[Johnnyk]

Well it's finally happened... I'm purchasing a PPK in .22lr. Actually a PPK-L model made in '68 with the aluminum frame. Not inexpensive to be sure, but the company I'm getting it from offered me some very good cash for two Walther brand trade-ins towards the PPK-L.
Now for the "Not so great" part. The gun does not come with a box, any papers or test target and comes with one magazine. I see Earls has PPK .22 magazines listed on his website, but they are $150. I was planning on buying 2 additional mags and the thought of spending $300 plus shipping for two magazines makes me a tad nauseous.

Is there any other outlet you guys are aware of that might have'em for less? I understand they are most likely out of production, supply and demand stuff but just thought I'd ask now and not be sorry later.


Thanks guys!

 

[Jimbo80]

I was planning on buying 2 additional mags and the thought of spending $300 plus shipping for two magazines makes me a tad nauseous.

Welcome to Club .22!

I have yet to find anything remotely like a reasonably priced factory mag for the .22 PPK. Beware of imitations.

 

[TheWatcher]

Not sure if you want to take a chance, but Numrich has an aftermarket mag in stock. Ebay and gunbroker are dry right now.

https://www.gunpartscorp.com/products/194020

 

[BlitzPig]

Numrich's "aftermarket" mags, no matter what they are for, are usually made by Triple K. Run away screaming from them.

 

[halfmoonclip]

Lumping the PPK in with the PP and PPK/S isn't especially reassuring.
Moon

 

[Pantera Mike]

I see Earls has PPK .22 magazines listed on his website, but they are $150. I was planning on buying 2 additional mags and the thought of spending $300 plus shipping for two magazines makes me a tad nauseous.

In times like this, it’s worthwhile to remember the famous quote once used by a Rolls Royce salesman in England:

“The quality will be remembered long after the price is forgotten”.

You only NEED one magazine. Anything more is a luxury. Only you can decide what that luxury is worth to you. But a less-expensive magazine that doesn’t satisfy will definitely be less rewarding than the expensive one that does....

 

[Johnnyk]

Earls it is! (For one)

Thanks guys

 

[TheWatcher]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Walther-Ma...Sw2KRbnxc1:sc:USPSFirstClass!89052-8676!US!-1

Found one on ebay if you want to take a stab at it. Made by Manurhin but should fit.

 

[1917-1911M]

Sent Mec-Gar an e-mail to ask why they don't produce mags for the PP .22 pistols. Their construction seem simple enough. 1917

 

[1917-1911M]

Bet I can make a P22 mag work in in old .22 PP pistol. No mods to the pistol. The top of the follower needs chopping so that the hold open arm will be engaged reliably. The original is metal with a wing way out to the left side to engage the stop arm/ejector. The mag needs <0.03" removed from front/rear to match the depth of a PP mag. The width of the round portion where the P22 spring runs needs the od reduced <0.016" and the expanded tabs filed off. The button isn't going to likely work....way too tall. Fortunately it doesn't operate anything like on the P22. A new catch slot will need to be filed. The front, left lip filed to match the old mag and so it won't interfere with the ejector. I figure .... ten minutes with a strip of emery cloth roll and a file. Both mags hold a round at the same angle. The old breech rail runs neatly between the top lips of the P22 mag. But, will it feed? The rail gap at the rear of the mag is slightly wider on the old mag. Easy mod to a P22 mag. The P22 mag is slightly longer....won't be able to do anything about that. But, could build up the P22 base so the mag can't be over inserted.

Oh yeah, I'll be needing an old .22 PPK, PP, PPK/s, anything, as long as it is in beautiful condition. Sorry, I won't be able to return it. 1917

 

[MGMike]

M1917: You've anticipated a "future project" I've had in mind for some while. The key issues are the angle of top-round presention and the height of the lips above the horizontal plane of the frame; if they are, or can be made, the same as the original mag, a good potential is there.

Assuming that a modified P22 mag can be physically inserted into the grip, and that the new hole for the mag catch is above the existing one, the rest should be feasible. A U-shaped shim placed horizontally above the floor plate should take care of over-insertion.

You really don't need the loading button. Leave it out and stick a punch in the hole to depress the follower when loading.

I no longer have any P22 magazines to play with. Maybe I can find cheap some old models with short slots to cobble on.

M

 

[Jimbo80]

CPD makes mags up the street from my shop and does all their testing in our range. I spoke with them about it and there is just not enough folks wanting them to make the investment in tooling costs worthwhile.

 

[Jimbo80]

Found one on ebay if you want to take a stab at it. Made by Manurhin but should fit.

Sold...to me. Thanks for the heads up. Sad when $90 is a "good deal" for a mag.

 

[1917-1911M]

M1917: You've anticipated a "future project" I've had in mind for some while. The key issues are the angle of top-round presention and the height of the lips above the horizontal plane of the frame; if they are, or can be made, the same as the original mag, a good potential is there.

Assuming that a modified P22 mag can be physically inserted into the grip, and that the new hole for the mag catch is above the existing one, the rest should be feasible. A U-shaped shim placed horizontally above the floor plate should take care of over-insertion.

You really don't need the loading button. Leave it out and stick a punch in the hole to depress the follower when loading.

I no longer have any P22 magazines to play with. Maybe I can find cheap some old models with short slots to cobble on.

M

Yeah.....but I can't find my bag of magazines. I have a dozen and what looks simple from a distance...up close isn't quite the same. But I do have five short slot P22 mags in a drawer that I have cut the top and bottom off. I was going to be snarky and spot weld five or six together and make a 50 round, long, ugly magazine just so I could say....see...50 round mag.

OK, here is what I know so far. The top of an original steel PP magazine has a 70.85 degree slant, same as the P22. Measured up the back of the magazine and over a round. I mean, why wouldn't it...why reinvent the wheel? But, the front nose of the steel follower on the original is wider than the top of the P22 follower. 3/16" down, the P22 follower goes full width. So I need to either beef up the left front of the nose on the stock P22 follower or file the top off.Doing this interferes with the follower button but so what. P22 mags are extremely easy to load....besides the button is on the opposite side compared to an original and serves no purpose in a PP other than to pull the follower down. Agree, live with it.

Magazine width isn't a problem....front or rear. Magazine depth is and this might be the real killer. I measured all five of the old, sawn off mags and selected the one that was 0.001 thinner than the other two... The stock mag is 1.06'' front to rear.....P22 mags are 1.09". The magwell entrance on the PP measures 1.08 depth x 0.445 wide. The stock mag doesn't fit tightly....but it isn't sloppy either. Perhaps I could get by with a P22 mag filed down to 1.07". The steel is thin and even taking off 0.030 is going to be cutting it close. I've already done that though and the cut off mag fits. One of these is of no benefit for further testing....no bottom, no lips. I wouldn't throw it round....I'd treat it pretty gently. Although I can't destroy is with hand pressure by pressing or twisting....it just isn't nearly as indestructible as the original P22 mag.

Only two more modifications need to be made. The front, left edge of the lip on an original has been cut short so it won't interfere with the ejector/slide catch. The P22 front ear is right it the way....so off it goes to match as much as possible the original. On the P22 there are two expanded tabs. The would be of no benefit in a PP. In the P22 the top of the tabs press the mag disconnect safety up disengaging it. The bottom of the tabs catches on top of the mag catch. They are going to have to be either hammered back in or ground off. I ground them off.

With regard to the original mag catch, it is simply a small cut into the body of the mag so that the catch will engage the mag body. Pictures will clear all of this up for those not familiar with the details separating the function of the two mags. This appears to hit just slightly above where the two tab are stamped on the P22. The bottom of the notch on the PP is of no significance....it is the top edge of the cutout that determines how high or low the mag sits.

The only thing on both of my originals is the right edge of the nose has been ground to aid it in slipping over the mag catch.

So, it looks like a P22 mag can be made to fit in the magwell of a PP but that appears to be the hardest part. Both mags hold a round at the same angle. The with at the top, back of the original mags is slightly wider than that of the P22 but, the PP breech rail easily fits through P22 gap.

I will likely cut the mag catch notch in just to see how it works but since the practice mags don't have any top ears or a flange at the bottom to retain the base...that is as far as I will be able to go with them. After that I will need to modify a complete mag. The lips on a P22 don't exactly match those on an original but they hold a round at the same angle. The moment of release of the rim might be a bit different and that might make all the difference in feeding. Mags can be tricky. Anyway...I need to find my bag of mags...might be in the truck, might be at the farm. I have a couple and if necessary will modigy one of them. They all work fine, including a really old blued one. I wan't to measure some of the really old ones with a hope that they are thinner front to rear. Pictures next to illustrate what is going on. Going to post this before I lose it. Any errors I will correct. 1917

 

[1917-1911M]

It's not a drop in mag with simply a new mag catch slot. In 2007 or so Walther made the mags of thicker steel...B suffix they called them. Since then all the mags are of slightly heavier steel. If the outside dimensions are the same those will be the best candidates to cut down. I can tell already that all work should be done on the mag before the rear of the mag is thinned. That is where the stamped and folded steel is fastened. I've ground two down really thin and they haven't come apart but if you want to fasten the mag in a vise for filing the mag catch notch.....better to do it on mags with a stiff spine.

I don't really see any issue with the top of the mag being held at the same height as an original but the mag lips are a bit different. About the same height and somewhat similar but the front vertical ears are different. It won't be any problem to remove material from the front, left one so that it won't interfere with the ejector/slide catch. The breech rail fits fine although the original mags are a couple thousandths wider at the top rear cutout. Exactly how rounds will be released from the mag lips is not known and I think only shooting will answer that one.


Not all is lost on practicing on these old cut off mags though. A bit of practice on some worthless ones is teaching me the best approach. The camera is set up for some photos when I get a chance. It appears the top of the cutout for the left expanded tab will be modified for the mag catch hole. I think only the top position is of importance. Too bad they made the mags 0.030 deeper....making them fit is the hardest part. You can't test anything until the mags will go in the magwell. At least the lips aren't in the way and the mag is a bit too long. That is easier to deal with than if they were too short. 1917

 

[MGMike]

I wouldn't worry too much about the width of the follower unless it fouls the ejector or does not mate correctly with the hold open lug on the ejector.

As you've found, the tough part is getting the P22 mag to enter the frame. If the frame is 1.08" front-to-rear and the mag is 1.09", you'll need to remove .005" from both the front and the rear. With sheet metal, that's more than it sounds. There may not be enough material there to allow it. But don't assume that all mag wells in all frames are the same, or that they are uniform from top to bottom. Spotting with dykem will find the tight spots of interference, and since only the rear spine is flat, you may be able to fudge some on the curved front wall with judicious polishing inside the front of the mag well without significantly affecting its fit with correct mags.

M

 

[1917-1911M]

I think the hold open feature will be lost. The original PP mag has a metal follower and the left side at the front is all the way against the inner edge of the left side of the mag body. Placing a P22 cut off mag in there shows that the top of the stock mag definitely won't catch. I can cut that portion off and reshape the top of the follower as necessary....but with the follower inserted into a P22 mag, shoved into the PP magwell....it doesn't look like enough polymer engages the stop arm to last for long. Shooting will tell if I get that far. The metal band down the center of the rear of the mag is 0.006" thick at present. That is thin enough. No more off the rear of the mag. More can be taken off the barrel for the mag spring...but I've already taken off a lot. The mag fits but tightly. It needs to be a bit looser. The magwell might benefit from a good cleaning but all in all it is already in pretty good shape. I need to remove the grips for a better look at fitment.

The original mag is just smaller. Rear width of the mag is 0.43" and tapers inward toward the center of the mag immediately. The P22 is 0.444" and does not taper. I have not thinned the mag along the sides. Perhaps they are dragging on something inside the grips.

The round portion of the original mag that allows the full circle on the front of the follower measures 0.435 at the bottom, 0.429 at the top. And varies along the length slightly between the two. The P22 barrel measures 0.442 at the bottom and 0.439 at the top and varies along the length. At the base of the mag well a stock mag....bottom and top can be stuck in at an angle and there is plenty of room. You cannot align a stock mag with the proper rearward slant and insert it though. Too wide front to rear. When I look down the magwell from the top as the loose at the bottom mag moves up it becomes tighter and tighter in all dimensions. Possibly the magwell tapers but the original magazine is not tight at any point and with no slide installed will rattle slightly in the magwell. Tricky Germans.

You can see the cutout on the left side of the original mag so that there is no interference with the ejector. Note the metal follower reaches all the way to the left and if you look really closely you can see a tiny white area which is where there are light scratches from the bottom leg of the ejector when engaged by the follower. Note how narrow the top of the P22 follower is and that the left, front portion of the mag will likely interfere with the ejector. It should be easy to make it match the original somewhat.

Both mags seem to hold a round at exactly the same height with regard to the rear of the mag and at the same slant. The rim will be released just a bit later due to the longer rear lips on the P22. The larger difference seems to be the front section of the lips. The nose of the breech rail is tapered a bit inward and should have no problem engaging the base of the round. Height when seated will be determined by the top of the cutout for the mag catch. More can always be taken off...none can be put back.

In this photo I aligned the nose of the rounds with a square. You can see the position of the original catch cutout as it will sit above the expanded tabs on the P22 mag. The tabs will be removed.

Rear view.

Original follower engaging the ejector lower leg.



The P22 follower is iffy, even iffy with regard to wear of the steel leg against the polymer. It isn't an essential feature...if you don't have a mag for your PP anyway. I won't know how it works until a properly fitted mag is installed and test fired.

I'm not sure how the P22 mags are actually made. Stamped, crimped, folded but a center strip seems to be welded??? in some manner down the center. IOn the right is a stock mag and on the left one that has been filed and polished down to 0.006" at the center strip which is the thinnest point. I can't twist the mag but there is no benefit to further removal of material.

The mag slides easily in except for the last 1/2". It can be pressed all the way up but should not require any additional effort. Something is fitting too tightly but it doesn't appear to be at the bottom. That portion still wobbles a bit. I'll figure it out tomorrow. 1917

 

[MGMike]

Thanks for the photos. I think I've seen enough already to conclude that P22 mags are not the best choice for adaptation. I suspect that investigative time will be better spent on Astra Constable, Bernardelli or Bersa .22 mags, or any others that use the same grip angle as Walther's. The included angle between the back wall of the magazine and the presentation of the cartridge is critical, and can't be changed without messing up the geometry of the feed lips.

M

 

[1917-1911M]

Mike, making the mag fit requires far more work that I expected. Perhaps if someone has those mags you list they could provide some measurements. The fact that the P22 mag is 0.030" deeper front to rear is like you said...hard to cut down. The steel in magazines isn't thick to begin with and you can't really take easy methods to cut one down. A powered belt of emery cloth with cut quickly and with uniform, continuous movement will not cut evenly like a flat file will. The steel is amazingly hard compared to say a lawnmower blade.

If I can get one of these blanks to fit properly I will then likely try a complete mag. Cutting the left lip down won't be an issue. The slide catch notch isn't an issue. Getting the entire mag body cut to fit is the hard part....and I think I'm pretty good at this type of thing. I can then outline at least the steps to making a P22 mag fit and function....if indeed it ends up feeding properly. In an above post I said the original won't fit into the magwell when properly aligned. That should have said the P22 mag won't fit due to a longer front to rear dimension.

The angle of the mags appears to be the same to me. The photos might not show this. Shot with a macro lens. 1917

 

[1917-1911M]

If these fit, certainly someone would have already tested them. The .22 mags appear to be almost as rare at the PP .22 mags. The Bersa mag is half P22 looking. A few measurements would tell the tale here. Someone must have some of these mags and could give us some measurements. 1917