.22LR Revolver Showdown
- Thread starter fotoman12001
- Start date
Hey! Who let that naked lady in here?
OP
fotoman12001
Member
Update
Based on some questions via PM I added a summary ranking to the origianl post.
Based on some questions via PM I added a summary ranking to the origianl post.
Last edited:
brokenprism
US Veteran
Your name isn't Fotoman for nothing, that's for sure. Nice pics.
Stainz
Member
f-man,
Your picture of the Ruger is simply too busy... reshoot it less the gun. Remember, this is a S&W forum! Besides, that girl is cute!
Stainz
Your picture of the Ruger is simply too busy... reshoot it less the gun. Remember, this is a S&W forum! Besides, that girl is cute!
Stainz
OP
fotoman12001
Member
Sorry, that one's not mine.
Wee Hooker
Member
Very Nice photography! Interesting and insightful review too. FWIW, I've owned all reviewed here and a few more. My general thoughts after a 35 year active search for the perfect .22 revolver.
First, there is NO perfect .22 revolver. Only those perfect for a certain task for a certain shooter.
That said, I believe the K framed smiths have the best "shootability" of the dozen or so .22 revolvers I've owned. Better (and easier to tune )triggers than the Ruger's and J frames. Overall size and weight produce smoothest DA pull and follow up shots. ( J frames can be tougher to shoot accuratly.) Longer sight radius aids in accuracy.
Barrel length? I'd agree that the 4" 617's have better balance and comfort than it's 6" counterpart but not better than a 6" unlugged Mod 17. IMHO, the full lug is a disservice to these otherwise fine revolvers. Not sure I'm in love with the 8-10 shot options either. The shortened stroke definitely gives the DA function a "weird" feel for this old wheelgunner. My favorite 617 was a 4", no dash , 6 shot.
In conclusion, based on my experience, if I could have only one, my choice would be for an older mod 17 in 6" or (close second) 4" mod 17/18.
First, there is NO perfect .22 revolver. Only those perfect for a certain task for a certain shooter.
That said, I believe the K framed smiths have the best "shootability" of the dozen or so .22 revolvers I've owned. Better (and easier to tune )triggers than the Ruger's and J frames. Overall size and weight produce smoothest DA pull and follow up shots. ( J frames can be tougher to shoot accuratly.) Longer sight radius aids in accuracy.
Barrel length? I'd agree that the 4" 617's have better balance and comfort than it's 6" counterpart but not better than a 6" unlugged Mod 17. IMHO, the full lug is a disservice to these otherwise fine revolvers. Not sure I'm in love with the 8-10 shot options either. The shortened stroke definitely gives the DA function a "weird" feel for this old wheelgunner. My favorite 617 was a 4", no dash , 6 shot.
In conclusion, based on my experience, if I could have only one, my choice would be for an older mod 17 in 6" or (close second) 4" mod 17/18.
Great post.
Lobster Picnic
Member
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2010
- Messages
- 1,573
- Reaction score
- 998
I think the whole K-22 family, from the early Outdoorsman, to the Masterpiece and Combat Masterpiece, and the later 17, 18, and 617, are about the best .22 wheel guns available to mere mortals.
rbert0005
Member
Great write up, but you forgot the best one of the bunch.
The 4" 10 shot version is my favorite, by far.
Bob
The 4" 10 shot version is my favorite, by far.
Bob
OP
fotoman12001
Member
I do love my 4" 6-shot so the 10-shot can only be better. I really didn't care about 6 vs 10 for the 617. I just wanted a pre-lock version since the lock version doesn't offer any added benefits. I am not anti-lock though.
I just shot my 4" yesterday with newly installed fiber optic sights. I love FO sights and love this gun even more now.
There are people who shoot K-frame .22s better than J-frame (or earlier I-frame) .22s, and vice versa. I find that I need the extra mass in a revolver to use it to good advantage, but I don't need the last two inches of barrel; my best shooting experiences with .22s have involved K-frame revolvers with four-inch barrels.
Which is kind of tragic because my favorite .22 of all time is the prewar .22/32 Kit Gun. With occasional rare exceptions I just can't shoot them very well. The postwar small-frame guns with heavier barrels and a different balance may do much to address my problems with lighter frames, but I haven't had the chance to test them out to any significant extent.
Of all the guns you illlustrated and tested, I am most taken by the 63-5. I am sorry to hear it has such bad assembly problems. I vote for sending it back to Smith so they could finish building it the right way; if it comes back still unacceptable I would let it move along (with the proper cautions to prospective buyers) and look for another one.
I'm with everybody else on the photos. Great images.
Which is kind of tragic because my favorite .22 of all time is the prewar .22/32 Kit Gun. With occasional rare exceptions I just can't shoot them very well. The postwar small-frame guns with heavier barrels and a different balance may do much to address my problems with lighter frames, but I haven't had the chance to test them out to any significant extent.
Of all the guns you illlustrated and tested, I am most taken by the 63-5. I am sorry to hear it has such bad assembly problems. I vote for sending it back to Smith so they could finish building it the right way; if it comes back still unacceptable I would let it move along (with the proper cautions to prospective buyers) and look for another one.
I'm with everybody else on the photos. Great images.
OP
fotoman12001
Member
Here's a little video of shooting the 63-5 with the Speed Beez loader. It was shot w/ a Canon S95 point/shoot camera so it's not the best quality. I'm not a video guy so I'm just toying with it at this point.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15DOzjKF2ig
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15DOzjKF2ig
