does a man really need a .22 caliber revolver?

[mg357]

Dear Smith and Wesson Forum, I have a question for my fellow forum members. Does a man really need a .22 caliber revolver? The reason that i am asking is because i was at my favorite gunshop yesterday and when i saw how high the prices were for .22 caliber revolvers, All i could think was Does a man really need a .22 caliber revolver? any and all help in answering this would be really appreciated by me sincerely and respectfully mg357 a proud member of the Smith and Wesson Forum.

 

[Maximumbob54]

My preference would be that you should at least have a rimfire rifle and handgun of some sort. They are just too useful, affordable, practical, and most of all, fun. But as to do you @#$% a .22 revolver… I try not to use that dirty dirty four letter word with my habit… I couldn’t even type it…

 

[kingcobra07]

22 Caliber revolver

I can't seem to find a reason to add a .22 revolver to My humble collection. They may be fun to shoot but don't really have a SD value to Me. I'll stick to 9mm and .357. Steve AKA kingcobra07

 

[chessail 77]

As my wife stated when I told her I did not need such and such a pistol and decided not to buy it...."you passed need about four pistols back" Get it if you want it and will enjoy it, but be patient and get one at a fair price...

 

[Mack]

That is a personal decision but here are a few things they are useful for.
1. Double action trigger/target practice, to become a good double action shooter it takes a lot of live fire practice .22 is a cheap way to get it.
2. Training inexperienced shooters, like starting a new driver off with a manual transmission starting a shooter off with a DA revolver always made a lot of sense to me. Once you master the more difficult skill set transitioning to simpler mechanical devices is a lot easier. There are states that if you want to conceal carry both revolvers and autos you must get a revolver permit and take your test with a revolver. Sadly now days too many look for the easy way not the right way.
3. Ammo versatility, you have a wide range of ammo from CB caps that are as quite as a pellet gun to high velocity rounds that are good for small game hunting. For this reason I also like pump or lever action rifles.

 

[tbury]

.22 revolvers excel as training tools. They allow the revolver shooter affordable practice ammunition and are the preferred tool to teach young shooters the art of shooting. I have a couple of .22 pistols (Browning) which I prefer for plinking; but for training new shooters my 17-2 is my best tool. It also is great for working on my single or double action revolver trigger control.

 

[nawilson]

I have tried convincing my wife that I *need* all guns, so the answer is yes.

Seriously, they are a good way to practice. 22 LR is so much cheaper than centerfire ammo that you can recoup your costs pretty quickly (unless you reload).

 

[wbraswell]

To me, until you go to the range, and spend time with a quality .22, like a K22, and quality .22 ammo, you really don't know how well you can shoot. Eliminating muzzle blast and recoil, as much as possible, allows finer honing of your shooting skills.

 

[410bore]

i love the ones that i have.....cheap to shoot, quiet, ammo is abundant, and the guns are just neat in .22

 

[kenjen]

in my part of the woods i don't know anybody that dosen't own one. so i would say yes.

 

[carl3989]

Re. The humble 22lr.

I frequently encounter comments by so called gun enthusiasts that denigrate the 22lr revolver. While there may be cheaply made 22s so are there cheaply made 9mms. However knowledgeable gun enthusiasts appreciate the precision delivered by a nicely made 22lr. My collection runs from big to small and if I had to choose the humble 22lr would be one of the last I would give up.

And here is my 17-6, they cost the manufacturer the same amount to produce. (

 

[fyimo]

There are a number of reasons to own a 22 pistol whether it is a revolver or semi auto.

The first one is that they allow for a lot of practice and trigger time for next to no cost because the ammo is so cheap. The basic's of shooting have nothing to do with how much recoil a gun has but with sight picture, trigger control, and consistent stance.

The second is they are fun to shoot and great for teaching new shooters how to shoot.

The third for me anyway is that when my grandkids come I can take them to the range I belong to and set down a brick of ammo and they can shoot to their hearts content and all that quality time costs less the $20.

S&W 22 revolvers are expensive and used ones have really jumped in price the last two years as ammo prices went up and ammo was hard to find. Many shooters bought a 22 to continue shooting because a couple of bricks off 22 ammo gives many days of shooting time.

I find the question a little funny because most of the forum members who have bought one S&W revolver end up with more then one soon after getting the first one and shooting it. I know because I bought my first one 3 years ago and now I have five.

 

[snubbiefan]

I think it depends on where you live and what you plan/can do with it and maybe even if you can reload for the larger calibers. You can shoot the larger calibers about as cheaply as you can the 22. The bullet cost is the only real drawback and if you have a neighbor like I do who cast a few hundred a week and gives you all you want, you can reload 38-special, or the 32 variants for around 6-7 cents a round.

Not trying to draw anyone into the continuous argument over the 22 as a SD round, but it is all some people can comfortably shoot. If you live out in the country like I do...the 22 in an invaluable tool for plinking and for range work as well. If all I had was a 38, the cost of the ammo to just fool-around like some people do would be prohibitive...unless you reload.

If it is strictly for HD, then I can easily see the point of...why bother and a 38 (or whatever) truly meets the need and a 22 may be in the way around your house.

In my personal family situation....the wife can only handle the 22 and her little 10.5-ounce (expensive) 317 would have to be pried from her hands to get it away from her. It's the only thing she can comfortably shoot (has had a trigger job and Wolff springs). I would hate to take 3-rounds of CCI shot-shells in the face and then let her take her time to see where she wanted to place the remaining 5-rounds at her discretion after my eyes were shot-out.

The 22 has it's place. Can they be had cheaper than at the S&W store....you bet. I think if the 22 was eliminated or discontinued....it would be like taking away the right to vote. Lots of us grew-up with them and I would hate to see the caliber go away. It's like mom's apple pie. If I had to choose one weapon to keep....it would be a 22.

 

[bubbiesdad]

My preference would be that you should at least have a rimfire rifle and handgun of some sort. They are just too useful, affordable, practical, and most of all, fun. But as to do you @#$% a .22 revolver… I try not to use that dirty dirty four letter word with my habit… I couldn’t even type it…

As my wife stated when I told her I did not need such and such a pistol and decided not to buy it...."you passed need about four pistols back" Get it if you want it and will enjoy it, but be patient and get one at a fair price...

I have tried convincing my wife that I *need* all guns, so the answer is yes.

Seriously, they are a good way to practice. 22 LR is so much cheaper than centerfire ammo that you can recoup your costs pretty quickly (unless you reload).

It I only owned firearms thast I "needed", then my collection would be reduced drastically.

 

[PMRet]

Yes, for all the reasons listed and more. And a lot of folks obviously agree, because they are in great demand even with the prices so high.

 

[ldp4570]

Oh man!! I wouldn't know what to do without atleast one 22 rifle and handgun. The Horror!!!!!!

 

[bubbiesdad]

I can't seem to find a reason to add a .22 revolver to My humble collection. They may be fun to shoot but don't really have a SD value to Me. I'll stick to 9mm and .357. Steve AKA kingcobra07

A .22 is better than a towel, or a bottle of shampoo.

Police ID slain home invasion suspect  | ajc.com

 

[chp]

Because a person can shoot at a certain level of skill/accuracy/speed with a rimfire does not necessarily mean he can also do it with a centerfire.

However, if you can't do it with a rimfire, you certainly can't do it with a centerfire.

A good practice tool . . .

 

[Cpo1944]

Dear Smith and Wesson Forum, I have a question for my fellow forum members. Does a man really need a .22 caliber revolver? The reason that i am asking is because i was at my favorite gunshop yesterday and when i saw how high the prices were for .22 caliber revolvers, All i could think was Does a man really need a .22 caliber revolver? any and all help in answering this would be really appreciated by me sincerely and respectfully mg357 a proud member of the Smith and Wesson Forum.

Absolutely YES!!!

No gun collection is complete without one. I almost always take a .22 to my range and shoot it first to get "warmed up" and on target, then I switch to my center fire stuff.

.22 is also indispensable for training new shooters and kids.

I think if I had to part with my guns, one of the .22`s would be second to last to go. A.357 would be the last to go.

PS.I know it`s probably sacrilege here ,but my all time fav. is a 4 inch blue **** Diamondback

 

[Erich]

Mine (a 1947 K-22) gets used for training newbies and for checking the chrony and for calming flinches that folks develop and for inexpensive target work. I know I could use it for small game and for putting down varmints in the yard. It also has class.

I don't know if any other man needs those things, but I have a use for my .22 revolver.

(Oh, and I also have a nifty Bowen-customized .22 Mag Bearcat that's just cooler than a fan. I doubt anyone needs that, though.)