Author Topic: P22 Pro or Con? (Read 2518 times)

Old Griz · « **on:** June 30, 2009, 06:17:41 PM »

I want to get a .22 kit gun. I really want a S&W 317, however, the $735 price tag blows that one out of the water. I saw a Walther P22 this week at the gun store and really like the small size and the feel. I've never fired one, or know anyone that has it. So I was hoping you guys could let me know you experience with this firearm, good and bad.

Thanks!

Hodr · « **Reply #1 on:** June 30, 2009, 08:11:09 PM »

I carry a P22 in a Fobus holster. It took about 200 rds and a cleaning or so before it started absolutely trustworthy feeding. I do not use this for conceled carry. There are better alternatives. But this along with a camo ruger 1022 make an absolutely delightful day out four wheeling or hiking here in Az.

blindhari

oldandslow · « **Reply #2 on:** July 01, 2009, 01:23:41 AM »

I had one for a couple of years and liked it. Not the most accurate .22 pistol I've shot but it was fun to shoot and it gave me no problems. It would shoot everything I ever loaded in it, even some ammo at least 30 years old. The only reason I still don't have is the #2 grandson decided he really wanted one earlier this year. The local dealer can't get them and I took pity on him and now he has it.

44 Man · « **Reply #3 on:** July 01, 2009, 10:46:51 AM »

I owned one for a short while and really enjoyed it. It was light and handy and fit my hand to a 'T'. It shot quite well and the only reason I don't still have it is that I found a 'Pre Warning' 4 5/8" barreled Ruger in the box and had to have it. 44 Man

Biohazard Monk · « **Reply #4 on:** July 01, 2009, 11:16:50 AM »

I've had mine for about a year now. Probably ~1000 rounds through the tube, mine is still picky with the ammo, it only really likes the CCI Mini Mags. Other than that, it's a blast to take to the range! Has a lot of accessories made by walther that can customize it without breaking the bank.

jager · « **Reply #5 on:** July 01, 2009, 02:31:28 PM »

I've shot many of them since it has been introduced (both length barrels). Almost everyone I know that owns one loves the way it handles and shoots; however, just about everyone agrees that it is "picky" about what it will shoot and feed well. Put your cheap Remingtons in another gun and don't rely on it for your most "serious" task. I've seen the inside of its slide after a few thousand rounds fired and I'm not impressed with the wear marks from the "steel" rubbing on the aluminum frame. (Too many "bumps" rather than the typical smooth wear of the "mating" of materials.)
It may be fine for a "trail" gun, which seems to be your primary purpose for the purchase, but I'd keep around a more durable pistol for target work. While the standard Ruger MarkIII is not as "cool" looking, or lightweight, I prefer it for accuracy and reliability over all its other competitors (jmo).

woodchukhntr · « **Reply #6 on:** July 01, 2009, 03:58:56 PM »

I've had one for a few years now and have had no problem with it. I'm not too keen on how elevation is changed by using different front sight blades, they are only plastic. Walther could have done better that that! It is not all that accurate, but I didn't expect it to be.

greener · « **Reply #7 on:** July 03, 2009, 01:36:11 AM »

Pro: Light, small and easy to carry for outdoor activities. Makes a great snake and varmint gun for fishing and the like, although an S&W Airweight has the same light and small factor and might be better for bigger "snakes." The single action trigger is fairly good. Mine is fun to shoot and I enjoy it. It's hard to find many parts on the gun that will rust. Mine has no problems with ammo other than feeding Aguila and all my .22 semi-autos have a problem with that brand.

Con: The small size, light weight and short barrel make the pistol difficult to shoot accurately. They will find every shooting flaw you have. The sights are rather poor for fine adjustments. The slide is zinc alloy and can be chewed up by the trigger bar ears. At 600 rounds mine was leaving slide shavings in the pistol. That went away when I polished the trigger bar ears. I consider a complete disassembly and polishing a must for longevity of the pistol. The "fixes" are found in the P22 Bible (Rimfire Central). The older (up until about a year ago) pistols have a lousy extractor. Casings tend to pop straight up or back into your face and down your shirt. The newer ones have an improved extractor. Older model magazines can have feeding problems. This has been fixed with the newer models.

About the only pistols in the P22 size are the Beretta Bobcat and the Taurus PT22. They probably have better materials of construction than the P22, but I haven't fired one of those enough to form a "better", "worse" or "same" opinion.

A fairly high percentage of P22 owners seem to be fanatical about them. I'm not sure if that's despite a number of shortcomings or because of them. Mine is fun to shoot. When I work hard and everything clicks I can shoot it fairly accurately, but it is by no means a target pistol. Currently the P22 prices around Richmond are $349 or higher. For that price, I can get a Buck Mark, Ruger or S&W 22A. All are larger but they are well ahead of the P22 in reliability, construction and accuracy. 22A's can be found for at least $100 less.

jlwilliams · « **Reply #8 on:** July 03, 2009, 03:01:45 AM »

I like mine. I don't clean it every time I shoot it, only when it stops feeding. As already posted, they are only marginaly accurate but good enough for alot of outdoor activities. I put a light on mine and have shot many rats at night with it. I go into my bird pens when the birds are inside, lift or tip the feed stations and shoot the little bastards as they scurry out. It's close up and at least partially 'point' shooting so the little Walther gets the job done.

The light weight and compact size make it easy to have with you when you are outdoors. I think the trade off is worth it. It won't last as long as some better guns but that's OK. Get it, shoot it and consider the money you spent for a gun that will last about a decade as a decade of wear not put onto a Woodsman or an Ace. Those are guns that will last a lifetime but if you have one you don't want to put the wear on it by taking it out fishing and such.

Old Griz · « **Reply #9 on:** July 03, 2009, 01:59:27 PM »

Thanks for all the input guys. I think you have talked me out of getting one. It doesn't sound very rugged or accurate which are needed in a kit gun. Unless I run across a S&W 622 my next choice is the 4" Buck Mark. It is a tad smaller than the 4 3/4" Ruger Mk.III. (Unless someone talks me out of the Buck Mark.) Until then I will make due with a .22 SP101.

Brett · « **Reply #10 on:** July 03, 2009, 05:05:53 PM »

Old Griz, As for a kit gun I think you already have about the best choice you could have. That SP101 will stand up to more rough handling and abuse than any auto loader.

Not that I think you would intentionally abuse your gun it's just the nature of what a kit gun is all about IMO. i.e.; Getting dragged threw the brush on hikes in the woods, the possibility of an accidental dunking during a stream crossing or while out in a boat or canoe, or even just getting caught in the rain on one of those hikes in the woods. Do any four wheeling or horse back trail riding on dusty trails? None of these will have any affect on feeding or cycling of a solid revolver like the SP101.

emsemt911 · « **Reply #11 on:** October 16, 2009, 07:07:58 PM »

OK, I made the jump and bought a P22 today. I will say that I was pleased on the way it fit in my hands.
It is well made, "controls" are easy to reach. I will be shooting it in the next few days. I have to work nights and not able to shoot.

emsemt911 · « **Reply #12 on:** October 20, 2009, 10:08:20 AM »

I am very pleased with my p22. It is the AK series with the 3.6 inch barrel. At 7 yds I was shooting 1.5 inch groups with an occasional 2 inch groups with 5-10 rounds. It took me a while to get use to the sights, but my Browning Becnchmark shoots about the same groups. If I want tighter groups I will pull out my target models of my Colt and Benchmark. Those guns are picky on ammo, but the p22 shot everything I fed it today. I shoot Wolf and Federal. It is the most accurate in my other .22lr and the p22

It is a great gun for my purpose. A sidearm for me to h ave while just messing around in the field or to shoot my hogs in my traps.

Savage · « **Reply #13 on:** October 21, 2009, 02:57:48 AM »

I have looked at the P22s. I like the size and feel of the pistol. Problem is, I can't get past the zinc alloy (Pot Metal) slide, plastic sights, and spotty function. I played with one belonging to a friend for a couple weeks and decided to pass. It shot ok point shooting at close targets, but beyond that it just wasn't for me. My friend is quite fond of the pistol. Different strokes, I guess.
Savage

Keith L · « **Reply #14 on:** October 21, 2009, 11:58:52 AM »

Are you sure that the slide was pot metal? I consulted with a foundry that made frames for another manufacturer, and they used high grade aircraft alloy aluminum. I guess I wouldn't think zinc would stand up on a slide.

Savage · « **Reply #15 on:** October 21, 2009, 12:25:18 PM »

Keith,
It could be another alloy. Aluminum would also be a poor choice for the slide. A zinc alloy slide would have more mass and would likely be more durable. Either way they most likely last a good long time with normal use.
Savage

kynardsj · « **Reply #16 on:** October 21, 2009, 12:39:20 PM »

Really liked my P22 but traded it to a friend for what, I don't even remember now. It was a good, reliable gun with the right ammo in it but if I had the option from the start I'd get a 22 wheel gun. I've also had my stainless 22 Single Six for many years and to me it's top of the line.

Couger · « **Reply #17 on:** October 22, 2009, 01:13:25 AM »

Quote from: Old Griz

Thanks for all the input guys. I think you have talked me out of getting one. It doesn't sound very rugged or accurate which are needed in a kit gun. Unless I run across a S&W 622 my next choice is the 4" Buck Mark. It is a tad smaller than the 4 3/4" Ruger Mk.III. (Unless someone talks me out of the Buck Mark.) Until then I will make due with a .22 SP101.

I'm not familiar with the Buckmark, but have shot Ruger MkI's and MkII's all my life and they are superb pistols. My current ".22LR hiker" is a M22/45 frame I matched with the upper ass'y of a 4 3/4" MkII. Pretty light weight, and dependable. Sometime I hope to get a Tactical Solutions (Boise, ID) aluminum upper ass'y for the same pistol - and it will be extremely lightweight!

Tactical Solutions also makes aluminum uppers for the Browning Buckmark - so visit their site and check out this high quality after-market upper assembly! TacticalSol.com also makes aluminum drop-in 10/22 barrels (with a steel bore sleeve, like the uppers for the Ruger and Browning pistols).

However nothing wrong with an SP101 - except their weight! Sometimes S&W M34 or M63 kitguns can be found for a decent price, altho they're 6-shooters.

emsemt911 · « **Reply #18 on:** October 22, 2009, 01:20:58 AM »

I also have a ruger and a Buckmark. Their weight was the reason I wanted the p22.
It is roughly half their weight. I wanted a light semi to carry. If I want to drive nails, I will grab my Colt Target .22lr.
NOTHING I have shot beats its accuracy.

WIL TERRY · « **Reply #19 on:** October 22, 2009, 06:38:06 AM »

WELL NOW, I guess it is my turn to be the turd in the punch bowl. I won a brand new WALTHER P22 a few years ago. It seemed like a toy to me but my wife loved it. By the time she put three or four thousand rounds through it, it had turned into a rattling hunk of junk. I mean to tell you boys, a real POS !!! So, off it goes to the environs of Springfield MASS in the catacombs of Mr Wesson's fondest dreams where it was rebuilt from the ground up. The gun I got back had the same serial number but I still wonder if it was really the same gun in the ferrous flesh, or a semi imitation ferrous flesh as it were. I tossed it into the safe where it languised bored and unfed for several years while my wife put 10,000 rounds through a REAL Walther, the PP22, without so much as a serious hiccup.
In June past I found the old P22 in the safe and knowing it wasn't worth nor fit to being in the company of real guns I dumped it in NM for the grand and glorious price of $0.00. I gave the damn thing away so no one could say I sold 'em a real clunker.

emsemt911 · « **Reply #20 on:** October 23, 2009, 05:40:52 PM »

early models did have problems, but they have been fixed

Mikey · « **Reply #21 on:** October 24, 2009, 01:55:06 AM »

Mine is about the most 'fun gun' I have ever owned. I purchased 3 additional magazines with it for a total of four and I have not had one jam, misfeed or problem with it since I started shooting it. It is just way too much fun and you can have far too much fun knocking over cans and the like to want to stop. I just plain like the darn thing for the ergonomics (way it fits and feels in my hand), grip change capability, easy recoil and adjustable sights. It is just plain fun and it fits so very nicely in a field jacket pocket.

I ordered the longer barrel (mine is the 3.5") and slide extension but the gunshop where I bought the pistol moved to another county and I haven't followed up on it yet.

My buddy and I agree about these guns in that if we wanted 50 yd Squirrel accuracy we would use our Ruger MK2s. If we are just kickin' cans and want to outshoot his son (just cuz we can) we use the Walthers.

The more I shoot this pistol the more I like it and the more I am reeeally tempted to try and find one of Walther's new P380s (just about the same size). These things are just way too much fun. jmtcw.

AkRay · « **Reply #22 on:** November 05, 2009, 11:34:09 AM »

One advantage of the P22 is that they are so easy to put a suppressor on. The end of the barrel is threaded, so adding the can is no problem. My friend has a great time shooting subsonic ammo through his silenced P22.

DC · « **Reply #23 on:** January 29, 2010, 11:01:10 AM »

I know that this is an old thread but I recently sold my P22.
I loved the way it felt. It had a great trigger and was more accurate after finding my sight picture that it should have been.
All that aside, it required a lot of cleaning and would not feed many brands of ammo. The feeding issue took the fun out of the gun so to speak. I bought a Buck Mark which I think is far and away a better 22 semi auto. JMHO.

DC · « **Reply #24 on:** February 19, 2010, 12:28:59 PM »

I had one for a while. When it had ammo that would feed it performed great...very accurate for it's size. The "what it would feed" issue was the killer. Mine at least was very picky. Also, it needed cleaning much more frequently than my other 22's....I ended up trading it in and buying a Buckmark Camper.....which is wonderful...shoots any and every kind, make of ammo and fits great in the hand.

bunkysdad · « **Reply #25 on:** May 29, 2010, 11:59:10 AM »

semi old thread, but I wanted to say I like my P22. It does require some cleaning to feed well, but cleaning is a normal part of shooting, so I am fine with that. I have noticed that the slide has a tendancy to drag ever so slightly across the hammer when the drawn slide is released, and if not released sharply, it can actuallt cause the pistol not to go into battery. On Rimfire Central, the guys have put all of their best efforts and improvements into a gathering of information called the P22 Bible. It is chocked full of valuable information on things that can be done to make the gun really sing. Now in my opinion, if you want a gun that sings right out of the box, how can you go wrong with a Ruger Mark series pistol? I realize that there is a lot of wasted benefit to shooting Stingers in the P22, but mine really likes them.

.50cal · « **Reply #26 on:** June 03, 2010, 03:44:25 PM »

I had one for a couple months shot it about 1000 times

It jammed about every 4 clips. Keeping it cleaned and oiled was very important, I like revolvers soooo a trade sent it down the road. Really wasnt a bad gun just not as accurate as I would have liked.