Walther Forums banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
7,319 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I owned a TPH years ago, and wanted it for a tiny concealed carry gun. I tried a variety of ammo in it; none of it was terribly reliable and a really supportive gunshop owner returned/exchanged the gun several times trying to get one that worked. Eventually I sold the gun.
Piqued by other positive comments here, I tried some Stingers in a TPH; only fired a couple of magazines for reliability and chronoed 10 of them.
Reliability in a small sample was perfect. The muzzle flash is still quite pronounced, despite reported efforts by CCI to tone it down. Velocity was actually pretty impressive out of a short barrel:
-Average velocity 990 fps.
-SD 29/ES 94; not too bad and indicative of pretty consistent performance.
Moon
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,914 Posts
...
Piqued by other positive comments here, I tried some Stingers in a TPH; only fired a couple of magazines for reliability and chronoed 10 of them.
Reliability in a small sample was perfect. The muzzle flash is still quite pronounced, despite reported efforts by CCI to tone it down. Velocity was actually pretty impressive out of a short barrel:
-Average velocity 990 fps.
-SD 29/ES 94; not too bad and indicative of pretty consistent performance.
Moon
An ES (extreme spread) of nearly 10% seems pretty high to me.

M
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
7,319 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Mike, I'm not sure what level of consistency to expect from .22s. A quick perusal of my old chrono data seems to show a big difference between centerfire and rimfire.
For example, really high quality 9s show very little variation; some CorBons did a smoking 1367fps with a SD of 4 and an ES of 16. Some of my volume-measured reloads aren't much different, with an SD of 5 and an ES of 14. I think the small volume of the 9mm case contributes to consistency. An accurate and powerful .44 mag reload did 1374/SD 25/ES 69; the bigger case and whatever variation existed among chambers may explain some of that.
Twenty two rimfires are something else. Some standard vel Rem target loads did 1069fps/SD 26/ES 66 out of a 7.5" Smith 41, and well-respected MiniMags did 1211fps/SD30/ES104 from a 16" carbine. That's good ammo in plenty of barrel to burn the powder.
All that considered, the Stingers' numbers from a short barrel are respectable. The round surely was intended for more barrel, and a few extremes further skewed the results. So I'll stick with 'not too bad' as an overall assessment, especially since they seem to run just fine. I'm sure I tried Stingers in that long-departed TPH, and they didn't run reliably back then.
Slow powders in short barrels have the potential for a lot of variation. Some mild-kicking reloads with Trailboss for my daughter's snub gun show 514fps/SD65/ES162. Those aren't consistent or powerful, and I'll be back to the drawing board.
Moon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
316 Posts
My TPH gets fed nothing but CCI Stingers. Yep its gun to carry when you can't carry a gun. Plus I have three spare mags loaded for it too. May be slow to reload, but I don't know of anyone who would want a face or chest full of stingers hitting them.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,914 Posts
Mike, I'm not sure what level of consistency to expect from .22s. A quick perusal of my old chrono data seems to show a big difference between centerfire and rimfire.
....
Moon
Moon, you raise an interesting point that I have not considered. I have not chronoed enough rimfire ammo to form a firm opinion on what level of consistency is to be expected from .22LR.

I have a great deal of military surplus ammo in both rifle and pistol centerfire calibers that is by any standard old (some of it is prewar, older than me) that I have chronoed to ascertain its basic quality, performance, and, by periodic retesting, its level of degradation. These figures are compared to the results I obtain from new or relatively recent (0-15 yrs old) ammo to arrive at some horseback evaluations.

My chronograph computes both SD (Standard Deviation) and MAD (Mean Absolute Deviation) and gives for each the CV (Coefficient of Variation) expressed as a percentage of the average velocity. The latter CV --based on MAD--is for me the most significant in judging the overall consistency and performance of a given lot of ammo. Obviously the effect of a given ES (extreme spread) increases as the average velocity decreases: a 100 fps variation is a much smaller percentage of 2,700 fps from a .30M2 than of 1,000 fps from a .22LR.

Without going into great detail, over some years my findings are that the best ammunition will give MAD-CV at less than 1%. As a (bad) example: surplus 9mm Para 124-gr. ammo that averaged 1184 in 10 shot strings gave 103 fps extreme spread with a MAD-CV of 1.75%; this particular lot was sufficiently degraded that the variation could be audibly detected from its irregular cadence when fired through a submachine gun. Rate-of-fire readings could not be reliably obtained on a timer. At the other extreme, fresh Federal American Eagle 124 gr. rendered 1091 fps average, with ES of 27. That gave SD of 7.6, MAD of 5.1 and MAD-CV of .46%. I regard that as about as good as it gets with shooting range-grade factory ammo.

Surprisingly, I have tested some lots of military surplus rifle ammo at twice the velocity that have an ES no greater, with a correspondingly lower MAD-CV. For example I have some British .303 made by Norma 40 years ago that is astonishingly uniform.

M
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
7,319 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Mike, your response was interesting in several ways. I've always considered a chronograph more of a 'quality control' for reloads and means of verifying load data. You plainly are using it as quality control of a different sort with surplus ammo. A buddy was Class III for awhile, and I see the charm of it, but it's gotten too expensive for me.
Because I don't ordinarily check factory ammo, I had to spin my wheels a little to find some other rimfire and loosely analogous pistol data for comparison with the Stingers. While I can see merit in a more sophisticated analysis than SD/ES, for my purposes it will suffice. When either number goes up precipitously, I go looking for something not right. Examining variations as a percentage of overall velocity sounds like a great way to compare apples with apples.
I am primarily a handgunner, so patiently custom crafted rounds aren't an objective. My purpose in handloading mostly financial. Our range officer casts good, cheap bullets, and we shoot lots of them. The progressive loading press is one of mankind's crowning achievements, IMHO.
I've started storing the chrono in the arms room at the range; it's a bulky Oehler setup that requires some assembly time, but perhaps I'll try clocking more rimfires and other factory stuff now that it need not be hauled from home.
I've noticed a difference in report as well, tho' the shutoff thru' electronic muffs can affect that.
While there are now better alternatives to the TPH as a pocket gun, it is fun to shoot with decent ammo. Because of cost and volume demand on manufacturers, getting 'decent' and '.22rf ammo' in the same sentence is a challenge. Subjectively, I don't recall so many misfires with .22rf in the past.
Moon
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,914 Posts
Moon: I have never handloaded, because I don't have the time or, in my opinion, enough knowledge to do it right. (I've seen too many examples of what happens when people get it mostly right but not completely.) But I have taken an intense interest in ammunition because I have semi-automatic and full-automatic firearms that consume copious quantities of it. For me military surplus ammo was the answer, and for many years I deliberately avoided acquiring guns in strictly commercial calibers.

The problem with military surplus ammo is that it is surplus. It's ammo that was discarded because it was old or obsolete, perhaps degraded, and of unknown characteristics. I always pull a few bullets from the worst-appearing rounds and examine them internally. If they look okay inside the ammo probably is suitable at least for manually-operated firearms. But semi or full-auto firearms place far higher demands on ammunition. I might have, in a single caliber, six or eight different lots from different manufacturers or countries, of different ages and loadings. Triage becomes necessary. Corrosive-primed ammo, for example, is reserved for recoil-operated firearms as cleaning gas systems is too much bother. When malfunctions (especially those possibly associated with short recoil) or other signs of distress (for example, extruded primer indents) are encountered when shooting certain ammo, it's important to know if the problem is in the ammo or in the gun. That is when chronographing provides information and vital clues for diagnosis.

Sometimes it turns out that certain loadings function reliably only in certain guns, and I set aside that ammo for that use, allocating more versatile ammo to other guns. Another example: any lot of ammo that has an occasional round that chronos very low is on the verge of producing squibs that may not clear the muzzle and introduces a high risk of a wrecked barrel. Such ammo is no longer suitable for automatic weapons. Since squibs are quite easy to detect, such ammo can -- for a while at least-- be relegated to very cautious use in manually-operated guns only.

You've piqued my interest in chronographing .22 rimfire loads. I'll post results when I get around to it.

M
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
My TPH gets fed nothing but CCI Stingers. Yep its gun to carry when you can't carry a gun. Plus I have three spare mags loaded for it too. May be slow to reload, but I don't know of anyone who would want a face or chest full of stingers hitting them.
Excellent post and I could not have said it better. The Stingers are superb, I also have three extra mags, and while I get a great amount of negative comments about the validity of ta 22 I have yet to have anyone volunteer to stand in front of this round.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,722 Posts
...I get a great amount of negative comments about the validity of ta 22 I have yet to have anyone volunteer to stand in front of this round.
I have yet to have anyone volunteer to get stabbed in the eye with a pen either but that doesn't mean it's the ultimate in self defense... ;)

Stingers were the most reliable .22 ammo I found for my Interarms TPH though... :)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
7,319 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
While my current TPH has been wonderfully reliable with ignition and feeding, it is still a .22 and at the mercy of the ammunition. I'm not sure if it is economics or environmental concerns with the priming compound, poor quality control, or lousy recollection on my part, but current rimfires seem pretty spotty. Tiny pocket guns in real calibers (.380 is probably the best tradeoff between performance and size right now) are a better choice than any .22 in terms of frontal area and throweight.
While a TPH may not be a perfect answer to the question, it does meet the first rule of gunfighting (have a gun), and it does top pepper spray and primal screaming.
After our discussion, I plan to follow Mike's lead and chrono more .22rf, particularly out of shorter barrels, tho' no promises on when. I did happen to dig out some other old numbers for .22 shorts in a now-departed 4" 950 Beretta. Would you believe an ES of 120, SD of 41 and velocity a whopping 942. How would that one look as a percentage of velocity, Mike? ;)
Moon
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,792 Posts
I must be the only guy in the world who never had problems with a TPH one German, four SS IAs) as long as it was not Remington.....and I never thought to try Stingers.

Huh - learn something every day.

Photo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
Excellent post and I could not have said it better. The Stingers are superb, I also have three extra mags, and while I get a great amount of negative comments about the validity of ta 22 I have yet to have anyone volunteer to stand in front of this round.
I like the TPH very much but I don't see it as my only CCW gun. I can however share your enthusiasm for the little nipper though; far superior to harsh words in any situation. Not a trick question so I can zing you, Karla but I'm curious. Do you own any other pistols, maybe a Walther PP or PPK?

Best

Charlie :)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
7,319 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Off topic, but it was never clear to me what purpose that 4" .22 short was supposed to serve; in perfect honesty the pepper spray is likely a better stopper. With the light throweight and low velocity, it really won't knock over a cup of warm spit.
I still have a 2" version that served as cheap practice for a now-departed example of the same gun in .25 ACP.
Moon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
I like the TPH very much but I don't see it as my only CCW gun. I can however share your enthusiasm for the little nipper though; far superior to harsh words in any situation. Not a trick question so I can zing you, Karla but I'm curious. Do you own any other pistols, maybe a Walther PP or PPK?

Best

Charlie :)
For carry: PPK in 32, Kimber Solo, P290
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,228 Posts
Excellent post and I could not have said it better. The Stingers are superb, I also have three extra mags, and while I get a great amount of negative comments about the validity of ta 22 I have yet to have anyone volunteer to stand in front of this round.
Those are some of the best, and most realistic posting I've ever read. At close range, a TPH with Stingers in the chamber is fully capable of felling a water buffalo.

-Pilotsteve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
423 Posts
My TPH arrived earlier this year. And it's my pocket gun while walking around the farm. Has been death on a couple of snakes.

Also use Stingers most of the time, but lately found that the CCIVelocitor 40 grain hollow points are just as reliable and punch a really nasty hole thru a pine 2 X 4. And then plows into the oak backstop to the base of the slug.

Used a stinger round out of a FEG SMC about three years ago to finish off a wounded dear with a single head shot.

Hope you enjoy your TPH:D:D:D
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top