The new model 63's with 3" barrels. How are they?

[nsl]

I looked at one at a gunshow and kind of liked it. It did have the canted barrel syndrome, though. I compared it to the new Ruger SP101 22lr, and about the only things that it lost out on are the lock, and the high price. Anyway, how do they shoot?

[M3Stuart]

I have not shot one lately, but in the past the 63 seemed fine. I am put off by the price of the new ones, so I got a 34-1 4".

I have not held the new SP101 22lr, but I like Rugers and am planning on getting one of those. I've had a great experience with the MkII's and can't bring myself to spend 2X the price of a MkII on a 63. But the sp101, at $500 ish is on the edge of reasonable. I'm guessing the price will drop within a year too.

[lemeni]

I like mine. I bought it new (Davidson's). It had/has no manufacturing "issues" and is an accurate, fun little shooter.

[Stainz]

I had my 3" 63 on order since it's announcement in early 2010 - it finally became available before last Thanksgiving, when I snagged mine. I ordered Pro 60 style grips for it and my existing 5" 63. Last month saw the arrival of the 632 Pro, also first advertised along with the 3" 63 - it borrowed the 5" 63's '60 Pro' grips. I added an actual 3" 60 Pro in January of this year. The last eleven months was a sort of J-frame 'fest'.



Without a doubt, the 3" 63 is my favorite of the above three - and will be here long after many other S&W revolvers are gone. It came with a decent trigger - fully equal to the 5" 63, which I had cleaned up it's trigger and resprung, as well. The 3" 63 got even better with use - and no improvement was noted when I tried lighter springs in it, making me think that it came with different springs than the 5" 63, which is growing cobwebs from lack of use.

My 3" 63 came in fine shape, as have the latter two J-frames purchased. The 3" 63 balances quite well - and DA shooting accuracy and effort are second here only to my 4" 617 in rimfires. The 3" 63 has displaced my 4" 617 and it's DS-10 speedloader and 6 x 10 loading plate from their regular range bag perch, an existing 8-shot DS-10 Speedloader and 4 x 8 loading block from the 5" 63 helping in that effort. It likes my usual cheapo plinking ammo - Fed 550pk of 36gr plated HP's from Wally World - as many as 300+ in a day - and everything else I have tried - including CCI Stingers - equally well. It has yet to have it's first ftf. It feels significantly smaller than the 4" 617 - actually, it does feel like an extension of my hand, as tired as that expression seems. That HiViz sight lights up in any light like a searchlight. I already had put similar sights on my 5" 63 and 4" 617 when I bought my 3" 63, so it's inclusion on the new 63 was a big positive here.

From my prior horrid experiences with a new 4" SP101, in .32 H&RM, I will likely not be getting a new .22 LR 4" SP101. To me, the 3" 63 is well worth the $100-$125 difference in cost. In fact, I have fewer revolvers since making the switch from Rugers to S&W - but I have what I like and enjoy. YMMV.

Stainz

[Sportsterguy]

The 63 blows the Ruger out of the water IMO. The one I shot had a correctly installed barrel, good trigger and was an accurate little revolver. Get rid of the lock, plug it up and you have a fine little .22 for plinking, ect.

[Tom C]

While I haven't yet seen the new Ruger SP101 in .22, I do have S&W Model 63s with 5" and 3" barrels. Mine are very nice. Being stainless, the barrels tend to need some breaking in to smooth out the tool marks left in the stainless, but once they have some ammo through them and get smoothed out, they work very well. The short sight radius of the 3" makes it tough to match the 5" for hand held accuracy, but my 5" pretty well matches my 617s, so the 3" has a tough match.

[Stainz]

Interesting sidenote...

My 632 Pro, middle above, has a shot case date of 8/27/11. I bought it over a month ago. It has no IL! That would make it the first new S&W I've bought since '03 without the IL! I almost miss it...

Stainz