[22HM77]

I want a .22 handgun. I have not ruled out an auto yet, but I am heavily leaning towards a revolver, mostly because I don't have one yet and I like the look/nostalgia.

Anyway, I want a cheap gun (under $250) that I can go target shooting with. It looks like the only .22LR revolvers fitting this price range are the H&Rs and Charter Arms. What have people's experiences been with these firearms? How much can I expect to pay? Do I have to worry about the things (especially H&R, as the gunsmith said) blowing up in my hand?

From the online reviews these revolvers aren't the best, but they'll function reliably and are decently accurate. That's all I want; can I get it from these (or other?) makers?

[Fat Boy]

I have owned both a Charter Arms Pathfinder (older) and an H&R 999 Sportsman. The Charter Arms was serviceable and portable. The H&R was a finely finished gun, capable of holding 9 rounds...I would go for the H&R, but thats a personal opinion...I probably wouldn't buy one of the new Charter Arms guns, based on their record to date

[bensdad]

My dad has an H&R that's about a kerpillion years old. It shoots like a dream. One of my shooting buddies has one too. His is also awsome. I looked around for one quite a while before I switched plans. Now I have a small stable of autos.

[KevininPa]

............New England Firearms revolvers. They bought out H&R later on (90's ?). Same basic style of pistols. Neither company makes revolvers anymore.. I have 2 H&R's and 1 NEF. The NEF makes dime-sized holes at 10-15 yards. The H&R Sportsman is not as good but close. The H&R 650 is all over the place and I'm thinking about ditchin' that one. Maybe I'll try a few more types of ammo in it. I really don't think it was shot much. Lots of deals on Gunbroker.com for a lot of these types of revolvers. The Sportsman prices are getting a little insane though. The double action on some of these can be pretty rough. I don't much care since I usually plink with single action anyway.

[kle]

The NEF makes dime-sized holes at 10-15 yards.

Dime-sized holes? Holy crap, those bullets must be huge!

J/k.

I had a H&R Sportsman Double Action that was manufactured around the same time my grandparents were born and, while it looked pretty good (kinda rough and asymmetrical, like it was made by hand or something, but looked like a SAA, and it had the cool top-break feature), it didn't shoot very well because the cylinder-barrel gap was too big.

How about a used Taurus 94? They can be had for about $250 used (checked on gunbroker, found one: http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=98498714), maybe a little more...you still get 9 shots, and you get a modern gun with the (in)famous Taurus customer service...

[Dismantler]

I saw a used Ruger Single Six in .22 LR and .22 magnum at my dealer yesterday for $229. It was in really good shape, and gives you capability for both rounds.

[mainmech48]

For many years my grandfather kept an old pre-99 H&R 6" topbreak hanging on a nail in the feed room of his barn. It was always loaded with crimped "rat shot" and/or SV shorts and its primary job was dispatching pests.

It looked awful, as the only maintenance it ever got was the occasional swipe with an oily rag but it always worked and would hit right where you pointed it.

It was the first handgun that I had permission to use without direct supervision, and I earned ammo money by using it to thin out starlings from the calf feeders.

Obviously, I think very highly of them as a practical working/recreational tool.

That said, I agree with kle. While I own a very nice 6" H&R 99 my stainless 4" Taurus M-94 seems to get a lot more range and woods-bumming time these days. Some of the reason for that may be just my wanting to keep the old H&R as nice as possible, but the rest of it is all practical.

It's at least as accurate, has a smoother action (now that it's been worn-in and had the rebound spring replaced with a lighter aftermarket unit), is a mite handier to pack around and needs less immediate attention after a day in the woods or on the river to insure that it doesn't end up looking like it's been living in the feed locker.

Highly recommended. Compared to the admittedly-few Charter Pathfinders I've used it seems like it'd be more likely to hold on to its virtues longer under hard or prolonged use.

[Moonclip]

I'd go H&R 999 if you can find a deal. I have an older CA pathfinder but like most CA production, the gun is serviceable at best, marginal at worst.

[woad_yurt]

An H&R 676 is DA and comes with the two 6 round cylinders. In your budget, too. Or, if you want 9 rounds of .22LR, the 999s or 949s are nice guns. Look at this:
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=98472757
I have one of these and it outshoots almost any rimfire handgun around.

[Timthinker]

22HM77, you might consider a used Ruger single-action revolver. One of these may come with an extra .22 Magnum cylinder also, but I am not sure what the price of a used one runs these days.

I am surprised to hear that an H&R might "blow up". I know people who have kept these for home defense and they never experienced any major malfunctions with one. That said, I like the old H&R revolvers. I hope this input helps.


Timthinker

[CZ.22]

Don't forget Heritage Mfg. Very well priced single action revolvers.

[coelacanth]

is accurate out of all proportion to what it cost me to aquire but I understand the newer ones are a bit iffy. Most revolvers are ammo sensitive so be prepared to shoot several types to find out what yours prefers.

[ImARugerFan]

Decide first whether you want single or double action. If you want single action go for a used Ruger single six.

[Dustinthewind]

I would vote for the H&R. I have an H&R 622 that I bought for $10 back in the late 70's that is still the most accurate pistol that I own.

[loboloco]

I have a Heritage Rough Rider .22 I bought new three years ago that came with a .22 mag cylinder. I swapped the cylinders as soon as I got home and if you asked me right now, I couldn't tell you where the .22lr cylinder is. .22 mag is cheap and plentiful enough that it serves all functions from varmit hunting to plinking. probably the best thing about the revolver, besides phenominal accuracy, is the little safety lever that lets me carry all six chambers loaded in the field. this little .22 has gone every where with me, has knoced around between texas and arizona, and you'd be hard pressed to miss with it. right in your price range, too...

[ACP230]

I have an H&R 926 which has given me some trouble and an older Charter Pathfinder stainless three-inch which has not. The Pathfinder was refurbished by the current Charter factory before I bought it.

The Charter is more accurate than I expected too.
I'd lean toward an older Charter Pathfinder.

[22-rimfire]

With your budget in mind, I'd look for a H&R 999 Sportsman revolver which is a top break design. The top break is a nice feature for plinking and casual target shooting.

I owned one for a number of years and shot it a lot. The H&R is no Colt or Smith & Wesson. There is a reason the Colts and Smiths cost more and they are worth the price for long term ownership and shooting.

The H&R turned out to be a transition piece for me as I learned about how guns were made and noticed the substantial quality difference between the First Tier guns and the Third Tier guns such as H&R, Charter Arms, Rossi, and others. I will say that the H&R is probably the best of that bunch in my opinion.

For the money, you are better off paying just a bit more and buying a Ruger even though the Rugers in 22 (Bearcat, Single Six, or SP101) are not quite to the level of Colt and Smith 22 revolvers. Nothing wrong with a Ruger Mark II or III pistol for general use. I recommend them often.