SharpshooterOPD
Member
This is for my fellow law enforcement firearms instructors (the rest of you please feel free read on if you are so inclined).
Three years ago, when my department adopted the M&P 15 to replace an aging inventory of Marlin Camp Carbines, I was quite happy. Not only had we adopted a superior firearm for use as a patrol rifle, but we had also exchanged the 9mm for the 5.56X45mm thereby improving the terminal effectiveness of our issued long-arms.
As a former Marine, and a veteran of our department's tactical team (which utilizes Colt 9mm carbines), The AR15 platform was second nature to me. Unfortunately, the diminishing number of military veterans coming into the law enforcement field results in a situation where I was in the minority regarding my familiarity with our new rifles. Even though I provided all members of the department with training, I was still not happy with the overall proficiency I was noting in my officers. Not that qualification was particularly difficult (owing largely to our less than challenging state qualification course), but general handling and overall familiarity with the platform was lacking.
The obvious solution to this problem is increased training with the rifles. Enter last year's ammunition shortage; increased ammunition prices; and overtime concerns; and you might imagine the less than enthusiastic response that accompanied my pitch for more range time for the entire department.
Then last year S&W introduced the 15-22. My first thought was "This solves 2/3 of my training budget issue." My remaining question was whether the 15-22 would suffice as an adequate stand-in for the full power rifle. At the beginning of this year, I acquired a 15-22. My initial impression was that it simulated the operating qualities, trigger, and sighting characteristics of the M&P 15 very well. The only control missing is the forward assist and that omission is of little consequence. In contrast, when I evaluated the Colt .22 RF model, I felt the solely cosmetic bolt release and the difference in the operation of the safety lever were sufficient to adversely affect the training value of that rifle.
My feelings for the 15-22 were diminished somewhat when I took it to the range for the first time. With several different brands of ammunition I experienced failures to feed with annoying regularity. Thus, I trip back to Smith&Wesson was arranged. In typical fashion, the 15-22 returned to me within a week. The accompanying document indicated an update to "Current Specifications."
Since that time, the 15-22 has been nearly flawless with every ammunition I have tried, including the much maligned Remington Golden Bullet. In fact, over the course of the several hundred rounds that I've fired through the rifle since it's return, the only problem I have encountered is a very occasional instance where the bolt does not cycle far enough to reset the hammer/trigger. This I blame on the bargain-basement ammunition I've been using, not the rifle itself.
Two days ago, during a mandatory department range session, I finally devoted a portion of the course to the 15-22 (This was strictly training, not for qualification purposes). During the course of the training session, about one thousand rounds of Winchester Wildcat ammunition cycled through the 15-22. In all, there were perhaps 6 or seven instances where the bolt did not reset the fire control. This was not, altogether, bad as it afforded officers an opportunity to practice weapons transition and malfunction clearing drills.
In summation, I would say (subjectively) that the 15-22 provides about 75% of the training value to officers of the full-power AR 15. The only thing missing is the recoil of the 5.56 (and the cost). Accuracy, even at 50 yards, was more than adequate to simulate the results of the bigger round. Beyond this, there was another interesting issue surrounding the use of the 15-22. Officers loved firing it because it is so damn much fun. Enthusiasm, and desire to shoot, are intangible qualities that cannot be instilled, but pay tremendous benefits when they are present in training.
In closing I'll say: the 15-22 does not and will not replace practice/training with the full-power AR 15. It does, however, appear to supplement that training marvelously; and with the funds saved in ammunition costs, administrators may grumble less about overtime concerns. In short, if you are considering a 15-22 (as I was last year). Get one. I doubt that you will regret it.
HRF
Three years ago, when my department adopted the M&P 15 to replace an aging inventory of Marlin Camp Carbines, I was quite happy. Not only had we adopted a superior firearm for use as a patrol rifle, but we had also exchanged the 9mm for the 5.56X45mm thereby improving the terminal effectiveness of our issued long-arms.
As a former Marine, and a veteran of our department's tactical team (which utilizes Colt 9mm carbines), The AR15 platform was second nature to me. Unfortunately, the diminishing number of military veterans coming into the law enforcement field results in a situation where I was in the minority regarding my familiarity with our new rifles. Even though I provided all members of the department with training, I was still not happy with the overall proficiency I was noting in my officers. Not that qualification was particularly difficult (owing largely to our less than challenging state qualification course), but general handling and overall familiarity with the platform was lacking.
The obvious solution to this problem is increased training with the rifles. Enter last year's ammunition shortage; increased ammunition prices; and overtime concerns; and you might imagine the less than enthusiastic response that accompanied my pitch for more range time for the entire department.
Then last year S&W introduced the 15-22. My first thought was "This solves 2/3 of my training budget issue." My remaining question was whether the 15-22 would suffice as an adequate stand-in for the full power rifle. At the beginning of this year, I acquired a 15-22. My initial impression was that it simulated the operating qualities, trigger, and sighting characteristics of the M&P 15 very well. The only control missing is the forward assist and that omission is of little consequence. In contrast, when I evaluated the Colt .22 RF model, I felt the solely cosmetic bolt release and the difference in the operation of the safety lever were sufficient to adversely affect the training value of that rifle.
My feelings for the 15-22 were diminished somewhat when I took it to the range for the first time. With several different brands of ammunition I experienced failures to feed with annoying regularity. Thus, I trip back to Smith&Wesson was arranged. In typical fashion, the 15-22 returned to me within a week. The accompanying document indicated an update to "Current Specifications."
Since that time, the 15-22 has been nearly flawless with every ammunition I have tried, including the much maligned Remington Golden Bullet. In fact, over the course of the several hundred rounds that I've fired through the rifle since it's return, the only problem I have encountered is a very occasional instance where the bolt does not cycle far enough to reset the hammer/trigger. This I blame on the bargain-basement ammunition I've been using, not the rifle itself.
Two days ago, during a mandatory department range session, I finally devoted a portion of the course to the 15-22 (This was strictly training, not for qualification purposes). During the course of the training session, about one thousand rounds of Winchester Wildcat ammunition cycled through the 15-22. In all, there were perhaps 6 or seven instances where the bolt did not reset the fire control. This was not, altogether, bad as it afforded officers an opportunity to practice weapons transition and malfunction clearing drills.
In summation, I would say (subjectively) that the 15-22 provides about 75% of the training value to officers of the full-power AR 15. The only thing missing is the recoil of the 5.56 (and the cost). Accuracy, even at 50 yards, was more than adequate to simulate the results of the bigger round. Beyond this, there was another interesting issue surrounding the use of the 15-22. Officers loved firing it because it is so damn much fun. Enthusiasm, and desire to shoot, are intangible qualities that cannot be instilled, but pay tremendous benefits when they are present in training.
In closing I'll say: the 15-22 does not and will not replace practice/training with the full-power AR 15. It does, however, appear to supplement that training marvelously; and with the funds saved in ammunition costs, administrators may grumble less about overtime concerns. In short, if you are considering a 15-22 (as I was last year). Get one. I doubt that you will regret it.
HRF
......... Oh well, such is Law Enforcement.
I saw it as a simple solution for helping control the cost of rising ammo prices. And to that end, it has done well. I restrict myself to 50 yards or less when using it and does well enough for that. Still waiting for that match grade barrel accuracy to kick in. 
