I need someone to help me out on this one. Why does Smith & Wesson call some of their models, "Kit Guns"? To me a Kit Gun would be where you'd get a box of parts and pieces and put the thing together which obviously isn't the case. So their term, "Kit Gun" must have meaning but it sure isn't apparent to me. Help me understand?

That used to confuse me, too. Turned out that when they were introduced, a hunter's or angler's gear box or pack was his "kit." If he carried a gun in it, it was his "kit" gun.

I had a Model 34, but extraction was almost impossible. I had to literally pound the extractor rod with the heel of my hand or a mallet. I asked Roy Jinks about it, and he admitted that S&W .22 revolvers have had such problems for decades.

He suggested trying different ammo (I already had) and having the chambers polished. But I was too bummed with it, and sold the gun and a very nice Safariland basketweave holster. Yeah, I warned the new owner, who said he'd just have the factory polish the chambers if he had trouble.

One reason why I sold it was that I think a .22 revolver isn't enough gun for the outdoors. I now use either a M-60-4 .38 or a Ruger SP-101 .357 when I want a small, handy revolver for protection and small game hunting.

However,some people like the .22, and not all Kit Guns have the problem that mine did. But none should!

I learn something new up here almost every day. I never knew the the answer to the question you asked until now.

The problem with extraction can happen with any S&W 22LR revolver made back when they were P&R as my K22 5 screw has that problem with certain ammo or if I shoot it a ton at one range session. My 14-4 with 8 3/8 barrel never has had this problem and neither has my 617 no dash with 6 inch barrel.

There are solutions like polishing the chambers to cleaning them at the range after every 50 or so rounds. Some ammo is a lot dirtier then others and you should stay away from them- Remington Bluk pack comes to mind.

Little Big Gun
Excellent article about the Model 63. I have probably fired more rounds in my Model 63 than any other S&W I have owned. Extraction can be a little sticky, but I have never had the severe problems some report.

I recently acquired this little nickel 34-1, and it is a sweet shooter. I call it my "Purty li'l Thang."



Purty Li'l Thang

__________________
Georgia On My Mind

"Pack Up Your Troubles in Your Old Kit-Bag, and Smile, Smile, Smile"

A kit-bag (also known as a duffle bag) is a large cylindrical canvas or heavy-duty cotton bag, with a flat base and punched holes round the other end for tying with a draw string. It is generally carried balanced on one shoulder, with a hand held up to steady it. It was the traditional means of carrying personal equipment (bedding, clothing etc) in both the army and navy in both world wars and for some time afterwards.

Pack Up Your Troubles in Your Old Kit-Bag - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Model 63

__________________
A real sucker for the J-frames

Thanks for the clarification. I'm glad I asked here as it isn't something I'd have ever figured out on my own.

I was looking at a 22 revolver and never having owned one another question I have is that the barrel wasn't pinned but the cylinder appeared to be recessed. I wouldn't know one way or the other if all rimfire cylinders are recessed or if they were installed a bit longer than pinned barrels. Your thoughts?

I think the chambers stayed recessed on .22's, as the weaker rim of the case may blow out. Centerfire cartridge cases are stronger, and needn't be recessed.

But in these days of bean counters running companies, who knows?

The use of the word 'kit', is far more common in England than on this side of the pond. Watch a few English war movies, and you pick up on that right away.

You're confusing 'Kit Gun' with 'Gun Kit'.

__________________
Chris
SWCA #2243 SWHF #292

.22RF extraction is not only difficult in S&W's. I've had High Standards, Colt's, and Rugers with similar difficulties. It does stem from the tight near match chamber dimensions. Polishing is usually the answer, however on a just acquired K22 CM, 5 Screw, with chambers you can literally see your face in I do have to "Pop" the extractor rod with the heel of my hand to affect extraction. Just tight, quality, manufacturing.

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

In the late 50's an older man across town was my hero. He was a very good hunter and loved to fish. He opened his tackle box to loan me some lures for my first fishing trip to canada. In the tackle box was a revolver I was told it was used to shoot the big northern pike before he put them in the boat. He said it was a 22/32 kit gun. I have wanted one ever since. J

I have owned a good number of S&W 34 & 63 revolvers, one Taurus 94, at least three Charter Arms Pathfinders. I never found any of them to be very accurate. I was probably a factor in that, but did learn that the small stocks and heavy trigger pulls were detrimental to precision shooting. All of mine shot best with standard velocity ammo and a hand filling set of stocks.

I am running low on S&W .22's; two 622's & 2206's, 2213, 2214, pre 18, 317, 63, and a 650. The 317 logged many miles when my son was in Boy Scouts.

As a historical footnote, the model name Kit Gun was first used by S&W in 1936 when they introduced their very first .22/32 Kit Gun. In subsequent decades, the design changed a bit but the name stuck. Finally in 1957 -- two decades after the first Kit Gun was introduced -- the company began putting model numbers on their guns. Subsequently the 43, 51 and 63 came along.

Here's a catalog page from 1939 so you can see how the company characterized its recently introduced model:

__________________
David Wilson

Great little revolvers! One should be in every mans collection. Had a 4" 63 I traded off and replaced with a 34 snub that was going to be my wifes CC weapon. It is very acurate with just about any ammo and is a delight to pack in a Lobo holster. I did have a couple problems with hard ejections as it was rarely fired. Easy cure. Thoroughly cleaned the barrel, forcing cone, cylinder face and cylinders then treated same with Militec-1 using their directions. Now a quick stroke of the rod and they easily eject. I REALLY swear by this product and use nothing else.

With it and a brick of ammo, one could feed himself for a long time if needed. They are perfect small game revolvers that have low recoil and are plenty accurate for head shots out to 20 yards or so with a good rest. I shoot it more than any of my other S&W's as ammo is cheap and it's just plain fun to shoot. When out and about in the woods I always have it on as a companion to my 66 or other centerfire for rabbits and such with 50 rounds of CCI's.

__________________
V/R
Roger / SG

Speaking of Kit Guns in Lobo Holsters, here is a left-handed carved holster with my 63 in it. My brother is left-handed and has a 63. The holster was his present from me last Christmas.

__________________
Georgia On My Mind

I bought my model 63 new in 1978 for $210. A friend had one and after I shot it I had to have one. Brick after brick went through it and it still cleans up like new. It would be one of if not the last gun I would ever part with and is mostly a safe queen in more recent years.

Ejection can get sticky but I have never considered it a problem.

I still remember the words from a song played on the radio when I was in high school:

"When I was in France with the Army,
I one day looked into my kit.
I thought I would there find a sandwich,
But the whole thing was plumb full of shhh....shaving cream, be nice and clean.
Shave every day and you'll always look keen."

Mine is a -1. Chambers are a bit tight, but extracts OK.
Was surprised that its more accurate than expected.

__________________
-jwk-
US Army '72-'95