I want a tough built to last .22 lr revolver. I want to get one to practice with as a cheap plinker and one to carry in my backpack. Figure it might come in handy for emergency food from small game. I am looking at the 317 aluminum and the 63 stainless steel.

There is an obvious weight difference. How much tougher, longer lasting, more durable would the stainless be over the aluminum? Will the aluminum hold up to as much heavy use?

IMO the SS version will be the stronger of the two.
The 317 also has a paint on finish that will show wear easier where SS can be polished if scratched.

You mentioned weight,
The SS gun is not exactly what I would call heavy just because its so small but it definatly weighs alot more,
The 317 is so light it feels like a plastic toy.

Find and buy a 63. You'll never wear it out. And, after anything you can dish out to in short of dragging it behind a truck on a chain, the finish will still be wonderful.

__________________
<><

It's not the shooting that will cause problems, it's the carrying and banging around. A model 63 wil shoot more ammunition that you'll probably ever see, and maintain the looks with only slight care (don't use it to drive tent stakes), and your grandchildren can still use it.

The 317 needs better care to maintain looks, and won't take as much abuse.

__________________
Science plus Art

I bought myself and my son a 3" model 317. I bought my wife a Lady Smith 317 in the pretty case. I gave my model 63 to my 21 year old grandson. I did keep the model 18 for myself though. If shooting matters the model 18 is the most accurate, K frame vs J frame.

I'm old so carrying in the field I prefer the model 317, but it does take ALLOT of shooting to get used the light weight and V notch rear sight.
If you don't own a S&W .22 rimfire then a model 17 or model 18 is good to buy; but for carry a 317. A model 63 is a great compromise for a new buyer.

__________________
JIM
NRA Pistol Instr

As a recent purchaser of a 317 3 inch Airlite I'll give my opinion.
So far I have played with 8 different brands of 22 ammo to find out which one my revolver likes best. Out of the 8, only two were deemed unacceptable.
It is difficult to shoot this little bugger. Minor changes of how you hold the grip will change the point of impact enough to miss a rabbit at 15 yards.

All of my range testing so far has been at 15 yards. Best 8 shoot groups are running 2 - 2 1/4 inches. But my impression is this revolver is more accurate than that. I think if the sights were changed to a normal rear notched rear blade and a post front it would help. But even as it is, it is certaintly capable of killing small game at 15 yards easily and most likely up to 25 yards. So far I have run 200 rounds through this and havent cleaned it and it keeps on ticking. SA trigger pull is very sweet!

With a life time warranty the thought of "wearing it out" doesnt even enter my mind. It is the lightest .22 8 shot revolver made and it is the one that will go into my hunting pack. The only other pistol in the same league is the Beretta Bobcat which weighs in about 1 ounce lighter.

The current 3" 63 and it's immediate predecessor, the 5" 63, bottom & top below, are x8 .22 LR. I added the HiViz to the 5"-er - and all sport '60 Pro' grips from S&W.



The middle revolver above is actually a 4" 651 in .22 WMR - but it looks exactly like a 4" 63, the previous variant of the 63 from some dozen plus years ago. Both are x6 revolvers. You can get an idea of the proportional size of the respective barrel lengths. The 4" 651 has some long lusted for newness that makes it unfair to consider, but of the 3" & 5" I have - and a conceptual 4" 63 which I don't have - the 3" 63 is my favorite. It balances great - and shoots like an extension of my hand. I've had my 4" 617, not shown, a lot longer - and love it - but there are days that it's just more fun to shoot the 3" 63. I also have a 3" 60 Pro - and a S&W holster that shares time between the 60, holstered, and the 3" 63, alongside below:



I have fondled several 317's and shot a both a 317 and a 351. The DA trigger seems more stout than the 63 or 651, perhaps because the revolvers weigh less than half what the shorter 63 weighs. No recoil - even with the 351 - but it, like my 651, was flashy and loud. If you really don't need the lite weight of the 317, I'd get the 3" 63.

Stainz

I have a 43C, and have put about 2000 rounds through it. After cleanup, it still looks and feels like new. Just a thought.

I had a K-22 Masterpiece, which I thought was Huge.
Since then I've been shooting the 317 3", a 4" Kit Gun, and a Ruger Bearcat. For carry, you can't beat the 317. That said, you
just can't beat steel for being able to take a beating. As it
stands now, I'd like to carry all three, they're that nice. A 317 can
be carried anywhere, we'll see how it holds up.
To me, unless you're specifically hunting, the k-frames
are too much gun. JMHO, TACC1.

Well, since you don't appear to have bought either one yet; let me suggest the Model 34-1. Seen below on the bottom-left. J frame, blue, square butt, 6X, weighs about 24 oz I think. I have a pachmayr grip for it. I paid $450ish for it, or about 60% of what the 63 will run you. They made a 2" with AS also.

It is more accurate than I am.

__________________
But then, what do I know?

I have owned a good number of S&W J frame rimfires, and a few Charter Arms Pathfinders. I was never impressed by their accuracy, but I got best results with standard velocity ammo.

I currently own a snubbie 317 AirLite, a 4" 63, a 650, and a 4" K22. As stated, the 317 is difficult to shoot. I put a set of Herrett stocks on the 63 and factory banana style stocks on the 650 and can do right well with either one. My K22 was disappointing until I stuck a set of Rogers's stocks on it and tried a box of CCI Mini-Mags. What a difference!

A slightly less expensive option would be a S&W 2213/2214 .22 pistol.

Try it, you will like it.

Which one you pick probably depends on what you really want to do with it. If carrying is more important than shooting, then the 317 may be a better choice. If shooting is more important than carrying, then the current 3" or the slightly older 5" may get primary consideration. They are all good.

The problem I had with the 317 was sights: I don't care for the v rear, HiViz front. I changed mine to a black serrated ramp front and square notch rear. The 3" 63 has a HiViz front, but a nice square notch rear which works for me.

Attached Images

0092.jpg (107.2 KB, 229 views)

__________________
Tom

I have a 30 year old model 63 that I will never part with. I got a 317-1 on a trade and to tell you the truth, it is increasingly replacing my 63 in the ditty bag when I go out in the boat. That 63 is the first gun I bought on my own with my first pay check as a lawyer-but I got to tell you that 317-1 is really growing on me-kinda like trying to decide between my wife and a hot little 26 year old. The more you shoot the hot little number, the more you forget the wife But I'll never get rid of her (the wife and the 63 )
Of course now I have a 617-4 a K22 an SP101, a single six and a 317 gathering dust....I gues the really sensible thing to do is go ahead and buy a single ten

__________________
Forum consigliere

Buying good .22s is like eating potato chips: you can't stop with just one.

__________________
Tom

Yeah man....buy one of each! I have a 317 that I would never be able to pry from my wife's hands. I liked it so much that I bought me one, but have since sold mine in sacrifice to make another purchase. All said....and others have said it, I think for durability and lots of shooting...get the 63. I liked the 317 for the fixed-sights as well and if I ever found a 63 snubbie with fixed sights....I'd own one. Which means, I likely never will.

I bought a 317 kitgun has an understudy for my 329's - its awsome and I have a lot of fun with it but it is hard to shoot well with it

My 317 snub no-lock is great fun. Never a problem cycling Wally World .22s, and has held up extremely well to lots of range work. Tough to keep 100% clean, but it's a tool not a show piece.

__________________
I'm with the banned ...

I have both but love the 317, in a nice El Paso Saddlery holster I have no expectation of ever wearing it ou. Thanks Wallace

I have one and love it. I had two and loved that one also, but had to make room for another toy. I must suggest though....the 317 is plenty tough enough for what you may want to do with it, but it is very weak in a couple of areas. The yoke-tube is aluminum as well as the cylinder. We all know what end-shake is (it's okay to ask if you don't). These aluminum components are simply not going to hold-up like steel. I have heard of folks having over 10,000 rounds down range and that's a LOT. Maybe enough for a lifetime for most folks, but I have ran across some likely range-guns that were simply shot-to-pieces. I don't mean blown-apart...I mean just shot-loose. It may take 15,000 or even 20,000 rounds to loosen one up, but it will loosen-up much quicker than a steel gun. Take out your yoke-screw....pull the yoke out and see if you detect that gray mushy stuff. That is aluminum powder mixed with lubricant. IMHO, a 317 owner needs to pay close attention to this bearing surface and lube the yoke-rod often....more often than he/she would look at a steel gun.

I love it and plan to never be without one. I just take better care of it than I do my steel guns.

Words we should all heed and live by.

__________________
Forum consigliere

I have a few of the aluminum / Scandium guns. They make great carry guns, but not so great shooting guns. I much prefer the durability of the steel guns. I still consider the aluminum guns: Carry Much, Shoot Little.

__________________
Tom

My much carried 317, looks like it has been dragged behind my truck. It hasn't.

The sides of the barrel are completely worn through the anodizing, just from contact with the leather paddle holster. The cylinder front is also severely worn.

Yes, hard to shoot, but I still carry it for our numerous copperheads (killed one yesterday).

It is one LIGHT sucker !

__________________
NRA Instructor

Another consideraton is butt style. Most 63s I've seen are square butt guns and all the 317s are round butt to the best of my knowledge? I hate it that S&W has went to all round butts.
Steve

To the best of my knowledge most 63 are square butt guns? 317s are all round butt guns. I hate the fact that S&W has gone to all round butt guns. I actually was thinking about a Ruger Bearcat till my son bought one for his youngest son. The Bearcat's have a lot of aluminum in them also.
My choice to your question is:

She has been many a mile on my hip.
Steve

A lot.............

A lot....lot!

I have my 4" M34-1... a fine pistol & easily carried in a holster. What could be better? A 3" J frame in stainless. If I ever come across one, it WILL come home with me! The factory smooth target stocks are great for shooting... and the semi-closed back strap converts a Round Butt to Square for shooting. I have done this on my M36-1 on occasion.

__________________
NRA LIFE
Reserve Officer 9yrs

Flagman is the only poster that mentioned the 34! It is a great alternative to the 317 or the 63.

I have a 2"Square Butt that I bought refinished in satin nickel, its a real tack driver (as long as I wear the glasses). Not as easy to be precise as say a model 18, but great for a little snub.

Plus 1 on the 34.

I picked up a 2" 34-1 to save a little on ammo, over my 36 and 37 when at the range.
I enjoyed shooting it so much, I picked up a 4" 34-1 for field carry / plinking.
Each cost less than 2/3 what a 317 would have cost.

My guess is that the OP has either already made his decision or died from old age (or both) since this thread began over a year and a half ago. Anyway, some good info here.

I had a 317 but sold it. It was very hard for me to shoot it with reasonable accuracy.
Just bought a 63. Have not had time to shoot it.

If you look closely on the notice for most threads, they have a link to discontinue interest(not the exact words but, you get my meaning).
Steve

They are both great 22's..

63-5
317

__________________
JR

Well, Ranger, what's the top one? Looks like a N frame?
Steve

The only aluminum on my Bearcats are the ejector rod housings? I guess that could be considered a lot?

S.B.

The top example in Ranger98's post is the current production 3" 63 - a RB with a 60 Pro grip. It's just like my 3" 63 in a bit earlier post - #7 (5/12!) here. That '60 Pro' grip effectively squares off the RB gripframe, as seen on my 3" & 5" 63's and 4" 651 in that earlier post. The nice thing about the SS 3" & 5" 63's is that they are both 8-shooters. Additionally, the 3" 63 comes with a HiViz front sight - an aid to tired eyes. Since my first post I added a 7-shot 2 1/8" 351PD in .22 WMR. My favorite is still the 3" 63... YMMV!

Stainz

Yea, I just picked up the new m63 3'' and I like it a lot. I picked all steel over the aluminum.

Thanks for answering his question for me.I thought the model numbers I had included would suffice

__________________
JR