Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > >

Ammo All Ammo Discussions Go Here


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-12-2020, 07:52 PM
RAMS RAMS is offline
Member
S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351  
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: EDMOND, OK
Posts: 208
Likes: 2
Liked 10 Times in 8 Posts
Default S&W 317 v. 351

Question: Generally, for deep penetration purposes, would the current-day powerful .22 LR ammo (Aguila Super Maximum 30 gr. or CCI Mini Mag 36 gr., etc.) out of the 3" 317 bbl. be at least equal to the most powerful .22 WMR ammo (Winchester Supreme 34 gr., etc.) out of S&W 1 7/8" 351 bbl.?

Fifteen or so years ago, after my informal but repeated testing in phone books with both of those revolvers, no .22 LR ammo from the 317, including Stingers, even came close to the penetration of Win. Supreme 34 gr. WMR HP's from the 351. Expansion is a separate matter and a little info on the internet about expansion can be found..

Today, however, I don't have a 317, an indoor place to do repeated, measured penetration testing or current-day ammo such as the hot Aguila Super Magnum .22 LR or 36 gr. Maxi Mag ammo. Nor have I found any actual testing of those two revolvers pitted against each other on the internet.

Last edited by RAMS; 06-12-2020 at 08:00 PM. Reason: FAT FINGERS
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-12-2020, 08:04 PM
AJ AJ is offline
Member
S&W 317 v. 351  
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Central East Coast of Flo
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 293
Liked 1,687 Times in 717 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAMS View Post
Question: Generally, for deep penetration purposes, would the current-day powerful .22 LR ammo (Aguila Super Maximum 30 gr. or CCI Mini Mag 36 gr., etc.) out of the 3" 317 bbl. be at least equal to the most powerful .22 WMR ammo (Winchester Supreme 34 gr., etc.) out of the 1 7/8" 351 bbl.?

Fifteen or so years ago, after my informal but repeated testing in phone books with both of those revolvers, no .22 LR ammo from the 317, including Stingers, even came close to the penetration of Win. Supreme 34 gr. WMR HP's from the 351. Expansion is a separate matter and a little info on the internet about expansion can be found..

Today, however, I don't have a 317, an indoor place to do repeated, measured penetration testing or current-day ammo such as the hot Aguila Super Magnum .22 LR or 36 gr. Maxi Mag ammo. Nor have I found any actual testing of those two revolvers pitted against each other on the internet.
I have owned both the 317 and still have a 351C. I have never really done a penetration test. My 317 only had a 2 inch barrel and I used CCI Velociters in it. Just shooting them at the range, I would have to give the "shock & awe" value to the 351C.
__________________
USMC 1969-1993
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #3  
Old 06-12-2020, 08:19 PM
RAMS RAMS is offline
Member
S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351  
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: EDMOND, OK
Posts: 208
Likes: 2
Liked 10 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Roger that, but I miss my old 317 as a much more quiet fun gun, and wonder how much more powerful today's hot .22 LR ammo is if it ever had to be used for self defense in a 3" bbl. 317 compared to the 1 7/8" bbl. 351
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-12-2020, 08:22 PM
Injunbro Injunbro is offline
Member
S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 246
Likes: 1,545
Liked 428 Times in 143 Posts
Default

I have both 317 & 351PD w/ 1 7/8" barrels, my wife has a 317 w/ 3" bbl. The 351PD way outshines the 317's in either barrel length even w/ stingers - flatter shooting & nearly double penetration. No contest. Also now the new .22 WMR ammo made for short barrels is even better yet. .22lr is a good plinking, snake shooter round but it's not in the same league as a .22WMR.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-12-2020, 08:54 PM
RAMS RAMS is offline
Member
S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351  
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: EDMOND, OK
Posts: 208
Likes: 2
Liked 10 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Injunbro View Post
I have both 317 & 351PD w/ 1 7/8" barrels, my wife has a 317 w/ 3" bbl. The 351PD way outshines the 317's in either barrel length even w/ stingers - flatter shooting & nearly double penetration. No contest. Also now the new .22 WMR ammo made for short barrels is even better yet. .22lr is a good plinking, snake shooter round but it's not in the same league as a .22WMR.
Yep, it's looking like I should just stick with the 351. Sure wish Smith would put a 3" bbl. on it though--better sighting, better velocity and still concealable.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-12-2020, 08:57 PM
AJ AJ is offline
Member
S&W 317 v. 351  
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Central East Coast of Flo
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 293
Liked 1,687 Times in 717 Posts
Default

The real downside to the 351C is the trigger pull. Wish there was a way to lighten the trigger pull.
__________________
USMC 1969-1993
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-12-2020, 09:08 PM
RAMS RAMS is offline
Member
S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351  
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: EDMOND, OK
Posts: 208
Likes: 2
Liked 10 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AJ View Post
The real downside to the 351C is the trigger pull. Wish there was a way to lighten the trigger pull.
It can be done to some extent, but only by a good Gun $mith so as not to lighten it so much that ignition reliability is lost. That's why I like only the double action 351; the PD model.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-15-2020, 12:26 PM
Nevada Ed's Avatar
Nevada Ed Nevada Ed is offline
Member
S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351  
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Reno Nv
Posts: 8,612
Likes: 933
Liked 5,946 Times in 2,910 Posts
Default

+1 on post #2;

the heavy 40gr is the best medicine for most 22 weapons.
Plus they work a lot better in my rifles than the light 29gr or light "Speed balls" out at 50-100 yards.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-15-2020, 02:19 PM
ralph7's Avatar
ralph7 ralph7 is offline
Member
S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351 S&W 317 v. 351  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,460
Likes: 6,308
Liked 4,374 Times in 1,600 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AJ View Post
The real downside to the 351C is the trigger pull. Wish there was a way to lighten the trigger pull.
My 317 has the heaviest trigger pull I have felt on a revolver.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:10 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.42 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)