Whats your favorite gun?

[belshawelk]

30 Nosler and .454 Casull

Guns for men, not sissies.

 

[DeanMk]

You can do it. You have to rechamber the gun as 22 mag cases are fatter and longer of course and the rim thicker. The .001" isnt the issue.

So, Fbarley, to answer your original question, NO, a Mossberg 142A won't chamber a .22 Mag.
Does yours have the scope and is the flip down portion of the stock made of wood?

 

[DeanMk]

Ah, OK that makes sense.

Just to be super clear I'm going to tag @Fbarley and mention that none of what I said above was meant to negate earlier advice. Don't try it!

That said, if you want more velocity CCI makes some high-velocity .22 ammo that's pretty good quality:

Mini-Mag: 40 gr at 1235 FPS
Stinger: 32 gr at 1640 FPS
Velocitor: 40 gr at 1435 FPS

That should make the Velocitor the hardest hitting of the bunch if I have my math right. To give you an idea how it compares to 22 Magnum, their 22WMR weighs 40 gr and goes 1875 FPS. So not bad.

EDIT: I looked up the KE formula, and my guesstimation was off by a little.

Kinetic Energy in pounds / feet:

Mini-Mag: 135.444024358567
Stinger: 191.0748894962
Velocitor: 182.86464033816

So the winner is the Stinger. It doesn't look like much but at those lighter weights, it may be a noticeable difference. Unless the lighter bullet over-penetrates or makes a big mess, it should be the right one.

The formula, for those who wonder, is weight in grains times speed in FPS squared divided by 450437.

($weight * ($speed * $speed)) / 450437

In an article Wiley Clapp wrote on the .44 Special, he claimed the formula he uses is to Square the velocity in F/S, divide by 450240, then multiply by bullet weight in grains.
I've been using this formula for years and any calculated energies I've posted here were attained using that formula.
Seems to work...

Mini Mag - 135.503287136
Stinger - 191.158493248
Velocitor - 182.944651741

.22 Mag - 312.333422175

 

[VanceInWA]

30 Nosler and .454 Casull

Guns for men, not sissies.

Well, from a 475 Linebaugh perspective...

 

[Flopsweat]

In an article Wiley Clapp wrote on the .44 Special, he claimed the formula he uses is to Square the velocity in F/S, divide by 450240, then multiply by bullet weight in grains.
I've been using this formula for years and any calculated energies I've posted here were attained using that formula.
Seems to work...

Mini Mag - 135.503287136
Stinger - 191.158493248
Velocitor - 182.944651741

.22 Mag - 312.333422175

You probably read that post before I updated it Monday with the KE numbers, then replied today. The cool part is that we have verified each other's math.

 

[belshawelk]

Well, from a 475 Linebaugh perspective...
View attachment 1122277

Perfect. If you shoot something that doesn't let you know the gun went off then you might as well shoot a .22

 

[PORSCHE928S4]

Perfect. If you shoot something that doesn't let you know the gun went off then you might as well shoot a .22

Yes true but we need more noise and sometimes a 22 fall a little flat .

 

[Fbarley]

So, Fbarley, to answer your original question, NO, a Mossberg 142A won't chamber a .22 Mag.
Does yours have the scope and is the flip down portion of the stock made of wood?

It's nice to see an active forum, and I appreciate the time taken to reply. Regarding this question,
1. Yes, it has the flip down pistol grip. Also, the strap anchors, and apparently the "T" bolt handle.
2. I acquired it as a package deal with a used Ruger 10/22, which at the time I thought was the small rifle for a wanabe rancher.
3. I've come to appreciate the 142A as a more historical gun and use it for dispatching injured or trapped animals. I was inquiring about using a 22 magnum round, because that is what the two mobile slaughter outfits I've used use. I don't know why. Apparently a 22 LR round will stun hogs and goats just as well. It's all new to me.
4. The Mosberg 142A is in apparently good shape, so I don't want to modify it unless there is simply a switch out chamber.
5. In the end, it has been educational. I appreciate the advice. If I want a 22 magnum, which i apparently don't really need, I'll just buy one.
Thanks!

 

[wired]

It's nice to see an active forum, and I appreciate the time taken to reply. Regarding this question,
1. Yes, it has the flip down pistol grip. Also, the strap anchors, and apparently the "T" bolt handle.
2. I acquired it as a package deal with a used Ruger 10/22, which at the time I thought was the small rifle for a wanabe rancher.
3. I've come to appreciate the 142A as a more historical gun and use it for dispatching injured or trapped animals. I was inquiring about using a 22 magnum round, because that is what the two mobile slaughter outfits I've used use. I don't know why. Apparently a 22 LR round will stun hogs and goats just as well. It's all new to me.
4. The Mosberg 142A is in apparently good shape, so I don't want to modify it unless there is simply a switch out chamber.
5. In the end, it has been educational. I appreciate the advice. If I want a 22 magnum, which i apparently don't really need, I'll just buy one.
Thanks!

Point is. Its your gun. If your want to make it into a single shot 22 mag you can. Chamber reamer. Done deal. Personally I think its a lousy idea but its your gun.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Speaking of .22's and such....
Last gun show I went to , I traded for a 1946 dated Winchester Model 62A....its my new favorite .22 rifle....
Andy

 

[DeanMk]

You probably read that post before I updated it Monday with the KE numbers, then replied today. The cool part is that we have verified each other's math.

When I saw your post, the KE numbers were already there.
That is what prompted me to post my numbers, using the formula I mentioned in my post.
Apologies if my post seemed to defy yours. I didn't mean it that way. I just got excited when I saw someone else post about calculated energies....kind of my way of saying, Hey! I do that too! =)
I suppose someone smarter in math than either of us, would probably tell us we're doing the same calculation, only in a slightly different fashion and that's why the constants are slightly different.

 

[Rphanks]

Hard to pick, but I'm very fond of "Thumper" a Marlin 1895 45-70 made into a "guide gun" many years before the factory came out with them. The Browning BL22 with open sights is pretty hard to hate as well. Just a flick of the fingers and another ground squirrel bites the dust......

 

[DeanMk]

It's nice to see an active forum, and I appreciate the time taken to reply. Regarding this question,
1. Yes, it has the flip down pistol grip. Also, the strap anchors, and apparently the "T" bolt handle.
2. I acquired it as a package deal with a used Ruger 10/22, which at the time I thought was the small rifle for a wanabe rancher.
3. I've come to appreciate the 142A as a more historical gun and use it for dispatching injured or trapped animals. I was inquiring about using a 22 magnum round, because that is what the two mobile slaughter outfits I've used use. I don't know why. Apparently a 22 LR round will stun hogs and goats just as well. It's all new to me.
4. The Mosberg 142A is in apparently good shape, so I don't want to modify it unless there is simply a switch out chamber.
5. In the end, it has been educational. I appreciate the advice. If I want a 22 magnum, which i apparently don't really need, I'll just buy one.
Thanks!

I asked because I have one, too....hand-me-down from my dad and one of the guns I learned to shoot with.
To be clear, I asked if your flip down handle was wood, because I understand some were made of a kind of plastic.
Mine is wood, but I have the round bolt handle.
My best guess is that my gun was made around 1953.
I believe by the time the .22 Mag came about (should be around 1959, IIRC), Mossberg had already ceased production of the 142A, so any one chambered as such would be a modified gun.

 

[DeanMk]

Speaking of .22's and such....
Last gun show I went to , I traded for a 1946 dated Winchester Model 62A....its my new favorite .22 rifle....
Andy

Nice, Andy!

 

[Flopsweat]

When I saw your post, the KE numbers were already there.
That is what prompted me to post my numbers, using the formula I mentioned in my post.
Apologies if my post seemed to defy yours. I didn't mean it that way. I just got excited when I saw someone else post about calculated energies....kind of my way of saying, Hey! I do that too! =)
I suppose someone smarter in math than either of us, would probably tell us we're doing the same calculation, only in a slightly different fashion and that's why the constants are slightly different.

Yep, I had a number for Feet per Minute and divided it by 60 to make it apply more easily to firearms. That may be what did it. I feel like our results are close enough this application.

 

[DeanMk]

Yep, I had a number for Feet per Minute and divided it by 60 to make it apply more easily to firearms. That may be what did it. I feel like our results are close enough this application.

I think our numbers are very close.

 

[Jason999]

My Luger P08, always my favorite, always reliable. While there's many that I love, this is my favorite.

 

[Ben B.]

The gun I enjoy shooting most is a 5" 1911 in .45acp.

I think they are hideous to look at, because I like blued steel and pretty wood, but I really enjoy shooting ARs in any caliber. Great rifles.

 

[VanceInWA]

My favorite gun is the one I don't have yet...

 

[Frank RW]

i don't have a favorite, all of them are my favorites.

well, ya didn't say firearm, so here's what i'd keep from the collection if i could only pick one gun.