What pushed the smaller I-frame target .22 out of favor as the spotlight moved to the mid-frame K-22 I'm not sure. Perhaps cheap practice for a duty-sized revolver was key?
Here is mine from 1922:

Great Pickup man! I'd postulate that your reason for practice with a Duty Revolver is probably pretty accurate; and thus led to the demise of the 22/32 [and maybe the I-Frame in general].

Same principal with 686's and 617's today, essentially the same revolver, only with ammo that costs 10X less!

Good hunting!

Sweet looking revolver! I am in the process of bringing one of the same vintage "back to life" by installing a NOS barrel and doing some general fixing up. I can't wait to take it out to the club range and try to wear it out again!!

Your comment about the K22 and being an understudy for the service revolver is part of the reason, and as 3-gun bullseye became more popular, the extra weight and grip area of the K22 probably made enough of a difference that period shooters leaned toward the larger gun. Of course you could have shot 22/32 along with a K38 and a Model 1950 target in 45 if you really wanted to scale each gun to its caliber, but that would probably be less help and more hindrance.

I think ultimately the 22/32 fell into a comfortable niche for casual target shooting and plinking and don't forget that the niche was filled in the J-frames by the Model 35. It was just too small a niche for the bean counters @ S&W to keep supplying. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!

I also am a big fan of the .22/32 family. I tend to prefer the Kit Guns with the shorter four-inch barrel, but like the 6-inch target revolvers as well.

In terms of the target market for .22 revolvers of particular sizes, don't lose sight of what the opposition was doing. When S&W introduced the .22/32 Heavy Frame Target (Bekeart) model in 1911, it wasn't just because Phil Bekeart sent them a telegram encouraging them to do so and promised to buy a few thousand. The year before, in 1910, Colt had introduced the Police Positive Target Model in .22 LR. That gun had a larger frame than the tiny M frame (Ladysmith) .22s that had been S&W's only hand ejector .22s to that point, only a few of which were produced with adjustable sights. S&W couldn't afford to cede a market segment to Colt and jumped in with a competing model.

And in 1931, when S&W introduced the K-22, had anything interesting happened to the market in the preceding several months? Yes, in 1930 Colt introduced the Officers Model Target in .22 LR; that gun was based on Colt's Official Police frame, which was slightly larger than S&W's K-frame. Again, S&W scrambled to stay in the game by introducing a matching model.

My suspicion is that S&W didn't really grasp the appeal and potential of the .22 LR for a long time, preferring to concentrate instead on offerings in their .32 and .38 lines. Sales volume would have encouraged them in that approach; after all, their .22 sales in the first several decades of the 20th century were measured in mere tens of thousands while their .32s and .38s were ringing up sales in the hundreds of thousands.

__________________
David Wilson

Perhaps I'm being overly cautious, but I only shoot standard velocity .22 ammo in my 22/32.

I think that is wise. HV ammo was introduced in the early 1930s, so I imagine it would be safe to shoot in any .22/32 with a serial number over about 515000. But the 'teens and '20s guns deserve slightly more sensitive handling, I would think.

__________________
David Wilson

David, I've heard that discussion advanced before, especially with regards to the semi-auto pistols of the day, but my attitude is that these guns were the "heavy duty" model of 22s, built on the "larger" I-frame which was strong enough for the 32 S&W Long. It would appear that they were over-designed for the 22 LR. JMHO, and you may take it for what it is worth. I like the semi-high speed ammo that is made for 22 rifle competition in the 10-22s, because I can buy it in bulk and shoot it in pretty much all the 22s I own. YMMV.

Froggie

I resemble those remarks. I wouldn't be concerned either after about 1920 when they had heat treated cylinders as well.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819