Torture Test - WaltherForums
WaltherForums
 

Go Back   WaltherForums > Walther Firearms > PP and TP Series > PPK/S .22LR, New Production by Umarex, 2013 or later

Like Tree6Likes
  • 1 Post By scarecrow144
  • 1 Post By scarecrow144
  • 2 Post By scarecrow144
  • 2 Post By Austin Powers
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-03-2018, 01:01 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 7
scarecrow144 .22
Torture Test

Torture test summary- first of all, some people would not consider 405 rounds without maintenance to be a torture test. However, this is a 22lr, which is very dirty ammo and is known to be finicky. I'm also on a budget. Out of 405 rounds, I shot 30 CCI 40 grain CPRN MiniMags, and the rest were Winchester Westerns. It cycled flawlessly throughout the 405 rounds except for one Winchester cartridge which felt very underpowed (probably an ammo issue, not a gun issue). Four other rounds (all Winchesters) were squibs, and refused to fire even putting them through the gun a second time. All others, like I said, functioned fine. At about the 120 round mark the firearm started flinging very thick carbon paste at my face, but still functioned fine. I was extremely surprised by its overall performance throughout the test.

Coming home after work I cracked it open to clean. It WAS a pain, but still took no more than 15 minutes to scrub off the gunk and lube it back up. The fouling was pretty heavily caked on, especially around the chamber. The rifling in the barrel was completely filled with fouling, yet a copper brush soaked in gun cleaner fixed it after about 15 strokes.

The wear wasn't bad at all, just where you'd expect it. After today I'm at 885 rounds through the pistol in total. No cracks, even with the heat of rapid shooting, and just wear of the finish where the slide contacts the frame.

Overall I'm purely in love with this pistol, especially after today. I think people have a tendency to give it a bad rap for the "pot metal" material, but I think that is hardly justified. It's a solid, reliable platform that should last years of hard use and abuse, and well worth the $300 to buy brand new.

Sorry for the long read, hopefully it will debunk many of the myths and gripes surrounding this well-made pistol.
Austin Powers likes this.
scarecrow144 is offline   Reply With Quote
Register
Old 10-03-2018, 01:04 AM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 7
scarecrow144 .22
Just a few pics to spice up the review...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_20181002_165046_508_1538542914897.jpg (59.2 KB, 23 views)
File Type: jpg 20181002_233442_1538542933264.jpg (27.6 KB, 25 views)
File Type: jpg 20181002_233516_1538542951181.jpg (30.5 KB, 19 views)
File Type: jpg 20181002_234116_1538542973527.jpg (23.6 KB, 22 views)
File Type: jpg 20181002_234741_1538542999914.jpg (35.5 KB, 17 views)
Austin Powers likes this.
scarecrow144 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2018, 05:36 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 163
KDKSAIL .22
Not sure that 400 rounds comes anywhere near to a '..torture test..'. I regularly put 300-500 rounds through mine in a range session without so much as a hiccup....with only the usual few failure-to-eject and failure-to-fire, depending on the ammo. I think I've gone as high as 600 or 700 rounds but had to quit only because I ran out of both ammo and time. I have five mags, so putting 50 rounds down range in relatively 'rapid-fire' ain't difficult and the pistol doesn't seem to mind one little bit. I've been doin' this for the past couple/few years and probably have 10,000-12,000 rounds through this great little pistol without much more than some wear marks on the underside of the slide surfaces. Insofar as ammo is concerned...pretty much all .22 rimfire ammo is '..dirty..' (though CCI Mini Mags and Remington Golden Bullet seem less so).

On really HOT days during summer, I will occasionally have trouble with a fresh round seating properly in the chamber and going into battery. This is probably because some .22 ammo casing will expand just a bit because of the heat and residue buildup of spent powder and 'wax' from the ammo coating. I'm pretty sure that the heat of the day is the problem rather than the ammo. If I remember to put the ammo boxes in the cooler that I usually bring along for water and iced tea on hot days...the problem goes away.
KDKSAIL is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Old 10-03-2018, 07:27 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 7
scarecrow144 .22
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDKSAIL View Post
Not sure that 400 rounds comes anywhere near to a '..torture test..'.
Like I said, most people wouldn't consider it a torture test by any means. My main goal was to show how the hatred some people have for the pistol is completely unjustifiable. It bothers me, Walther and Umarex spent their time and resources designing this pistol, which turned out to be an excellent product, and it seems like all it's gotten is trash talk on reviews and public forums.
Yoxford and Austin Powers like this.
scarecrow144 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2018, 11:41 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 163
KDKSAIL .22
We'd all like it better if the new Walther/Umarex PPK/S .22 was manufactured from steel rather than cast ZAMAK alloy and produced in a Walther Arms firearms plant rather than a UMAREX air gun plant....but if it were, few of us would've bought one...because the selling price would have been way TOO MUCH for the market to bear for a .22 chambered pistol, used primarily for '..plinking..'. As it is the new ZAMAK-alloy Walther/Umarex PPK/S .22 fits the bill quite nicely.

Should the selling price for these great little pistols be lower ??..You bet !!....but the James Bond-factor ("..with a delivery like a brick through a plate glass window.."....even it that was for a 7.65mm/.32) mystique that probably adds to the price.
KDKSAIL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2018, 07:42 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Wildtoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Blythewood, SC
Posts: 509
Wildtoad .22
I like reading positive posts. Thanks for doing so.
__________________
Tom

Walther (2009) PPK .380, (2013) PPK/S .22, Ruger (2017) LCP .380, Henry (2017) Mares Leg .22
Wildtoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2018, 09:28 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Austin Powers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: East Coast, USA
Posts: 1,138
Austin Powers .22
Nice review.

You don't have to worry about the gun wearing out from a few hundred rounds, much less cracking or any other such damage. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the assertions that the slide will crack with use is all just ad-hominem based off of outdated information in regards to the P22, which is a completely different pistol altogether, but unfortunately Walther USA's incompetence mislabeling the PPK/S .22 as being constructed of "zinc diecast" alloy has placed an undeserved stigma on this pistol.
I have long since contacted Walther Germany on the matter after discovering that Walther Arms USA had mislabeled the slide material of the PPQ .22 as "zinc diecast" when it is in fact an aluminum alloy, and it turns out that they mislabeled the PPK/S .22 as well. According to Walther Germany, the PPK/S .22 is constructed from some sort of "proprietary alloy" which is "much stronger than ZAMAK" and not even necessarily zinc-based at all because they made it sound as if it was an aluminum alloy, but I can't be sure because English obviously isn't their first language and it seems like they were using Google Translate to communicate with me. So yeah, whatever this mystery metal is, it's not ZAMAK like the P22. My guess is that the PPK/S .22 is in fact constructed from an aluminum alloy, just as the PPQ .22 and Walther/Colt 1911 .22s are, which were manufactured around the same time as the PPK/S .22 was when it first debuted.

Unfortunately, the damage has been done thanks to Walther Arms USA, so now it has been identified as "zinc diecast" (i.e. ZAMAK) for so long that everyone has long since written it off as a cheaply constructed replica which doesn't deserve to wear the Walther banner and will assuredly break from regular use.
Meanwhile, the PPK/S .22 has been on the market since 2013 and I've yet to see a single report of slide failure, despite there being folks who claim to have put tens of thousands of rounds thorough theirs, not to mention reports of PPK/S .22s surviving catastrophic case blowouts which have destroyed many a P22. So obviously they're not as flimsy as folks believe.

I've owned my PPK/S .22 since October 2015 and so far the only issues I have ever had with it were 100% ammo-related. (For some reason, mine either doesn't like Remington Golden Bullet or I just plain got a bad batch of the stuff, as it has resulted in numerous FTEs and one stuck case, yet CCI Mini Mag runs flawlessly.)

Bottom line, the Walther/Umarex PPK/S .22 got a bad rep thanks to a combination of Walther USA mislabeling it as ZAMAK and the fact that many folks are used to PPKs which were hand-fitted, high-quality pieces which would easily cost upwards of $1000 today, yet hold these $300-$400 pistols to the same standards.
When judged by their own merits, they make great range guns for the price, which is why most folks who actually own them tend to like them, and generally have no complaints aside from the heavy DA trigger.
cocojo and Yoxford like this.
__________________
I've entrusted my life to a S&W PPK/S-1, it may not be able to stop the illusive 7ft/300Lbs+ Meth Head wearing 5 layers of denim and wielding a car door as a shield, but I'm fairly certain I can outrun such a beast, especially after dumping 7 rounds of .380 ACP into him.
Austin Powers is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   WaltherForums > Walther Firearms > PP and TP Series > PPK/S .22LR, New Production by Umarex, 2013 or later


Search tags for this page

22lr torture test

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.