close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

9mm or .22 Mag?

Discussion in 'Caliber Corner' started by fgutie35, Jun 9, 2010.

  1. I'm debating on two pistols for self defense. I'm currently carrying a G19 with a M-Tac IWB holster. I'm pretty happy with it, but for summers and the quick trip to the store, I would like something light and slim that I can just put in my pocket or clip to my pants. I was looking at the Kel-Tec PF-9 and I was pretty convinced that is what I wanted, but now I see on CDNN catalog the PMR-30 which is suppose to be the poor man's FiveSeven. I called CDNN, but they don't have them in stock right now, but will be according to them. Their price will be $299.00. Now I'm tempted and willing to give up the PF-9 for the fire power 30rds of .22 Mag. So my question is. How does the two calibers compare when used as Defensive pistols? (I know there is a .22mag round that can be used for SD):dunno:
     
  2. sdrnavy

    sdrnavy

    129
    0
    Dec 20, 2009
    I have a PF-9 , It has never failed. I carry Federal 115 +P HST: I do want a PMR-30 though ! The Bass Pro Shop had a wide selection of .22 mag last time that I was there, About $11.00 a box of 50 on average.
     

    Last edited: Jun 9, 2010

  3. fredj338

    fredj338

    21,941
    1,052
    Dec 22, 2004
    so.cal.
    Wow, I know, I know, shot placement is king, but seriously. The 22mag is a nice rodent basher, not a serious SD caliber. Better than no gun, just barely. There are far too many subcompact 9mm, even 380, not to mention the J-frame snubs in 38sp, to choose a 22mag as a SD weapon. As always, JMO.
    The ammo isn't even cheap enough to consider that as a reason.
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2010
  4. Well, I was considering it after I saw a video on YouTube that compares both .22Mag and 5.7x28 rounds and both have the same expansion and similar damage up to 12" of wet phone books. After that, is the 5.7x28 alone.
     
  5. gunreviewonmyspace

    gunreviewonmyspace havegunwillgo

    Get the one you will shoot more. That will be the one you will be better with. That is what matters.
     
  6. voyager4520

    voyager4520 -----

    8,589
    0
    Apr 25, 2009
    SE Colorado
    Out of the two I'd say PF-9. But make sure you get one with the metal mag release and don't ever dry-fire it without a snap cap.
     
  7. Mountain10mm

    Mountain10mm

    795
    109
    Dec 14, 2007
    Colorado
    9mm.


    A .22mag really isn't regarded as defensive caliber. The 5.7 has similar ballistics to a .22mag - out of a RIFLE. The 5.7 also has a better self defense bullet selection, even so the effectiveness of the 5.7 as a defensive caliber, with civilian available bullets, is highly debatable. Truly a gun is better than no gun, given strict size and weight requirements, I think there are better alternatives to any .22 such as the new Ruger LCP/LCR, Kel-tec, Kahr, or the venerable air-weight J-frames, all of which (except for maybe the Kahr) fully-loaded should weigh less than a pound.

    Keep in mind that you won't be shooting, or even drawing, your gun unless your life or limb is in mortal danger - with such high stakes, do you want to literally put your life on the line with a .22mag?
     
  8. fredj338

    fredj338

    21,941
    1,052
    Dec 22, 2004
    so.cal.
    Well said.:wavey:
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2010
  9. HAMMERHEAD

    HAMMERHEAD

    3,445
    18
    Dec 20, 2002
    Minnesota
    Was the .22 mag fired from a rifle or short barreled pistol?

    I like the .22 mag, my CZ Lux is my favorite long gun, but would never stake my life to it out of a pistol when a 9mm or .38 spl was available.
     
  10. HAMMERHEAD

    HAMMERHEAD

    3,445
    18
    Dec 20, 2002
    Minnesota
    Never mind, found it, 24" rifle for the .22 mag.
    Can't assume performance from a 4" pistol will be anything like it is from a 24" rifle.
     
  11. AK_Stick

    AK_Stick AAAMAD

    17,397
    1,120
    Jan 20, 2004
    Alaska, again (for now)

    I'd look hard at the terminal performance of the 5.7 at Ft Hood, and in the few LEO shoots its had, then ask yourself if you felt that was good enough to trust your life to.


    Killed 13, wounded 30..... Almost all at close range, and defenseless.....

    Fairly piss poor performance if you ask me.
     
  12. PATRICE

    PATRICE . . . . .

    782
    0
    Jun 3, 2009
  13. den888

    den888

    5,068
    0
    Sep 4, 2009
    SF Bay Area
    I would say that a .22 mag is not a serious SD/HD round.
     
  14. ROG

    ROG

    155
    0
    May 19, 2006
    USA
    According to news reports most of the wounded survivors at Fort Hood were shot in extremities. But regardless, it is also true that the vast majority of victims (680+) in the Oklahoma City bombing survived. That does not mean a bomb is an ineffective means of killing someone.

    But if you like, we can compare Fort Hood to incidents where other bullets were used. The Columbine massacre involved roughly twice as many rounds fired (mostly 9mm), and resulted in an almost identical number of dead. The Virginia Tech massacre (also 9mm) resulted in about twice as many dead, but the victims were shot roughly twice as many times as the Fort Hood victims. The North Hollywood bank robbery (mostly 7.62x39mm) resulted in a large number of wounded and no fatalities at all.
     
  15. srt-4_jon

    srt-4_jon

    90
    0
    Jan 14, 2010
    Well said. The other reason against a .22 mag SD gun is the rimfire bullets themselves.
     
  16. AK_Stick

    AK_Stick AAAMAD

    17,397
    1,120
    Jan 20, 2004
    Alaska, again (for now)

    Many of the victims were hit multiple times, and alot of them had wounds in both extremities and the torso. Only 8 of the wounded soldiers have been able to go on the deployment they were spooling up for. Alot of the shots were also taken at extremely close range in comparison to VT and Columbine. I don't know where you get that the people at VT were shot "twice as many times"

    They only give an approximate round count for VT, and Ft Hood, and they don't give names of wounded, or locations of hits, I'd be very interested in how you came about those stats. What I know of people who were shot, comes from medics stationed on Hood, who were either on station, or at the hospital some of the wounded came to.


    However, almost every shooting involving the 5.7 seems to end with poor evaluation of the 5.7. Versus the other calibers where poor performance is the exception and not the rule.
     
  17. ROG

    ROG

    155
    0
    May 19, 2006
    USA
    Many of the victims had wounds to extremities only. Many of the others hit in the torso were specifically hit in the lower torso or simply grazed. Some were hit by ricochet fragments or only scraped while escaping.



    News reports state that roughly 100 rounds were fired in the Fort Hood shooting, versus 170 rounds in the VT shooting. The Fort Hood count includes at least 10 rounds of 9mm fired by police officers at the shooter, so roughly half as many rounds were fired at Fort Hood as were fired in the VT shooting. Given the very close range both shootings occurred at, we can conclude that the VT shooting victims were shot more times than the Fort Hood victims.



    A thread posted here awhile back listed most of the wounded and hit locations:

    http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1160561

    A brief Google search of any of the names in the list will yield local or national news reports with details that match up with the list. Most of the information in the list is verifiably accurate, although some of the details (on specifically which organs or bones were destroyed by the bullets, for example) are understandably not included in news reports in many cases.



    I doubt you can produce a verifiable source on said shootings.
     
  18. All right guys, thanks for all the replies. I guess I will have to get the PF-9, then whenever they work out all the bugs of the PMR-30 (which they usually have to do with every new innovative design), then I will save money again to get it.:supergrin:
     
  19. AK_Stick

    AK_Stick AAAMAD

    17,397
    1,120
    Jan 20, 2004
    Alaska, again (for now)
    Most accounts I've seen say he fired "more than 100 rounds" and aren't including rounds fired by the police, but even without that,

    Do you actually believe what you just wrote?

    You have to be kidding, because twice as many rounds were fired, we should conclude they were shot twice as many times?

    :rofl:

    Thats quite possibly the dumbest thing I've seen posted in here since the latest Dr Courtney troll showed up.

    There are plenty of first hand accounts of use of the 5.7 available if you know where to look. I would suggest you do some reading/searching, you might be amazed. Fact is, its a terrible round for un-armored personnel from the handgun. Backed up by the 13 people who took shots to the torso mostly at point blank, and lived.

    The 5.7, makes about as much power as a 22 magnum out of a rifle, which isn't a caliber noted for its impressive terminal performance, power or penetration. But you pop it into a handgun, make it look cool and suddenly people think its high speed.
     
  20. kendric98

    kendric98

    610
    2
    Oct 29, 2008
    Haha a post asking what is better 9mm or .22 mag, that has never happened to the .45. Looks like the war is over .45 wins!:rofl: