KTOG - Kel Tec Owners Group Forum > Other > Other Guns > Truly 'mousey' guns - .25 vs. .22 WMR mini
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-13-2011, 06:31 PM   #1
JAB
Grand Poobah
 
JAB's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 2,708
Liked 166 Times on 120 Posts
Likes Given: 42

Default Truly 'mousey' guns - .25 vs. .22 WMR mini

As part of a thread in the P32 section, what I feel is an interesting topic of discussion has come up. Rather than hijack that thread, I thought it would be interesting to continue discussing it here. I would like to say that I perceive this discussion as more motivated by different opinions than by one or the other being definitely right or wrong. Still, I think it would be interesting to hear others' considered opinions on the subject, as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Picatinny_Pete View Post
Hi JAB,

I posted my reply fast during lunch at work so I wasn't really clear. Ghost Chili is saying you should consider the 22 Magnum NAA revolver if size is a real consideration due to the merits of the 22 Magnum rimfire cartridge.

I'm of the opinion when there is no expansion and relatively low energy placement and penetration become very important. The 25 ACP from a palm/pocket pistol seems to be much more efficient penetrating than the 22 Magnum bullets from the NAA revolver. The brassfetcher tests showed that of the five rounds test there was no significant expansion and only one made/exceeded (12.5") the FBI 12" gelatin penetration requirement. The S&B FMJ 25 ACP rounds made 16" of penetration and tumbled routinely.

The below photo shows a comparison of palm/pocket pistols. As you can see the Browning M-1910 is a bit larger than the P-32 with the 22 LR Beretta M21A & Sterling 25 ACP about the same size. The Colt Junior though is smaller than the P-32 and can be called a palm pistol as wells as the Colt 1908 and Baby Browning.



People tend to forget that Palm and pocket revolvers in caliber down to 22 short were popular in the early 1900's, and that pistols in 25 and 32 ACP eventually caused their demise. I think the 22 Magnum NAA revolver is a throwback to that era. The P-32 is a big advance though as it greatly diminished the size of the 32 pocket pistol.

Neither the 25 ACP or 22 Magnum out of a Palm/Pocket pistol can equal the performance of the 32 ACP from the P-32. The big majority of today's Zamak , and alloyed frame pocket pistols have no size advantage over the P-32. I think the that if you need a palm pistol that's smaller than the P-32 the small 25's like the Colt Junior have a lot more to offer than the 22 NAA Magnum revolver, and fill a niche. The P-32 in 32 ACP meets the majority of my needs.

Best Regards:
Ah, I see what you are saying, now. I don't entirely agree, but I understand.

When it comes to using something as diminutive as an NAA, I believe that ammo selection plays a very important part. As even the Brassfetcher test shows, one type of ammo might be perfectly capable of penetrating 12 inches or more while another might not even make six inches.

Until recently, I owned a NAA mini in .22 WMR and a .25 acp (a Phoenix, so it wasn't one of the higher quality ones you mention.) Having shot both and observed very informal terminal effects, I still have the NAA and the .25 got traded. By 'very informal' I mean that shooting targets tacked to a tree in a wooded area at my sister's where it is safe to shoot, I found four of the six bullets fired from the .25 lying at the base of the tree looking like they could be reloaded and fired, again. They literally just hit the tree and fell. .22 WMR bullets fired from the mini at least penetrate into the tree. Of course, the human body is not made of wood but neither is it made of ballistic gel.

Of course, the projected use of the firearm comes into play, as well. I certainly agree with you that a .32acp pocket pistol such as the P32 is superior to anything in WMR or .25 as a primary. In fact, when my wife thought she would like something like my NAA as her carry gun, I steered her away from it and toward a P32. Quite apart from effectiveness of the caliber, I don't think that a single-action mini revolver is the best choice for a primary, especially for someone (like my wife) who will practice some but not a whole lot. To me, a P32 is a small carry gun while a NAA mini is a niche gun. The mini doesn't make the best primary carry gun, IMO, but the P32 doesn't fill the NAA niche as well as the mini does.

So what is that niche? Well, to my way of thinking a BUG is a different thing entirely from a primary and the NAA works better as a BUG. For me, the most likely use of a BUG would be as a 'get off me' gun to be used literally at contact distance as a belly gun when the proximity of an assailant or grappling with said assailant might make getting to/using a primary impossible. A revolver jammed directly into an assailant's gut isn't going to go out of battery. There isn't a slide to get jammed by cloth from a shirt or jacket. At such close proximity, even the simplest jam would be nigh impossible to clear. Sure, I guess revolvers can jam but it isn't very likely while such conditions would tend to greatly increase the chances of a jam in a semiauto. Functionally, revolvers don't care if your grip isn't perfect, they don't care if you limpwrist and they don't care if you are firing from an odd angle. As any or even all of these factors would likely come into play for a civilian who has to resort to using a BUG, it is my belief that the mini revolver is superior to any small semiauto in that role.

One other factor I consider is that, living in a rural area, especially since I have chickens, a copperhead is a threat I am much more likely to face than a human assailant. The mini works just fine with shot shells while they often won't cycle the action on a semiauto. Further, commercial shot shells don't even exist in .32acp as far as I am aware. By carrying shot shells as the first one or two up in the NAA, I don't compromise its functionality for firing the next round and I can still carry a full complement of SD ammo in my primary.

For such a role, I also think the NAA and similar mini revolvers are superior to most other pocket revolvers. I have a S&W 642 and, as small and light as it is, it dwarfs the mini and is heavy by comparison. Also, due to differences in recoil, I can keep a better hold on the mini when using a weak hand only grip.

Going back to my original point regarding ammo selection, I recently did some informal (water jug) testing with various ammo from my NAA. What I found was that the cheap-looking Winchester Dynapoint 45 grain rounds penetrated five gallon jugs of water, made a hole in the face of a sixth jug and the bullet rebounded and was found in the fifth jug. Just as the human body isn't made of wood or gel, I realize that we aren't made of water jugs. Still, at point blank range that should be plenty of penetration.
__________________

Last edited by JAB; 09-13-2011 at 06:37 PM.
JAB is offline  
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-14-2011, 12:33 AM   #2
torrent
Grand Poobah
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,425
Liked 22 Times on 20 Posts
Likes Given: 11

Default

The one thing that is always missing from ANY test is bone density. Stop and consider that a bullet that will consistently penetrate 16" of gelatin may only break a few ribs or deflect off a rib and not penetrate a person at all. I would like to see a test done on cadavers because that would be as true as one could get.

__________________

If the right thing to do was easy everybody would do it.

torrent is offline  
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-14-2011, 02:47 AM   #3
HardShell
Grand Poobah
 
HardShell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Slapout, Alabama (Just as rural as it sounds.)
Posts: 2,677
Liked 150 Times on 131 Posts
Likes Given: 15

Default

All of these (except the Laser-25 ) have served me as a BUG at some time in the past, long before today's diminuitive .380s and 9mms were on the market.




I was comfortable with them in that limited role at the time but, without a doubt, there are much better choices in the same size/weight class these days.

__________________
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.
HardShell is offline  
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-14-2011, 01:54 PM   #4
JAB
Grand Poobah
 
JAB's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 2,708
Liked 166 Times on 120 Posts
Likes Given: 42

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JAB View Post
A By 'very informal' I mean that shooting targets tacked to a tree in a wooded area at my sister's where it is safe to shoot, I found four of the six bullets fired from the .25 lying at the base of the tree looking like they could be reloaded and fired, again. They literally just hit the tree and fell.
Thinking more about this, it wasn't the Phoenix from which I specifically observed those results. It was my mom's tip-up barrel Taurus .25.
__________________
JAB is offline  
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-14-2011, 07:10 PM   #5
Picatinny_Pete
Grand Poobah
 
Picatinny_Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,553
Liked 61 Times on 53 Posts
Likes Given: 12

Default

Hello,

This debate was started by another member Ghost Chili who proposed that 22 Magnum 1 1/8" NAA revolver merited considration as back-up gun in 22 Magnum with ballistics of 1000 FPS witjh a 40 grain bullet. I did a little research and found that in many ways the 25 ACP was actually showing better gelatin results than the NAA 22 Magnum revolver.

22 Magnum vs. 25 ACP Ballistics in Mousguns

I figure there had to be a reason and found out why. The below results are ballistic test results from NAA for their 1 1/8" & 1 5/8" mini-revolvers .

1 1/8"

http://www.northamericanarms.com/ball_mag18

1 5/8"

http://www.northamericanarms.com/ball_mag58

The below results are generic for the 25 ACP

http://www.ballistics101.com/25_acp.php

I noticed right away that the 22 magnum results from the NAA 22 Magnum revolver were much slower in many cases than the cited 40 grain bullet at 1000 FPS. The 22 magnum and 25 ACP from short barreled handguns have almost identical ballistics in fact. This really shouldn't be a surprise since both cartridges have nearly identical operating pressures. The difference is that the 25 was designed for short barrel pistols and the 22 Magnum for rifles.

Why A 25 ACP ACP Auto over a 22 NAA magnum mini-revolver?

I still think the big majority of small 25 ACP automatics are better BUG's for self defense than the 22 NAA magnum mini-revolver for a few good reasons.

Fire Power

-Eight to six rounds in a plam sized automatic beats five in a palm sized revolver.

-The shots from a automatic can be shot faster than a single action revolver that has to be manually cocked for every shot. You can get several shots off at an opponent in the time it would take you to do one from the 22 NAA magnum mini-revolver.

-Ballistically the 22 magnum has no advantage over the 25 ACP in short barrel lengths. The centerfire case is also stronger and fires more reliably.

Tactical Advantage & Weapon Retention

-The 25 ACP pistols can all be magazine loaded much faster than the standard 22 NAA magnum mini-revolver.

-The 22 NAA magnum mini-revolver has no proprietary to the user features. You cock it and pull the trigger and it fires. A Colt 25ACP Junior for comparison has the following features not on the 22 NAA magnum mini-revolver; safety/slide hold open, magazine eject button, & magazine safety. I mention this since this thought was expressed.

Quote:
For me, the most likely use of a BUG would be as a 'get off me' gun to be used literally at contact distance as a belly gun when the proximity of an assailant or grappling with said assailant might make getting to/using a primary impossible.
In such a situation often you might be disarmed and your handgun used against you. Being defensive we can't choose who we're in that grapple with. Your oppenents experience, size, strength, knowledge, or plain luck may give him a decisive advantage over you. The extra features on a 25 Auto such as a safety or magazine disconnect mean if you're losing control you can briefly disable it if just for a few seconds to allow you an escape or access another weapon. The 22 NAA magnum mini-revolver with no such features is easy to use, but that can also be an advantage for your oppenent too.

Some Other Thoughts

Nothing's concrete, but I have noticed that for those people who don't have much money the initial investment in an used 25 ACP is around $100 less than 22 NAA magnum mini-revolver. Typically I don't see a huge number of rounds being shot with either 22 NAA magnum mini-revolvers, or 25 ACP's at the range so I don't think ammo price is a large factor.
The 22 NAA magnum mini-revolver is a niche handgun now, and the 25 ACP may be soon with the increasing sale of similar sized pistols in 32 ACP and 380 Auto. I still have a use for my 25 ACP Colt Junior Automatic, and carry it when the situation warrants, as do I with my S&W 36 revolver, P-32, or Glock 26. Ultimately a handgun is a tool and we use what works best for us.

Best Regards:
__________________
Picatinny_Pete is offline  
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-15-2011, 01:44 PM   #6
JAB
Grand Poobah
 
JAB's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 2,708
Liked 166 Times on 120 Posts
Likes Given: 42

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Picatinny_Pete View Post
Hello,

Ultimately a handgun is a tool and we use what works best for us.

Best Regards:
On that we certainly agree. As I said, I don't consider this a 'debate' so much as a discussion of varying opinions. Truly, I don't believe that there is a 'right' answer, just a 'right' choice for each individual. For me and my way of thinking, the NAA mini remains the 'right' choice for a BUG over a .25acp or pretty much any other handgun for the reasons I stated. Also, based on my own observances of shooting the two, I truly believe the terminal performance of .22WMR from an NAA is superior (although it isn't as if either is exactly a 'powerhouse'.) Of course, a lot of the reason for my choice likely goes back to the fact that, while I do have semiautos in my carry rotation because of certain factors, I will always like and trust revolvers more.

Honestly, I just thought this thread would be interesting because I like discussing things like this. Partly, too, it is because until very recently I was a 'fan' of the .25. My very first handgun was a Titan .25 that worked very well. Largely because of the nostalgia associated with that, I think, I liked the .25 out of all proportion to what it was/could do. For a long time, I would defend the .25 to those who said things like, "If you shoot someone with a .25 and they find out about it then they will be mad." However, seeing that the bullets fired from my mom's Taurus .25 hit that tree and simply fell to the ground in an almost cartoonish fashion has left me completely disillusioned with the .25acp. I guess I feel a little 'betrayed' now that I realize that the .25 really is that weak. That doesn't mean it is useless - any gun is still better than no gun. Also, for the most part, I don't think the majority of us are going to face male silverback gorillas on crack who will keep coming through a hail of bullets to strangle us with their bare hands, burn our house and eat our dog. For most folks (including most potential assailants) I would say that getting shot is getting shot and the .25 is certainly capable of shooting as is the NAA mini.
__________________

Last edited by JAB; 09-15-2011 at 04:06 PM.
JAB is offline  
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-15-2011, 01:57 PM   #7
jonnin
Grand Poobah
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,034
Liked 113 Times on 88 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by torrent View Post
The one thing that is always missing from ANY test is bone density. Stop and consider that a bullet that will consistently penetrate 16" of gelatin may only break a few ribs or deflect off a rib and not penetrate a person at all. I would like to see a test done on cadavers because that would be as true as one could get.

On the other hand, a small bullet that hits a bone will often tumble or bounce around and cause massive internal bleeding. The best terminal ballistics I have found all say that any "standard" pistol round under 200 grains will fail to penetrate and may bounce at least some of the time. Cadaver tests are out there but hard to find and rare. Lot of folks do it at home with a large animal such as a pig and some even fire into cheap bony meat from the market with various approaches.
__________________
jonnin is offline  
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-15-2011, 07:06 PM   #8
Picatinny_Pete
Grand Poobah
 
Picatinny_Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,553
Liked 61 Times on 53 Posts
Likes Given: 12

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JAB View Post
Honestly, I just thought this thread would be interesting because I like discussing things like this. Partly, too, it is because until very recently I was a 'fan' of the .25. My very first handgun was a Titan .25 that worked very well. Largely because of the nostalgia associated with that, I think, I liked the .25 out of all proportion to what it was/could do. For a long time, I would defend the .25 to those who said things like, "If you shoot someone with a .25 and they find out about it then they will be mad." However, seeing that the bullets fired from my mom's Taurus .25 hit that tree and simply fell to the ground in an almost cartoonish fashion has left me completely disillusioned with the .25acp. I guess I feel a little 'betrayed' now that I realize that the .25 really is that weak.
JAB,

I have had the same thing happen but with a 44 caliber SA revolver. The bullets flew out and hit the cardboard target leaving a big dent, but bouncing off. All my guest (my minister) could do was look at the revolver, look at the target and comment "You mean they actually fought Indians with those? Boy they must of been brave." I was the victim of some squib rounds and I suspect you were too. I too ended up trading that revolver bot for a different set of reasons.

The weird thing about blowback and delayed blowback pistols and rifles is that in some instances they'll function fine with light loads. The pressure in the case has to be enough to only eject the round and cycle another into the chamber. There was one instance with a Seecamp LWS 32 where some powderless 32 ACP rounds shot the bullet out of the bore. The bullets landed in front of the shooter and cycled the pistol! Interestingly, the Seecamp LWS series of pistols started as 25 ACP's and have been upsized now to 380 Auto. I suspect if you used Fiocchi or Sellier & Belliot your results may have been a little different with the tree.

As to the effectiveness of the little 22 Magnum NAA revolver (1 5/8 version) I ran across this.

http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/a-victim-s-gun-battle-1.400030

The survivors account follows:

Quote:
Proud Boer
March 9, 2009, 03:54 AM

Those of us who enjoy firearms in general and handguns in particular usually spend a lot of time practicing for the day we need to defend our loved ones and ourselves against attack. I am one of those individuals who have been fascinated by firearms and shooting since 10 years old, starting with my first BB gun. Since 1983 I've been a regular pistol and revolver shooter, competing over the years in Cowboy Action Shooting, Defensive Pistol Shooting as well as Practical Pistol Shooting.

Cowboys, Boers and the history of the rugged individuals who have invented our great modern world, have always interested me. In South Africa violent crime is high and therefore I am grateful for my mindset of self-reliance as I now live in the heart of the current day "wild west".

On the 8th of May 2008, I faced off a gang of three armed goblins who in the weeks preceding my attack, had robbed and killed numerous victims. These scumbags attacked me in front of my wife and daughter in the drive of my house at 20h00. I had just returned from a formal business function to launch the head office of a new dental insurance in Cape Town and was wearing a tuxedo and therefore only carrying single action .22 Magnum N.A.A. revolver. They wanted my house keys as well as the keys to my new Mercedes Benz SUV which I was driving. With their firearms pointed at me, I drew mine (thank God for years of practice), and shot the apparent leader of that gang in the chest - he screamed like a stuck pig and staggered backwards. The first thing I did was run for cover. As the other two were only about 20 feet away from me, bullets rained down on me as I hid momentarily behind a tree in my drive. In this exchange I was hit in the left arm (but actually felt nothing) and I returned fire hitting the first one of the two remaining goblins in the groin. He ran away to the getaway car standing in the road, shouting and crying and shooting into the air like a drunk Mexican officer during the Battle of the Alamo. There was one left besides the one who I shot first still staggering around.He still had his gun in hand and tried to point it again in my direction. I gave him another round to the chest and he disappeared to the getaway vehicle, fatally wounded as I was to find out in the days that followed. The last one had to run past me to get out of my drive and being the coward that these scum normally are, couldn't quite muster the courage. As I pointed my revolver and fired at him, the revolver blew up in my hand and I had no choice but to take him on bare handed. I smacked him to the ground by punching him in the face as the fact that I was now unarmed seemed to give him some courage. As he fell, he pulled off a shot and hit me in the right arm. He then turned and ran as he realised I was ready to fight to the death and he wasn't feeling well with a smashed nose.

My wife, at this stage, had taken my .45 A.C.P. out and passed it to me through the window, giving me clear instructions to finish them off. They got away only with my bullets in them and in pain and I was lucky enough to win the fight.

What did I learn from this?

1. Always carry a gun no matter how small it may be. Even when the last thing you expect is to be attacked, don't let your logic of statistical probability of not being in mortal danger lull you into a false sense of security.

2. Remember that in a gun fight - cover is king!

3. Practice regularly to allow for the advantage of competent surprise,
AND
most importantly, if you want to win a gun fight, the most important factor is resolve and commitment. You have to have the inner courage to decide in a split second that you are going to win the fight irrespective of the consequences and then carry out that plan with determination and courage that surprises and stuns your "would be" attackers.

I hope that the above sheds some light and gives some valuable insight into a real life gun fight. I would like to hear from others on this forum who have experienced the same or similar situations.

Proud Boer.
The full write up is at:

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-433867.html

Clearly, the 22 NAA Magnum can save your life though it seems the wounds inflicted by the revolver from the blow-up were almost as bad as the wounds inflicted by the Goblin.

Best Wishes:

PS: I still think more shots are better Take Care
__________________
Picatinny_Pete is offline  
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-15-2011, 11:10 PM   #9
johnny9
 
johnny9's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 226
Liked 2 Times on 1 Posts

Default

a mouse gun thread w/out a seecamp???????

something must be wrong,as other than the old and true baby browning a seecamp 25,then 32,then 380 as of nowadays and naa 22,s is about the best mouse guns ever made imho
seecamp 380 being number 1 all the way

__________________
johnny9 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-16-2011, 03:11 AM   #10
Picatinny_Pete
Grand Poobah
 
Picatinny_Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,553
Liked 61 Times on 53 Posts
Likes Given: 12

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny9 View Post
a mouse gun thread w/out a seecamp???????

something must be wrong,as other than the old and true baby browning a seecamp 25,then 32,then 380 as of nowadays and naa 22,s is about the best mouse guns ever made imho
seecamp 380 being number 1 all the way
Nah,

Nothings wrong only Seecamp 5000 LWS 25 ACP pistol's were made from 1981 to 1985 when production ceased, just not that many around to make it into a thread about 22 Magnum vs. 25 ACP.

Best Regards:
__________________
Picatinny_Pete is offline  
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply


Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Go Back   KTOG - Kel Tec Owners Group Forum > Other > Other Guns

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New NAA Mini ksmoose Other Guns 4 03-16-2011 11:03 PM
A PMR mini grymph PMR-30 17 09-10-2010 11:56 PM
SU-16X vs. Mini 14 Maurice419 SU-16 27 03-31-2010 04:26 PM
$$$ for crime guns and felons w/ guns Eric_in_Nola The Counter 5 06-07-2008 03:23 AM
my mini guns. JERRY-S. Other Guns 12 02-11-2008 10:13 PM