22LR vs 9mm for the handgun newb

JimboJones said:
Picked one up myself a couple months ago. Very under-rated gun IMO. Only complaint I have so far is the trigger is a little gritty and If you have long fingers (which I don't) you might find it a little to slim.

Wantsalls has the extra mags for you.;)
Click to expand...

Thanks.

EDIT: Those are factory Ruger mags- is there an aftermarket company that might make them cheaper? If not- well, I guess I'll shelling out more cash for som extra mags.
 
This is not specific to Ruger but just general pistol advice: do not cheap out on mags. Most pistols are pretty reliable IF used with decent mags...I have probably seen 5 times as many mag-related failures as actual pistol mechanical failures.

And for some reason Ruger in particular seem to build guns that really prefer factory mags. That is not based on any SR9 experience, but just general Ruger experience, so take it for what it's worth.
 
I love my buckmark i shoot it all the time! Id suggest getting both if you can afford it...I also have 9mm, 40 and 45acp so if i get bored i cant switch to whatever
 
mr00jimbo said:
Both! :D
I taught a lady friend of mine with my Buckmark. Within 2 minutes she was shooting a huge hole in the target and told me she was getting bored with it.
Just stupid accurate.

9 millimeter will add an element of complexity with recoil management.
Click to expand...

I agree, they can be used for different reasons and serve different purposes. A .22 is fun, a 9mm more fun and pretty soon you will start looking at .357 magnum(even more fun).Also look for a gun safe that is at least twice the size that you think you will ever need, and high enough for rifles as well.By this time there is no going back.
icon7.gif
 
Trigun said:
Buy a 9mm bother, .22 is next to nothing

Trigun
Click to expand...

I have an SR9 I also have a mk2 22 and i am telling you the 9mm hands down it is very easy to shoot no real recoil to speak of and its very reasonable to shoot i think the cheapest next to the 22 i can reload a box of 50 for around 5 dollars and you can get a thousand rounds at most of the above stores for around 280 bucks i mean buy both if you want them but to learn on 9mm is the way to go in my book and i am just learning myself, i have a 2 45's a 40s&w a tokerev a few others and the 9mm actually i think its because its the sr9 but it is my favourite to shoot my wife enjoys it and my oldest girl does as well i think i am going to get an sr40 just because of the like for the model
cheers,
 
Both the Glock and the M&P have a much, much more proven track record.

I am not hearing too much complaining about the current SR9s, although the early ones did get recalled, which is pretty typical for Ruger.

Both the S&W and the Glock have their issues as well, but they are playing in the big leagues all over the place. The SR9 is not really doing that at this time.
 
misanthropist said:
I have never seen the point of starting people on .22s.

If you happen to like .22s, I have nothing against them. I think they are potentially a useful training tool if you understand their limitations...my preference is for a conversion kit for an existing firearm so the trigger is exactly the same as on your real gun.

I have an AA kit for my G17, for example.

But I don't have a ton of use for .22 pistols generally. I find them a little boring to shoot, and if you spend all your time on .22s, you don't learn to manage recoil properly.

Of course you can get pretty good on trigger press, and sight alignment, and all that...but that's all pretty easy anyway. I have generally had the experience that most people, in the space of an afternoon, can learn to slow-fire very tight groups with a bit of instruction. It's recoil management that seems to be the sticking point for most shooters I see.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly... it was the main reason why I got rid of my Chiappa 1911-22.

To djmay71,

Again, misanthropist is correct. Both the Glock and M&P have excellent track records. I have used both platforms in 9 and .40 quite a bit, and I feel that they are both solid designs, and are ergonomic, easy to maintain, relatively inexpensive and very reliable. If you can, go to a local store that stocks them and try them out. See which one is most comfortable in your hand and get a feel for the pistol.
 
Heres what i started with, A GSG 1911 and it works great and then i traded a Mossberg 500 Shotgun for a New Norinco NP-22 (226) copy and it too funtions flawlessly

I dont shoot the Webley much but when i do its fun. I say shot what you can afford.I'm still a noob to the handgun scene.

011-2.jpg
 
djmay71 said:
If the SR9 has been well received, why did Tyson from Wolverine, try to dissade me from buying it and reccommended a Glock or S&W?
Click to expand...

Likely for much the same reason a lot of folks avoid them. The trigger. Or it may be that they are hard to get parts for them.

I've shot a box and a half through an SR9. The gun feels great in the hands and shoots really nicely. But in stock form it's got one of the most lousy triggers of any gun I've tried out. It literally feels like there's a short and stout rubber band that you're pulling on so the trigger has lots of build in it and very much a toy like feel. Although I've seen reports of the trigger feeling gritty this one was smooth due to the rounds shot through it. It was a rental range gun so it gets more rounds through it in a year than most folks would put through it in a lifetime.

As a gun to shoot I'd say it's OK. But it's not a gun you see in compeititions much for whatever reason. Which is likely why he was trying to shift you over to a more mainstream option.
 
If you are a HG newb, get a CZ in 9mm, DA/SA gun, 2K of ammo, take a few (3-6) classes like Slavex teaches, save/collect your empty brass, get into reloading with progressive press (be it Blue or Red).

If you are just a casual shooter, shooting 100-300rds a month - get whatever gun you like, keep your hands clean by not picking up brass, and never mind reloading thingy - do hickey or whatever you wanna call it...
 
Rich or reload, don't shoot much, get the 9mm, way more fun than 22LR. Easy to go through 150 rnds, that's at least 40 bucks in factory ammo, adds up quick.

Want lots of cheap trigger time, get the 22LR.

Best yet, get both.
 
misanthropist said:
It's recoil management that seems to be the sticking point for most shooters I see.
Click to expand...

What is "recoil management"? Our instructor just teaches us to hold the gun in a relaxed neutral way and just let the recoil happen, and watch the front sight lift up and then back down again, to make sure we know where the sights were lined up when the trigger broke. Is the .22 that different? Obviously the .22's sight wont lift up as high, but I'm not sure how that affects "recoil management"?
 
CeeZer said:
If you are just a casual shooter, shooting 100-300rds a month - get whatever gun you like, keep your hands clean by not picking up brass, and never mind reloading thingy - do hickey or whatever you wanna call it...
Click to expand...

And also let me know when you go shooting so that I can claim your brass after you leave the range! :D
 
I bought a used nornico .9mm for $265 that works great and a chiappa 1911 .22 for $300 at the same time. Both good guns for the money spent but the .22 is much cheaper to shoot.
 
Skyhawk said:
What is "recoil management"? Our instructor just teaches us to hold the gun in a relaxed neutral way and just let the recoil happen, and watch the front sight lift up and then back down again, to make sure we know where the sights were lined up when the trigger broke. Is the .22 that different? Obviously the .22's sight wont lift up as high, but I'm not sure how that affects "recoil management"?
Click to expand...

depends what you are shooting i guess, shooting fast splits you want the sites on target again as fast as possible and as little muzzle rise as possible, this mean holding the gun as tight as you can without causing a tremor in your hand
 
heavenIsAlie said:
depends what you are shooting i guess, shooting fast splits you want the sites on target again as fast as possible and as little muzzle rise as possible, this mean holding the gun as tight as you can without causing a tremor in your hand
Click to expand...

I would argue the same line as Brian Enos, that muzzle flip happens in a couple milliseconds, certainly not something that will cause any significant improvement if you muscled your gun and was somehow able to fight it and cut the muzzle flip distance in half. But that kind of tension will have other undesirable side-effects, according to the greats.

Hey I'm not a great shooter by any means, and I'm just repeating what my instructor says. But taking that advice has made me a much better shooter in a very short amount of time. I used to try and "control" (muscle) recoil, and once I was forced to let that idea go, my splits improved considerably. Bill Drills were a great help for learning the fallacy behind "managing recoil" as most folks imagine it.
 
heavenIsAlie said:
depends what you are shooting i guess, shooting fast splits you want the sites on target again as fast as possible and as little muzzle rise as possible, this mean holding the gun as tight as you can without causing a tremor in your hand
Click to expand...

Talk to a bunch of Grand Master shooters from IPSC or similar. I'll bet they don't hold it as tight as you're suggesting.

Of course you want a firm grip but that generally comes at about the same pressure as a firm but friendly handshake and with the same tension/pressure extended back through the wrists and forearms. If you've got that sort of support the gun will come back to the nearly the same spot just due to muscle persistance. I've shocked myself doing fast double taps on more than a few occasions where the second shot was within 2 to 3 inches of the first despite not actually aiming the second shot. But so far I only trust myself to do it in matches at 7 yards or less from the targets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom