Quote:
Originally Posted by M3Stuart
I don't own a 617, but, after buying my 1981 vintage 34-1 last year (and after owning a taurus 94 that we'll just forget about), I started paying a lot of attention to any thread that talked about .22 revolvers. Whether they are 617's, 34's, colts, taurus, rugers or whatever. Am I missing something, or are .22 revolvers generally problematic? The 34 only holds 6 rounds, but after a bit of shooting, ejection becomes problematic - you have to clean the cylinders after every few shots). The rugers go to 8 rounds, the taurii to 9 - I know for a fact that the taurii 9 shooters are virtually impossible to extract with the extractor rod, you have to do them one-at-a-time. I imagine the new SP101 isn't shipping anymore (they only shipped one batch) because they all went back with bent extractor rods. I now understand why Ruger stuck with the Single Six's for 100 years - because you really have to use a ramrod to extract the casings - one at a time.
Are .22 revo's typically that problematic? Or am I 'attention focusing' on the problems?
|
Just found this forum and your posting, and would like to reply. I have three S&W .22 revolvers, including one model 63 and two model 317 AirLites. I have also had several Kit Guns and model 17 K-22s in the past.
Over the years, I have found that the only .22 ammo that reliably extracts from these revolvers is the Remington Hollow Point in the green box. Every other brand I've tried binds up in the chambers and is very difficult to extract.
I don't know why this is so problematic for me, but it is.
I'd be interested to see what you experience with the Remington ammo.