longarm
Member
Todd,
You want a M18.
Dan
You want a M18.
Dan
I'm on the hunt for a perfect .22LR
- Thread starter Todd
- Start date
WJR
Member
Originally posted by bdGreen:
This is what I consider the 'perfect' .22.
bdGreen
That is awesome. However, I would still be glad to have the more plebian full underlug version.
WJR
Bullseye Smith
Member
Originally posted by bdGreen:
This is what I consider the 'perfect' .22.
bdGreen
------------------------------------------------
bdGreen is that a hard chrome finish on a 17?
stevieboy
Member
My question exactly. It looks a little like matte stainless but, they didn't make 17s in matte stainless (at least I don't think so), and I always thought that 617s came with full underlugs plus a high gloss stainless finish. So, what are we looking at, here?
snuffy smif
Member
You didn't say what your primary use will be and forgive the plug for an auto on the revolver forum, but I have owned several blue and stainless versions in 4 and 6 inch barrel lengths and none of them came close to my Model 41 with a Clarke barrel with integral Weaver rail and Holosight. If you want to shoot one hole groups, try this setup. If you want to conceal it, forget the Model 41.
Also, I hate to admit it, but my 4 inch Diamond Back 22 groups significantly better than the Smith 22 revolvers I owned.
Also, I hate to admit it, but my 4 inch Diamond Back 22 groups significantly better than the Smith 22 revolvers I owned.
lafayne
Member
I vote for the 4 inch 617 or the 4 inch 17. The 63 is a really nice and easy to carry. With proper grips the J frame is not much of an issue. True, the trigger is not as good as the K frame models, but not bad either. One has served me since the 70's.
Maybe you can find one of these and have the best of both worlds.
Maybe you can find one of these and have the best of both worlds.
BlackSky
Member
I know it doesn't meet your stated criteria but when I think of a perfect .22 revolver I think about this little beauty from 1948. They named it Masterpiece for a reason
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2005
- Messages
- 2,533
- Reaction score
- 14,756
bdGreen is that a hard chrome finish on a 17?
Damn John, bite your tongue...
My question exactly. It looks a little like matte stainless but, they didn't make 17s in matte stainless (at least I don't think so), and I always thought that 617s came with full underlugs plus a high gloss stainless finish. So, what are we looking at, here?
stevieboy, stevieboy, so much misinformation...
This is a Model 617. It is one of 116 that were ordered special by Ashland Shooting Supplies in 1991. This is as it was shipped from the factory. It is unfired and I am the second owner of the gun. It was ordered without the full underlug as were 190 of the Model 617's with the four inch barrel. I have the complete package including the sales receipt to the first owner on Ashland letterhead. It is a very rare gun and I am the proud owner of it.
bdGreen
Damn John, bite your tongue...
My question exactly. It looks a little like matte stainless but, they didn't make 17s in matte stainless (at least I don't think so), and I always thought that 617s came with full underlugs plus a high gloss stainless finish. So, what are we looking at, here?
stevieboy, stevieboy, so much misinformation...
This is a Model 617. It is one of 116 that were ordered special by Ashland Shooting Supplies in 1991. This is as it was shipped from the factory. It is unfired and I am the second owner of the gun. It was ordered without the full underlug as were 190 of the Model 617's with the four inch barrel. I have the complete package including the sales receipt to the first owner on Ashland letterhead. It is a very rare gun and I am the proud owner of it.
bdGreen
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2005
- Messages
- 2,533
- Reaction score
- 14,756
And, as others have already noted, you can't go wrong with one of these... Or even three of these...
bdGreen
bdGreen
Another vote for the Combat Masterpiece!
Tim
Tim
Originally posted by bdGreen:
This is what I consider the 'perfect' .22.
bdGreen
The 6" is good
...but it's too long for easy carry. I'd just as well carry a 7" Model 41.
The 4" is perfection. Easy to carry & feels exactly the same as my 4" 66.
Bullseye Smith
Member
Very nice bdGreen, very nice indeed. You have a great saving account in it
. Greed is a bad thing
.
Stainz
Member
I had a tack-driver Ruger KMK-678GC for ten years. I may have exceeded the rounds shot from it already with my 4" 10-shot 617, bought new 9/08. I can't believe that it is as nice a revolver - or as much fun - why did I wait so long?
I live in the real world... this is the finest 'new' S&W .22 revolver available. Some springs, a socket headed set screw in place of the strain screw, and some decent wood grips make it perfect. Sure - sub the 6"-er, if that fits you better. Great revolver... but what would you expect from the finest revolver maker?
PS I included the 696 because I like it's Ahrends square conversion grips on the 617, too - the Ahrends Retro-Targets my 617 sports are my favorites.
I live in the real world... this is the finest 'new' S&W .22 revolver available. Some springs, a socket headed set screw in place of the strain screw, and some decent wood grips make it perfect. Sure - sub the 6"-er, if that fits you better. Great revolver... but what would you expect from the finest revolver maker?
PS I included the 696 because I like it's Ahrends square conversion grips on the 617, too - the Ahrends Retro-Targets my 617 sports are my favorites.
Stainz, Those are some nice revolvers there, especially the grips. I take it you also post on RFC? I also like the Retro Target on the 617. How comfortable are they? I like to use a high hold with my revolver and wonder how those grips might fit with a high hold.
CDM
CDM
G
Guest
While I love my Revolvers I have been in love with the Model 41 for many, many Years. And if I had to make the choice of keeping only one .22RF this would be the one and ONLY.
This is an early style Frame from the early '70s - with the cocking indicator, a 5 inch Sport Barrel, 12 round magazine and Stocks that have been modified to better fit my hand. I have shot several 1/2 groups from the Sand Bags with this gun at 25 yards so it will do the "JOB" and then some!!!
Yes, I know this is in the Revolver Section but the Truth is the Truth!!!
This is an early style Frame from the early '70s - with the cocking indicator, a 5 inch Sport Barrel, 12 round magazine and Stocks that have been modified to better fit my hand. I have shot several 1/2 groups from the Sand Bags with this gun at 25 yards so it will do the "JOB" and then some!!!
Yes, I know this is in the Revolver Section but the Truth is the Truth!!!
Stainz
Member
I loved my ten plus year relationship with my Ruger MKII, a KMK-678GC. It was sacrificed to fund the 617 - and i don't miss it or the eight mags I had for it. I'm sure it was a better BE shooter, but it was also the only evil-bottom-feeder left in my corral, which is now all S&W revolvers. Okay, I lied - there is still a Ruger SS Old Army c&b bp revolver, but it's a keeper.
Here is my 627 Pro sporting a new factory finished Ahrends cocobolo Retro-Target grip from Brownell's. I do like that grip - and it does afford a high one handed grip on both the K & N frames.
Stainz
PS Yep - I post in RFC - same handle & pix.
Here is my 627 Pro sporting a new factory finished Ahrends cocobolo Retro-Target grip from Brownell's. I do like that grip - and it does afford a high one handed grip on both the K & N frames.
Stainz
PS Yep - I post in RFC - same handle & pix.
KKG,
IMO, the Model 41 needs two things to be perfect; stainless construction & the perfect holster. Every holster I've tried pushes against the (standard extended) magazine release, and will eject the magazine if pushed on. Cutting chunks out of my holsters under the release helps but still isn't 100% effective. After losing a couple of mags, I've taken to running a piece of duct tape over the well to retain them. Shortening the button would help, but I've never seen a shortened release offered. The gun is useless if the magazine is lost. For these reasons the stainless revolver is my one and only if all but one rimfire handgun had to go. It would be a very sad day if I had to make this choice though.
tcc
Member
I've only been shooting for 6-7 months, but it appears that the bad news is that there is no one perfect .22. The good news is that you have to make up for that by having many! .22/.32 Kit gun, M 34, M 43, K 22, M 63, M 617 and that's just the Smiths! Have fun and treat yourself.
G
Guest
I'm not a fan of Stainless guns. As S&W has found Stainless does not make for good Hammers and Triggers - the current guns are made with Hard Chrome plated Hammers & Triggers and have been for many, many Years. Doing "Action" jobs on Hard Chromed parts just doesn't work as the only way to smooth one up is actually cut through the Hard Chrome finish. Also, the Hard Chroming process can leave bits and pieces of Chrome on the surfaces of the parts - also, not good. That's my take of Stainless Steel.
As for a functional Holster, well, I've found myself using one of the Bianchi Cyclone II Holsters for some time and found it to be great! I have never yet lost a magazine from one of my Model 41s while using one of these Holsters. Yes, it is Nylon but I'm not that much of a Die Hard leather fan that I won't use something that works and works well. I do love good leather and a believe there is nothing more impressive than a finely made Gun Belt and Holster Rig!!!
I live in an area of High Humidity and having "had" to carry a sidearm in a leather holster for many Years I know what it takes to make that work. I've also lived and worked in area of extreme Humidity - Panama and Viet Nam - and carrying in leather in those areas was required because "Uncle Sam" hadn't learned to use Nylon yet.
Similar threads
