SW22 Victory, is it just me?

First, I love my M&P's and S&W. Have had just about everything, was an avid Glock shooter before but once I held an M&P, I was sold. I'm short and have small hands and they just fit me. Carry a 40c and compete with a full sized .40. I also enjoy this forum. Have lurked quite a bit, but I had to join to ask this question and I'm sure I'll start posting more.

For the love of Pete, why didn't they give this thing an ambidextrous safety? WHY? Every single steel framed target style .22 pistol on the market for the last 60 years of this design has a single sided, right handed safety. I'm a lefty, I sold my 22/45 and various other .22 pistols because I can't actuate the safety with my left hand without contorting it. I would go out and buy a Victory tomorrow if it had an ambi safety. I just don't get it. I think it's a slick looking pistol and when I saw it, I thought "PLEASE have an ambi safety, they wouldn't go about designing a NEW .22 target gun in 2015 without thinking of the everlasting plight of lefties, would they?" When I saw photos of the right side of the gun, my heart sank a little.

I have friends that are new shooters, women and kids that are lefties and I don't like giving them a pistol that is so "wierd" for them to actuate the safety.

Oh well. I'm sure it was an oversight, I guess it could be an engineering problem, but with what we can do today in engineering it would surprise me that they can't put a lever on the right side of this pistol. Guess I'll stick with my polymer .22's.

Otherwise, keep up the good work, Smith!

Its a target pistol, not a carry piece.
Fast safety actuation is generally not an issue in the target world.

But, with an ambi safety it can fill more than one role. Why bother with the mag release on the side, then? Why not stay with the European heel release? That was one of the major reasons that I read, when they designed the Ruger 22/45. More like full sized firearms. Standard grip angle, 1911 feel, mag release button on the side. It just frustrates me. I can use this to teach kids and people that haven't shot before using cheap ammo and very low recoil. Having a standard ambi safety would help a lot.

I'm with TAROMAN, the safety isn't an issue. You can still teach people about using a safety if you want to whether or not it's ambidextrous. Personally, I can't remember the last time I engaged a safety on any of the semi-autos I shoot. They are all DA/SA and I feel that the long heavy trigger pull is safe enough. Of course I don't carry so I can feel safe without using a safety.
I feel that you are making too big a deal of the safety. It's an inexpensive pistol that is a remake of an older design and they probably could not justify the expense of making the safety ambidextrous. They already made the mag release on the side instead of heel type, and that probably used up all the cost they could justify. Every little change costs, and companies today are all about the bottom line.

This may come off as antagonistic but that is NOT my intention.

Some folks have made a pretty penny by making something that "seemingly" the masses would appreciate. Case in point? There is a company making good money building retro-fit parts to make the Ruger Mk I-III easier to field strip & re-assemble. (I never found it that hard but the MASSES have spoken and many do)

If you very genuinely believe, engineering-wise that it would have been -SO- easy for S&W to make it... then YOU should focus your efforts on doing it yourself.

If you followed that and put forth the effort, you would have:
--a .22 with an ambi safety
or
--a product that OTHERS will pay you cash to get!
or
--your inability to make it work could give you a more clear picture of why S&W didn't do it themselves

I have to agree with most of the posters to this thread who find the safety unimportant. As said, it is first and foremost a target/plinking pistol and as such, the safety is not much of a concern. But I can see your point as well - I'm married to a lefty and after 43 years of marriage, I'm teaching her to shoot.

But here's a very real thought. As you have no doubt discovered, left-handed folks are going to pick up a lot of guns in their lifetimes with right-handed engineering. Since an ambidextrous safety is a combative handgun feature, those people you are training might some day have to defend themselves with a handgun without an ambidextrous safety. It's best that they know how to handle such a challenge.

On a carry gun, I want an ambidextrous safety in case I have to use it left-handed for whatever reason. Because of that, the gun I bought to carry if I think it necessary is a Smith & Wesson E-Series 1911Sc which, as you may know, comes with an ambidextrous safety.

Ed

I do see what you are all saying, and I have carried for a decade and been shooting for much longer. I can, if necessary can use a pistol without an ambi safety, but sometimes I feel that righties don't really understand the plight of us southpaws. I'm not the only one that dislikes the G3 for the very reason that it sucks for any real use for a lefty other than shooting on a square range. I am a person that is used to adapting. I'm short. 4' 11" and ride a BMW R1200CL, I'm a lefty and shoot a right handed Remington 700 ( I would prefer a left handed action, but I got a good deal on it and I have learned to shoot it well). I can reload revolvers in decent time. I’m not talking about not being able to adapt. Maybe it is extremely difficult to engineer an ambi safety into this pistol. I think I remember when I owned my 22/45 trying to see if I could do something about it. I think that the disassembly lever in the back of the grip was the main obstacle, and since the Victory doesn’t have that, it seems like it would be rather easy. I may be remembering wrong, it’s been a while.
Here are my main reasons. I shoot at a local range’s USPSA events. Have for a long time. We have several youngsters that want to get involved and we’d like to use .22’s. I know how easy it would be to teach my 11 year old step son how to shoot single stack with a Victory or 22/45 with an ambi safety. He’s not big enough yet to shoot any of the major calibers with any confidence. He’s too wet behind the ears to put him into a situation where he’s moving on a range AND having to manipulate controls made for the wrong hand. I’m not trying to start ****. If I came off like I was bitching, just to bitch, I apologize. I have been a Smith fan for decades and this isn’t a “S&W” gripe. It’s just a gripe for a lefty who wants to be able to use a left handed safety. BTW, everything I shoot at the moment is polymer as well. I sold my Springfield 1911 because my thumb kept pushing the slide lock out when firing. It’s just where my thumb naturally goes and I didn’t feel like having it milled down. I will probably buy another 1911 and have it done, though. I miss shooting it. Last, I have carried my 22/45 at a friend’s farm for little critters. It’s a pain to draw it and have to fiddle with the stupid safety. Hey, I hate slide mounted safeties too, I have small hands, but here I am in a Smith forum and have owned several with slide mounted safeties.

You plight is understood and appreciated. Although statistics apparently say otherwise, it sure seems like there is a large enough portion of the American population that is left-handed to make manufacturing of items for those people practical and profitable. My late father-in-law was left-handed, my wife is left-handed, our daughter-in-law is a natural lefty but can do some things right-handed and our granddaughter, while only eight months old, appears to favor her left hand. That's just in our small family and if representative of the country, indicates there are a lot of people who are left-handed.

Ed

The O.P. makes a good point. A local mother brought her teenage daughters to our irregular timed action pistol or what ever you want to call them matches. Fortunately both daughters were right handed so Ruger .22/45s worked. The point is, life isn't all bullseye matches anymore. They could not participate with single action pistols that lacked safeties.

Oddly enough, the new Victory replaces a pistol that had an ambidextrous safety, the 22S and 22A series. The largely forgotten 22Ss had stainless frames. Have you handled one?

k22an, I have not seen the 22s I have seen the 22a. I can't seem to find anything on the 22s on the web. Got any links?

ghouston13 said:

k22an, I have not seen the 22s I have seen the 22a. I can't seem to find anything on the 22s on the web. Got any links?

Click to expand...

http://smith-wessonforum.com/smith-wesson-semi-auto-pistols/458559-new-sw22-victory-22lr-target-pistol-2.html

k22fan said:

Oddly enough, the new Victory replaces a pistol that had an ambidextrous safety, the 22S and 22A series.

Click to expand...

My 22A-1 does not have an ambidextrous safety.



I honestly can't say I can recall ever seeing one that did but maybe a certain version did.

Ed

My bad. I was remembering the mag release on the front of the grip strap. What can I say? I haven't fired any of my .22 autos in a while and it was late.

If you've seen a 22A you can imagine a 22S. The only difference is the metal the frames are made out of.

Hey, no problem - I've made my first mistake this year too.

Ed

I will hold out hope, guys! Thanks for listening to me complain.

AveragEd said:

You plight is understood and appreciated. Although statistics apparently say otherwise, it sure seems like there is a large enough portion of the American population that is left-handed to make manufacturing of items for those people practical and profitable. My late father-in-law was left-handed, my wife is left-handed, our daughter-in-law is a natural lefty but can do some things right-handed and our granddaughter, while only eight months old, appears to favor her left hand. That's just in our small family and if representative of the country, indicates there are a lot of people who are left-handed.

Ed

Click to expand...

Being left-handed, I'm aware of the lefty plight. Baseball gloves, golf clubs, even scissors! Fortunately, my right handed brother taught me to shoot when I was 10 and never even considered that I was left handed. Consequently, shooting is the only thing I do right handed. Just lucky I guess.

Took my 14 year old granddaughter to the range for the first time on Spring Break from school and started her with the Ruger Single Six, then went to the S&W Victory. Now get this - she is right handed, shoots with her right hand, BUT her left eye is dominant and that is the eye she uses to shoot. If I had to shoot with my left eye, I think I'd fall down!

Before anyone tells me I should be shooting with BOTH eyes open - I just can't do it with my old eyes. I see double images! It's fine with my red dot, but not with standard sights. The granddaughter can't do it either.

Its strange to me why most 22's even have safeties on them as both my M41 and m46 have never been used. I strongly believe the vast majority of all 22 owners Never use the safeties on their guns at all. Its because they are Target guns and NO more then that. My 45apc does have a double sided safety on it but I do not carry it except to the range and back in its locked case with a trigger lock on it also.

TAROMAN said:

Its a target pistol, not a carry piece.
Fast safety actuation is generally not an issue in the target world.

Click to expand...

Fine for Bullseye type shooters. But what about Steel Challenge shooters? Or any shooting discipline requiring speed shooting, starting from safety enabled?

Funny, how a left handed safety is never important, to right handers.
Imagine how they'd howl if the majority of pistols only had southpaw safeties.
I'm a lefty and shoot handguns with either hand.
I prefer an ambi, because you never know when you may have to shoot with your weak hand.
I'm amazed at how many right handers refuse to learn to shoot with their weak hands or have an ambi on their pistols.
Lefties tend to be more open minded about ambis and learning to shoot weak handed.

For those of us who like to carry a pistol when hunting, an easily operated safety is very important.

ghouston13 said:

First, I love my M&P's and S&W. Have had just about everything, was an avid Glock shooter before but once I held an M&P, I was sold. I'm short and have small hands and they just fit me. Carry a 40c and compete with a full sized .40. I also enjoy this forum. Have lurked quite a bit, but I had to join to ask this question and I'm sure I'll start posting more.

For the love of Pete, why didn't they give this thing an ambidextrous safety? WHY? Every single steel framed target style .22 pistol on the market for the last 60 years of this design has a single sided, right handed safety. I'm a lefty, I sold my 22/45 and various other .22 pistols because I can't actuate the safety with my left hand without contorting it. I would go out and buy a Victory tomorrow if it had an ambi safety. I just don't get it. I think it's a slick looking pistol and when I saw it, I thought "PLEASE have an ambi safety, they wouldn't go about designing a NEW .22 target gun in 2015 without thinking of the everlasting plight of lefties, would they?" When I saw photos of the right side of the gun, my heart sank a little.

I have friends that are new shooters, women and kids that are lefties and I don't like giving them a pistol that is so "wierd" for them to actuate the safety.

Oh well. I'm sure it was an oversight, I guess it could be an engineering problem, but with what we can do today in engineering it would surprise me that they can't put a lever on the right side of this pistol. Guess I'll stick with my polymer .22's.

Otherwise, keep up the good work, Smith!

Click to expand...

Because it looks like it was designed by ELMER FUDD.......Its not a target pistol......Maybe a plinker for those that don't want a 41/Buckmark/Mk IV.