| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the .22 Short article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled edit
Just wanted to point out to anyone who is reading this but has never shot a firearm, saying that the .22 short has 'low recoil' is an understatement; even in handguns and revolvers, it has no perceived recoil at all, atleast not in my hands.--Stevekl 03:44, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- It does have the tiniest bit, enough that .22 Short automatics used in Olypmic rapid fire events have recoil compensators. That said, I've heard that with the muzzle brake, you can balance an empty brass on the front sight, and empty the magazine, and not knock off the brass. Wonder if I can find a source for that anecdote, it might be interesting to include... At any rate, the High Standard Olympic rapid fire pistol, in .22 Short with recoil comp, can be seen here: http://www.highstandard.com/guns.html scot 13:53, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, and FWIW, my Crosman 2240 pellet pistol, which fires a 14 grain pellet at about 400 fps (compared to 29 grains at about 1000 for the .22 Short) does have discernable recoil--under the right conditions, you can see the front sight lift about 1/4" upon firing. The 2240 is pretty hefty--29 oz. according to Crosman--and with the sear engagement dialed down to nearly nothing (that's a custom part I made) the trigger breaks if you just think "bang". Granted, unless you are firing it one handed, with a relaxed grip, and the lightest trigger pull, there probably won't be a movement. I haven't tried making a muzzle brake for the 2240 yet, but I have an idea for a modification to remove slack between the trigger and sear, so I might have to consider that just to see the impact it has. It should have about 200 milligrams of gas to work with, and the residual pressure should be fairly high, since I know people get significant velocity improvements by going from 7 to 15 inch barrels. scot 14:07, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah I have used these and I agree that there is extremely little recoil. However I have big shoulders so I don't really find the recoil of a shotgun or large calibre magnum cartridge too bad at all, so I don't know if you can count my experience with them unfortunately.Spec ops commando 22:46, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Might it be possible for Harvey Henkelman, or anyone else with one of those NAA mini-revolvers, to retake the picture with a ruler or maybe a quarter in the picture, just to show how incredibly small the gun is. You cant really tell in the current picture. There is no point of reference. EO —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.180.196.202 (talk) 04:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
The history of the .22 rim fire and other rim fire cartridge calibers from Europe where they originated would be an interesting addition to both articles. Rim fire ammunition and this. My experience starts with a GI .22LR in South East Asia where the modest recoil, very low noise and light weight were all plusses. It was also 100% effective stopper, which is not unusual in those conditions. NeoconShooter.