Model 63 Production Dates (1977 Question)

south_ridge

Member
Joined
May 5, 2012
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I have been interested in buying a model 63 for a couple of years, but never pulled the trigger. I was reading through the Standard Catalog today and noticed that the first production year was 1977, which happens to be the year I was born.

So...do any of you know how many they made in 1977? I'm trying to figure out what my odds are of finding one made that year. Any comments on what the going rate is for one of these would be appreciated (if they exist). I'm not looking for a safe queen, but rather something to pack and shoot.

Thanks,

SR
 
Register to hide this ad
I doubt you can find out how many model 63s were made in a particular year. From the published information, if you find one in the later part of the M with 5 digits (80000-99999) it may be a 1977 gun, but you would need to have a factory historical letter to confirm this. Figure on $500 or so for one of this era in average condition.
 
Alan,

Thanks for the feedback.

I was a bit confused, because the book says they started with M101699 (for a 100-unit pilot lot) and started full production at M103577. Then in appendix 2 it says that 1978 started with M100000, which would seemingly put all 63s in 1978 or later.

Perhaps the serial numbers were a bit out of whack since it was a new product release. But no matter what it sure doesn't seem like there would be many of them in existence from '77.

If anybody has any further insight, I would sure appreciate it. I hate to launch into a pursuit for something that doesn't exist.

If anybody has one they want to give away I will gladly provide my FFL's address. :)

SR
 
I think the ship dates in the SCSW appendix are approximate, and I didn't look at the model 63 listing for the SNs. I suppose your best bet would be to find as early an SN as possible and cross your fingers...or find a more common 1977 gun? ;)
 
Alan,

Thanks. Like I said, I've wanted a 63 for a couple of years. It wasn't until today that I realized they started producing them in 1977. I thought I might have the grounds for a new search. Unfortunately I'm not usually patient enough to execute on something like that. I will probably look for a month, find one from 1981, can call that close enough.

SR
 
but never pulled the trigger.

After you buy one and have it in your possession, then you can pull the trigger! :D

The stainless Kit Gun is a sweetheart revolver to own. If I were you, I'd spend my energies finding a good one and not worry about what year it shipped. If you focus on the latter, you'll end up passing up some good opportunities in what may end up being a forlorn effort to find one that shipped in the "right" year.

That would be my advice anyway. But I realize it may be tainted by my personal disregard for the whole "birth year" mania. I don't own a single gun that shipped in 1950 (my year of emergence) and it makes no difference to me at all. Please don't misunderstand, I am not critical of others who think differently, I just have a hard time seeing how it matters. Get the gun you want - that's what matters, IMHO.

Jack
 
Jack,

I hear you. For me the birth year thing is more of an afterthought. I was looking for a decent k-22 for a while. I walked into a LGS and they had one (a 4" pre-18) that looked pretty good so I was probably going to buy it. Then I realized it was produced in 1952 which is when my dad was born, so it definitely tipped the scales toward the purchase. I like that gun because I like that gun, but the production date is just a little something extra.

I really wish the older 63s had 3" barrels, because I like that length a little better for packability. But I can't bring myself to pony up $650+ for a new one instead of ~ $500 for a 4" gun from ~ 1980.

SR
 
There are two 63 no dashes at my lgs. 575.00 and 595.00. New or used the price is not that much different with todays prices.
 
But I can't bring myself to pony up $650+ for a new one instead of ~ $500 for a 4" gun from ~ 1980.

Boy! I hear that! I have zero interest in any of the new S&W handguns.

As for barrel length on the Kit Gun, I think you will like the 4" just fine. I don't find that the extra inch makes much difference in carrying it and you do get a little bit more sight radius out of the 4" barrel. And I find that the 4" Kit Gun balances nicely in the hand.

Having said that, I am enjoying the new (to me) 2" Kit Gun I recently purchased. At a range session recently, I thought I would lose it to my wife, who very much enjoyed shooting it.
It is shown in the upper right hand corner of this photograph:
jp-ak-albums-miscellaneous-revolvers-picture9214-5-snubbies-4a.jpg


Added: This Kit Gun is not model-marked. It shipped from the factory in January, 1958.
 
My barrel length preference isn't really about carrying. When I'm hiking or hunting it doesn't matter that much - I can carry my 4" k-22 or my 6" model 57 and they are just fine.

But I spend quite a bit of time on the farm climbing in and out of a pickup, or riding a tractor, or in the Jeep, etc. In those situations it seems like the 4" barrel on my k-22 occasionally gets in the way.

To me, it seems like if I have a 4" k-22, I should probably go with a little shorter barrel length on the j-frame.

Of course no gun is perfect. That's one reason why we all have so many guns.

I've also been eyeing the new Ruger Bearcat shopkeepers with the 3" barrel. I like Bearcats.

SR
 
Interesting. In Bill Jordan's book, No Second Place Winner, he talks about the swivel holster, developed to accommodate officers who had an issue with the car seat pushing the holstered revolver up when the officer was seated. He recommends keeping the swivel locked, except when seated in the automobile.
Jack
 
Back
Top