.25 pistol

.22lr actually hits about twice as hard as .25 lol.

Yeah that's what I'll probably do, poor lady thought it was a .22 and wondered why it wouldn't fire.

Out of an 18 inch barrel, yes. Out of a 2.5 inch barrel, .22lr and .25 ACP are roughly the same with .22lr having a slight edge.

Yikes.
.25 is absolutely dog shit.

You're honestly better off taking that thing to a pawn shop and trading it for a handful of ninja stars.

it's the best in it's size class, anything better is going to be at least a little bit larger.
it can and will kill but it's significantly less powerful than even .32.
.32 pistols can get pretty small but the smallest of them tend to have issues.
Beretta's .32 tomcats for example have a history of cracked frames though I've heard it's been fixed

.25 still penetrates deeper due to a copper jacket and slightly more projectile weight. Added reliability too compared to .22lr

oh and the gun itself is just a cheap german import like röhm/RG or erma.
probably a lot of die cast parts.
you should take a magnet to it to see how much is steel

Attached: 333247_01_rohm_rg_model_26_25_pistol_640.jpg (640x480, 54K)

I mean the fact we're comparing it to .22lr at all says magnitudes.

OPs gun is a neat range toy addition to his collection, but probably shouldn't be used as a primary ccw.

A whistle won't horribly maim or murder someone.
A whistle saves lives, doesn't destroy them.

Sounds like another reason not to use the rape whistle then

Sometimes a life needs to be destroyed.

.25 seems to work fine as long as you're up close

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasily_Blokhin

>Then, without a hearing, the reading of a sentence or any other formalities, each prisoner was brought in and restrained by guards while Blokhin shot him once in the base of the skull with a German Walther Model 2 .25 ACP pistol.

>His count of 7,000 shot in 28 days remains the most organized and protracted mass murder by a single individual on record,[3] and saw him being named the Guinness World Record holder for 'Most Prolific Executioner' in 2010

>laughs in rimlock
Have fun with your FTFs, at least you'll get proficient at clearing jam!

are you trying to imply rapists dont deserve to be killed on sight

It's barely enough to kill reliably.

Handgun design has come a long way since pistols like that were designed.
On one hand, application of polymer frames and the tilt-barrel recoil system produces guns of similar size and substantially lower weight, in more effective calibers -- consider Kel-Tec P32/P3AT and Ruger LCP.
On the other hand, the same blowback system, enhanced with a chamber-ring delay system, allows guns of completely comparable weight to be substantially smaller, again in more powerful cartridges (Seecamp .32 and .380).
To be sure, there are .25s smaller than that, but it's still hard to find a niche where they're any better choice than one of the modern .32s

The NAA minirevolvers are also worth comparing -- the short-barreled .22 magnum version is significantly more powerful; only slightly smaller, but more concealable in a pocket as it is less "gun-shaped". And the .22 short/.22LR versions neatly bracket .25 ACP's ballistics, while both being much smaller.
(On the other hand, these take more practice to use well than any of the autopistols.)

Attached: 25ACP -- Jeff Cooper's Commentaries, Vol. 4, No. 14.png (1094x372, 75K)

Okay rapist sympathizer.

You better not be disarming your elder, hopefully you will give her a nice pistol in return

Attached: 1510715170860.jpg (1200x1602, 987K)

faggot

Listen bro. I tend to be a lot less "KILL! KILL! KILL!" than most people here, but even I gotta ask, is this a hill worth dying on? We're talking about rapists here.

.22 magnum won't be much better from a 1.625" barrel

Attached: IMG_7796.png (754x460, 58K)

It will kill

Attached: 20190602_162552.jpg (1048x786, 332K)

It is a belly gun.

It is better than nothing

Doug mercada!!!!

Rape is a function of the patriarchy. Why are you defending male privilege?

ITT: user proves that Jow Forums is the easiest board to troll

Attached: 680df7b9-ead0-4044-bfad-b63b0f6f9adb..jpg (480x317, 28K)

Note that ballisticsbytheinch uses solid barrels for everything. So a 2" barrel is ~1.3" of chamber, plus ~0.7" of rifling for .22WMR, vs ~1" of chamber, plus ~1" of rifling for .22LR.
Whereas NAA minirevolvers listed barrel length is just the rifled portion, and excludes the cylinder with the chamber in it.
Also it doesn't account for cylinder gaps, though there's no reason that effect should be different between .22LR and .22 WMR.

So it seems easier to just look at the test data from NAA:
northamericanarms.com/ballistics/
Fastest 40gr .22LR (1-5/8"):
>Federal Gold Medal Target avg 727fps
Fastest 40gr .22WMR (1-1/8"):
>Winchester Super X avg 879fps
Fastest 40gr .22WMR (1-5/8"):
>Winchester Super X avg 927fps
That's a pretty big improvement: +200 fps at the same barrel length, and +150fps even when you give .22LR the benefit of a 1-5/8" barrel vs .22WMR out of a 1-1/8" barrel (so we're comparing guns of similar, though not identical, physical size).

30gr@1195=95 ftlbs
40gr@883=69 ftlbs
50gr@754=63 ftlbs

I didn't calculate for all loads... but that doesn't look to be significantly more powerful than .25

Just my opinion though.

45gr@820=67 ftlbs
50gr@785=68 ftlbs

That's BBTI data for 25 ACP from a 950 Jetfire

.25 Reckt

based gramma.

Fucking hell that was good

/thread

ITT: user proves that if you say something retarded under the guise of irony, you still said something retarded

Bullshit. Anything is a weapon. And I do mean ANYTHING.

Old pocket pistols are fun as hell.

Pic related: it's mine.

Attached: Rigarmi Brescia.jpg (2382x2006, 954K)

That's one of the nice .25 acps. Good materials and machining. Something to carry in the vest pocket of suit jacket.

FYI, the pistol used on Travis' wrist gun was a Smith and Wesson Model 61, chambered in .22lr, which is only a few feet per second slower at a 1/6th of the price (and reliability).

>use a fist to punch harder than a 25acp
that may very well be true, but the energy of the 25 is focused on a 1/20in^2 surface and can be delivered from a distance. OP should be happy with a gun he can hide behind his balls

Dude, you just got a fucking bb gun. Shot will literally bounce off of your target half of the time.

>.22mag won’t be much better from a 1.625” barrel
Only if you disregard the flashbang that comes with every shot

That's not a bug, it's a feature.

Took my keltec pmr30 to an indoor range for the first time yesterday (I usually go to an outdoor one that’s closer and cheaper). Fucker was far and away the loudest pistol on the line because fireballs. I wish there was more common 22wmr loaded for pistols length barrels.

Yeah, that is what I mean. A gun like that is a deterrent tool, not a weapon. Couple of barks like that and your opponent is likely to get quite worried. And that is why the world got the concept of pocket and bicycle guns in the first place.

>Yikes.
>.25 is absolutely dog shit.

The whole point of the .25 ACP was to duplicate .22 LR performance (from a rifle-length barrel) in a handgun.

>I mean the fact we're comparing it to .22lr at all says magnitudes.
The only thing it says to me is that many people here are totally ignorant of the .25's history or purpose. OFC we're comparing it to .22LR, that is the whole fucking point of the cartridge.

>And that is why the world got the concept of pocket and bicycle guns in the first place.
Keep in mind that when those guns were first invented medicine sucked ass compared to the way it works today.

In 1900 if you took a bullet wound, even a lowly .22 short, there was a very good chance it would kill you. There were no antibiotics, no skilled trauma surgeons, etc.

>bicycle guns
looks like I learned a new term today
>deterrent tool
yes, but what if you mag dump all 30 rounds of deterrent?

>The whole point of the .25 ACP was to duplicate .22 LR performance (from a rifle-length barrel) in a handgun.
Nope. The point was to duplicate .22 LR performance when each are fired from the same 2" barrel. The only intended advantage over .22 LR was improved reliability due to a proper centerfire primer and features like the extractor groove. Unfortunately, the larger caliber tends to make it a poorer penetrator, so you're actually accepting a slightly weaker round than .22 LR, as well as a slightly bulkier or lower-capacity gun, in exchange for a reliability advantage that's negligible compared to well-chosen .22 LR ammo.

>In 1900 if you took a bullet wound, even a lowly .22 short, there was a very good chance it would kill you.
Today if you take a .22 short (a real, full-power .22 short, not a CB short or some primer-only gallery round), there is still a very good chance it will kill you, and a near certainty it will kill you, if it's well-aimed within a few yards.

Having a loaded gun is 90+% of armed self-defense. Cartridge is maybe 1%, less important than capacity, which itself barely matters since most encounters are resolved with one or two shots, or ergonomics/accuracy, which itself barely matters because most criminals will flee the moment they recognize their target has a gun. A soldier or police officer needs a more powerful sidearm, because he's far more likely to face determined enemies, who he actually needs to destroy.

There certainly was less emphasis on power at the time. In the US anyway; the Brits in this period had revolvers in .455, which had a radius like a railway tunnel.

Attached: 1493025700356.jpg (489x640, 50K)

It was a common term. Bicycle guns, velo guns, pocket guns - they were all small and handy, and specifically for self defense. Purse guns were the female version and some times had mother-of-pearl grips.

Attached: 6874738056_cfa1b10c7a[1].jpg (500x466, 270K)

Oh, and vest pocket gun was also a term. Back when we had vest pockets - and vests.

Attached: PR3_186_9d907436-f84f-4b56-ba3d-9bc767ed69a5[1].jpg (1500x2121, 338K)

>all these concerns about 22lr reliability
they could have just picked a tiny 22lr revolver. tiny pocket pistols don’t fit more or much more than 6 rounds either and 8 shot 22lr revolvers aren’t too rare

>There certainly was less emphasis on power at the time
For most purposes you simply didn't need much power, as covers quite well.

>Brits in this period had revolvers in .455
They also had them in .476, as well as .577, though these were intended more as army officer's sidearms or a hunter's defense against dangerous animals in the colonies in Africa and India (e.g. Howdah guns)