The touted Stinger comes in at 1640fps and 191 lbs with a little 32gr bullet. Typical 22LR is 1255fps with 140lbs of force at the barrel (Wildcats, Blazer, ect.) The magnum cartridge is almost 2x more powerful though. Unless the revolvers lose a lot more energy from the magnum then they do from the LR (and maybe they just do). My numbers reflect using a rifle but should scale down to a pistol. The 22Mag is not a little more powerful than the 22LR, it is 2 to 3x more powerful. These figures all seem low for the 22Mag. There is only "what cartridge and load will work best for this application". In a lifetime of shooting and studying the affects of various bullets, cartridges, and loads, I've learned that their is truly no such thing as one being better when comparing cartridges. 22 LR at the same pending on bullet weight, velocity, and construction. When the bullet slows a bit, you might get better penetration when compared to the. I say "maybe better penetration at longer ranges" because velocity causes expansion, and expansion decreases penetration. What the maggie will give you, depending on the load and what bullet is used, is better expansion, and maybe better penetration at longer ranges. The coyote is invariably dead within a couple of seconds. I can't remember a single time I did this that the bullet didn't pass completely through the coyote, and go into the dirt on the far side. I've shot many an unlucky coyote through it's broadside chest with a ~4" Colt Woodsman loaded with mini-mags. 22 LR, but does it make it "better"?įirst, what does velocity get you? Deeper penetration? Depends. 22 mag generally has more velocity than the. angle (up or down doesnt matter though most are up into trees) at about 50 feet.To be very honest, if the comparison is to be truly fair, there are some qualifiers that should be considered before making a decision of "which is best". I keep one old rifle sighted -0-for them at about a 30deg. So, given that they are a short range proposition anyway only you can decide if they group well enough in your gun for whatever you need to pop give ‘em a go if you have a need for such a loading and see how they do. bullet that more ‘thwack’ and should drive deeper in a yard varmint. The Quiets raise the bar for me, the velo’s I chono’ed were much more consistent than the CBs, the groups better at 50yd and the 40gr. I cant remember the last time I saw Longs on a shelf and Shorts are rare around here.ĬBswere not even in my awareness back then and even now are hard to find on a shelf and only good for schootzin-plinkin or small yard varmints same 29gr. The Longs were pretty much the same ballistics but the Shorts were cheaper. velo Shorts squirrel hunting because they were not noisy, pop one and the squirrels might disappear, but not for long. It requires a bit more concentration, but it's worth it IMO. The end result: 5-shot groups consistently under 1" at 40 yards, what I consider the maximum effective range for this round on ground squirrels and starlings (also the max distance from my garage door to the garden where these pests congregate). So, time to really buckle down and make each shot count. At only 700 fps, the bullet's dwell time in the barrel is almost twice that of a high velocity round, meaning any small movement immediately after pulling the trigger will throw the shot off. Thinking about it for a while, I realized that the low velocity would require that I treat the gun more like an air rifle when shooting. Running it over my Chrony, I observed that the SD wasn't any worse than normal high velocity ammo that grouped far better, so that wasn't the culprit. It was frustrating, but I really wanted the round to work since it's so quiet, and CB Shorts won't feed from my rifle's magazine. I'd have a good group going, then bam, a flier I couldn't quite figure out. In the past it was always so-so, with groups ranging from 1" to 2" at 40 yards. I finally figured this out yesterday while trying to squeeze the best accuracy possible out of this ammo.