I chose this pistol, not because it is something you might be able to obtain, but because it was available in both 22 and 25, and would give a fairly accurate comparison of performance, such as might be obtained in most of the tiny pistols in this class of weapon.
Often, people will cite 22 Long Rifle velocity and energy figures which are far in excess of those obtained from 25 Automatic. This is because they are using figures obtained from testing longer barreled pistols, or even rifles. Let's take a quick look at velocity figures that are obtained from short barrels. This figures are obtained from http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com, a site that has done a lot of testing of this type.
The main types of 22 Long Rifle ammunition are the "high velocity" load, which uses a 40 grain bullet, and the hollow point load, which uses a 37 grain bullet and is somewhat faster.
The hollow point "high velocity" load shows 782 f/s and 49 foot-pounds of energy (66.5 joules).
(Note here that there are many different loadings for 22 Long Rifle nowadays. "Standard velocity" is a slower loading, sometimes available, that is near the speed of sound and is often used for target work. "High Velocity" is usually the most common loading that's available in solid or hollow point, and newer loads, such as the famous CCI Mini Mag and many others, often show increased velocities. I'm going with the most common loading here, but if you can find some of the faster ones, so much the better -- make allowance for the higher performance in your personal comparison.)
The 25 Automatic is loaded with a 50 grain bullet in its most common loading, and from a short barreled pistol shows 785 f/s of velocity and 68 foot-pounds of energy (92 joules).
The velocity figures for either cartridge will vary from gun to gun -- what you have in your hand may well show a different level of velocity. I think that the correct interpretation of these figures for the real world would be that both rounds are not very powerful in small pistols and both will display a similar level of performance.
One argument made for the 22 Long Rifle is that it is more available than the 25 Auto. This is true.
Another argument is that 22 Long Rifle ammo is cheaper than 25 Auto, and this is certainly true. 25 Auto is expensive ammunition.
But, is there anything that would be in favor of choosing 25 Auto over 22 Long Rifle? Yes.
For one thing, the priming of centerfire ammunition, which has a separate primer, is more reliable than rimfire priming. 25 Auto is more likely to go "bang" when you pull the trigger. The priming compound, which fires the main powder charge when struck by the firing pin, is deposited in the folded rim of the 22 Long Rifle cartridge case. The firing pin pinches the folded rim and sets off the primer. For the 25 Auto, the priming compound is placed in a primer cup and covered with a piece of foil, sealing it inside the cup. When the firing pin strikes the primer cup from the outside, the foil packet containing the primer compound is pinched against an "anvil" which is a small pointed structure, either placed inside of the primer as a separate part or as part of the cartridge case primer pocket.
The sealed nature of the 25 Auto primer and the more accurate process by which the primer compound is deposited in the critical "pinch" area struck by the firing pin makes it more reliable -- and more expensive. The cartridge, too, must have special provision for accepting the primer, adding to the expense.
But, the 25 Auto is more reliable than the rim primer of the 22 Long Rifle. So, with regard to reliability, you make your choice, and you pay your money.
But there's also another factor to consider: Being a fully rimmed cartridge, the 22 Long Rifle is not as easily fed from a magazine in a pistol as the 25 Auto cartridge. Many of the old time automatic pistol cartridges, like the 25 Auto, were designed ~125 years ago just for this purpose: to feed well from a magazine. The shape of the 22 Long Rifle and its rim are not fed so easily, and are thus more prone to jamming.
This does not mean that one or the other cartridge will always jam or never jam, it just means that the 22 Long Rifle is more likely to jam than the 25 Auto. This is an important consideration when you are carrying a pistol to protect your life, or the lives of others.
What do I think? You may have noted a little preference for the 25 Auto, versus the 22 Long Rifle, in this case. I think that this is because the 25 Auto cartridge was made to operate in small pocket sized self defense pistols, while the 22 Long Rifle is more of a "jack of all trades."
However, either is better than nothing. i don't carry either, but if you decide to carry one or the other, hopefully the information I've written here will help you to figure out what you want.
This NRA article sums up this same information: https://www.nrafamily.org/articles/2021 ... omatic-why
luckygunner.com is an online ammunition sales company, and they've presented a lot of interesting information about guns, ammunition, and shooting on their site. It's free and a lot of it is good, backed by data, so why not check it out and take advantage of it? Browse around this site and you will probably find other articles and videos of interest.
Here's a 22 Long Rifle article: https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/why- ... estimated/
Here's a 25 Auto article: https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/is-2 ... cartridge/
Note that their ballistic gel test shows the 25 Auto making over 305mm of penetration with one kind of ammo, demonstrating that it can work.
Studying a number of 32 articles on ammo performance, I've noted that all 32 Auto ammo is not equal. The 71 to 73 grain FMJ loading from different manufacturers has different levels of penetration, and the fastest bullet isn't always the deepest penetration. So, this tells me that there are subtle differences in bullet shape between brands of ammo. I expect that this holds true for 25 Auto ammo, as well.
Well, those are my thoughts on the subject; make of them what you will. I hope the information is useful to someone.
