# .22 lr vs. .22 mag



## Last Man Standing (Dec 7, 2011)

Title pretty much says it all. Right now my only .22 is a browning SA that is a very sentimental piece for me and I don't really want to ding it up any more than it is. I'm going to start laying some traps here shortly and want sort of a workhorse .22. This is gonna be a gun that I don't really care about beating up a little. But I kind of want a .22 mag, I've never owned one and I've been thinking it might be fun. I figured I could hunt all the same things with it but have a hair more power and maybe make some longer shots. My question to you guys is, Is there any real advantages or disadvantages to the .22 mag vs. a standar .22 lr? other than ammo price which I realize is obviously gonna be worse. I'm also wondering if I use it to dispatch some trapped animals, if the fur is gonna get a lot more damage? Is a .22 mag worth it?


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

I've owned four 22WMR rifles. In 1976 I bought an Ithaca lever action rifle. I found myself in need of some cash once and let it go in '82. I bought a Winchester model 9422M in 1991 or '92. Our own Frisco Pete complained that it was neither fish nor fowl. "As long as you're gonna pay that much for ammo, you might as well get a .223 and be able to reload it. If you're gonna shoot a rimfire, you might as well be using the cheaper 22lr ammo." He changed his mind the first time he saw the Mag drop a jack rabbit at 150 yards. I'll let him tell you the story of how he had to have one of my rifles for a few months, and how many of them he has, or has owned. I sold the 9422M, and wish that I still had it. I hate the tube magazine, but liked the lever action. Plus they've gone up in value. I now own 2 Ruger 7722M rifles. I like the rotary magazine, and the guns work flawlessly, but they just aren't as pretty as the old Winchester. 

The fur will get more damage if you shoot anything with an expanding bullet. The Mag produces enough velocity to actually make a bullet expand. But they make solids that don't expand and at one time you could find 50 grain bullets that were slower. The nice thing about the rotary magazine is that you could walk around with the hollow points or ballistic tipped ammo in the gun, and if you walk up to a trap, you could have another magazine loaded with the other type of bullets to switch out in just a second or two.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

The .22 Mag is a great gun for sure. Have you considered a .17 HMR for dispatching trapped critters? My wife bought me a .22 Mag and a .17 HMR, and I tend to use the .17 more often then any other rimfire I have. They both cost about the same for ammo. Or you could just pick up another .22 LR and that would work fine for you too. The funny thing is that you can buy 50 rounds of .22 LR for $1.50 but the cheapest .22 Magnums will cost you $9.00 I don't really see why the price jumps so dramatically. I could see maybe paying twice as much, but it is what it is.


----------



## Frisco Pete (Sep 22, 2007)

_Fishrmn_ summed it all up - the .22 Mag is an excellent hunting round that more than doubles your power and distance over the best .22 LR loads.
From our very extensive experience (multiple cases each shot at varmints) loads like our favorite Winchester Super-X 40-gr JHPs do make a reasonably large exit hole on jackrabbits.

However, there are several ammo options that can reduce this effect. Of course not using HP ammo and using 40-gr FMJ instead is one, but others are Federal's 50-grain JHP load or Winchester's 45 grain copper plated lead Dynapoint bullet that expand, but less violently than the usual JHP.

There is also another choice if you can find it - Winchester's old and almost obsolete .22 WRF (Winchester Rim Fire) ammunition which uses a Lubaloy plated lead flat nose (LFN) 45-gr bullet at a reduced velocity of 1300 fps. Currently it is listed in their Wildcat line. It was designed for the Winchester Model 1890 pump action rifle and was later adapted to Remington and Stevens rifles. Winchester .22 WRF loads used a flat point bullet.
Remington manufactured the cartridge, loaded it with a round nose bullet, and called it the .22 Remington Special. The two are actually the same cartridge and are completely interchangeable.
Basically it works in .22 Win Mag (WMR)-chambered rifles like the .38 Special does in .357 Mag guns. A slightly shorter and less powerful version that the later version was developed from.

The .22 Mag is not a plinking round, but a versatile hunting round that shoots a reasonably heavy bullet that seems to have good power and killing effect on the larger varmints at the trade-off of some trajectory loss due to the light bullet/high velocity of the .17 HMR.


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

I LOVE my .22 Mag.

It hits hard, shoots enough distance to keep me entertained, is cheap enough to shoot, and it is versatile enough to give you enough knock down for large varmints. 

Advantage on the .22 WMR is effective range. Like was previously mentioned, it humiliates the .22 LR when range is taken into consideration. Because it shoots faster, it also carries more energy. Once you buy one and shoot your first jack rabbit and hear the thump it makes when it hits, you will never regret buying that gun after that.

Honestly, I rarely pull out my .22 LR for rabbit hunting anymore. The .22 WMR just does a better job IMO.

Frisco mentioned that this isnt a plinking round. While I agree, I slightly disagree as well. I definitely wouldnt want to spend the whole day shooting it (for the sake of cost), but I personally dont have a problem getting out and seeing how well I can shoot using iron sights (after all, how can I learn the limits of the caliber without playing with it?). But this is definitely a great varmint hunting round best suited for use while hunting.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

I don't own a 22 mag nor have I ever shot one, but just in looking at ballistics I see the 17hmr, which I do have, to be the superior caliber in flatter trajectory, but not quite the energy due to being smaller. The advantage of the 17 may be less pelt damage as you asked about it. From prices mentioned, the ammo is a little bit more, but as much as you would actually be shooting it I think the overall cost difference could be made up in one less hot dog at the gas station.


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

As a hunting round, a .22 mag is fine, but for dispensing animals in traps it is overkill.....makes for a bloody mess skinning and a sizable exit hole to patch. A .22LR is much better in this regard and a .22 short or CB cap works even better than that.

Here is a solution that gives you an excuse to get you a couple new guns, get you a .22 mag rifle for carrying around when you check your traps and a .22 revolver for dispatching critters. You can even buy a revolver with interchangable .22 mag/.22LR cylinders that will allow to shoot everything from .22CB caps to .22mag. I'm sure there are other manufacturers, but Ruger makes their Single Six revolver with interchangable cylinders for around $500.


----------



## Last Man Standing (Dec 7, 2011)

Wow, this is all great info, thanks guys! 


Fowlmouth said:


> Have you considered a .17 HMR for dispatching trapped critters? My wife bought me a .22 Mag and a .17 HMR, and I tend to use the .17 more often then any other rimfire I have.


The thought had crossed my mind. A couple of things I didn't like about were brought up, like huge said,


Huge29 said:


> ...just in looking at ballistics I see the 17hmr, which I do have, to be the superior caliber in flatter trajectory, but not quite the energy due to being smaller.
> ...From prices mentioned, the ammo is a little bit more, but as much as you would actually be shooting it I think the overall cost difference could be made up in one less hot dog at the gas station.


Another beef I got is that I would have to buy another cleaning rod because the one I have wouldn't fit in a .17 ( I've got a carbon fiber tipton rod and they run about 30-ish bucks), this also would require an all new set of jags, brushes, etc. I'm not going to lie, I've never shot a .17 HMR but for some very irrational reason, I don't like them and haven't ever had an itch to buy one. -Ov- 


Kevin D said:


> Here is a solution that gives you an excuse to get you a couple new guns, get you a .22 mag rifle for carrying around when you check your traps and a .22 revolver for dispatching critters. You can even buy a revolver with interchangable .22 mag/.22LR cylinders that will allow to shoot everything from .22CB caps to .22mag. I'm sure there are other manufacturers, but Ruger makes their Single Six revolver with interchangable cylinders for around $500.


I think this is what I'm gonna do. I've got a Ruger SA .22 pistol I could load up with some subsonics and then I'll grab a .22 mag to carry around. Besides, the Ruger has a sweet leather holster and I always feel like a cowboy when I wear it around


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

I own three rifles and a Tarsus revolver in 22 Mag. I have numerous 22 LR guns. I even own two 17 HMR's, you know which ones I carry and shoot the most, those Mags! 

For trap lines I would just use a 22 LR or a short, ain't much call for anything bigger unless you expect to kill some critters you run across while checking your traps. 

When I lived back south I always carried a 22 mag for a truck gun to dispatch vermin while out and about back home, you will be hard pressed to beat those 22 Mag's until you jump to a center fire.

Back in Oklahoma you can use center fire rifles in the fall turkey season, I haven’t found a better caliber yet than the 22 mag for them. It hits hard, and doesn’t destroy the turkey. I tried my 17 a couple of years ago on one of them and was sorely disappointed with the results.

I have a Henry lever action 22 Mag that shoots the best groups I have ever seen out of one, I toped it with one of that new Redfield 2 x 7 x32 scopes with the ballistic crosshairs, I regularly punch paper out to 175 yards with no problem. I don’t know if I would try to make shots on most critters that far, but then again I wouldn’t try it with .22 LR’s or .17 either so it really doesn’t matter. beyond that range is center fire land IMO.


----------



## Last Man Standing (Dec 7, 2011)

Mojo1 said:


> I have a Henry lever action 22 Mag that shoots the best groups I have ever seen out of one, I toped it with one of that new Redfield 2 x 7 x32 scopes with the ballistic crosshairs, I regularly punch paper out to 175 yards with no problem. I don't know if I would try to make shots on most critters that far, but then again I wouldn't try it with .22 LR's or .17 either so it really doesn't matter. beyond that range is center fire land IMO.


This is actually the rifle that I've been looking at. With the reading I've been doing and the good word you put in for it I think I'll go for it. Thanks


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

I grew up using a 22 Mag for everything that I could leagally shoot with it. I started with an old Coast to Coast that I think was made by Mossberg, then a Ruger 7722Mag, and my favorite which was a Ruger Lever action 22Mag that used the same clips as my 77. I have since given two of the rifles away, and traded one for a 22 hornet. I can afford to shoot centerfire as much as I want now, and don't hunt all the same stuff that I did when I was a kid, or I would have a 22 Mag for sure. I took coyotes cleanly at 100yds, and several gray foxes, jackrabbits, racoons, skunks, feral cats, and any other target I could get in the Leupold 4X out to that range or a little further. I would highly recommend the 22Mag especially for "hunting" scenarios. I must agree that it is overkill for dispatching an animal in a trap. -----------SS


----------



## Kdub (Sep 6, 2010)

I can't justify buying a .22 mag. They are an awesome caliber, but for the price of ammo I will just use my .223 if I need something bigger than a .22. I'm kind of weird though. I like all my guns to be of standard caliber allowing me to buy ammo in bulk. In an eow scenario I want simplicity and conformity when it comes to my guns. If I was a collector and had money then sure I would get a .22 mag. Their capabilities over a .22 are impressive.


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

Kdub said:


> I can't justify buying a .22 mag. They are an awesome caliber, but for the price of ammo I will just use my .223 if I need something bigger than a .22. I'm kind of weird though. I like all my guns to be of standard caliber allowing me to buy ammo in bulk. In an eow scenario I want simplicity and conformity when it comes to my guns. If I was a collector and had money then sure I would get a .22 mag. Their capabilities over a .22 are impressive.


I definitely understand your perspective here. And I own both a .223 and .22 WMR. Both have their place, and I would definitely use the .223 for longer distance shots. But the .22 WMR really has its place too. The muzzle blast is much more tolerable than the .223 when in the field and for your average varmint hunter, it gives just enough added range to be worth the expense and you dont have to be as concerned with ricochets ( <--- disclaimer: I am not saying the .22 WMR doesnt ricochet, but the bullet construction generally causes the bullet to fragment limiting the ricochet distance / potential, whereas the .223 bullets generally hold up better upon impact and can still maintain a fair amount more of energy due to weight retention / bullet design, unless someone happens to be using a frangeable bullet like a Varmint Grenade)


----------



## Frisco Pete (Sep 22, 2007)

One other virtue of the .22 Mag over the .223 is that it is quieter which is a plus when hunting closer to settled areas - yet it still does a significantly better job on varmints than a .22LR. 
So it is a nice option in the arsenal.


----------

