617 vs. 317

[rbstern]

Been shooting a 2206 for a few years. I've been wanting a 22LR revolver for a while, for ease of loading, cleaning, and not having to care which 22LR ammo it gets fed. The right deal finally came along for a 6" 617-1 6 shot.

I had a chance to shoot it in an extended range session earlier today. Action was very nice, and it was very accurate with anything I put in it.

And I found that I didn't enjoy it very much.

I love K frames. Have a 66-3 and a 10-8, both of which are great guns and favorites in my collection. For whatever reason, this 617 didn't stir my soul. It's obviously a fine gun, but it's not "talking" to me. Maybe it's the weight. Or the barrel length. Just don't know.

Anyway, I'm thinking I may downsize, perhaps find a 3" 317 with Hi Viz sights. The 317's ease of carry aspects appeal to me; could be a companion piece on squirrel hunts.

Or, I could go to the dark side and get a Taurus 94. Could also look for a 63 or a 17.

Comments on 617 vs. 317, and anything else you care to offer.

 

[rbstern]

Been shooting a 2206 for a few years. I've been wanting a 22LR revolver for a while, for ease of loading, cleaning, and not having to care which 22LR ammo it gets fed. The right deal finally came along for a 6" 617-1 6 shot.

I had a chance to shoot it in an extended range session earlier today. Action was very nice, and it was very accurate with anything I put in it.

And I found that I didn't enjoy it very much.

I love K frames. Have a 66-3 and a 10-8, both of which are great guns and favorites in my collection. For whatever reason, this 617 didn't stir my soul. It's obviously a fine gun, but it's not "talking" to me. Maybe it's the weight. Or the barrel length. Just don't know.

Anyway, I'm thinking I may downsize, perhaps find a 3" 317 with Hi Viz sights. The 317's ease of carry aspects appeal to me; could be a companion piece on squirrel hunts.

Or, I could go to the dark side and get a Taurus 94. Could also look for a 63 or a 17.

Comments on 617 vs. 317, and anything else you care to offer.

 

[Revolver King]

The 317 has one of the hardest trigger pulls of all of the 22 revolvers. You might want to look at a 63, 17, 18 just to mention a few. I really didn't like the 317. I sold mine and bought a model 63, I already have a 617.

 

[sipowicz]

Originally posted by rbstern:

I love K frames. Have a 66-3 and a 10-8, both of which are great guns and favorites in my collection. For whatever reason, this 617 didn't stir my soul. It's obviously a fine gun, but it's not "talking" to me.

I would bet a nice Model 17 would speak volumes to you....

 

[pred]

Originally posted by sipowicz:

Originally posted by rbstern:

I love K frames. Have a 66-3 and a 10-8, both of which are great guns and favorites in my collection. For whatever reason, this 617 didn't stir my soul. It's obviously a fine gun, but it's not "talking" to me.

I would bet a nice Model 17 would speak volumes to you....

YES YES a nice 17 or Pre 17 will blow your dress up!

Peter.

 

[Shuz]

Originally posted by Revolver_King:
The 317 has one of the hardest trigger pulls of all of the 22 revolvers. You might want to look at a 63, 17, 18 just to mention a few. I really didn't like the 317. I sold mine and bought a model 63, I already have a 617.

Doesn't Wolff sell rebound slide springs that fit the 317?

 

[Golddog]

317's indeed have awful triggers; they can't compete in that department with K frames.

And Taurus quality control makes their .22's a crap shoot - they're a hell of a way to gamble your money. My 94 was virtually useless after the first few hundred rounds, even after a trip back to the factory.

Get a Smith 17, 18, or 35.

 

[Speedo2]

617's are indeed a bit weighty. I tend to compound the problem on mine by adding red-dots, scopes and such contraptions to them. They're tack drivers, but I can't hold them up for very long. Sometimes I even resort to adding a bipod to my 8-3/8" 617 w/ scope. They are what they are, and they do what they do: big heavy small caliber guns that are extremely accurate...for a while (until I run out of gas).

Mr.Golddog speaks the truth. M18's were made for squirrels hunts. -S2

 

[keppelj]

You can't count on the Model 17 you buy not needing an action job either though. I have one at Clarks now for just that service. It was terrible from the factory. I complained about my 617 action just after I bought it and the gun shop agreed with me and sent it back to Smith where they gave it a great trigger. Still it's a bit inert to shoot. Personally, I think the autos make more interesting and pleasurable 22s.

 

[617fan]

I have both a 617 and the Taurus 94. While the Taurus shoots well enough from a rest, I can't keep a very good group off hand. I am guessing its the lighter weight combined with a heavier trigger pull.

You will be hard pressed to find a better shooter than the 617. I like the stainless underlug, but if the appearance of the 617 is the issue..hunt up a blued steel 17 or 18.

 

[keithherrington]

Well, I have a bit of a different view from the rest. I have a late-model 17 (full lug), a 617-1 and a 317 snub. The 17 I shoot bullseye and for that it is tops. The 617 I use for hunting where the stainless is best for bad weather. Both are very very accurate. The 317 is a carry gun when weight is an issue. I consider them apples to oranges. I use different ammo in each: Eley in the 17, various hi-vel CCI in the 617 and CCI Velocitor in the 317. The trigger pull on the 317 (after switching the rebound spring for a lighter one) is a delight and for instinctive shooting spot on. IMO it all comes down to what you want to do with it. As to whether or not the gun speaks to you, well that's another matter entirely. For example, an older 17 without the full lug leaves me cold only because for bullseye shooting it's not as stable and therefore not something I'd choose.

 

[Tom C]

You are right to suggest that the 6" 617 is too heavy. There are several solutions. I got a 4" 617 to supplement it and cut my 6" to 5". That took 3 oz. off the muzzle. Much better. I also got a 63-4. That took 16 oz. of the weight. The 12 oz. 317 is a bit more extreme, but it, too, has its place. Just don't expect it to be as shootable as a 63.

 

[Meeteetse]

My 317 had a terrible trigger until I got about 500 rounds through it. It is better now and keeps getting better as I shoot it. It will never be close to my Mdl. 18, but it is a very handy, light and useful little gun.

 

[Lou_NC]

If you can afford a new or lightly used 317, then you could probably afford a used model 18 in reasonably good condition. A good leather pancake holster and a decent belt will take care of the carry issue.

I personally think the model 18 is the pinnacle of .22 revolver design. Subjective, I know, but that's what opinions are supposed to be!

Lou

 

[Gebe]

I think 317's must be hit and miss. My 317 with the 3" bbl. that I bought new around 2001 has had a great trigger right out of the box. It is also very accurate.

Everyone that I show it to can't believe how lightweight it is. I've even had a couple of non-gun people ask me if it was a fake gun!

I love the little gun and wouldn't sell or trade it ever.

 

[patentmike]

The answer is 43.

 

[Stainz]

Here is my new 9/08 4" 10-shot 617 - I don't know why I waited so long to get it. Great fun with el-cheapo ammo. No, it won't group like my Govt Comp 6.88" Ruger MKII - but it's a lot more fun. No A-Bing, of course - I sold the MKII to buy the 617 - no regrets, either.

I told a friend how great the 5" 63 was - my only objection being the grip - and the J-frame lockwork (Same as the 317!). Still, he bought one - and we shot it yesterday - new! I've tweaked my 617 - great trigger - the 63 is stock - and not 'broken in'. Still, it's a fun gun - great balance/feel. I wouldn't sell my 4" 617 to get one, but it's on my 'next' list.

Here is my 617 sporting my own oil finished Ahrends retro targets in cocobolo. The 696 has the regular non-fg square conversion grips with the factory finish. I like the retro's better on the 617.

Stainz

 

[TSQUARED]

I found the 6 inch Model 617 much too muzzle heavy for my taste. I purchased a 4 inch Model 617 and have really enjoyed shooting it very much. I wish they made the Model 617 in 6 inch without the heavy barrel underlug much like the old K-22's.

Originally posted by rbstern:
Been shooting a 2206 for a few years. I've been wanting a 22LR revolver for a while, for ease of loading, cleaning, and not having to care which 22LR ammo it gets fed. The right deal finally came along for a 6" 617-1 6 shot.

I had a chance to shoot it in an extended range session earlier today. Action was very nice, and it was very accurate with anything I put in it.

And I found that I didn't enjoy it very much.

I love K frames. Have a 66-3 and a 10-8, both of which are great guns and favorites in my collection. For whatever reason, this 617 didn't stir my soul. It's obviously a fine gun, but it's not "talking" to me. Maybe it's the weight. Or the barrel length. Just don't know.

Anyway, I'm thinking I may downsize, perhaps find a 3" 317 with Hi Viz sights. The 317's ease of carry aspects appeal to me; could be a companion piece on squirrel hunts.

Or, I could go to the dark side and get a Taurus 94. Could also look for a 63 or a 17.

Comments on 617 vs. 317, and anything else you care to offer.

 

[lafayne]

I like them all for different reasons. The M17's are great classic blue steel that shoot very well and are not as heavy as the 617. I like them for aerial shooting single action. IME the double action trigger is better on the 617's. I like the 4 inch 617 better than the 6 inch. The 317 does have a heavier trigger pull and not as smooth, but is very light and is my go anywhere carry piece in a plastic paddle holster and Lasergrips. Shooting single action it is very accurate. They all have their place and I would not want to part with any of them. Just MHO.

 

[rbstern]

Thanks, everyone, for the input.

I'm gonna try one more range session, outdoors, and see if we bond a bit better this time.