does a man really need a .22 caliber revolver?

Dear Smith and Wesson Forum, I have a question for my fellow forum members. Does a man really need a .22 caliber revolver? The reason that i am asking is because i was at my favorite gunshop yesterday and when i saw how high the prices were for .22 caliber revolvers, All i could think was Does a man really need a .22 caliber revolver? any and all help in answering this would be really appreciated by me sincerely and respectfully mg357 a proud member of the Smith and Wesson Forum.

Regarding the question of "NEED"... I don't think a MAN NEEEDS any particular sidearm unless they are far from civilization, or in a combative situation.

I used to shun the .22 revolvers in my youth. I said since .22 rimfire isn't reloadable, why handle the cases twice. Semi-Auto's made sense. But then after I retired I began to think about grandchildren and training them to shoot, and how a k22 would be provide a good segway into a k38, and to a 357 magnum and on and on.

The cost of shooting is rising daily, and for those of us who don't have unlimited funds... the .22 rimfire offers a chance for trigger time without the expense of center fire ammunition.

After a 15 year period of no shooting I started back to the range weekly and shot my .22 rimfire rifles, every time. I shot on the 100 yard range, and set my target at 25 or 50 yards. I shot among center fire shooters and reacclimated myself to others shooting nearby and re-learned how to cope with this and retain my accuracy. After nearly a year I brought out my .223 Remington 788 and began shooting centerfire. The range master was surprised. He said "I thought you only shot .22 rimfire".

The k22's are not as prolific as the k38's and therefore more costly. Finding one with the target trigger, target hammer is not easy, or cheap. Be prepared to spend upwards of 650 for a nice one. While you can get a Ruger 678, or other semi autos for in the $400 bracket. They will decrease in value for many years before their value begins to increase again. The k22's will continue to increase in value close to the value of gold, if not more. As clean good examples become fewer the value of the old (pre-1980) guns will continue to grow in value.

If you want my opinion... Buy only old guns. Shop carefully and limit your purchases to Colt, S&W, Sako, Browning, and certain Remington and Winchester items
 
Need one? No. Good for practice? Yes. Good for SD? No. All up to you, though I've always believed that it's best to practice as much as possible with what you might use in a real life situation.
 
no, i really dont need a .22lr revolver.

i bought my 4" model 63 just because i had the money at the time and it was a stainless old school S&W.

i have no intentions of selling it just because......but i will trade it for the right deal on some sort of 1911 seeing how it seems to have gained about $100.00 in value from when i bought it.
 
Nope, I don't need a 22 revolver......but.......If I were limited to own just 1 handgun, in any caliber, it would be a K-frame S&W in 22lr with a 4" barrel.
 
Nobody needs a good .22 revolver. Please send them all to me for proper disposal.


But seriously - I bring a .22 revolver out to all my range sessions and shoot the first 100-200 rounds before moving on to my centerfire guns. It really helped my double action shooting.
 
If anyone ever lived who doesn't need a .22 revolver, it would be me, since I collected High Standard target guns (and the utility grades they came from) for several years. And yet, there sits an eighty year old .22 Heavy Frame Target (that's kinda like a J-frame for you youngsters :rolleyes:) amongst the .32s, .357 and .44 Mag, and I am shooting it about as much as any. The introduction of semi-target ammo in bulk from Federal via Wally World makes it cheaper to shoot this gun than reload even for my .32s! :D

Froggie
 
Does a man need muscles, a deep voice, and a moustache?

Dear Smith and Wesson Forum, I have a question for my fellow forum members. Does a man really need a .22 caliber revolver? The reason that i am asking is because i was at my favorite gunshop yesterday and when i saw how high the prices were for .22 caliber revolvers, All i could think was Does a man really need a .22 caliber revolver? any and all help in answering this would be really appreciated by me sincerely and respectfully mg357 a proud member of the Smith and Wesson Forum.
Of course a man needs a .22 revolver. Now go lay down in a darkened room until you feel better...
:)
 
Reading this whole thread has been fascinating.

To give more than a microsecond's thought to the question of "needing" or not needing a .22 revolver may seem like a waste of time, at first glance. And most of us here have special admiration for what a Smith & Wesson handgun is, any model and any caliber, but particularly the older classics which were built to a certain standard.

Some of those happen to be .22s, so they fit into the overall picture for S&W collectors and recreational shooters. So I have a few.

In fact, I think I have more .22 handguns and rifles than anything else. It's a bunch. They're fun to own, study, admire, and occasionally even...well...shoot. When I get tired of chasing center fire cases to reload, I can shoot the .22s. The older I get, the more of that I do.

But there is another factor that everybody here seems to have overlooked. I'm no survivalist kook, but I've lived and travelled in a number of places abroad, some being unstable and run by people who are not very nice. This country is not immune to such destabilizing influences, as Americans are just starting to figure out. Some of the lessons of 911 are already being forgotten, far too soon.

If widespread natural or unnatural calamity should befall us, your life may depend upon just saying "no" and being able to back that up with lethal force.

Expect no operable power grid, and then loss of basics like running water, sanitation, fuel, transportation, police and fire protection, etc., etc. Localized weather disasters have already give us a taste of this. Imagine if it were on a broader scale than that. The possibility is not just something to be fantasized by a bunch of Idaho militia whackos, crawling around in the hills and fighting off ticks.

Our comfortable infrastructure is complex and very vulnerable to rapid collapse. In such case, you would not be going down to Wal-Mart to buy a box of .45 ACP, .38 Special, .223 Remington, .41 Magnum, or the most common centerfire (or rimfire) ammunition.

But...

.22LR ammo is going to be floating around all over the community...in houses, cars, barns, old pants pockets, and who knows where. .22LR is the most widely distributed cartridge in the entire world. It is everywhere. And in unbelievable quantity. It lasts forever, and under pretty adverse storeage conditions.

I tell friends to lay away a few bricks of .22LR...to use or to barter. It may someday be more valuable than gold. No matter what all the "experts" say, it is quite effective for defense, food gathering, and a lot of other things. It is not just a worthless cartridge to shoot at paper targets.

The .22 revolver, especially a high quality S&W model, perhaps made of stainless steel, is more reliable and durable than a semiauto. Expect very little parts breakage, when there may be no new parts available through an infrastructure where lines of distribution no longer exist.

A .22 revolver and a few hundred or thousand rounds of its ammo represent a small, durable, and easily concealed package. Put it away, carefully packaged, along with a good bolt action .22 rifle...perhaps a scoped, super accurate target model with backup iron sights.

Sound silly? Maybe. Or maybe not. But the required effort is negligible.

In future years, we might "need" these .22s, or not "need" them. But if we don't, none of us need be unhappy for having taken an "unnecessary" precaution, which can also provide recreational entertainment in the meantime, if not packed away. Just remember to buy as much ammo as you shoot for fun, to keep a good supply on hand...always. I certainly do.

My personal opinion is that stashing a rugged .22 revolver, rifle, and a few thousand rounds of this ridiculously inexpensive ammo is some of the cheapest insurance any human being can buy. We never buy insurance because we are expecting accidents, and if one does not happen, we are not upset because we bought the policy.

A fine .22 revolver is no different, except that it can be more enjoyable to own in the interim than a piece of paper you get from the insurance company. And a S&W K-22 or 617 will most likely appreciate while giving you free coverage after you buy the initial "policy".

I rest my case.

A prudent and thoughtful person "needs" one...perhaps only after thinking all of this over, though.
 
No, aman doesn't need A .22 revolver, he needs several. I nearly always take my K-22 or my 17-2 along when I go shooting (the Woodsman also tags along frequently). I'll usually shoot up a bunch of center fire ammo through a variety of guns, but I've found one problem wit the 22s - a whole lot more 22 ammo seems to get used up at any given range session - they are just so much fun to shoot, and are extremely accurate,, the hallmark of a quality gun.

Remember, a man can never have too many tools or to many guns ( a long-standing personal motto).
 
The first gun I shot I was 7 a .22 Winchester Rifle with my dad,
that was over 53 years ago.

During the years that passed I went through the 44 mag stage and big bore large capacity handguns.

But now I really enjoy a nice afternoon plinking away with several of my .22 handguns and rifles.

Your gun collection would not be complete without a .22 handgun and
rifle.

al
 
After wading through this thread, I have to say; man!, too much thinking going on here!

Hell yea a guy needs a .22 revolver, and not just any cheapo, 22 plinking revolver, but a full size, full weight revolver like the 617.

Whenever I take several pistols and go shooting with friends, we all get to play with various sorts of the usual pistols, but the one pistol that always gets unanimous "wow, that's a lot of fun!" comments is the .22 617/4".

Shooting the full size and weight .22 equivalent to a .357 revolver is about as fun as it gets.
 
new 617

Do I need one? I might need another one. When I take my new 617 to the range, I have to wait until all of my friends are through shooting it.. everyone who tries it loves it and swears they are going to get one...they are a little pricey but they are awesome and have already improved my trigger control on my 627.
 
I agree a 22 is about the cheapest one to shoot and a lot of fun. For a small price you can buy quality ammo and plink to your hearts content for $3.00. Love to shoot,em.
 
Lots of handguns around here but the .22 Smith & Wesson Model 17 would be the second to the last one out the door if I was getting rid of the menagerie.

A few .22 handguns represents one of the most essential parts of a pistolero's collection.
 
Friends,

I have to admit that I haven't read every response in this thread up to now... too many to wade through.

I totally enjoy my model 17s and my model 617s. So much fun, so little cost. I couple that with a Browning Auto-22 rifle. Small, sweet, and easy to handle.

Honestly, get a quality 22 revolver. They are so much fun, and you can use them so often.

Best wishes,

Roger a.k.a. Mr. Wonderful
 
I vote with all the others.
If you can afford the price of a 617, you will never regret it.

Practicing with my 617 has greatly improved my pistol shooting.
Living in the hills as I do, the little 10 shot SW 22 is real handy and earns it's keep.
The 'Mrs' also uses it as a garden gun loaded with CCI CB 22 shorts.
 

Attachments

  • SW 617, 10 shot, 22lr.jpg
    SW 617, 10 shot, 22lr.jpg
    119.2 KB · Views: 67
Back
Top