Getting a Model 17. New or old?

[jaymoore]

Old, new, they've all been good!

1970's, 2000's (Not "messed up" at all! And 10 shots to boot.)

Pre-WWII blued. Or late century stainless.

Buy what you like. Mostly likely will be quite satisfactory!

 

[Tom S.]

What is P&R?

P = pinned barrel, where the barrel was pinned into the frame after it was screwed in, as a means of preventing it from turning.

R = recessed cylinder, where the cylinders were countersunk so the rim of the cartridge sets into the cylinder instead of sitting on top of its surface.

While both of these manufacturing methods are nice, neither adds to the pistol's functionality or durability, especially in a cartridge as mild as the the .22 rimfire.

 

[g8rb8]

The fine S&W Forum members who have responded so far have given good answers but unfortunately they have all forgotten that the CORRECT answer to these questions (i.e. purchasing one versus the other) is always "BOTH." I enjoy shooting both the older ones and a newer one but give a slight edge to the newer ones.

Many have pointed out the traits of the older models they like such as pinned barrel, absence of internal lock ("the hole"), and absence of full ejector shroud (seen as a positive by some).

There are advantages to the newer models:
-easily available in a 4" barrel.
-predrilled to accept scope or reflex sight mount. You say you were born in 1960 and a reflex sight is much easier for eyes of that vintage. S&W started to drill and tap the frame in the early 1990's.
-10 round capacity.
-chambers seem a bit larger so I can shoot many more rounds before cleaning. Older S&W .22 chambers are generally very tight.
-stainless (pro for some and con for others).

 

[sodacan]

I have a 17-2 from 1966. I lost count long ago on how rounds have been through it, but it still runs perfectly. My pre-18 from 1953 is equally amazing. If it has a pin in the barrel, you can't go wrong. The pin itself is no big deal, but it represents an era of very high quality. The fit and finish of the old ones is clearly superior, without exception. Good luck.

 

[Dave_n]

I have to admit, "BOTH" is the correct answer. I have a 17-2 and a 617 full underlug (6 round), both in 6" barrels. I still prefer the blued 17-2 however. Dave_n

 

[Kernel Crittenden]

1st S&W, 1st revolver. Will I be better off with a new one or older NIB/LNIB?

Since your new to revolvers I thought I'd mention there is also a Model 18. It was called the K-22 Combat Masterpiece. (The Model 17 was the K-22 Target Masterpiece). Similar to the M17, the M18 is likely to be found with a 4-inch tapered barrel. It was built, in part, to more closely resemble the tapered barrel M10s and M15s that were in common use with police agencies at the time. The M17 and M18 are twins.... just not identical ones in every respect.

 

[shouldazagged]

I'm a 1960 model, but it seems like things I'm most drawn to were produced @ 1937. My Harley Davidson 45 & Allis Chalmers WC are both '37s.

1937 was a damn good year. It's when I was born.

I love the tried-and-true, so older Smith revolvers suit me well. But my EDC gun dates from 1990. Made right, though.

 

[shouldazagged]

What is P&R?

P&R=pinned and recessed.

 

[steamloco76]

I've put many thousands of .22LR rounds down range through a variety of K-22's from 1951 through 2012 vintage. My 617 no-dash is the most accurate and has the most forgiving chambers. My 1951 K-22 is very sensitive to ammunition case diameter, with several brands causing difficult extraction unless I brush the chambers every 100 rounds or so. Great revolver other than that. My favorite is the 17-8, 6 inch, ten shot which does everything well. I've also owned a 17-2, 17-3 and 17-4 which were the best looking, best finished S&W .22's to pass through my hands. The 17-2 was a fantastic shooter, the 17-4, well I never did find ammo it liked. My point is, all S&W K-22's, blued or stainless, ancient to brand new, are the cream of the .22 revolver crop. If looks are paramount, then 17-2, 17-3 or 17-4 are the best choices and have the pinned barrel (ALL S&W .22 revolvers have recessed cylinders). If pure shooting enjoyment and a durable finish along with accuracy top the list then any dash 617 stainless K-22 would be my recommendation. Any way you go, even revolvers with the lock, you will have a great shooting, durable revolver!

 

[Wee Hooker]

Personally, while realizing that pins, recessed cylinders, target hammers/triggers and pre-lock configurations will aid in retaining collectors value, I don't get too hung up on them. Truth be told, I've owned well over a dozen 17/617's over the years and have not been disappointed in one of them. In fact, I'd argue that any (usable) differences in accuracy and action quality was more individual to the gun vs the year /dash number . ( I used to have a near filled collection of at least one of every dash # in the K-22/17/617/18 line up. I often had several from the same dash number lines at once.)

FWIW, Currently, I have a pair of post lock 617's , a 17-2 and a 1939' Outdoorsman. They all have their unique attributes. All are ajoy to take to the range. Truth be told, I shoot the 617's most as I don't worry about beating them up.
My advice: Don't over think it. Just buy one in the configuration that YOU like and go enjoy it. There are no bad choices in K22's.

 

[Beemer-mark]

Since your new to revolvers I thought I'd mention there is also a Model 18. It was called the K-22 Combat Masterpiece. (The Model 17 was the K-22 Target Masterpiece). Similar to the M17, the M18 is likely to be found with a 4-inch tapered barrel. It was built, in part, to more closely resemble the tapered barrel M10s and M15s that were in common use with police agencies at the time. The M17 and M18 are twins.... just not identical ones in every respect.

I have a Model 18 no dash, it does not have a tapered barrel. With all the versions of the Model 17 & 18, I've often wondered why two model designations. They are the same revolver. Rarely see the Model 18 mentioned or offered for sale.

 

[Kernel Crittenden]

I have a Model 18 no dash, it does not have a tapered barrel. ...

Yes, I have one like that as well. My previous paragraph was not meant to cover every possible variation. It was just to alert the OP that such a model exists.

Often times a M18 can be found at an attractive price. I bought mine, a 4-inch, off this forum for just $475 delivered about a year ago. Just a tiny bit of bluing wear near the muzzle.

I think perhaps they are overlooked by buyers who are otherwise preoccupied scouring the ends of the earth and turning over every stone looking for M17s and M617s.

 

[Engine49guy]

I have a Model 18 no dash, it does not have a tapered barrel. With all the versions of the Model 17 & 18, I've often wondered why two model designations. They are the same revolver. Rarely see the Model 18 mentioned or offered for sale.

The 17-5 (upper gun ) was the first wide rib K-22 , it was available in 4", 6" and 8 3/8" lengths.
All Model 18's (lower gun) have a tapered barrel with a narrow rib .


Model 18 (left) Model 17-5 (right) below :


The 17-6 changed to a full underlug barrel a bit into its production as earlier ones do not have the full underlug barrel pictured below.


On a side note the reintroduced Model 18 Classic with MIM/IL (below) had a tapered narrow rib barrel


So does the MIM/IL 6" classic 17 version below


The exception is the 17-8 Heritage gun that has a pre war style barrel without any rib below:

 

[1937]

Well you guys have been quite generous with your much appreciated knowledge. You've all prevented a hasty retreat to the GP100 22LR that originally sparked my interest in rimfire revolvers. Since my eventual purchase is intended to be a companion piece to my Winchester Model 52D, I'll go with a 17 with large walnut target grips. New or old remains to be seen. Could be a 617 later.
Thanks again and happy new year to you all.

 

[Beemer-mark]

The 17-5 (upper gun ) was the first wide rib K-22 , it was available in 4", 6" and 8 3/8" lengths.
All Model 18's (lower gun) have a tapered barrel with a narrow rib .
][/URL]

I guess I do have have a tapered barrel on my M18 from your first pictures. However from the Heritage pics you can see that with the differenet versions of the M17 they often look look like the M18. Or maybe I wrong on that -. I just don't have that acquired collector's eye. I buy what I like. I like the M 18 because it looks identical to my M15. Don't shoot either of them much anymore but back in the day......

 

[BAM-BAM]

My 17s date from 48,57 and 59..... so I guess you know my answer.....

LOL I also have a first year.... 4" 617 .... which sees the most use of them all!!

 

[Nightowl]

Personally, I think that the main thing to look for is the quality of the individual gun you are looking at. I now have two pre 17s, one from 1948 and one a few years later, and a 617 six shot, and a 617-2 ten shot. I bought the ten shot a few years ago, used, at a gun show for $700. It is the only ten shot I have ever had my hands on and know I paid too much for it, but, its the one that gets shot the most and I really like shooting it.
I once had a model 17 dash something, that I had back in the mid 80s. I would not shoot for anything and had very sticky chambers. I gave up on it and traded it for a nice High Standard Military. That has been the worst K22 I have ever seen. My cousin has one his grandfather bought new in the 1930s and it has seen lots of use and still shoots great!

Find one that has good characteristics and buy it and enjoy it. You may pay a little more than you would like, but a good gun will provide a lifetime of shooting enjoyment!

 

[TTSH]

1st S&W, 1st revolver. Will I be better off with a new one or older NIB/LNIB?

There is little doubt in my mind that older is better. The problem is that finding a reasonably affordable older Model 17 (or Model 18) in very good to excellent condition is not an easy task. I've been looking for years and haven't even come close yet.

The solution for some is to punt and pickup a new or slightly used Model 617... although they are not exactly cheap either (but still cheaper than a nice vintage Model 17) and the newer ones have the ugly, universally-hated IL.

So I continue to wait for a reasonable deal to come along on a pre-IL Model 17 or 18. I'm no longer holding my breath.

 

[OldChief]

I'd go for the older model. I have two, a 1947 K-22 Target Masterpiece and a 1978 model 17-4. The 47 model functions flawlessly while I always find some of the chambers in the cylinder on the 78 model tight to load. The quality control on the older models is obviously better. I can't speak for today's output because I don't own any newly produced revolvers.

 

[jaymoore]

Well you guys have been quite generous with your much appreciated knowledge. You've all prevented a hasty retreat to the GP100 22LR that originally sparked my interest in rimfire revolvers. Since my eventual purchase is intended to be a companion piece to my Winchester Model 52D, I'll go with a 17 with large walnut target grips. New or old remains to be seen. Could be a 617 later.
Thanks again and happy new year to you all.

I don't seem to have a photo of them together, but this 8 3/8" 617 has been my short range companion to an old squirrelinating Winchester 52C for many years:

Comes in handy, as the Ballistic Plex scope on the 52 is set at about 12x to match the .22 load out to 100yards.