Gotta be honest--much as it pains me
Took the Colt Officer's Model .22 and the Model 17 to the range yesterday for a face-off. I am a Python advocate, so I asumed the Colt would devour the S&W at the 25 yard line. Ooops....
250 rounds later, having shot Eley, RWS, Wolf MT, Federal 711-B Gold Medal and CCI SV, the S&W 17 spanked, and I mean SPANKED the rear off my "new-to-me" old Colt.
The Colt stayed in the black from the rest for all shots, no problem. Most clustered in the 7, 8 and 9 rings. The K-22 stayed in the 10 and 9 rings, with about 6 times as many X-ring hits as the Colt.
This test, in reverse, is what I normally see when I test a Python against a S&W
GLOOM, DESPAIR and AGONY on ME!
OK, I told my tale of WOE. I gotta go lie down now. I hear you S&W boys clinking your glasses together already.
Arman4461

Do not despair Arman, after all it was only a two gun test and could have come out different with a bigger sampleing of revolvers. However this does reflect just how good the average K-22 can be. I have a M-18 that I was about to give up on until I found the ammo it liked, Winchester Expert of all things.

__________________
Stay safe people!

I love a Colt Phyton and have always wanted one but never bought one mainly because I couldn't justify the high price. So I have a large S&W collection and I guess I would say the outcome doesn't suprise me that much because my Model 17-4 with 8 3/8 barrel is my most accurate revolver I own that I have shot.

It's morning here or I would have poured a stiff one and held it high and said " Hail Hail S&W Model 17"

Your comparison sounds familiar.





In 38 caliber the Colt will usually shade the Smith a bit due to the tapered rifling that runs a tad tighter than does the S&W barrel. The Colt barrel was made for lead bullets. Not so sure if any real advantage exists with the 22 caliber guns. My own experience is that the S&W did shoot a little better. Not much, but better. But in defense of the Colt, this particular example is a first year production (1930) that has seen countless thousands of rounds fired in "Bullseye" matches and shows a lot more wear than does the K22.

__________________
No life story has happy end.

SP is right on the money!
These days I'm strictly a paper-puncher, and it's pretty clear every week:
The .38 Python and Officers Model (from 1936!) consistently outshoot my OD's.
Not by a LOT, but consistently.
The .22's are another story entirely.
The K-22 is, IMHO and experience, King of the Hill in its caliber.
Don

Hey guys, thanks for those fine pictures of both models. I haven't completely given up, since I do have about 10 other brands of ammo to try. Maybe Eley 10-X will do the trick
The Officer's is new for me, and I really love how the adjustable sights work. I do believe they were ahead of the M-16 sight concept by a few years. My bigger problem is that I enjoy both brands, as long as they were made before about 1970. I haven't bought a new S&W since they went to the dark side and determined I needed to be protected from myself. Colt has only sold me new 1911s and a couple of Peacemakers. I guess I lean toward nostalgia and hand-work more than lawyers and stupid locks. At least they haven't figured out how to lock the Peacemaker (yet).
Enjoy those .22s, and kindly email me if you wish to part with one or two.
Arman4461

**clink**

In all seriousness, I'd love to have your Colt. You're very lucky to have both.

-S

Arman4461 you have inspired me to try mine. I have a 1933 Colt Officers and a 1947 K 22, they both seem to shoot very well but I will have to get them to the range and let them go head to head. Should be interesting!

I just picked up a used and in excellent condition 1948 S&W K-22 today and after reading all of this, I feel much better about my purchase. I knew the gun was special but this makes me even more confident in its potential. I’d like to thank the original poster for starting this thread and all those who followed up with their insightful replies.

V/R Robert

I wonder how the later Mk III .22 would fare against this competition. It sure has a heavy barrel.

__________________
Wayne
Torn & Frayed

wbraswell,
As collectors items (and for value-scarcity), those MK III's are real hot items!
As far as besting the earlier OMS and OMM, I seriously doubt there's anything about the MK III that makes it any better.
Just my 2-cents worth...
Don

I wonder the same thing about the Colt Diamondback.

__________________
NRA Life Member

Hello Arman4461
I ventured to the Other side and Purchased a Colt Official Police .22 revolver made in 1936 about Five years ago. It is shown below and certainly did not appear to be shot very much, at least me. I was Pleased with the looks of it for it's age and had heard they were great guns. I took it to the range and experienced many Miss fires during the shooting session. I took it to my Gun smith and he found a new main spring and explained the Colt Main spring was weak and of Poor design being the V-style as he called it, with no way to adjust it. After he finished with it, I Purchased Ten different Brands of .22 ammo to shoot the Colt and see how truly accurate it was & it showed to be not near as accurate as my 1947 K-22 of which the Target is shown below shot with 6 rounds of CCI Mini-Mag, it was apparent the gun would group far better than I was able to hold it. Lesson learned, The Colt Now has a new owner and I stick with S&W K-22's Only...

Well, comparing an OP to a K22 masterpiece isn't really fair. Should be matched against a Model 45.

__________________
No life story has happy end.

Thanks to all who put together info and start threads on the merits and abilities of different revolver brands. Very informative and super interesting. Some one mentioned doing a MK III Trooper or a 22 Diamond back vs the M17. Sounds interesting. As a child of the 50's all was TV westerns and Colts. OK, I bought into it. I found a unwanted 2nd gen SAA in 38 special, I had a Python, a 1911 Gold Cup, a Combat Commander, a couple of snubbies, a Cobra and Detective. One day I bought a post war S&W 22 Masterpiece. It opened my eyes on that accuracy thing. It made me start demanding more of all my guns. I eventually sold all the Colts, foolish? Probably? Colt's pull is emotional rather than accuracy based. This will fire up a couple of Colt guys, but please hold on till the end. After I had divested my self of the Colts, the little S&W 22 was bought by a collector, who still has it and will not sell it back to me, several 22's in both the Trooper and the diamond back came in the gun shop, the 22 Diamondbacks were almost enough to lure me back in the Colt door but I didn't go back. On the Colt Python, it was 4" and nickle. When used head to head with other police folks on paper, all were 4" service revolvers and using 38 wadcutters, the Python out shot all S&W's present the Python made better shots out of us all. I used to hunt a lot, daily if possible. I shot lots of squirrels, hey, one bullet = one meal. All of the handguns I have owned were good enough to kill squirrels, a few were good enough to pull off a headshot every time, only 38 wadcutters in the Python and the 22 Masterpiece were good enough to shoot the eye out every time. I recently bought a 27-3 and a 19-3 both are 6", at the first opportunity after I am healed up from surgery I will find out if they compare to the Python. I also picked up another 22 Masterpiece, My fingers are crossed that it is close to my first one in accuracy. And I know there is at least one who will say without pictures it didn't happen. Just so you know, I'm old, some of my early stuff happened before there were cameras. I'll figure out a way to get the brownie film developed and pictures put in here. :-)

Call it karma if you will, but the day after posting my first reply to this thread I ran across a nice 1959 vintage Colt OM in 22lr and I bought it. I decided to also go ahead and do a head to head shoot out, 1947 vintage K-22 vs 1959 vintage Colt OM. Well the S&W kicked butt in a very lopsided way. But to be fair I just dident find what the Colt liked to eat. I have bought some more brands of ammo to try in the Colt and will see how it does.

Attached Images

	Colt OM left.jpg (144.0 KB, 207 views)
	Colt OM right.jpg (141.9 KB, 167 views)
	k 22 5 screw left.jpg (156.4 KB, 177 views)
	k 22 5 screw right.jpg (149.8 KB, 165 views)

__________________
Stay safe people!

An ammo thought. Prior to and just after WW2 here were 2 major ammo makers in the US, Remington and Winchester they also made Peters and Western. I suppose they used either Win or Rem target ammo for paper punching. If someone tried some old target ammo from that time I wonder if they might shoot better or different? Or did S&W also just flat out shoot better then?

Hello
Why is there a Difference in the barrels ? It Plain did not group as tight as my K-22 did no matter if it had adjustable sights or not...

While others have done far more extensive testing, my Ransom Rest tests of Colt and S&W .22 target revolvers of many eras using the best match ammunition give a slight edge to Colt. The best shooting AVERAGE (six shot groups at 25 yards-at least 6 groups) went to a Colt Diamondback .22 four inch at .59 inches. Groups with the Diamondback ranged from .33 to .95 with its best ammunition. This is an exceptional revolver. Another 6 inch Diamondback had its best groups twice as large. The typical Colt would have an average about .1 inch better than the typical S&W. Of course I can't equal this from the bench and in practical terms it means nothing.

I'll just say I like 'em both, and have ODs and OMTS in both calibers from the '30s. I don't get a chance to shoot 'em much, but for me, last time out with the rimfires, I was better with the OMT than the K-22, offhand. But unlike some here, i am not much of a shot, not having much opportunity for practice.

I do like the look, the lines, of the S&Ws better, but would say they -- Colts and S&Ws -- are equally superb in quality of manufacture, at least in the 1930s.

This is an interesting thread.
My 686 will shoot with my python, they're about the same.
My MKII will out shoot my dimondback.
But my Colt detective special will crush my mod 37.

I have 2 Colt OM Match and 2 one is 1947 pre-17 and the other is a 17-2....I have yet to have a shoot out but it sounds like it needs to happen.....the 17-2 is an absolute beauty....case colors, deep blue....47' is a dull blue but the action is unreal.....the Colts are bigger but lock up like a bank vault.........I just like revolvers...blued guns.......got to love em....I have 2 Pythons but keep reaching for the 27-2....

Hammerdown, that Official Police cannot be of 1936 vintage. It has the single cylinder retention screw that was new after the early Post-War parts cleanup transition guns made with Pre-War parts were all gone. The plastic "Coltwood" stocks are also an indication of production between 1947 and 1954. Most likely you did not realize the .22 rimfire Officers Model and Official Police are numbered in a different series than the centerfire models, and looked at the wrong serial number chart.

Hello Judge Colt
Actually I asked members of the Colt Forum when this gun was made as I know very little about Colt's, and that was what I was told...

I would think with the colts cylinder lockup being solid when its fired would shoot much better accuracy wise? I love my colts & smith and wessons but i also love my surplus military guns too. Heck i love them all.

I hope to have a shootout between my S&W K-22 masterpiece, my colt police positive and my colt officers target model 22 revolvers someday all with 6" barrels and adjustable rear sights. I have some 6'' barreled H&R's to throw into the mix too.

Either way these older 22cal revolvers and the old pump 22 rifles from tyhe late 1890's till the eary 1900's are a hoot to collect.

Now with the results of your S&W being a tad more accurate over the colt that may say the firm lockup on the cylinder may not matter on the colt?

My 70's python in 357mag wasn't accurate tilol i shot it at 100yds with my 140gr jhp reloads with its 6'' barrel. I could make pin point shots at the rocks on the 100yds berm yet she always shot high at 25yds. This tells me that each gun can have its sweet spot distance and ammo wise too.

Don't forget to lubethe sear with moly or a gun grease. The let off will change drastically.

Here are two .22's - both from 1948. On top is a Colt Officer's Model Target and below, a S&W K22. I love to take both to the range together. Both guns shoot much better than I do - and alternately win the day's competition. They have different balance, different sights, and different grips - and either, on a given day, can seem better than it's rival. I do enjoy having the opportunity to compare such outstanding guns from Colt and S&W with the same general birthdays. Both are keepers.

Jerry

Jerry, I concur. When it comes to accuracy, sometimes I have Smith days and sometimes I have Colt days.

Those are two great-looking revolvers.

__________________
David Wilson

Isn't this just the greatest hobby ever!

I am big Colt revolver fan. But...... I did a side by side visual of blue and polish, fit and finish, handling, action feel, overall quality comparison and my Prewar K-22 Outdoorsman won pretty easily over my Prewar Colt Officers Target 22.

I own both a 1956 K-38 and a 1941 Officer Model Target. Both are outstanding shooters and two of my favorites. That's it.

__________________
I type. Therefore I am.

MWark, are you sure your Officers Model Target is from 1948? By 1948, Colt was shipping its guns with plastic "Coltwood" stocks and "Dual-Tone" finish. Clearly, your gun does not have plastic stocks and it does not appear to have the "Dual-Tone" finish, although it may just be the way the gun is lighted in the picture.