Kinda like bringing an almost gun to a knife fight...

Ron,
Touche, but which would you rather carry around all day, the micro-gun, or this?

"...that's 100 chances more of getting dinner..."

In that case, I think that I would throw in 50 rounds of snake shot, you might have better luck with birds up close...

OldBaldGuy,
Good point, but have you priced that stuff lately? It's expensive. However for a B.O.B., I guess the expense can be easily justified.

Yup, and keep in mind that the .22 shotshell has really little bitty shot in it, and not much of it either. Might be a good idea to pop for a box, then do some pattern testing on a large piece of paper, just to get an idea of what you might or might not hit. And with that sized shot, hitting and bagging are not necessarily the same thing...

First rule of a survival weapon geared to social encounters is not to hand out photos of it like baby photos. I'm always bemused by fellas who talk paranoia about abc and then say Hey! wanna come on over for a brew and see my gun collection? <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> I know your in Pasadena and your employer by your username already <img src="/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

I'm sorry I'm confused; I see that you're talking about this gun and talking about going into the wildnerness. But later posts indicate something of a self-defense standpoint regarding the gun.

For varmit hunting the .22 has more than proved it's point. You also make a perfectly valid point about the ammo and it's definitely worth looking into. My concerns would only be the short barrel length interfering with accuracy and possibly the weight of the gun being so light it absorbs little recoil (though that's hardly a concern with a 22.

Obviously if it shoots well enough, then no big deal. I'd just rather have a gun with 5 rounds that hits consistently vs one that has 100 that can't hit anything.

From a self defense standpoint it's 50/50. Knife fighting range for a LEO as of current is 21 feet. Tests basically concluded that it a person wielding a knife can get to cutting distance of a person with a gun in the time or before the time they have a chance to draw and fire it.

It has been discovered (and I'm not a LEO btw) that this at times can be woefully inadequate. Knives cause huge injury upon impact and massive shock with even a minor hit. That being said, so can a gun. What is my point?

The gun you carry would be difficult to draw, unfold, and fire in a time in which someone with a knife could close on you and assault you.

As to damage capacity there are plenty of deaths every year with shootings involving the 22. Here are a few just to emphasize the point.

http://www.wltx.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=45837
http://www.allbusiness.com/government/3628046-1.html
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4186/is_20050706/ai_n14723188

Anyways so I'm not disputing the round but rather simply the range involved (if it's not accurate to 21 ft you may want to consider something else) and the ease of drawing, unfolding and firing a weapon under duress.

Just my two cents!

If you are comfortable shooting it, it's easy to pack, and reliable, then why not carry it? My only reservation is that it does not appear to be that much smaller than something like a Kel Tec in .32 or .380. I guess you have to realistically assess your threat. If you routinely hike in areas frequented by bad guys, then maybe more gun is in order. But if your chances of running into a thug is judged remote, then I think your choice is a good one. Either way, you are probably right to not plan on collecting much game with any of the so-called "mouse guns".

IIRC its #12 shot & for birds its effective at around 20 feet. Granddad swore by the crimped end rounds that come in a box of 50 for keeping birds out of the cherry tree. The plastic tips from CCI didn't work as well.

Have you seen the Velocitors from CCI? They're a Stinger with a 40gr. bullet.