One of my range-friends bought one of the new 4" x8 SP101s - paid over six for it. That is about what I paid for my new 3" 63 a year ago when it finally hit the stores. We met at the range recently - he with the new Ruger and me with my year old 63. The trigger of the 63 obviously was far better - lighter and smoother than the new Ruger. Balance was better, too - the 63's lighter weight (26 oz) and shorter barrel making it point better, too. The finish of the Ruger was far better than that of the new .32 H&RM 4" SP101 I had years before, even if the roughness of the action was reminiscent. The fully adjustable rear sight was a nice touch, the cheesy windage-only rear sight on that earlier .32 SP101 being such a detriment. Knowing what causes the 'roughness' and, after years of buying new Rugers, having become adept at alleviating the QC shortcomings, you'd think I'd have grabbed the .22 SP101 I saw a week or so later - for $499... but no thank you. My 3" 63 is a lot nicer - more accurate - and the 63/317 x8 speedloader from DS-10 works fine with my 63 - a no-go with the Ruger.

Don't get me wrong - I am at home in an S&W's innards - and had to take the screwdriver to my new 3" 63 when I brought it home over a year ago. I had to switch grips - I love the 60 Pro grips!



I have a 5" 63 also. I recently bought a lnib 4" 651, a .22 WMR version of the 4" 63. If the early 4" 63 is as nice as my 651 - or either of my 63s - I have no doubt that it would be a better choice than the Ruger. Of course, what can you expect - this is the S&W forum!

Stainz

PS While some professional reviewers have observed decent groupings, many have not - and there has been some talk about poorly done forcing cones. Check the Ruger forum and rimfirecentral for more info. Keep in mind that I was a Ruger guy - I am now clearly an S&W guy.