Indeed, one can put together a 9MM AR cheaper than I have seen in awhile, and a couple hundred less than I paid for my RRA 9MM AR some years back. (Before the craziness)
"Benefits of reloadable 9mm over 22LR with new CA ammo law change"
- Thread starter LiveLife
- Start date
- Status
armoredman
Member
And, to blow minds while combining the two sides against their will, I present - reloaded 22lr, with home cast powdercoated and Lee Liquid Alox lubed bullets. Yes, this is real. 
A gunsmith buddy of mine found the kit online, says he gets about 5 loads per case before they disintegrate. The only problem is if the previous primer dents come up under the hammer, because he can't get them out for the new priming compound to get under that part of the rim. They work, using both smokeless and black powder.
I don't shoot 22lr much simply because I am not fond of the round, that's all. I can reload 9mm for $2 a box, and my time is my own. Three hobbies are more fun than one, and my three are bullet casting, reloading and shooting.
A gunsmith buddy of mine found the kit online, says he gets about 5 loads per case before they disintegrate. The only problem is if the previous primer dents come up under the hammer, because he can't get them out for the new priming compound to get under that part of the rim. They work, using both smokeless and black powder. 
I don't shoot 22lr much simply because I am not fond of the round, that's all. I can reload 9mm for $2 a box, and my time is my own. Three hobbies are more fun than one, and my three are bullet casting, reloading and shooting.
buck460XVR
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,087
Kinda where I'm at. While I can see the fun factor of a 9mm carbine, I see little cost efficiency at spending $800+ just to replace my .22s that I already have. Also while the 9mm may have an advantage over a .22 LR for SD purposes, there are very few folks out there that consider a .22 their primary SD caliber. My .22s have other purposes that would not be filled efficiently with a 9mm firearm(small game hunting/elimination of backyard pests for example). I've found that I can reload .38 specials for my .357 revolvers and carbines that will rival any 9mm load I can make, for cost and performance. Even then, good .22 ammo in bulk is available and still reasonably priced. I can't speak for others tho and I don't live in Koneyforney, but I would assume that the process for obtaining 9mm ammo and components will be no different than those for .22 LR. Same BG checks and required IDs. Add to the fact that reloading, while becoming more popular than ever before, is still done by a small minority of shooters. Even tho I reload, I still find that it's nice to shoot 500 rounds of .22 ammo during a range session with my kids and grandkids without having to reload it.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
I understand this is getting away from the OP, which I largely agree with (given the stipulation of scarce .22LR ammo) but it warrants a response.
The whole discussion is about cost. So if we're going to discuss the costs involved in shooting, we should discuss all of them, including those that casters ignore. Not everyone is retired, on a limited income, with lots of free time. Some of us are still working and have more money than time. I'm running two businesses, managing employees and more clients than ever before. My time is extremely valuable. I can't buy time but I can buy cast bullets and that's the next best thing. Even if I had time to cast, I couldn't justify it economically. Handloading saves a ton of money over buying factory ammo and it allows me to shooting guns and loads I otherwise couldn't. I can justify that. When we start comparing commercial cast to home cast bullets, the savings is a lot less for the work involved. My .38Spl handloads cost me 7 cents over yours. That $35 I pay for 500 cast bullets buys me a lot of time and saves me a lot of aggravation. That's time I can spend in better ways, of which there are plenty. For I'd much rather be doing leatherwork or going to a movie with my wife than standing over a friggin' lead pot.
When we start comparing shooting homecast reloads to .22LR, it's an argument you really can't win. I don't know where you're getting two cent primers. I don't buy Russian primers so I'm paying three cents apiece for them buying CCI or Winchester in cases of 5000. So even if your lead is free, at 4.2 cents a round, you're still paying $23/550rds for what I was paying $20 for before the shortage. The big difference being that you're spending hours and hours procuring lead, processing it, casting ingots, casting bullets, sizing them, lubing them and finally reloading them. I'm not. I'm buying bulk .22 ammo and shooting it. Before the shortage, I was shooting 2000-3000rds a month of it. Were I shooting cast handloads, I'd have been doing a lot less shooting and spending a lot more doing something I get no joy out of.
And all of this completely ignores the guns associated with the cartridges in question. There is simply no way a centerfire can compete with the .22LR. Not only is it more economical to shoot, guns tend to cost less. They also offer more utility than any centerfire. I can buy a .22 pistol that shoots tiny groups at 25yds for $250-$300. I can hunt small game and varmints, plink, train and teach with it. No centerfire equivalent exists. I can buy a bolt action .22 rifle for $250 that also shoots tiny groups and is perfect for all the same purposes. What centerfire would so easily fit that role so economically?
Sorry but I just don't see it.
I really do envy you guys that enjoy casting and handloading. I wish I did but I don't. For me it's just a necessary chore so I can do the shooting I want to do.
The whole discussion is about cost. So if we're going to discuss the costs involved in shooting, we should discuss all of them, including those that casters ignore. Not everyone is retired, on a limited income, with lots of free time. Some of us are still working and have more money than time. I'm running two businesses, managing employees and more clients than ever before. My time is extremely valuable. I can't buy time but I can buy cast bullets and that's the next best thing. Even if I had time to cast, I couldn't justify it economically. Handloading saves a ton of money over buying factory ammo and it allows me to shooting guns and loads I otherwise couldn't. I can justify that. When we start comparing commercial cast to home cast bullets, the savings is a lot less for the work involved. My .38Spl handloads cost me 7 cents over yours. That $35 I pay for 500 cast bullets buys me a lot of time and saves me a lot of aggravation. That's time I can spend in better ways, of which there are plenty. For I'd much rather be doing leatherwork or going to a movie with my wife than standing over a friggin' lead pot.
When we start comparing shooting homecast reloads to .22LR, it's an argument you really can't win. I don't know where you're getting two cent primers. I don't buy Russian primers so I'm paying three cents apiece for them buying CCI or Winchester in cases of 5000. So even if your lead is free, at 4.2 cents a round, you're still paying $23/550rds for what I was paying $20 for before the shortage. The big difference being that you're spending hours and hours procuring lead, processing it, casting ingots, casting bullets, sizing them, lubing them and finally reloading them. I'm not. I'm buying bulk .22 ammo and shooting it. Before the shortage, I was shooting 2000-3000rds a month of it. Were I shooting cast handloads, I'd have been doing a lot less shooting and spending a lot more doing something I get no joy out of.
And all of this completely ignores the guns associated with the cartridges in question. There is simply no way a centerfire can compete with the .22LR. Not only is it more economical to shoot, guns tend to cost less. They also offer more utility than any centerfire. I can buy a .22 pistol that shoots tiny groups at 25yds for $250-$300. I can hunt small game and varmints, plink, train and teach with it. No centerfire equivalent exists. I can buy a bolt action .22 rifle for $250 that also shoots tiny groups and is perfect for all the same purposes. What centerfire would so easily fit that role so economically?
Sorry but I just don't see it.
CoalTrain49
Member
If anyone feels a shortage of 22LR coming again you can buy all you want online right now for 0.08/rd. I did just that this year. I'm not exactly sure how much I purchased but it was a considerable amount. I think I have enough for about 10 years at my present use level.
I like to keep it around for varmint control and to teach new shooters. Mostly I shoot CF and reload all of that. I find that 357 is the most versatile CF if you like revolvers and bolt guns. If semi I would go for 9 MM.
I like to keep it around for varmint control and to teach new shooters. Mostly I shoot CF and reload all of that. I find that 357 is the most versatile CF if you like revolvers and bolt guns. If semi I would go for 9 MM.
Wow!. I think you guys missed the intent of the OP. In CA, where it is going to be much more involved to buy any ammo, reloading is a good alternative. There are even areas in CA that do not allow "mail order" ammo sales, so the best option is reloading. Just because folks in Texas aren't having much trouble finding 22lr ammo, that doesn't mean there are not areas that still have "shortages". In my part of Oregon there is very few 22 lrs available, some Federal shows up...
CoalTrain49
Member
Regarding new laws. States can and will pass new laws to regulate ammo and gun sales. A good work around would be to reload. My reloading cost for 9 MM is about 0.14/rd. using coated bullets and pick up range brass. You could possibly get it down to around 0.12/rd. depending on the type of bullet you used. You have to consider dies also. I can see the cost of .22 equaling the cost of reloading 9 MM or 38 spl. in the not to distant future. The cost of all ammo could get stupid again.
Collect all the brass you can even if you don't reload. It may be years before you need it but I'll guarantee you the time will come that you wish you had it.
Collect all the brass you can even if you don't reload. It may be years before you need it but I'll guarantee you the time will come that you wish you had it.
Last edited:
Swampman
Old Fart
Nobody missed anything, except maybe you and others who arrived later in the thread.
This thread was originally titled:
Dump 22LR for reloadable 9mm carbine / KeyMod vs M-Lok PSA
At some point it was renamed (without any notice being given).
"Benefits of reloadable 9mm over 22LR with new CA ammo law change"
Read the original post, it doesn't even mention California.
It pretty difficult to stay on topic when the OP changes the title to a subject that's not even mentioned until post #9 of the thread.
Yes, I did it at the OP's request. He thought the original title was distracting from the intent of the thread.
Swampman
Old Fart
OK . . .
But changing the question after people have already answered it still seems kinda like a "bait and switch" to me.
It's not like starting a new thread is difficult or expensive.
But changing the question after people have already answered it still seems kinda like a "bait and switch" to me.
It's not like starting a new thread is difficult or expensive.
armoredman
Member
I think I remember some places in California that do not allow/restrict the sames of reloading gear/components, specifically LA County, IIRC?
I lived in CA for about 60 years and am fully aware of their style of politics. The state is run by Los Angeles (Norte Mexico City), San Francisco (Bay Area) and Sacramento. All ultra liberal, anti gun urban voters which vastly outnumber normal folk and sportsmen/shooters. So anti-gun, pro illegal immigration legislation is a fact of life. One of the reasons I escaped as soon as I retired...
With 22lr ammo going for $4.00+ per 50, when they can be found, I would guess my 9mm reloads are cheaper, but I don't count pennies for my hobby...
With 22lr ammo going for $4.00+ per 50, when they can be found, I would guess my 9mm reloads are cheaper, but I don't count pennies for my hobby...
Capybara
Member
midland man
Member
I just hope this commie california crap on our guns and ammo dosent come to Oklahoma! but Obama just passed a new law check this out! we need to fight this crap! https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...-obama-ssa-finalizes-new-gun-prohibition-rule
Swampman
Old Fart
It seems like casting your own bullets would be a major factor in keeping the cost of reloads down.
How hard/expensive is it to get lead for casting in CA?
Something with a lighter bullet like a .25-20 or .32-20 seems like it might be a better substitute for .22 LR than the 9mm Luger.
I know the cases are considerably more expensive, but if loaded to .22 rimfire power levels the brass should last a long time.
Another advantage (albeit probably temporary) is that the 1892 Winchester and 1894 Marlin haven't been declared "assault weapons" yet and don't currently require registration as such.
How hard/expensive is it to get lead for casting in CA?
Something with a lighter bullet like a .25-20 or .32-20 seems like it might be a better substitute for .22 LR than the 9mm Luger.
I know the cases are considerably more expensive, but if loaded to .22 rimfire power levels the brass should last a long time.
Another advantage (albeit probably temporary) is that the 1892 Winchester and 1894 Marlin haven't been declared "assault weapons" yet and don't currently require registration as such.
Catpop
Member
I love shooting everything, 22s- centerfires- even muzzleloaders. And reload everything I shoot now, except 22.
My long range plan for 22s is to buy them and build a stash only went they present themselves at less than 8 cent per round. Used to be 4 cent 5-10 years ago. And even 1-2 cent in the 50s. But times change, even with reloading components.
My longrange plan for centerfires is to build a stash of primers, powders, a boolit mold, and dies for each caliber for the next shortage that invariably lies ahead.
No I would not get rid of my 22s just because of the unavailability and higher cost of ammo. Just as I would not stop owning a car because it cost 10-20 times what it did in the 60s.
It's all relavent, so shoot what you like and enjoy!
Happy new year, catpop
My long range plan for 22s is to buy them and build a stash only went they present themselves at less than 8 cent per round. Used to be 4 cent 5-10 years ago. And even 1-2 cent in the 50s. But times change, even with reloading components.
My longrange plan for centerfires is to build a stash of primers, powders, a boolit mold, and dies for each caliber for the next shortage that invariably lies ahead.
No I would not get rid of my 22s just because of the unavailability and higher cost of ammo. Just as I would not stop owning a car because it cost 10-20 times what it did in the 60s.
It's all relavent, so shoot what you like and enjoy!
Happy new year, catpop
buck460XVR
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,087
I didn't miss it that's why I replied.....
Even without restrictions on reloading components as of now, the intent of the law is to restrict ammunition to those legally allowed to possess it. Somewhere down the road, reloading components will also be put on the chopping block too. Just a natural progression as those, viewed to be prohibited, find ways around the new law..
That said, there are many reasons for one to reload, and for many years the primary reasons have been increased availability to accurate and reliable ammo, and reduction of the cost of that available ammo, not just in Korneyforney, but everywhere, and it isn't delegated to just 9mm ammo and AR platforms.
GooseGestapo
Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2003
- Messages
- 6,154
My solution to current and future shortages of QUALITY .22rf is to cast for my .22Hornet and .218Bee as well as a Ruger .327 S7.
Powder coating and 1.6gr of Bullseye or Titegroup produces a Very good replacement for decent.22lr. I control quality.
I don't buy Thunderbolts or Wildcats. ( like lightning, the thunderbolts seldom strike the same place twice in a row, and wildcats are, well, like hearding cats!).
Long before most recent (2008) shortage of primers, I bought many thousand small pistol primers at $10/M.
I maybe need to include them in my will...
Powder coating and 1.6gr of Bullseye or Titegroup produces a Very good replacement for decent.22lr. I control quality.
I don't buy Thunderbolts or Wildcats. ( like lightning, the thunderbolts seldom strike the same place twice in a row, and wildcats are, well, like hearding cats!).
Long before most recent (2008) shortage of primers, I bought many thousand small pistol primers at $10/M.
I maybe need to include them in my will...
DeadEye9
Member
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2016
- Messages
- 282
Very interesting topic. This CA stuff is getting out of hand, though. Background checks and tracking lists for ammo purchases? First step to tracking PEOPLE if you ask me. Anyway about the topic at hand I don't think there's much of a correlation between 9mm and .22 rimfire at all. Price wise you can get around 100 rounds of premium top shelf .22 for the price of like 50 rounds of whatever is cheapest on the shelf for 9mm. That's not really a comparison in my book, along with the fact that they are each in a completely different class of what they are typically used to do. That being said I think either can make a good training platform or plinker, however I don't think too many die hard .22ers will switch to 9mm or vice versa. Everyone has their preferences. Me personally I don't shoot .22 much anymore because it isn't practical for me. Once you get your fundamentals down, there is hardly any similarity between shooting a .22 Lr and shooting a true defensive caliber. It also doesn't make sense for my own purposes of use to stock up on 50k rounds of .22; while stocking up on 50k rounds of 9mm/.45/.5.56 etc or 50k primers + 50lb powder + 50k brass cases etc. does make sense. Could something like a .22 LR be used for defensive purpose or hunting in a SHTF situation, well ofcourse, but for a person that can handle it properly such as myself 5.56 or even 9mm would be a much more viable option, so I chose to stick to that. I do still own a few .22s and at any given time will have 5-6k rounds on hand, but that's plenty of .22 for me because it is JUST a plinking cartridge for me. I would never grab my 10/22 or .22 pistols to defend myself, so I don't need defensive Ammo type stocks built up for that caliber. Now all of this is just my own opinion and feelings in my personal situation. I'm not trying to bash anyone for being into .22 or rimfire in general, as it is a very economical and practical caliber for lots and lots of people. That being said .22 is just not a good fit for me and what I'm looking for out of my personal systems. By the same token, neither is California haha. Their laws honestly offend me, even as a nonresident gun owner & 2A enthusiast/supporter so I cannot even imagine how one could tollerate living there. Same principal as the .22 LR; I know it has a great purpose that is a perfect fit for millions of people, I am just not one of them.
Capybara
Member
Too late, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and mostly Colorado are all under the scourge of Californians invading and bring idiotic California ideals, policies and politicians. Reloading supplies are currently not affected by the new ammo laws but give Sacramento a year or two and they will be.
I currently have plenty of .22 LR in stock and only shoot it once in a while. To me, if .22 is over .08 per round, I would rather shoot my .10 per round 9mm reloads any day of the week.
- Status
