I would like to hear some opinions as to the value of the 22 WMR in a short (3") barrelled revolver, to be used as a general companion piece, not for anything specific. Is the performance edge over the 22 long rifle enough to justify the higher cost of ammunition? I don't anticipate shooting it very often, or I would definitely go with the 22 LR.

Tough question. There is quite a bit of overlap in what these two cartridges do. There are also things that both won't do. It depends upon what your expecting the 22 WMR to do that a standard 22 lr. won't do.

You do gain some power with the 22 WMR, but at quite a bit more cost. I've found that the WMR really doesn't dispatch the type of critters both are designed for all that much better than the 22 lr fired especially from the the type of gun your talking about.

Even the folks whom have tried the WMR on coyotes from rifles often find killing power on the low side.

For my uses I've carried a 4 inch 22 lr revolver as a hunting companion for a lot of years. Works for finishing off a wounded deer or potting grouse without much meat damage and for general plinking at a real small expense. Friends whom shoot the WMR seem to tear up grouse when they pot them.

If your thinking about the WMR for a defence weapon you might want to check out some of the centerfire calibres that are really designed for that usage. I'm a bit finiky about trusting my life to something that might not instantly stop an intruder intent on mayham to me or my family.

My preference is for the long rifle cartridge then step up to a centerfire. There are some interesting handguns now being chambered for the 17 rimfires you might look at also.

I also would recommend .22lr for a revolver, over a .22mag.. I shoot a 9 shot .22lr revolver, w/ a 7.5 inch target barrel. It's lots of cheap fun, and accurate.
I use to carry it for my snake gun while hiking the Rockies and plains.

I would like to hear some opinions as to the value of the 22 WMR in a short (3") barrelled revolver, to be used as a general companion piece, not for anything specific. Is the performance edge over the 22 long rifle enough to justify the higher cost of ammunition? I don't anticipate shooting it very often, or I would definitely go with the 22 LR.

The only real advantage of the .22mag over the .22LR is in penetration...if that's useful, then the .22mag is a "better" choice. Well...it also makes more noise, which might be useful for signaling.

For about 23 years, i carried a Charter Arms Pathefinder as a kock-around during hikes....if i hadn't left it behind in N.O., I'd probably still look forward to more years with it along for the hike.

It's not any better at small game shooting, is much more expensive to feed for plinking sessions, and all .22Mag. handguns tend to collect unburned powder (as the loads aren't make for such short barrels). Would come along with me on deer and pig hunts as well, mostly loaded with shot shells in the warmenr seasons...but with FMJ's it does doe an extra nice job of making sure your pirsed hog doesn't get up and run off 20min. after you are sure it's dead (don't laugh..had a buddy that had his DEER jump out of the back of his pickup on the way out of the woods).

Gasbag one suggestion I have is go buy a Ruger single-six for your general companion peice. They come with a cylinder for both .22lr and .22 mag. when you want to do a lot of plinking you can use .22lr and when you need to use the .22 mag all you have to do is switch out the cylinders.