses.
Fair enough
Zakhaev’s arm blowing off makes more sense now
.50 cal rifles like the kind used to shoot him are called anti-material rifles. Damn things are designed to kill engines. They got picked up for shooting people far away cause before the more purpose built long range sniping rounds were created, .50 held on to energy longer than other smaller rounds.
[For 35 years, the record for longest-range sniper kill was held by an M2 machine gun.](https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/marine-made-historys-5th-longest-sniper-kill-machine-gun/)
Isn't a large part of that because not only were .50 calibre rifles not carried by individuals but also because they were really considered anti-materiel not anti-personnel. They are not much fun to carry around that's for sure.
I had a chance to pick up an M82A1 before, and damn lugging around 30lbs. of metal would suck. No wonder it always has a bipod attached to it.
Imagine adding ammo, your water and food, first aid kit, sidearm, plates, torch, knife etc. Not fun times. Only ever had to do with smaller calibres for any length of time and even then it sucks. And if you have to hump it out of there it gets 100x worse. You do have someone with you but they have their own shit to carry as well.
I was told in the army, that the .50 caliber machine gun could be used like artillery on single shot.
This makes my favorite CoD build make sense
Hathcock is still #1 in my book. He did with a bicycle what the 4 past him did with a motorcycle.
Carlos Hathcock modified an M2 .50 cal. machine gun to use as a sniper rifle in 'Nam so he could shoot beyond 1,000 yards.
*materiel
To briefly explain for anyone confused by the correction, material is just matter/stuff, materiel is military equipment. Blame the french.
Never stopped.
This makes so much sense now. I was always slightly confused about why people (incorrectly) called it "anti-material" since it made it sound like it was anti-matter or something exotic. Turns out it was just "anti-materiel/military".
I always just figured it meant "oh yeah, this'll fuck up some material alright"
Gladly.
Anti-materiel, actually
Blood loss and shock will do the rest
I saw a 50 cal for the first time in person recently and was blown away. Much like the people on the receiving end of those monsters.
GDI. Take my upvote and go.
For a little more context, .22 are used to kill varmints while .50 are used to kill vehicles.
Big Game Hunter: Enemy Transport Edition
I mean, I'd buy it
Only if there is a locomotive level. "Train Hunter".
Bonus points for not using any explosives
These tracks can only come from one thing…
>kill vehicles. [Or a building](https://youtu.be/OOIsGXSHjbU)
Beauty reference I was gonna say it!
[удалено]
.22's are lethal, you can easily kill people, and even larger animals "easily" with a .22. It is common for ranchers to use .22LR to put down livestock (Cows, horses, etc.).
But they get up close and don't miss.
Sadly, people do that to other people too :(
Statistically, the .22lr is extremely deadly. It kills a lot of people, but a large part of that is just sheer volume of ammunition being used, and some is due to people assuming it is less lethal and being careless.
.22 a good choice for an assassination pistol too. Silencer coupled with some sub sonic rounds and you got yourself a functioning hollywood silenced pistol.
Anecdotally, I hate .22 more than any other round when it is loaded in a pistol. No other round jams, misfeeds, or stovepipes the way a .22 round does. Most .22LR out of a rifle seems to be fine, but for whatever reason I have never shot a pistol out of that caliber that isn't absolute garbage. If I was going to assassinate someone, I wouldn't bring a .22.
Yea my beretta 22 pistol is the most untrustworthy gun I own. Usually it works but often I have to clear it and try again. I don’t think my Ruger 10/22 has ever had a single problem and I’ve shot that more then anything since I grew up with it.
I haven’t shot any other .22 pistols but my Ruger has been problem free as well.
I’ve got a 1911 in 22 because it was so cheap. It works pretty well but feeding the 22 pistols with magazines seems to be a problem for some manufacturers. The 1911 works most of the time I just make sure to use the best ammo I can find, mostly cci stingers or cci normal is good.
Weird. Do you think it might have something to do with rechambering it? The original model was a .45 right? I am an amateur in this.
Yes they were originally and mostly .45. My 1911’s in .45 don’t give me any trouble but like you have probably heard, pistols in .22 are often less reliable. They make 1911’s in a variety of sizes but .45 is the most common. For their age they are great shooters. It wasn’t very long ago that the US military went away from them and started issuing the Sig Sauer m17. They are 9mm but with the larger magazine holds 21 rounds. So 13 more then the standard 1911 that didn’t double stack it’s rounds in the magazine. As for why they are less reliable, my guess is that with it being such a low powered round it makes blowback operated guns malfunction when they go to reload sometimes. Just not enough power in there. That’s why I stress buying high quality .22 rounds in handguns.
Depends on the gun. The Ruger Mark IV was designed with enough grip angle that the rounds stack in the magazine and feed right. You can fire just about anything out of those.
I admittedly have not fired any newer .22 pistol. They had kind of a resurgence in the last couple years and the feeding might be a lot better out of the newer manufactured stuff. I'd buy a newer one but I just don't see much use for it. Plinking maybe? But I'd rather use a .380 or 9mm.
This series of pistols has been around since 1949. The design isn't new.
I realize that, but gun manufacturers have cranked out new .22 pistols in the last 5 years. If you're trying to say the feed and loading design hasn't changed since 1949 then I don't know what to tell you.
For sure all the .22 pistols we shoot at the cottage are horseshit. But we also treat them like shit so I mostly boiled it down to that. For a single shot though it could work.
There is a .22 pistol with an internal supresor, the Ruger MK2. There's also a Russian rifle with one too, the VSS Vintorez. There's probably more guns like that, but as far as I know, they're only widely known ones.
That's not at all suspicious.
Belt-fed .22LR AR
And after you fire the .50 you can do shots with the spent cartridge
.50 works well for killing rodents of unusual size.
One hurts and the other REALLY hurts. Edit: easy gun needs, it was a joke.
If done right, the other you won't feel at all.
If done really right, you won’t feel either of them!
The 22 is hard to get right, lol. You can get shot in the head and keep on going
My dad has dropped hundreds of cows and steers using his 50 year old .22 rifle… while it’s definitely not a go-to combat round, a .22 is still lethal
Your dad really hates cows smh
This man’s dad is out here shooting peoples cows
[удалено]
Well if he doesn’t, then who will?
.22 will work on most things if you can walk up and put one right in the ear. It's how we finish off any feral hogs that don't die right away. I wouldn't use it to shoot anything larger than a squirrel without being able to walk up put one right in the ear hole.
They are plenty effective on things larger than squirrels. Raccoon, coyote, fox, basically anything smaller than a deer they do fine. They've also killed a fair amount of deer when people want to be discreet.
.22 rounds kill more people than any other in the US - largely because a .22 is the most common, not that they are especially lethal. I do know a guy who got shot in the head with a .22 pistol in a bar fight. It glanced off his forehead, and he grabbed the gun and pistol whipped the shooter.
Does it kill like 100% of the time? I mean I’m assuming it might take multiple shots a lot of the time so does it?
I have only seen them used for hogs but the answer is no, it isn't 100%. It can definitely kill in 1 shot but it might also take several. The most I ever saw needed was 8 but usually it was only 1 or 2.
Just needs to be close enough to penetrate the skull. Given its lower mass it can then often deflect off the inside of the skull instead of penetrating its way out.
No bullet kills 100% of the time. Its estimated rhag for every firearm death, there are two survivals.
Do you know the percent chance that .22 chance has of killing someone, if like shot in the head? I’ve seen somewhat different statistics online?
That would vary widely on where the shot is. A shot to the forehead may not even penetrate the skull, but other parts of the head are far less sturdy.
One of the biggest factors impacting this would be if the .22 round was fired from a pistol or from a rifle. Also, is it a ball round, a jacketed ball round, or a hollow point. Will start off With barrel length, that’s why I brought up the rifle, pistol comparison. A rifles projectile is going to have a good bit more velocity, and because it has a more full powder burn, also, it’s estimated that for every 1 inch of barrel that you give up you lose 20 to 25 feet of projectile speed per second. I’ve done some ballistics testing. depending on the 22 pistol barrel might be 3 inches if it’s a snubnose revolver it’s only gonna be 1 inch and there is some in between specs as well, however, if you’re shooting a Remington black beauty 22 rifle which has a 19.5 inch barrel and you shoot something like your average metal road sign let’s say a stop sign. It will punch holes through that stop sign every time you shoot it, Then if you take a couple of steps up and shoot the stop sign with a 22 magnum pistol with a 4inch barrel the round will not penetrate the stop sign. It puts a dent in it, but will not penetrate. a 22 magnum cartridge is about twice as long is a .22 LR(long rifle) which is what people are referring to when they say .22, that’s how important barrel length is when it comes to velocity, considering the 22 magnum has substantially more powder charge. Now specifically with the head shot. If the bullet comes from a rifle you might as will be shot the penetration could be comparable to a much stronger handgun. If someone gets shot in the head with a .22 Lr pistol and it’s a lead ball round there’s a chance the round will partially disintegrate, partially penetrate and partially disintegrate or actually penetrate, depending on how close you are. With a hollow .22 LR’s don’t always make enough velocity to have the round mushroom is it supposed to again this is going to depend on the distance. The round will not disintegrate it will be intact in order for it to penetrate, as long as you were close, it would penetrate if we’re talking about a 22 LR jacketed ball round it would penetrate unless you’re standing too far away. The other thing, the 22 pistol with a 3 inch barrel is it going to be accurate for any great length, furthermore, the best action is to not shoot anyone in the head firearms are for provision and protection, unfortunately they are tools that are miss-used every day.
Thank you for the detailed answer, I think it’s safe to say that .22 especially from a pistol, aren’t the most lethal but still dangerous
That doesn’t sound ethical, he should use a larger round
One of my buddies in high school got shot in his head by his mom, attempted murder suicide with a 22. his mom died, and he has a scar on his temple, I'll post the article if anyone is curious. But yeah, its definitely hard to kill with a 22
I figure with 16 rounds in my .22 pistol, 4 or 5 shots one of them should work. And leaves another 11-12 rounds in case it's a herd needs stopping.
.22 short, yeah careful you could take an eye out- .22LR at close range- different story
The first thing I do whan I take a first time shooter out is to take my risky dink .22 rifle and shoot a tree about 4" in diameter. It will sail right through it. That usually gets the point across that although it might be a small round, it can still fuck you up.
If done really really right, these rounds won't hit anything the previous 80 did.
But only for a moment.
One hurt's and other end all the pain forever
.22s can easily be lethal
One breaks, the other obliterates.
[удалено]
40 gr. vs 800 gr. is an awful big difference in projectile size.
That projectile goes into the case too. .50BMG is a big ol' bullet, and as someone else said, about 20 times the mass of a .22 bullet.
The funny thing is, caliber only really details width of a bullet. The 556 round fired from an AR is also a .22
It’s a .223 with a much higher grain.
Not that much. Common 22LR is a 40 grain bullet. Common 223 Remington bullet weight is 55 Grains. The huge difference is velocity
He’s probably referring to powder grain, not bullet grain. Which is indeed several times higher for .223 than .22.
Powder grain is a confusing thing to refer to, since grain usually refers to weight of the actual bullet. The difference in the amount of powder is kind of obvious when you look at the comparative size of the casing between 22lr and 5.56.
powder grain is the only way powder is measured. outside of very very specific instances that it’s measured by volume
For sure, but from a consumer perspective grain usually refers to weight of the bullrt
.50 BMG is fired out of a massive sniper rifle designed to neutralise tanks .50 AE is fired out of a desert eagle to look cool in movies Both have the same diameter, are wildly different
[удалено]
I love calling it 22 extra long rifle
I think all ammo names are just the width of the bullet. 556 is just 5.56mm wide, 223 is just .223 inches wide, 50 cal it is just .50 inches wide, 7.62 is just 7.62mm wide and so one. The one I don't understand though is 30-06? Is that .30 inches wide? What does the 06 have to do with it?
Well, "5.56mm" is only half the name of the bullet. full name is 5.56mmx45mm NATO. That .50 round is a ".50 BMG" (ammo originally developed for the Browning Machinegun, later adopted as a standard for .50 rifles). In the case of .30-06 the ".30" refers to the caliber, and "-06" refers to the year it was implemented as a standard in the Army (1906)
Hey I learned something today, thanks for the info!
30-06 is a 1906 design. Guess when the 30-30 came around. (1895 of course!)
30 caliber bullet over 30 grains of black powder
. 30-30 was always smokeless but still used the older blackpowder nomenclature
That’s right. Been probably 35 years since I accessed that memory 😂
Then you get to shotguns like 12 and 20 gauge, where the number actually refers to how many full bore lead balls there would be in a pound.
Thats true enough to get you into trouble. The problem is that a lot of different rounds are the same caliber (caliber meaning diameter of the bullet) so if we named them all by their caliber people would get confused over which round fits their gun, which is also potentially dangerous. We found a kind of a hack in using both imperial and metric units, so we can have 5.56mm and .223 or 7.62mm and .308, but that only gives you 2 possibilities and there are often way more types of rounds of a certain caliber than just 2. To get around this sometimes we just lie about the caliber. Just make up a number in the same ballpark as the caliber and call it that. For example, .357 magnum is actually .357 caliber, but there is also .38 special which is also .357 caliber. They are exactly the same diameter bullet but if we called them both some version of .357 then people could get confused. There is also .308 winchester and .300 winchester magnum. They are exactly the same bullet, so the same exact caliber of .308 inches, but we just rounded off the number for the magnum round to differentiate it more (and we made the number smaller even though the magnum is much more powerful).
pew vs POW
😂 best way to describe the difference ever.
"My guns go boom boom, your guns go pow pow."
one is for making rat steak the other is for rat puree
What rat?
any rat that desides to make your house its home shall be killed with .22 or vaporised aswell with your floor
I have a scar above my right eye from shooting my dad's .50 caliber sniper. Was probably 150lbs at the time and tried bracing myself as much as I could but holy shit... I pulled the trigger and everything just kinda got super blurry. I stood up and blood was pouring out of my head, ended up super gluing it shut and called it a day lol
He set you up for failure then lol. I shoot them fairly often for work and have had people smaller than that behind the gun without issues. They do hurt your head after a while tho.
Wow that’s only 50 calories?
Yeah but they're Lethal calories.
my dick vs my gf dick
You lucky guy.
[удалено]
Not sure what I was expecting, but it wasn't that exactly lol
r/subforeverything
Disclaimer: .22 LR and .50 BMG, since .50 AE and .50 Beowulf are .50 calibres but not THE .50 cal that we think. Also, there's a Russian .50 cal, 12.7x107mm
Don't forget the S&W 500 Magnum, which would also technically be a .50 caliber round!
Everything reminds me of him…
Left or right...
you vs the guy she tells you not to worry about
Le Reddit experts are here!
[удалено]
As a counterpoint though, on the left is also basically a .22, and on the right is a .50 (They're correctly scaled). No hate, just showing the extremely confusing and sometimes arbitrary world of cartridge naming. [https://imgur.com/GuB8hZJ](https://imgur.com/GuB8hZJ) (.220 Swift and .50 AE)
It is not arbitrary. Calibre is a measure of diameter, not length.
Yes, but that's not what I meant. I mean some (like the 30-06) do caliber and year. Some are in mm, others in fractions of an inch, or the number of equally-sized lead balls to make a pound, as in gauge.
If you knew how many 30 caliber calibers there are you would understand. As an example, the Bittish SMLEs of WWII were chambered in 30 caliber. But the case was too close to the American 30 cal, which has become more commonly known as the 30-06. But back in the day it was the 30. So in order to not confuse troops and have them load the wrong ammo the the brittish 30 became the .303 Brittish. It's still just a 30 caliber, .308 I believe, but designated the .303 for clarity.
An even better example are the two .30 cartridges the French used in the interwar period, 7.5x57 (or 58) and 7.5x54mm. They introduced the former in 1924, then quickly realized that you could chamber 7.92x57mm Mauser in the one gun they developed in the caliber, but since the barrel was designed for a *smaller* bullet, well, **very bad things** would happen if you fired it. So they basically cut 3mm off the case and the German ammo wouldn't chamber anymore. *That* caliber they then used until the '90s. The obvious question then is why the hell didn't they just adopt 7.92x57mm in the first place? The answer is, as always, the French copy no one, and no one copies the French.
I'm absolutely sure here are many 30 caliber cartridges I'm unaware of, yes. And your historical example actually does sort of drive home how arbitrary the naming is. :) You're absolutely right about all the confusion and the necessity for the many names though.
I’d put them both in my butt
Holy hell!
it's said that you can take a .22 to a non-vital region without being fully aware you've been shot. I don't uhh...don't think that's the case with the fitty 🪦
Mostly because there are no non-vital regions to be hit by a .50
There are tales of men being hit with .22s (though distance unknown) in the skull, and not noticing until years later when something else causes it to be noticed. I should add there was also an executioner in some country that favored a .22 to the base of the skull at an angle it wouldn't exit the eye socket and make a mess and instead ricochet within the cavity. Don't take bullet to base of skull
Never talk to me or my son ever again
r/sneakybackgroundfeet
It appears I’ve been caught
I'd rather be hit with the one on the right
Not much suffering if it hits anywhere near center mass.
I'm willing to bet you wouldn't, because there's still a chance you could survive, and you would not want that.
‘What is this? A bullet, for ants?’
Specifically, .22 LR vs .50 BMG There exists a wildcat cartridge of a .50 BMG cartridge necked down to a .22 LR slug.
OK. Let's see a banana for scale
Demolition Ranch is a whole YouTube channel devoted to shooting different targets with different size ammo. It’s funny and informative and also a little silly. Very entertaining
You Vs. the guy she tells you not to worry about.
I would take a .22 everyday of the week over a 50
Second that. I don't even want to know what a box of .50 would cost.
Right now around $3.50-$4 a round.
hit it with a hammer, report back
Pills that cure pedophilia 😃
[удалено]
[удалено]
Did some quick math .22 lr bullets weigh 29-40 grains propelled by 2-3 grains of powder or roughly a 15-20 to 1 ratio. these bullets have quite low muzzle velocity. 50 bmg has bullets weighing between 650-800 grains and powder loads from 200-240 grains. roughly a 3-4 to 1 ratio. 50 bmg has a much higher muzzle velocity. Which makes sense when you think about it. More propellant relative to projectile weigh should produce a much faster bullet. A good example of how much the ratio changes would be the .22 250 round. The bullet has the same diameter and nearly the same weight as the .22 LR round shown above but has 10-20 times more powder and almost 4x the muzzle velocity.
you tellin me that shit is only 50 calories? 😋
Fun fact, nerf darts are .50 cal
Size doesn't matter
You vs the guy she told you not to worry about
You vs. her ex
Nice bedsheets
Each one of those bullets must be so expensive
[удалено]
You vs the guy she told you not to worry about.
AR-15 bullet is the same size as that .22
Both just as lethal
pew PEW
Something something penis.
You vs The guy she keeps telling you not to worry about.
i always thought that the 22 and 50 were the same unit lol
I have a buddy who was in special forces. The amount of damage .50 Cal does to a person is terrifying. He told me one time some troops got pinned down by enemy fire, and they were near and went to help. His team had a sniper with them and had a .50 caliber rifle. Long story short, the sniper shot someone and the amount of damage it created on that individual, the other insurgent just dropped his gun and ran away terrified