Model 63 22LR values

[clang444]

A .22 mag Model 63 was a dream gun of mine when I fly fished in snake country, the .22 mag snake shot being a magnitude better than the same in .22lr, and in stainless in case of a dunking. But S&W didn't make one….
OZ

Sure they did, only is was called the 651:

 

[clang444]

To me personally the older ones are more valuable only because they are usually made to a higher standard - but that's just my opinion. You also might want to check out the M43 which is the same gun but in carbon steel and blue finish.

The M43 has an alloy frame. The M34 has a carbon steel frame.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

Also love my 63s. Have a 2 and a 4, plus a 4 inch 651.
When I need to ease that Rimfire Magnum urge.

 

[VaTom]

Could you possibly expand on this a little? Or anyone else, TIA!

here is why I ask:

Since my first post, I had an opportunity to handle and shoot one of the two I mentioned above. The finish and grips looked pristine, no marks on the screws, or the sideplate, grips, but... EVERYTHING on this gun seemed stiff (?) Cocking the hammer required extra effort at the end of the travel, single action required extra effort, never mind DA. Mini Mags and Aquila Subsonic extracted well compared to my 18-4. 3 guys fired a total of ~30 rounds, same thing. When I asked the owner about it, he replied "It has always been like this" (I think this is my only post ever complaining about the action on a S&W).

If you are used to a S&W center fire revolver, the trigger pull on the Model 63 may feel different. The mainspring is a different design than that of say a Model 10. If I recall correctly it is a coil type spring instead of a leaf (flat) type spring. Pull the grips to compare it. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Walter Rego]

VaTom is of course correct, the J frame Model 63 uses a coil spring for the main spring. My theory is that the geometry of the hammer fall or arc is different on the J frames than the K frames or maybe it's due to the shorter grip frame not being able to use a longer leaf spring so a heavier weight mainspring is needed to ensure reliable ignition.

My explanation may not be 100% technically accurate but I think I'm on the right track.

There are reduced power spring kits available but given the wide variety of .22 LR ammo out there reducing the mainspring weight may compromise reliability with some brands and not others. Using a reduced power rebound spring is especially tricky. You may need to experiment. Here's a pic of my 1980 Model 63 with a set of Goncalo Alves Smooth Target Stocks.

 

[ralph7]

Could you possibly expand on this a little? Or anyone else, TIA!

here is why I ask:

Since my first post, I had an opportunity to handle and shoot one of the two I mentioned above. The finish and grips looked pristine, no marks on the screws, or the sideplate, grips, but... EVERYTHING on this gun seemed stiff (?) Cocking the hammer required extra effort at the end of the travel, single action required extra effort, never mind DA. Mini Mags and Aquila Subsonic extracted well compared to my 18-4. 3 guys fired a total of ~30 rounds, same thing. When I asked the owner about it, he replied "It has always been like this" (I think this is my only post ever complaining about the action on a S&W).

You ain't felt stiff until you tried a 317.
My trigger pull is horrendous, yet I read where it is necessary in such a lightweight rimfire.

 

[ajgunner]

This is one that I bought the holster for years before finding the revolver. Not the first time this has happened, and judging by all the classic leather that lives here, probably not the last time the holster is bought first. Some of us just have a soft spot for well broken in quality leather.

 

[PeteC]

If you are used to a S&W center fire revolver, the trigger pull on the Model 63 may feel different. The mainspring is a different design than that of say a Model 10. If I recall correctly it is a coil type spring instead of a leaf (flat) type spring. Pull the grips to compare it. Correct me if I am wrong.

VaTom is of course correct, the J frame Model 63 uses a coil spring for the main spring. My theory is that the geometry of the hammer fall or arc is different on the J frames than the K frames or maybe it's due to the shorter grip frame not being able to use a longer leaf spring so a heavier weight mainspring is needed to ensure reliable ignition...

@VaTom, you are not wrong, but with respect, I am used to the coiled springs on the Model 36 and 60, and also to the trigger pull on my model 18-4, ~~1977 vintage.

@Walter Rego, Awesome stocks on your M-63!... I agree, and I do have .38/.357 K frames to compare to my Model 18. But - I only have Model 36/60 J-Frames, and wanted this to be the .22 companion piece with similar trigger/action. Oh well, live and learn,

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[VaTom]

@VaTom, you are not wrong, but with respect, I am used to the coiled springs on the Model 36 and 60, and also to the trigger pull on my model 18-4, ~~1977 vintage.

Thanks for the feedback.

I don't have a stiffness problem with my M63. Back in 1983 when I first took the job of chief at a small campus department the Chiefs issued revolver was a Model 60. The action was too stiff for my liking as I was used to K frames at my previous position so I carried my 2" Model 64 until we transitioned to Glocks in the Mid 1990s.

Thanks!

 

[rockquarry]

If you shoot these guns regularly you'll likely become accustomed to any extra stiffness and probably won't notice it, but I don't know about double-action. I've had a late '70s Model 63 for years and can't recall ever firing it double-action.

 

[RubEric]

I paid $1k for this last year:

 

[gr8smiles]

Was in Tulsa this past weekend and came home with a few little gems….here are my 3 Model 63 2" models…the middle one flew home with me from Tulsa…

 

[Imissedagain]

Here's a 63-3 picture that shows the coil spring with paper clip.

 

[larryofcc]

M63

I bought my M63 no dash # M 197061, shipped 2-1982, at the Reno show few years back. Seems to me being a no dash it should be P&R but it is not. Others at the show were $700++, but my BIL found this one for $450, no box.
Great shooter on my 4 wheeler until I found a rare 4 3/4" stainless Ruger 1974 KS-4 Super Single Six "Star". A little heavier
and harder to reload, but way more accurate.
Still, I like my M63, and finally got a correct box for it. Now it sits in the safe with all my other handguns.
My 4 wheeler gun is now a S&W M&P 22 with 4 magazines. Very accurate and easy to reload. Big Larry

 

[saemetric]

Model 63 and Bianchi Kit Gun marked holster is hard to beat.

 

[MajorD]

For the longest time ( probably 10 years or so) I wanted a 2" 34. My preference was blue square butt.
I had a 2" years before and accuracy was horrible ( if I had more knowledge at the time perhaps this could have been an easy fix) it got sold promptly.
I tried a 4" round butt, but didn't care for the round butt, it had sticky extraction and again it went away before I again had knowledge of finish reaming ( this was all pre internet days)
Glad I gave one a chance- found a 2" square ( unfortunately nickel but they are so hard to find at a decent price I relented) it is remarkably accurate- I can ring a uspsa 1/2 size steel target with boring regularity at 50+ yards.
It chambers and extracts very smoothly, and has the best trigger I have ever experienced on a J frame