[andy]

unless it's shtf, I'd rather have sks, &

a quiet,accurate .22 pistol, really. With a small scope on, say, A 28 oz Mountain Eagle, with a suppressor, a good hand can reliably hit 3" disks at 50 yds, from Weaver. Since nobody HAS to always score when sport hunting, why bother with more, hmm?

 

[andy]

.22 mag rifle has 1/3rd power of 223, sks

and it lacks a subsonic load, and its ammo costs 7-8x as much as 22lr. So it' s not a training load, and it lacks the power of a fighthing load. As a survivalists's load, it lacks the commanality of 223 or .22lr, and the guns lack the military guns rustproofing, threaded muzzles, luminous sights, trigger jobs, ambi safeties, etc. So the .22 mag is neither fish nor fowl in my book. The only one I ever owned was a HS derrigner, and that was 1973, before I knew how feeble the Mag was,how awkward and hard a DA pull the Derringer had, etc.

 

[andy]

Some guys will buy ANYTHING "new".

why bother paying 15c a rd for something that won't do a thing that a 1.8c a rd .22 lr won''t do just as well, hmm?

 

[andy]

160 ft lbs is close, from derringer. From

a rifle, .22 mag has 350 ft lbs. HOwever,a hot load in a locked breech 380 has 350 ft lbs. The .32 is only better because it's an auto,instead of a derringer. The HS DA derringer is a real pos. It has a 25 lb trigger pull, and almost no butt to hang onto, and if you try to lighten the pull, u get missfires (with the stiff brass of .22 mag, at least. .22lr you might be able to "improve" down to a 20 lb pull, but I'd sure take a M21 Beretta, with better sights smithed to it,over any derrringer,regardless of the cartridge or the "power' of the derringer's load.