I’ve grumped about the cost of .22 WMR (Mag) before, because I just cannot fathom how the Mag can be that much more expensive to make than .22 LR — because it isn’t. I’m likewise unconvinced by the “small market” argument (i.e. that it’s more expensive to make because there are no economies of scale), because that sounds to me like a self-fulfilling prophecy — the high cost of the ammo makes buyers leery of getting into the caliber, ergo a small market.
Asking the question of my Readers: ignoring the people who like me have guns chambered in .22 Mag already, how many of you who own .22 LR guns would like to get into .22 Mag, but are pushed away by the high prices?
It’s not just the ammo. The guns themselves are badly priced. e.g.
I cannot accept that a .22 Mag rifle requires that much higher a production cost than its LR cousin; we’re not talking about the difference between a .22 LR and a .308 Win. Basically, what generally happens is that the manufacturer shuts down its production line for, say, a couple-three weeks, drops the necessary tooling and machinery to make the few parts that differentiate the one from the other, then produces several thousand of the Mag rifles, and then reverses the process and goes back to the .22 LR version. (At least, that’s how a guy from CZ once explained it to me about their 612 and 612M semi-auto rifles, for which at the time there was a $20 difference in their respective MSRPs. “The $20 pays for the inconvenience of rejigging the machinery.”)
Not $150, as above.
I think we’re being ripped off. But I welcome comment from any gun manufacturers out there who can give a credible reason for the price difference.
Ditto for Remington, Winchester or anyone else who care to do the same for rimfire ammo.
I once saw a video of a snake being shot with one of these, and it was excellent: in a split second, it went from being all hissy and strikey to totally limp — whereupon I bought about 500 rounds of the stuff.
