Firearm Forums - Arms Locker banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,482 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
3 oz 22 silencer, even with poor designalmost 3x as long as the one I made for the beretta, when I was in CO. So John is once again proven to be fos. The M21 is 10.5 ozs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,314 Posts
Proven how? And in what regard. You provide no context, nothing to describe what you’re talking about, and if this is regarding another post, you don’t put this in the same thread, nor even quote what this is about. You’ve proven nothing but the lack of cognitive ability and discipline to make a coherent point. Even if you’re correct in what you’re trying to say, you fail at saying it. The failure means you haven’t proven anything.

See why posting in the right places matters?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,744 Posts
...The M21 is 10.5 ozs.
Wrong, but closer than most things you post. Per Beretta's website, it's 11.8 empty, not 10.5; which is a difference of 12%, and so definitely closer to right than most of your statements. https://www.beretta.com/en-us/21-a-bobcat/

And that's empty weight. Loaded with 8 rds adds another ~1 oz or so, taking it to around 14.
- Plus you claim you use an extended (Taurus) magazine, making it taller and heavier, and slightly increasing ammo weight as well.
- Plus we have to add the weight of the extended and threaded barrel.
- Plus you claim you add an additional metal plate on top of the slide.
- Plus you claim you add a dovetailed sight on that metal plate on top of the slide.
- Plus you claim you add an extended speed safety.
- Plus you claim you add a manual slide lock.
- Plus you claim you add an extractor.
- Plus we have to add the weight of a suppressor.
- Plus you claim you add a luminous sight onto the suppressor.


m21 Beretta needs steel cap added to the slide so that you have the needed metal to fit a dovetailed rear sight and the extractor. a vertical pin thru the slide retains the extractor.

...I preferred the speed safety lever and cocked and locked carry anyway. I put the luminous front sight on the can and the rear of the slide, and the sight that I dovetailed into the thread protector was just plain blued steel.
...m21 Beretta pocket .22. 7.5" OAL. needs sights, extractor, slide lock, the longer PT22 Taurus mag, speed safety...
...the SA-only, re-worked M21 Beretta as my only .22lr handgun. I'd have about $900 in it, by the time the luminous sights were fitted.

When you add the silencer to the M21, you can hunt any time and anyplace. That 9" 15 oz, 2" at 25m combo constantly entertaining on the trail. Adding the can would be another $400...
All those added items mean added weight; no way around it. I know you don't like being reminded of the laws of physics, but they're laws that simply can't be ignored anywhere other than a drug-induced fantasy.

So starting at around 14 ounces (loaded with the modified, longer Taurus magazine) before all those adds, what is the finished weight likely to be? I honestly don't know, because I've never kludged up my 21A that way.

But I do know that when you start with a gun that weighs 13.5-14 oz loaded, add all the stuff you say you add, and then add a silencer on top of everything else, you don't end up with a finished weight of 15 oz.



A 9" long, 15 oz silenced M21 .22lr Beretta AND a Sig P938, also 9 ozs, weigh no more, (both fully loaded)...
Then again, I don't think a one-pound Sig P938 weight only 9 ounces either...
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigEd

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,376 Posts
I don't know why you bothered to bail him out on this post. Even though he was proven, once again, to be wrong, his post was nonsense and weapons grade stupid without any context.
In Melvins defence, while he generally lacks "clarity" (can't think of another word without insulting him), he does bring out well thought out responses from others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,744 Posts
I don't know why you bothered to bail him out on this post. Even though he was proven, once again, to be wrong, his post was nonsense and weapons grade stupid without any context.
Didn't at all mean to bail him out of anything; was trying to point out detailed examples of ignorance & stupidity, rather than the tempting (and completely true) "holy god, you're about a 9 on the ignoramous scale" comments. :cool:

I mean, add all that crap to a gun, add a silencer to a gun, and think you're only going to have 3 ounces more weight than the gun is empty? That truly is at least an 8 or 9 on the igmo scale.

The 'about what' query was to see if coward-boy would specify what I was FOS about. He always spouts the "I already told you" comeback, but never really does tell us.

But if I was nearly 70 years old, cared for no one, had to take drugs in order to sleep and was still playing with homemade backyard-camping ideas, I'd probably be bitter and lash out at the world too...

I'm fortunate and blessed in that once I consciously decided to change my life I met a woman who showed me what a decent life can be. We're at a point now where we're able to help people to some degree, and enjoy it immensely. I gave away a couple thousand 22LR's today to a couple people who needed them, and even though it's something I'll never miss, it made me feel surprisingly good. I wish gunkid would learn that lesson and experience that relaity, but time is not his friend at this point. :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: Garand

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,376 Posts
But if I was nearly 70 years old, cared for no one, had to take drugs in order to sleep and was still playing with homemade backyard-camping ideas, I'd probably be bitter and lash out at the world too...

(
:laugh01::laugh01:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,744 Posts
3 oz 22 silencer, even with poor designalmost 3x as long as the one I made for the beretta, when I was in CO. So John is once again proven to be fos. The M21 is 10.5 ozs.
More & more of these old threads springing up. Kind of fun sometimes. Fwiw, the specs on the suppressor, from the mfr's page:

Specifications:
Caliber……………………….22lr
Overall Length……….…….5.95”
Diameter…………………….1”
Weight……………………….3.2oz
Tube Material……………….Hard Anodized 6061 T6
Baffle Material………………Hard Anodized 6061 T6
Design………………………..Monocore, Take-apart Tool Included
Finish…………………………Matte Black Anodized
Attachment…………………..1/2-28 threads
So this 5.95" suppressor is "almost 3x as long" as yours. Yours was 2" long or so? Had to be substantially less than 3 inches, because if yours was 3 inches, then this one is not only way less than "3x as long", it's LESS than 2x as long.

And at 2" length, giving up at least 3/8" of that length for threading and say 1/16" for the end cap, means that the total internal length of your suppressor was no more than 1.56 inches. But minutia and details aside, you claim that your window-screen-based .22 pistol silencer had an usable internal length of less than two inches, and was still quiet enough to "take out sentries" without anyone noticing...?

Uh huh....

Fwiw, I really don't think you're lying John. I think you really believe it, and are instead just fantasizing instead.


And again since you originally chickened out of your own thread & didn't respond the first time, the Beretta 21A is not 10.5 ounces. Even WITHOUT a threaded barrel and the many other things you dream about adding to it (listed in post #5 above), it's 11.8 ounces empty. Add ammunition, the extended magazine, steel slide plate, and all the other crap you say is necessary to make it a good choice, and it's WAY above that.

So no, little guy. You are the one undeniably shown to be FOS on the topic. The manufacturers' own specifications show that to be the case, not me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,744 Posts
Out of curiosity, decided to check for myself, instead of just trusting the manufacturer’s numbers. Empty, was right at 12.2 ounces:
Wood Bumper Gadget Automotive exterior Font


Loaded, just a hair over 13 oz:
Wood Bumper Rectangle Gadget Automotive exterior


Main thing is, “it really doesn’t matter”, John. Okay, you were off by a little less than two ounces. But if less than two ounces makes the difference in whether it works for me, there’s something seriously wrong with me, not the gun. My point is just your constant, adamant pontifications that are demonstrably wrong, yet spewed as undeniable fact. As Dorobuta described it , “being wrong with great authority”.

The problem with the Beretta 21 rimfire isn’t its weight. Its problem is that power-wise it’s a wimp. Even with good, high velocity ammunition, it’s only as powerful as a baseball thrown by a little league pitcher.

I forget the details of the comparison that I posted here before, but it’s something like the energy at the muzzle with the Beretta 21 is the same as a 32 ACP or 380 ACP has left at 200 yards, or something like that. Just horribly weak. That’s just reality, regardless of how I like the gun. (And I do like it. Had it more than 30 years now, and you can tell by looking at it that it’s led a fairly full life.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,920 Posts
I don't know if it's the medication or lack of it on his part.
I'm assuming gravity must work different in that little world of his.
Well gravity and many other laws of physics
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,744 Posts
Out of curiosity, I looked up some of the comparisons I've looked up in the past, rather than re-doing them again now. On the 21A (which I still own & like) vs. other options, the 21A's absence of power is hugely crippling if we were needing something for serious defensive purposes.

...It's a well-made gun, but other than the tip-up barrel (which you claim to get rid of anyway), it's nothing special at all. In that caliber and with that barrel length, it has less than 60 ft/lbs with almost all loads that I've chronographed, and less than 55 ft/lbs with some of them. Basically, it has about the same energy at the muzzle as the same rimfire ammo has from a rifle at 200 yards or so; and a .22LR rifle at 200 yards is unacceptable power-wise for defensive purposes.
A .22LR rimfire rifle at 200 yards has approximately the same muzzle energy as the 21A has at the muzzle. And surely nobody would recommend a .22 rimfire as a rational 200-yard defensive gun.


And it's 38% as powerful as a good .32acp load; 57 ft/lbs vs. 149 ft/lbs:
I also really like the Beretta 21A. It's beautifully made, it's very reliable when you find a load it likes, and it's in a caliber that's cheap to shoot.

Its main problem is that it's a wimp power-wise. It was great when it came out, just as with the Colt Paterson was in its day. But to consider a Paterson a good choice for any serious purposes today would be lunacy. It could be fun, it could even be a good learning platform potentially, but it would not be a good choice for defensive use, offensive use, hunting, or anything where performance was important. Exactly the same with the 21A - it's fun to shoot and it's very nicely made, but it's not powerful enough to accomplish much anytime that performance is important. It's less than half as powerful as a well-loaded .32acp micro-pistol like the P32, running 57 ft/lbs compared to the P32's 149 ft/lbs.
Meaning that the 21A at the muzzle still has less than HALF the power of a .32acp pocket pistol loaded with good factory ammo at a HUNDRED YARDS. So even if we were to miraculously believe that a .32acp was a viable 100-yard defensive caliber, the 21A's short barrel means that even at contact distance it's still only half of that. Good call...


And one third as powerful as the 380acp that he himself calls a joke:
...The pretty much undisputed best of the good, consistent, reliable, rimfire loads are minimags and stingers. And Stingers & Minimags both ran not only less than 70 ft/lbs, not only less than 65 ft/lbs, but less than 60 ft/lbs. The Minimags run 57.4 ft/lbs and even the very-good Stingers run only 57.8 ft/lbs. That's pitiful power-wise; as I've pointed out before, it's right about the same energy as a little-league pitcher's fastball. And for defending my life, or my wifes' life, or anyone's life, I want more power than a little league pitch. And you should too. You're the one that says the .380 is a joke - yet you praise the rimfire 21 with only one-third as much power.

And this one is probably my favorite. The 21A loaded with Stingers has less energy at the muzzle than a .380acp pocket pistol, loaded with fairly mundane factory ammo, has at 450 yards:
...Got me curious whether I was remembering it wrong, so I looked it up on my spreadsheet. I was remembering right - stingers from the little 21A averaged 57.8 ft/lbs.

Out of curiosity I checked factory-ammo ballistics, because I suspected that even a .32 or .380 pistol would have those same power levels out to a couple hundred yards. I was very wrong on the 'couple hundred yards' thing. Turns out that even a little .380acp (federal hydrashok, from their website calculator) still has that same energy (59 ft/lbs) at a staggering 450 yards. Again - the 21A, even loaded with stingers, has less energy at the muzzle than a .380acp pistol has at a quarter mile. There's just no way I can bring myself to trust that power level for defensive purposes.
But the claim from our favorite internet gun preacher is that the 21A will "rock your world", while the .380 is "lame" and "a joke". Got it.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: BigEd

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,744 Posts
I do find it amusing that we have all this constant & continuing praise for the 2.4" barreled beretta .22lr, from the same person who (correctly) said:
...a 2.5" barreled .22lr has just 65 ft lbs, barely lethal, highly likely to fail you if you have to fire

...there's no reason to settle for such a feeble gun.
So gunkid admits that it's "feeble", that it's "barely lethal", that it's "highly likely to fail you", and that "there's no reason to settle for such a feeble gun". And then also regularly praises it as a defensive pistol, even going into details about custom modifications that turn it into a $3000 combat piece; so good that oil sheiks would love to have them.

The tracks that this "logic train" runs on are about as straight & true as a bowl of wet spaghetti.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top