617 vs. 317...
- Thread starter patepluma
- Start date
Triggernosis
Member
The 317 is light as a feather. Too light, actually, as it's hard to shoot well.
Stainz
Member
The 617 is built on a SS K-frame, the same size as the Model 10, 64, & 67 now. They share a common gripframe - and resultant grips - with the L-frames, like the 620, 686, & 696, too. It's a comfortable 'plinker' size. It has the same lockwork as the L and N frames as well, including a smooth leaf hammer spring. There are easily made improvements to the lockwork in this size revolver. The front sight replacement with a HiViz was easily done - I could find said sight.
The 317 is an Al J-frame - smaller - and generally a 'pocketable' size (Unless it has a long barrel - like my 5" 63 below!). The smaller gripframe permits smaller grips, with larger grips just seemingly unavailable (The aftermarket squared Hogues on my 63 were the largest I could find.). The lockwork is particularly stout, due no doubt to the strong wound hammer spring and the shortened geometry of said lockwork (It can be improved - just not as much as the K-frame!). I haven't found a HiViz type front sight for mine yet.
There is a new 3" 63 due out this month - with a HiViz sight, a la the current 317K. As it is essentially a SS 317, it will share the stout DA pull of the 317, too. Even S&W recognizes the limitations on improving the 63 & 317 DA pull, as they only offer an $85 minor 'trigger job' for them. They err on keeping a stiffer hammer spring - insuring your revolver will go 'Bang!' with all rimfire ammo.
I have looked at the 317K many times... just couldn't convince myself I needed one that badly - even a recent $375 LN used one at the pusher's. I jumped on the LNIB 5" 63 from a friend's estate. I have improved it enough to make it fun to shoot, DA or SA. Both the current 317's and 63 are 8-shooters - a DS-10 8-shot speedloader and loading plate make the 5" 63 a fun plinker - not as much so as my 4" 617 X10, but getting closer. Maybe it just needs a HiViz style front sight? I hope this helps.
Stainz
The 317 is an Al J-frame - smaller - and generally a 'pocketable' size (Unless it has a long barrel - like my 5" 63 below!). The smaller gripframe permits smaller grips, with larger grips just seemingly unavailable (The aftermarket squared Hogues on my 63 were the largest I could find.). The lockwork is particularly stout, due no doubt to the strong wound hammer spring and the shortened geometry of said lockwork (It can be improved - just not as much as the K-frame!). I haven't found a HiViz type front sight for mine yet.
There is a new 3" 63 due out this month - with a HiViz sight, a la the current 317K. As it is essentially a SS 317, it will share the stout DA pull of the 317, too. Even S&W recognizes the limitations on improving the 63 & 317 DA pull, as they only offer an $85 minor 'trigger job' for them. They err on keeping a stiffer hammer spring - insuring your revolver will go 'Bang!' with all rimfire ammo.
I have looked at the 317K many times... just couldn't convince myself I needed one that badly - even a recent $375 LN used one at the pusher's. I jumped on the LNIB 5" 63 from a friend's estate. I have improved it enough to make it fun to shoot, DA or SA. Both the current 317's and 63 are 8-shooters - a DS-10 8-shot speedloader and loading plate make the 5" 63 a fun plinker - not as much so as my 4" 617 X10, but getting closer. Maybe it just needs a HiViz style front sight? I hope this helps.
Stainz
Last edited:
Wee Hooker
Member
I would also add that while the 317 is nice for it's intended "kit gun" purpose, the 617 will be more accurate and more capable due to it's size and weight.
cowboy117
Member
I use the 317 for a trainer for my guns i use for CC;the 617 at the range for target shooting.
Triggernosis
Member
I loved my 317, but couldn't shoot it well - sold it.
stevieboy
Member
The 617 replicates the feel of Smith's K and L centerfire revolvers. It makes an ideal trainer for those guns and it also happens to be a superb target pistol. The only gun that I own that I shoot more accurately than my 617 is my 686 and I suspect that the difference really is not inherent in the gun so much as it is a function of my 686's longer barrel length (6" vs. 4" in my 617).
The 617 is a fairly heavy gun. My 4" 617 tips the scales at over 40 ounces, about what a comparable length L frame 686 would weigh.
On the other hand, the 317 is as light as a feather, weighing only about 1/3 as much as a 617. It may be an inherently accurate gun but I've not heard anyone describe it as a target revolver. It's much too light for that purpose and, the J-frame trigger is very heavy compared to that of the 617. However, you cannot put a 617 into your pocket and carry it that way into the field whereas that is definitely a possibility with a 3" 317.
The 617 is a fairly heavy gun. My 4" 617 tips the scales at over 40 ounces, about what a comparable length L frame 686 would weigh.
On the other hand, the 317 is as light as a feather, weighing only about 1/3 as much as a 617. It may be an inherently accurate gun but I've not heard anyone describe it as a target revolver. It's much too light for that purpose and, the J-frame trigger is very heavy compared to that of the 617. However, you cannot put a 617 into your pocket and carry it that way into the field whereas that is definitely a possibility with a 3" 317.
Gebe
US Veteran
patepluma,
The 317's are so light you'll swear you're holding a toy! Mine is very accurate, (though I wouldn't consider it a target piece), and it's one gun I would never consider selling.
The 317's are so light you'll swear you're holding a toy! Mine is very accurate, (though I wouldn't consider it a target piece), and it's one gun I would never consider selling.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
