I am contemplating buying a model 17 - K22 with a 6" bbl for occasional target shooting. I would appreciate some opinions as to what generation has the best quality as far as fit, finish and accuracy, and what the changes were from generation to generation.

Thanks

I have a 17-4 and have been really happy with it, I did have the trigger worked over. A friend has a late 1940's early 1950's era 5 screw model. It has a more satin blue finish. I like the more polished look myself. I think if you go with any K22 or Model 17 you will be happy. The pre-ww-2 models are very nice but pricey for a shooter. If it is a shooter go with a 17-3 or 17-4. Just an opinion.

Troy

I don't remember reading anything bad about any of them. Most love which ever version they have, I know I do.

I believe that a general rule of thumb would be that fit and finish degraded as time went on after WWII.
However, I have post war K-22s that don't shoot as good as my model 17s. As the fit and finish went down, some of the design technology went up and such complaints as, hard to extract cases went down over the years.
I personally don't own any K-22s newer than the early 80s but all that I have encountered have been up to the task and most will be capable of shooting better than the person using it.
Be aware that just like 22 rifles, the revolvers are ammo sensitive and after purchasing one, you need to find which brand and type of 22 ammo your gun does best with. It does make a difference.
Pre 17s or any of the model 17s will be good shooters.

i have several k22 and outdoorsman models. IMHO there is know better 22lr revolver. i have in my collection gun's with only pinned barrel's. i think the latest one i have is a 17-4. buy one and you will see what i'm talking about.

__________________
George Jamison

I have a K22 5 screw with 6 inch barrel made in 1952 and I have a Model 17-4 with 8 3/8 inch barrel. They both are excellent shooters but the K22 action is smoother and the 17-4 does have a higher gloss blue. I don't think you can go wrong on one of these. They are very popular these days because of ammo costs and the scarcity of pistol ammo.

K22

17-4

Art,

Those are both beauties! Thanks for the input.

Hi Moosedog,

I know exactly what you are talking about with .22's being particular about the brand of ammo. I ran into that with a model 52 Winchester. Do you have any idea what changes were made from generation to generation (17-2, 17-3 & 17-4) ?

Thanks

Do you favor any particular generation (17-2, 17-3 or 17-4) ?

Model 17 stamping model number on crane in 1957
Model 17-1 Change extractor rod , right to left thread 1959
Model 17-2 Delete trigger guard screw, change cylinder stop 1961
Model 17-3 Relocation of rear sight leaf screw 1967
1968 delete diamond grips
Model 17-4 Change to move gas ring from yoke to cylinder 1977
1982 Eliminate pinned barrel
Model 17-5 New yoke retention system/ radius stud package 1988

When you look at the changes and if you like a pinned barrel you need to buy a model 17-4 made in the first 5 years of production or an eariler dash number like 17-3.

The 4 screw 17-1 and orginal model 17 no dash command a preimum in price as do the K22 pre Model 17.

I hope this helps.

I really do not think you can go wrong with any of the K-22's. However I do like the looks of the four and five screw models.

__________________
Stay safe people!

As you have read on all the above, for a shooter you can't go wrong on any K22 OR Mod 17 (any dash). They are all good shooters. One thing you may wish to think about is the full lug Mod 17-6. I've had two, and both were sold off as while they were tack drivers, they were just too barrel heavy for me. I prefer the 17-4 or earlier models as the weight is just about perfect. But, you may prefer the heavier model. Then there is the 617, which is in stainless. A little easier to clean up.

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

I have several from a 1938 Outdoorsman through a 17-4. I don't think you can go wrong with any of them either. Pick one you like and fall in love! I do have a 617 as well, and it shoots real well, but I much prefer the balance of the earlier ones without the full lug.

I have a 17-3 6", a 17-4 8 3/8", and an 18-4, 4". All are pinned and recessed and are fine and accurate shooters. The only problem I have with any of the K-22s is that the chambers get really tight when dirty, to the point of having to forceably push the cartridges in. The problem is compounded if the round has a bullet which is off at an angle from the case even a tiny bit. The answer is to scrub the chambers thoroughly with solvent and a brass brush; things will then go a lot easier. But any K-frame .22 is a fine firearm. My 17-4 with its long barrel is nearly as good as any .22 rifle at extended distances. That long sighting radius really helps.

__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -

Don't wait on a certian year or dash - go get one ASAP !

Go buy a model 17 that locks up tight, good shape 90% or better,no rust.

Next go get various types of .22 ammo shoot the snot out of it !

You will not regret buying one...and will buy more !

Then go for a model 18, 617, 63 etc etc etc.......

In other words .22's are a blast. I could kick myself for not getting one many years ago.... too interested in them big bores and magnums....

JW

Hi Guys,

Just joined the forum, my first post. I've been searching for the past 2 months for a K-22, looking at condition and a decent price. I'm looking at one that has the serial # of K1891XX, would anyone know what year this was produced.

Thanks Mark

That would have been made in 1953 and probaly mid year.

I have a 17-3. It is scary accurate! It also has the best trigger of any Smith gun I've ever owned.

Thanks Art,

You info is informative and does help. I know the k-38's had problems with the gas rings but I can't remember what generation that occured. Did the 17's have the same issues? If so when was that?

Thanks Art,

What would the last serial number be for a 17-4 made in the first 5 years of production?

Hey Gun 4 Fun - why don't you sell me that one?

Welcome to the wonderful world of Smith .22 revolvers.
If you are genuinly interested in the K22 and other S&W handguns evolution,
I suggest picking up a copy of the "Standard Catalog of Smith and Wesson" 3rd edition by Supica and Nahas. I consult it almost daily.

Your questions regarding the best K22 are so broad I dont think they can be accurately answered with a one model answer.

Way too many variables and alot of conjectured opinion.
IMHO it boils down to the fact that they are all great.
Some will argue certain models are better than others because they are a bit more accurate, pointable, collectable, comfortable, rare , etc.... but they are all great.

There are way too many variables to ask for one that stands out amongst giants.

If you were to present 4 specific examples with bottom line prices to compare you would probably get a consensus as to which stands higher and for what reason.
To ask which is the best from hundreds of varients is wishful thinking at best.
We all have our own favorites but they are all great.
I love all mine,
Which is great? All,
Which is best? None.


Best of luck .
Cheers

According to SCSW transition from the 17-3 to the 17-4 began in 1977.
The first serial numbers for K frames in 1977 are 10K0001 ending in 1981 at 269K699 .

Serial number style changed in 1982 to a 3 letter prefix.

"Edited to make sense"
Cheers.

It's clear as mud. To simplify, what would be the last serial number in '81 which, I assume, would have been the 5th year of production of the 17-4 generation.

Engine49guy,
Thank you for the reply. Although my initial posting did ask for opinions covering a some what broad spectrum I was a little more specific than merely asking which model is "better" than the others. As I recall, I did ask for opinions relative to "what generation has the best quality as far as fit, finish and accuracy." Clearly there must have been a specific period when those attributes were better, if even marginally, that other periods.

1981 serial number range 91K6801-124K000 for K frames.

IMHO.....they are all equally great in fit finish and accuracy.
The only area that I see them as unequal is number produced per model, AKA ..."Collectability".
Cheers.