im in the market for a light weight .22lr snubby for my daughter.

ive fondled the LCR 22 and like what i see (except the lock).

has anybody personally compared the LCR22 to the light weight S&W 22lr snubbies?

in particular the LCR 22 trigger seemed noticably better than the S&W's.

i know the S&W had exposed hammer and adjustable sights, 3" bbl....but also costs substantially more.

this isnt going to be a defensive gun for my daughter, she turns 10 this week. this is for plinking, training, and totin' around for fun.....

__________________
I'm only allowed 30 characters

Although I like the DA trigger-pull on the 317,
I've also heard that the LCR 22 has a better trigger pull
than the S&W's. Hope you get some good responses
to this thread, I'm thinking about the LCR myself. TACC1

I personally would not recommend the 317, the aluminum alloy frame is a horrible combination with the 22lr round. Chambers and brass expand so much after 50-100 rounds that ejecting the rounds is almost impossible. I'd say check out the Model 63 .22lr, it's the same as the 317 but Stainless Steel.
I own more ruger revolvers than I do smith, and I actually enjoy them more than my smith. Rugers are great firearms, and the SR22 is just as good.

Check out hickock45 on youtube, he has a 20 minute review/shooting video on the SR22

thanks but im interested in the revolver instead.

__________________
I'm only allowed 30 characters

For starters kudos on training your daughter at a young age to responsibly handle firearms, I wish more people would do the same with their children. I don't know much specifically about either revolver and cannot comment about expansion on chambers but I do know that a double action only revolver can become a bit frustrating. I would personally go with the Smith so that she can learn to use both styles of the action and learn to be more accurate by using the single action that you would not get on the Ruger. You can always take your Smith to a decent gunsmith and have the action worked over to be much nicer than the Ruger. I'm sure you can get the Ruger worked up as well but you won't feasibly be able to have an external hammer put on it.

Hope I helped.

__________________
Son of a Gun...Smith

The 317 is awesome , I have one a 2 inch with hundreds of rounds through it and u can get the shells out easier than on my 617 / 10 shot only after a few rounds ,, the 317 has a very heavy DA pull that can be lightened up it is very accurate ( I put three rounds into a 1 1/2 " OD sized , triangle shaped group at 40 plus yards in an old appliance ) 30 years shooting exp. doesn't hurt , although they are heavier built have u ever seen a Ruger u would rather have than a Smith and Wesson ? and most of the ruger triggers really suck , But the way they come the DA pull on the 317's is way too Lawyer Engineered Heavy and the shape of the hammer is awkward if u do any SA shooting personally I don't , why they didn't stay with a 63 or 34 type hammer is a mystery , about everyone I let shoot my little 317 wants one but they are high priced even in a used one , especially the non keylock models like mine

I have 317's and suffer no, zero...nada problems with extraction. The TP can be tamed for your daughter with a set of Wolff (or similar) springs and maybe just the hammer spring only. It is my wife's daily carry and I have taught her to pull the trigger enough to grab the top of the hammer with her itty-bitty thumb and cock it for SA. It is a little "tender" in some areas, but it is not intended to be a range-gun. It is a very accurate little Judy-Pooper for it's size. Mine are 1-7/8" NL snubs.

I can attest that you are 99.9% wrong about the 317s. Just this morning I blew 150 rounds through mine with zero issues. I use to work at an indoor range outside of Philadelphia and the range 317 held up with no problems.

What are you basing your statement on?

I purchased a 317 three years ago. 3 inch bbl, adjustable sights. The front is fiber optic, the rear is shallow " v ". The shallow "v" was a little hard to adjust too and may one day change it to a " U " for a better sight picture. Other than that I absolutely love it and have had no problems with anything. I have shot it a lot at least 2,000 rounds. Love the adjustable sight , love the fiber optic front ( very easy to see with 60 year old eye ), light as a feather, goes in a little belt holster and I never know it's there. Get the 3 inch wih adjustable sights will be easier to teach some one than with 2 inch fixed. Using Kentucky windage to aim with is frustrating to a new shooter and the longer sight radius makes hitting easier. Only wish I had one when I taught my children to shoot, this is perfect for that application. Daughter will love it.
gary

Interesting that one's first post is to make a statement that's completely not true....if it was a person, it would be slander! (OK, I'll admit I do more lurking than posting on this site.....)

A friend of mine liked my Mdl 18 so much, but wanted smaller and lighter. So he bought a Mdl 317, and he's well on his 10,000+ rounds (it takes him longer to load it than to shoot it).

He's one of those who believes excess cleaning wears out a .22 firearm more than shooting, and has maybe cleaned the bore 3 or 4 times. I cleaned out the innards at about 5000 rounds when I installed a lighter trigger spring. Other than that, it lives in his tackle box.....in the Pac NW.

Another friend has the LCR, and I've shot it.....it's a nice gun, and a good buy. My experience is that both Ruger and S&W make good firearms.

But I'm with those who say that your daughter would be better served by single/double action. Especially for small, weaker fingers (although kids might have stronger hands now, what with all the texting they do), double action-only may be frustrating.

Further, teaching them single-action may (IMHO) be safer: when the hammer is cocked, she'll know that the gun is ready to shoot....easily.

I trained 2 daughters how to shoot, and my Mdl 18 was the first handgun they shot. Now....soon it'll be a grandson's turn!

my kids been shooting since age 5 with a bb gun, then at age 6 with a cricket .22lr rifle, then at age 8 with a walther p22, she turns 10 today but the 317 or 63 is out of my price range for now.

she will have to wait for her lcr 22, none in stock in my area, my lgs is trying to find one.

i had a 4" model 63 non locked that i traded off because she just didnt like the balance, too front heavy for her.

__________________
I'm only allowed 30 characters

My suggestion for a young child is the Ruger Bearcat. It's sized appropriately and the dedicated SA only will teach her great handling skills. Meanwhile, save your denaro's for a new 3" 63 - you'll love it - it's like an extension of my hand - and she can develop more skills with it later. Gads, I suggested a Ruger...

Stainz

Suggest you send yours back to S&W. I just purchased a 3 inch 317 and shot about 300 rounds out of it so far, 8 different brands. I did not have one single issue with the revolver and it ejects all brass just fine. I have not cleaned the revolver yet either.

Unfortunately I have no experience with the Ruger LCR but may I offer a suggestion? Have her handle a 617 with the 4 inch barrel to see if it "fits".
As much as I like the 317 it is difficult to shoot well and any change in holding it will change the point of impact. This could prove to be frustrating to a young lady.

Good luck with what ever you two decide.

ive seen on GB lately that new LCR22s are going for $360~ish. thats a good price!!!

then i see S&W DAO 2" model 43 no locks going for under $500.00~!!! damn tough decision i have to make.

__________________
I'm only allowed 30 characters

Don't have a 317, but have its cousin - the 43C and love it. No problems, poa = poi, no extraction issues and decent trigger pull for a rimfire revo.

well i went out and bought the LCR 22. the trigger is as tough as any other D/A rimfire revolver ive shot, the only difference is that it gets the stiffest mid stroke instead of at the end. id have preferred the 43C or something like that but with a steel cylinder. im not a fan of the aluminum cylinder guns.

__________________
I'm only allowed 30 characters

You might also consider the Ruger SP101-22...



It has a slightly longer sight radius and my give her more satisfactory plinking results.
.

I have a model 63. I considered the alloy version but I was worried about my scrubbing out the finish on the interior of the cylinder chambers.

For durability, my vote is for the 63. Many shots later the trigger has improved.

Metal parts break-in; plastic parts break-down.

I like steel or stainless steel for the durability factor as well....but don't sell the aluminum cylinders short. I have seen them worn-out on range guns, but it's not the chambers that wear out. It's the rotational wear from turning on the yoke-tube and range-guns don't get all that much "love" anyway. Unless you plan to put 30-40,000 rounds through it, I would not be too concerned about an aluminum cylinder. I don't think anybody has posted a picture of a bad or blown-up chamber on an aluminum cylinder.

I've shot both.
Off a rest the Ruger in DA outshot the Smith in SA.
Denis

I know the original poster is comparing the lightweight .22 offerings from Ruger and Smith, but I will say that SP101 is pretty sweet.

I just handled one yesterday at my local gun store after handling a 317 in their case. That Ruger is very sweet! I decocked it (didn't want to dry fire it) and the thing is really smooth, for what it's worth.

I have that same gun in .357. The grips are way too small for me and I cannot get comfortable shooting it. I have not done anything about it; I just have not been shooting it.

Hogue.
Denis

I opted against buying a 317 because, having fired one, I found the hammer too small and hard to pull back. I would say that, especially with my daughter, SA on the 317 just wasn't an option because the hammer is too small and hard to pull back.

When I fired the LCR22, I thought the trigger was much smoother - but I was then a bit leary of the LCR22 because you actually need a hard hammer strike to reliably touch off the 22 rounds. I'll admit I made an assumption that the hardness of the trigger pull is related to the hardness of the hammer strike - that may not be true.

End result; I bought neither. But I would say that they are both good guns and you couldn't go wrong with either one.

In my case, I just stuck with my 34-1 for my teenage daughter and bought a used Ruger MkII in mint condition for $200 and a new Ruger SR22P (which she really likes) - purchasing both for less than the price of the 317...

My daughter likes the 34-1, 4", and the SR22P best.

Just a shoutout to the SR22P; it's not a jam-o-matic like the Walther P22 or the Sig mosquito, it weighs in at only 17 oz, it has a stainless 3.5" barrel. A half dozen different people who have shot mine said it was their favorite over the 34-1, MkII or MkIII.

That's my 2 cents anyway.

__________________
But then, what do I know?

my daughter (age 10) can dry fire the LCR-22 just fine. of course she has yet to fire it DAO on target. there is a big difference in pulling the trigger and doing that accurately.

__________________
I'm only allowed 30 characters

As a retired Phila Police sergeant, I carried a myriad of sidearms—on and off duty: S&W Models 10 and 36, Colt 1911, Beretta Bobcat. Since retiring, I down-sized my firearms cache to the Ruger LCP for summer carry, and a Smith 637 snubbie. Recently, I traded the 637 for a Ruger LCR.

Big mistake! I never realized how much I missed the SA/DA option until it was gone. The LCR has the smoothest trigger pull I’ve ever experienced, and Ruger makes a fine product. But the LCR is a bit bulkier (bigger trigger guard and grip than the 637), albeit it lighter at just 13.5 ounces.

My recommendation is to forego the LCR. Teach her both SA and DA firing sequence. Lessons learned early are difficult to undo, and you want her to have the ability to easily transition from SA to DA and back again as circumstances may someday demand.

I just picked up an LCR-22 to go with my LCR-38 and 357. I put 250 rounds through it the first time out and had a blast. Stingers, Velocitors, Yellow Jackets, Federal cheap LRN, Triton Quick Shocks. All fired and extracted with no problems. The hotter rounds did require a little sharper jab on the extractor rod. I only had one case hang up under the extractor star. This was my fault for not pointing the gun upward enough during extraction. The trigger smoothed up considerably during this first outing (this and a few hundred dry fire cycles). The trigger is still somewhat heavier than the centerfire LCR's though. It should make a fun plinker to teach my Daughters how to handle a double action revolver.

My LCR-22 thoughts.....Good shooter, good trainer, good price.

I just picked up a Ruger LCR .22 and put 50 rounds through it today. The only problem I had was some tight extractions that eased up when I used different ammo.

While it is a decent gun, it is not what I'm looking for. I wanted a backup piece to my Ruger 10-22 rifle that I could use for hunting small prey. I would buy a Ruger SR-22, but it is off-roster in California. Because of problems I had with my other .22 semi-auto pistols (they only like CCI mini-mags), I decided I wanted a revolver. I may pick up a Mark III and try to restore confidence in SAs.

With the LCR 22, I was able to hit the black circle of my targets at 7 and 13 yards, but my shot groups were pretty bad. This is not surprising with a snub nose, fixed notch rear sight, and a hefty trigger pull. At 25 yards, I missed the black circle completely, but I probably wouldn't have missed a torso. In order to hunt small game, I think I will need at least a 4" barrel.

As I said, the trigger pull on the LCR 22 was very hefty, probably too much for a child, although the weight of the gun was nice and recoil was negligible. It will fit small hands well. On my S&W revolvers, I slicked up the action and put Wolff springs in. I'm not sure if Wolff has springs for Rugers.

I will probably sell the LCR 22. If you are interested and in California, I can give you a good deal on a barely used and already inexpensive revolver.

I will probably get either a Ruger SP-101 in .22, a S&W 317, a S&W 63, or a S&W 617.

The Smiths are around $800-900 new! If that's not too much money for you, then look at the S&W 63 or the 43C. I have a an old J-frame .357, and they are nice especially after a trigger job. Also consider the SP-101 which is substantially cheaper and a nice piece.

I am not particularly fond of the quality of my Rossi/Taurus in 44 magnum, so I would hesitate to buy their convertible 22LR/winchester magnum. Stick to Ruger or Smith, the latter being better quality at a higher price.

The Ruger Mark III is a phenomenal pistol that I think you should consider for your child. Revolvers are challenging weapons to fire well although they are easy to operate.

The S&W has the advantage of more grip options...the Ruger has only one grip style and may be too big for your daughter- If she has a good grip on the gun she will shoot better-

The 317 is a more versatile little gun. Like any of the j-frames....you have options for grips....like mentioned above and you can work the trigger to make it decent. I looked at the Ruger LCR and went thumbs-down on the 22 version. I read a lot of press on the gun and it does not get good reviews in the smaller caliber. Nobody makes the gun I want. I would like to see an all stainless steel fixed sight J-frame in 22 dress....like the M60, 640, 649...etc., but they never made one. The only choice out there is the 317. It is in some ways a tender little gun and was never designed to be a range-gun, but we have people here on the forum that say they have high round-counts with no issues. I purchased one that had been a range-gun once and the yoke had been stretched twice during it's lifetime. BTCG was like .012 and the overall gap was close to .018. The gun NEVER stopped shooting and there is no telling how many thousands of rounds had been fired thru that little pistol. I think the ideal set-up would be the 317 with a stainless yoke, cylinder and barrel and there is one poster that I have read here on the forum that has one. Smith will convert the gun for you, if you're willing to pay the price and wait for the gun. I guess my ideal pocket-pistol in 22 would be a fixed sight snub-nose 63....but they never made that either. My wife took the 317 and I will never get it back.

After reading this post, I just checked rugers website and although they're good guns, there's not one LCR or SP101 that I saw that I prefer to S&W based on looks and features alone. Not ruger bashing but afterall this is a S&W site.
In all fairness, my experience with the 317 is limited and I've not owned ruger DA 22's for comparison but my adj sight, 3", no-lock 317 hasn't had extraction probs but trigger pull was in need of a spring swap which helped immensely. BTW, my g-kids argue over who gets to shoot the 317.
I will state that my 317 doesn't shoot as well (at least I can't) as my 17, 617 or 18 but that's not surprising. I do hope to someday acquire a nice 63, 34 and 43, which you may also want to check. If this is for your daughter, you may want to have her go along for her input.

Most of us don't beat-up on other people, or the guns they may choose. Truth-be-told....many of us on here have more than one brand anyway. I do not carry a prized NL Smith. If I get one taken away or stolen, I do not want it to be one of my prized beauties. Let me offer-up another suggestion that worked for me and at the cost of 22 nowadays, it's getting pretty close to being economically sensible.

You can come-by a decent 38-special in various brands often for well under $300. Get an all-steel model for the weight. I have taught my wife and grand-kids with a 38 as opposed to a small frame 22. If you hand-load this works great....simply download a 38-special. I use something close to 2 grains of Bullseye and a 110-grain slug. In an all steel revolver the recoil is not much worse than a 22 and the TP is smother than the small frame 22. If you don't reload.......the Short Colt round is based on the 38-special case. In other words....the 38 Short Colt is a baby 38-special. 38 Short Colt can be found at most gun shows, or ordered from one of the popular websites. The cost is competitive with 38-special. I consider it a good "training round" to build-up to a 38-special.

For anyone having problems ejecting the spent hulls from a 317,I would recommend that you try Federal 22 jacketed hollow points.I have had good luck ejecting the ammo after shooting several hundred rounds.

__________________
JR

I have a 34-1, which is comparable to the 63, only in blue steel. It is a fine revolver, over 40 years old now, and will pass to my children and grandchildren.

Hard extraction is not unique to an aluminum revolver. 22 ammunition isn't what it used to be, and most brands are somewhat sticky in the chamber. CCI MiniMags are about the cleanest and best, but be grateful if you can find anything these days.

A J-frame is really tiny, and a 10 year old will quickly outgrow it. I find it difficult to hold it in a way conducive to good marksmanship. There are better grips, but keep the originals if someone would ever want to sell it.

The DA pull is as stiff or stiffer than any other S&W I own. However it gets lighter through the pull, making it something you can get used to. Mostly, I use it SA, at which the little .22 (and any S&W) excels.

If it were up to me, I would hold out for a steel cylinder. Aluminum depends on anodization to resist the heat and flame of firing. It will erode rapidly if the coating is damaged, which is inevitable in time.

A 617 (K-frame), or blue K-22 (if you can find one) is a better choice for a lifetime companion on the range. The little kit gun is meant to be carried much, fired little.

Ruger revolvers are an acquired taste - clunky but serviceable. The closest I've come is a New Vaquero in .45 Colt.

To me there's only one choice for a 10 yr old girl to learn with, and that's a Mod 63 with a 4" barrel. Good trigger, good sights, and accurate. Stainless and easy to clean and care for. What more could you want.

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

Good choice... and would last her a lifetime.

DIY, I think you are being unnecessarily harsh on the 317. Years back I had a Model 63 that did exactly the same thing you describe, tight chambers are a common ailment w/ earlier 63s, I have never heard of it with the 317.

I have used my friend's 317 for several shooting sessions with no problems, performs as well as my 2" 34. Of course much lighter.

I am on my third cylinder for my 3" Model 317. The problem was that the empty cases would not extract. The last time I sent it in to S&W I again requested they put a steel cylinder in. They did and so far so good. I wouldn't buy another one.

__________________
I like Ike.

Based on what I am reading in this thread, I would also recommend the Ruger SP101 to the OP. This is a beautifully made all-steel gun that will last a lifetime. The trigger pull is a bit stiff, that I'll grant, but it is also smooth. I shoot DA great with my SP101 .22LR revolver. The gun has a FO front sight and the sights are fully adjustable for windage and elevevation. What's not to like besides the somewhat stiff trigger, which is inherent in DA .22LRs?

I like Smiths and I like Rugers and I own many revolvers of both brands. In this particular case I would enthusiastically recommend the SP101 .22LR. And I do not think that this gun is in the least bit "clunky."

__________________
Army veteran, NRA Life Member

I own both revolvers and they are both good guns. My only gripe against the 317 is that shortened hammer spur. Between the 2 I have to admit I prefer the LCR. The trigger pull though heavier than the centerfire LCRs is still lighter than the 317. If price isn't an obstacle the very best 22 revolver I own is the newer 3" Model 63. To me this is the perfect rimfire revolver, not to big or to small and much more accurate than either the 317 or LCR. I own several rimfire revolvers and the new Model 63 is my favorite. My wife who weighs 95 lbs has shot all 3 and she too prefers the 63.

Attached Images

	DSC05343.jpg (82.4 KB, 141 views)
	DSC06628.jpg (118.2 KB, 124 views)
	DSC00823.jpg (130.2 KB, 171 views)

I've fired both the 317 (I own one) & the LCR .22 and like them both. The LCR I shot hit to point of aim, something I can't say is true for my 317. The little S&W is fun to shoot and great for practicing rapid fire from concealment. I have no issues with ctg ejection. Some ammo is better in this regard than other brands. I keep Q-Tips and solvent in my shooting bag for those times when the gun gets "sticky!" Ditto for my S&W 63.

I'm not sure about the 317 but Ruger says it's OK to dry-fire the LCR .22.

Rich

Somehow a set of Boot-Grips wound up on my little 317. This is a mid-1990s model, thus no internal lock.

You do realize DIY posted back in May, 2012, and still only has three posts? This is a resurrected thread.

I had similar issues with mine. It now has a stainless cylinder, Wolff springs, Pachmayr grips, a black, serrated ramp front sight and standard square notch rear sight. It is now a pretty sweet gun. It picked up a few oz. with the steel cylinder, which for me is a good thing.

I also have 3" and 5" Model 63s and a 4" SP101 .22. I like all of them, but the 5" 63 may be the most useful for me.

Attached Images

0082.jpg (105.1 KB, 123 views)

__________________
Tom

I remember Tom's former posting concerning the SS cylinder swap. I called Smith to see if they would change mine and they said sure....$140. I thought about it for a few days and called back....was told they would not do it because they would not put the stainless cylinder on an aluminum yoke....which I can fully understand. I would want the yoke and cylinder to both be stainless. I'm wondering here and have a question for Tom....did they change the yoke, or simply install an M63 cylinder. Nothing wrong with my 317, but I thought about doing this conversion anyway. The older 63 cylinder I had on hand would not fit (too long), but the newer model might???

I just went down and checked; the yoke is aluminum. Mine was changed because the barrel/cylinder gap had a slight valley in it which produced a gas jet that quickly eroded the cylinder face. On the second trip to the factory for the same issue, they followed my recommendation and put in the stainless cylinder. They also put in a new barrel and I don't know what else. Fortunately the reinstalled my serrated ramp front sight. Works fine now. Really likes Federal match stuff.

__________________
Tom

Thanks for the info Tom. I have remembered that discussion, because like I said....I think a stainless cylinder in a 317 is the cats pajamas....as they say. I can't see how much harm it could cause other than possible early end-shake issues. The yoke-tube would be the place to see the wear as opposed to an aluminum cylinder "sharing" the wear. I really don't have any worries about the aluminum cylinder as to strength, but that finish is the first thing to go on a 317. I have seen many of the older ones with worm-trails on them.

I noticed the very slight V in the forcing cone early on. I was surprised how much and how quickly it ablated the face of the cylinder. Now with a stainless cylinder and a properly cut forcing cone things are good. I like the increase in weight. My scale says 3.8 oz. increase to 17.8 with the Pacymayr Gripper grips. I can shoot it better with just the slight increase in weight.

__________________
Tom