.22 Rifle "Stopping Power"?

[Howland937]

Maybe I'm just that dumb, but I've not specifically seen anything stating such, but here's the question.
Amish neighbors shoot quite a bit and love their .22 rifles. However , this particular group is adamant that semi-auto .22's lose velocity and energy vs. bolt action. Their proof? Shooting a meat hog in the head twice with a 10/22 and it not dying. One shot with a bolt rifle and it died on the spot. Is this old news or vivid imagination?

 

[Varminterror]

They’re dramatically overhyping theory by applying anecdotal experience.

Here’s a reality - my 10” Charger pistol, a semiautomatic, runs the same velocity within 10fps of my 21” Savage Mark II, a bolt action, when using the same load.

Data is out there, all over the internet, and proving it for yourself is simple - shoot across a chronograph, your answer will reveal itself.

 

[MedWheeler]

Yep. It's a one-time anecdote. It's more likely that the bullet fired from the bolt rifle just happened to hit the spot it needed to at that second, and the Ruger-fired ones did not. That's all. I doubt all three bullets impacted in exactly the same spot.

 

[Howland937]

I was just at curious if this is a widespread theory that I'd never heard. I've never noticed dramatic differences in velocity from one to the other or even factory 10/22 barrel vs. bolt action 22" barrel. I pretty well ignored it, but apparently in my area, the Amish people accept it as gospel. And getting them to look it up online to see for themselves isn't likely, but I'd heard it again this morning and I quote "They're accurate enough, but they lose so much energy because the gas required to cycle. Bolt action uses all the gas to push the bullet out"

 

[stringnut]

It's not just the Amish. Have heard that claptrap from many people over the years. Just trying to explain the difference between a blowback action and a gas operated one is an all day project sometimes. Usually both parties are pretty frustrated by the end of the discussion.

Might be interesting to get 5 Remington 552 and 5 572 and chronograph various loads. That would be slide vs semi. That would at least give an idea if there was any truth to myth.

 

[Varminterror]

I’ve had the opportunity and (largely) good fortune to kill thousands of animals with various 22LR’s, from 2lbs to 2,000. I kept a collection of hundreds of recovered bullets for many years, unfortunately lost somewhere in storage during a move from one home to another. Growing up, my father favored a rifle, while I always favored carrying a more compact pistol. Many theories were presented over the years - that handguns weren’t accurate enough, or lost too much velocity for quick kills... or that solids should be used in handguns, rather than hollow points, to make up for reduced velocity and subsequently reduced penetration... or, of course, locked breech rifles (bolts, levers, breaks) are more powerful than blowback semiautos...

However, demonstrated both across the chronograph and repeatedly on live game and livestock, none of the theories proved true. Skinning out animals and examining literally thousands of wound tracts over a couple decades has disproven any of these theories for me. Hollow points were just as likely to be found mushroomed against the skull of small game, failing to penetrate, whether fired from a rifle or a pistol, semiauto, bolt, or levergun. Odd things could occasionally happen, such as failed penetration of the skull, even with a rifle firing solids at muzzle-contact-range when dropping large livestock, such a pneumatic bolt gun (not bolt action), a set of felling hammers, or a shot behind the ear were all favorable to a head on “between the eyes” shot with a 22LR. And with relatively equal occasion, an animals body will inexplicably fight or dangerously flail long after terminal damage has been done to their brain.

All in view, I can’t pretend I have seen a remote difference in killing efficacy between a semiauto or bolt rifle in 22LR. Certainly not sufficient difference to declare one is obviously superior to the other.

More likely, the two rifles described in the OP were either a fluke, or some other variable step change. For instance, the guy who owned the bolt gun was shooting solids and the guy who owned the semiauto was shooting hollow points, or one using low noise and the other standard velocity ammo, or one high velocity and the other standard. Any of these variables has far, far more influence on killing efficacy than the non-influence of action type.

 

[I6turbo]

With all due respect to those guys, what they are seeing is not due to the rifle that the round came out of - semi-automatic vs. bolt action. Or, they are shooting the animal in the wrong spot.

Having witnessed my family and neighbors do this exact deed many times when I was growing up, it all depends upon where the animal is hit with the bullet. These were generally 400-ish pound hogs. There's a relatively small spot in the forehead (and probably some spots elsewhere on the side of the head, but I don't know from experience where those are) where the animal will drop dead in its tracks from a .22 rimfire. If the bullet impacts outside of this spot, all bets are off. I saw botched shots a few times. I had a very bad feeling come over me when the first shot didn't kill instantly and the animal was in pain and confusion. I still remember it clearly to this day, 50 years on.

Here's how I know from experience that it's not bullet velocity. One of our neighbors shot his hogs with .22 Shorts out of an old Winchester bolt action rifle. Of the 10 or so animals I witnessed him shoot, I never saw one take a step. So, based upon what I saw with my own eyes, case closed. There's no way a 22 LR round out of a semi-automatic is traveling slower than a 22 Short out of a bolt action.

 

[whm1974]

Personally I rather use a full .22 LR with the barrel placed to the side of the animal's skull instead of the forehead. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the side way thinner then between the eyes?

 

[LoonWulf]

Personally I rather use a full .22 LR with the barrel placed to the side of the animal's skull instead of the forehead. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the side way thinner then between the eyes?

Its also harder to hit the skull flat from the front, and the bullets more likely to deflect.

Ive killed plenty of trapped pigs with a .22, and ive bounced a few off the skull because the pig was looking pretty much straight at me. shooting thru the side of the skull can cause some issues as well, as theres some heavy bone and muscles that can stop or deflect bullets.

probably less if an issue when the things arnt trying to get away.....

 

[Speedo66]

Bella Twin, an older Cree woman, dropped a world record grizzly with one shot from her single shot .22 rifle, loaded with a .22 long.

I guess it worked because it was a bolt action, not a semi automatic.

https://www.ammoland.com/2017/06/be...-world-record-grizzly-and-more/#axzz6PHW3lX1R

 

[Howland937]

Yeah, these are domestic pigs they raise for the freezer. No chasing or trapping. They just whistle for them, maybe a "here pig!" then pop them point blank. They do cattle the same way, so I'm guessing they know what they're doing...

 

[whm1974]

Bella Twin, an older Cree woman, dropped a world record grizzly with one shot from her single shot .22 rifle, loaded with a .22 long.

I guess it worked because it was a bolt action, not a semi automatic.

https://www.ammoland.com/2017/06/be...-world-record-grizzly-and-more/#axzz6PHW3lX1R

It worked because Ms Twin knew what she was doing. And fast enough to act before the bear did.

 

[Speedo66]

It worked because Ms Twin knew what she was doing. And fast enough to act before the bear did.

Sarcasm, whm1974, sarcasm.

And yes, from the article it did mention she was an excellent shot, and knew enough about bears to aim for the weak spot in a bear's skull.

Next, we talk about how shot placement is everything, killing a giant grizzly with a 29g bullet.

Personally, I think in her place, I'd be shaking enough to miss the bear completely. lol

 

[whm1974]

Sarcasm, whm1974, sarcasm.

And yes, from the article it did mention she was an excellent shot, and knew enough about bears to aim for the weak spot in a bear's skull.

Next, we talk about how shot placement is everything, killing a giant grizzly with a 29g bullet.

Personally, I think in her place, I'd be shaking enough to miss the bear completely. lol

The only place I ever seen a bear is at the St Louis Zoo. Chances are, if a grizzly came up next to me, I would freeze up solid or run.

 

[jmr40]

A 22. especially a FMJ version penetrates a LOT more than you'd think. And shot placement is critical. These are photos of a bear skull I took many years ago. You can see that a frontal shot from any cartridge stands a fair chance of deflecting unless you hit directly in the nose. Even a shot to the eye will miss the brain. A pig wouldn't be a lot different.

Bella was only 13 IIRC and picking blue berries. The bear didn't necessarily attack her the way I read the story. She saw the bear and hid in a brush pile. The bear smelled her and investigated. She placed the muzzle of the rifle against the side of the skull and fired one shot putting the bear down. After it went down she fired several more shots into the side of the skull.

Your Amish friends are simply wrong. And even if they are right, more muzzle velocity tends to mean LESS penetration in many cases.

 

[Speedo66]

View attachment 923023

A little orthodontal work on the bottom teeth and he'd have a very nice smile.

Where did you hit this one, and what where you using? I'm going to assume it wasn't a .22.

 

[LiveLife]

Their proof? Shooting a meat hog in the head twice with a 10/22 and it not dying. One shot with a bolt rifle and it died on the spot.

Was the shot with the bolt rifle done AFTER the two shots with 10/22?

I've never noticed dramatic differences in velocity from one to the other or even factory 10/22 barrel vs. bolt action 22" barrel ... "They're accurate enough, but they lose so much energy because the gas required to cycle. Bolt action uses all the gas to push the bullet out"

Well then I guess it's pointless to explain that typical 22LR powder charge has burnt out before the bullet reaches the end of 10/22's 18.5" barrel and in longer 22" barrel, bullet is actually slowing down from friction with the barrel.

 

[newfalguy101]

This past spring I bought three hogs for butchering, on 3 successive weeks.

Each time the guy double tapped the pig in the rear quarter of the skull.

1st one ran a few steps and went down, and was popped a 3rd time through the side of the head.

2nd jumped, flopped and twisted like an olympic gymnast.

3rd dropped and flopped a couple times and was done.

Each time the gun used was a Ruger 22 pistol, and this guy has killed hundreds if not thousands of hogs.

The point...when bullet hits critter, the only rule is there really arent any...

 

[Casefull]

The best way to the brain is through the ear hole. Velocity is very important. But you have to get inside the skull.

 

[Skylerbone]

Well then I guess it's pointless to explain that typical 22LR powder charge has burnt out before the bullet reaches the end of 10/22's 18.5" barrel and in longer 22" barrel, bullet is actually slowing down from friction with the barrel.

It’s all the hot gasses trapped by the bolt action and moving toward the muzzle. Follows the bullet, into the wound channel, and cooks the beast’s brain DRT! That’s my “hot air” theory

 

[LoonWulf]

It’s all the hot gasses trapped by the bolt action and moving toward the muzzle. Follows the bullet, into the wound channel, and cooks the beast’s brain DRT! That’s my “hot air” theory

hey man, muzzle burns a thing!

 

[Dave DeLaurant]

Unless there is a case failure, the high-pressure propellant gas will still be entirely contained within the barrel of a properly designed blowback action firearm at the time the bullet leaves the barrel.

The residual gas pressure that finishes propelling the cartridge case out of a blowback gun's breech is no longer contributing to bullet velocity.

In this video, the action has been slowed just enough to see gas escaping from the muzzle before the spent case ejects:

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Just recently testing .22 bullet penetration from my Armalite AR-7 semiauto (16" barrel) versus the .22 barrel of my M6 Scout (18" barrel) and a Savage single shot bolt action (22" barrel) with CCI Minimag on stacked phonebooks I got the same degree of penetration.
I would say that the stopping power of a semi-auto blowback would be the same as a fixed breech gun.

The bolt of a .22 semi-auto has mass and inertia and does not begin to move until the bullet has left the barrel and the gas pressure has dropped.
The gas pressure expands the case til it fills and sticks in the chamber, with no or very little movement..
It is residual pressure that blows the case out of the barrel to force the semi-auto bolt back after the pressure drops and the case unsticks.
If the case was blown out of the barrel while the bullet was still in the barrel, the pressure would balloon and split the case.

 

[Texas10mm]

Just recently testing .22 bullet penetration from my Armalite AR-7 semiauto (16" barrel) versus the .22 barrel of my M6 Scout (18" barrel) and a Savage single shot bolt action (22" barrel) with CCI Minimag on stacked phonebooks I got the same degree of penetration.
I would say that the stopping power of a semi-auto blowback would be the same as a fixed breech gun.

The bolt of a .22 semi-auto has mass and inertia and does not begin to move until the bullet has left the barrel and the gas pressure has dropped.
The gas pressure expands the case til it fills and sticks in the chamber, with no or very little movement..
It is residual pressure that blows the case out of the barrel to force the semi-auto bolt back after the pressure drops and the case unsticks.
If the case was blown out of the barrel while the bullet was still in the barrel, the pressure would balloon and split the case.

Where in tarnation did you get phone books?

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Texas10mm: "Where in tarnation did you get phone books?"

At the antique store, of course. LOL.

No, actually, my wife had to have landline phone and fax for her home office and we got two phonebooks a year for well over a decade. I am running out.

But the usual reaction today is, You have a phone book? Like they use on the late show movies?