Best Rimfire Revolver/Trainer

Status
Not open for further replies.
I seem to recall that Taurus made a full-sized 22lr revolver back in the day. If I ran across a used one in good shape with a nice trigger, I would be sorely tempted.
There is one at my local gunshop and looks brand new. I have looked at them new before but they had a bad reputation for the trigger not to mention a higher than average mechanical difficulties (or so I have read).
 
you guys may have talked me into it. im thinking of getting a s and w 617 in a 6 inch barrel. or if you can convince me the trigger is better on the ruger gp 100 i may go that way. which one is better?

Having owned and shot various Ruger and Smith revolvers of various vintages, I suspect that no Ruger revolver will ever come, out of the box, with as good of a trigger as a Smith & Wesson. It's just not how their built. To quote Chuck Hawks, the Ruger is a single action gun that is capable of firing double action.

I bought my Redhawk in spite of the trigger, not because of it.
 
So...of all these rimfire revolvers we've discussed, which, if any, have speed loaders readily available for purchase?
 
Depends on what you mean by readily available.

Speedbeez.com has speedloaders for most of the guns discussed (and a few that haven’t been).
 
"There is one at my local gunshop and looks brand new. I have looked at them new before but they had a bad reputation for the trigger not to mention a higher than average mechanical difficulties (or so I have read)."


(Speaking about a full-sized Taurus 22lr revolver.) I've been through quite a few Taurus revolvers. The best ones I've had were made from the mid 1980's up until 1990 or so. All of them have gone bang every time except for one. If they go bang every time, my next interest is the trigger. A few triggers have been very good, most have been okay, a few have been horrible. If the trigger was pretty good, I would be tempted to buy it... after trying to bargain the price down, of course. If it's not too old Taurus will fix it for free if necessary, even if you're not the original owner.

None of my Taurii have had as nice triggers as my very best Smiths, but a few have been as nice as good Smiths. Sorry to stray OT.
 
004.JPG
Only 70?

This one shipped in 1932. That makes it 87 years old, as the wear to the finish testifies, and it is still the most accurate 22 revolver I own.

View attachment 871092




If you want a 22 rimfire revolver, don't scrimp. Buy the best, it will outlast you. Left to right, K-22 Combat Masterpiece that shipped in 1953, K-22 Outdoorsman that shipped in 1935, the above pictured K-22 Outdoorsman, the good side, that shipped in 1932, a K-22 Masterpiece that shipped in 1950, and my Model 17-3 that I bought brand-spanky new in 1975.

View attachment 871093




If you don't want to buy used, I can understand, but there are plenty of terrific deals in used revolvers out there. That beauty in the middle only cost me $600 because of the distressed finish. The most expensive 22 in the photo above is the K-22 Outdoorsman 2nd from the left. It cost me $1200. The rest each cost between $800 and $900. I only paid $125 for my Model 17-3, but that was over 40 years ago. Compare that to the price of a brand new Model 17 or 617. $997 for a brand new Model 17 $883 for a 617 with a 4" or 6" barrel.




I don't much care for the modern Model 617 that S&W is producing today. I don't so much object to the lock or MIM parts, it is that full length underlug. Besides making the gun ugly, it makes it way too muzzle heavy for my taste. I suppose the 4" version would not be as muzzle heavy, but I don't buy brand new Smiths anymore. Ten shots? Who needs so many? Six shots has always served me fine in a 22 revolver.

View attachment 871094




Here are a couple more older 22 revolvers you might try looking for.

A Colt Officer's Model Target that shipped in 1935 and a Colt Police Positive Target that shipped in 1936.

View attachment 871102




Hmmmm.... That Officer's Model Target may be more accurate than my worn old K-22 Outdoorsman.

View attachment 871103

You can't beat a pre-war Colt or S&W, I've heard it said it would cost about $2K to make one today to those high standards. The other week I shot a .37" 6 shot group at 30' with my 1932 Colt OM .22, not bad for my 60 year old eyes. It isn't like you have to worry about wearing them out.
 
Nobody rents guns in Alaska.

I would lean toward the Ruger solely because my main gun is also a Ruger revolver, so the manual of arms is the same. I wonder if there are speedloaders for any of those guns (617, 17, K-22, GP100 etc.)

Seriously, I would recommend a .22 that matches your Ruger Redhawk in size and feel. I don’t know what Semi-Auto you have but you wouldn’t find a revolver that matches it anyway.
I am a big fan of S&W but I wouldn’t recommend a Smith for what you wish to buy the .22 for. Even though I have no experience with them I would recommend the Ruger GP100 as it would resemble the Redhawk in operation. I say that mostly because of the cylinder release.
I am guessing the Redhawk is for protection from big animals. It would be a shame to waste 1/2 a second to realize the cylinder release your manipulating isn’t the .22’s but the .44’s in a serious situation. Just my thought.

Speed Loaders - looks like Speed Beez is it.
https://www.speedbeez.com/product/r...ed-loader-pre-order-now-shipping-feb-14-2016/

https://shopruger.com/GP100-10-Round-Speed-Loader-22-LR/productinfo/12058/
 
That's kind of what I was afraid of. I haven't seen anything other than those, either.I'm not paying close to $40 for a speedloader, even though I routinely pay that for a magazine for an autoloader. Go figure.

Funny, isn’t it. I am kinda the same. I do recall last Christmas seeing Speed Beez sets on sale somewhere online but I do not recall who had them on sale. I believe one got 2 or 3 speedloaders and a loading box that you could insert 50 or 60 rounds so that you could quickly reload your speedloader. But I am pretty sure they were for the S&W 617.
 
I have shot a 617, a gp100, a Taurus copy of a smith 17, and a bunch of older 22 revolvers. The only one I can say stood out as a “don’t buy” was the GP based on weight. I would buy the SP101, but not a gp100.
 
I think rimfire is a waste of time unless you're trying to learn rimfire. The trigger must necessarily be different, and the recoil is different. It does not take 10's of thousands of rounds to learn, so if the goal is to shoot centerfire, stay focused on centerfire. You only have so much time for shooting. Unless you're a full-time shooter, it's probably only a few hours a week or less. Diverting your attention to rimfire isn't the most efficient method to learn centerfire skills and it doesn't save a significant amount of money. If you're shooting 20 hours a week that might change the equation, but otherwise, spend the rimfire gun money on centerfire ammunition. I do recommend 38/357 rather than 44 Special, 44 Magnum or 45 LC. 9mm, 40 S&W or 45 ACP are ok. It's just a matter of cost. If you handload, then you already know how much if any difference it makes. Set the Redhawk aside for a while. Stay away from J frames and LCR. Consider a good mid-size revolver. That would include a K6 or SP101 Match Champion with a 3" or longer barrel. You can't go wrong with a 3" or longer K frame, L frame, or GP100. There's nothing wrong with old Ruger Security Six, Colt Pythons, Troopers, or King Cobras. I'm not impressed with the new ones but the target model might work. Again, I'm recommending all these in .38 and not rimfire or .44 Magnum. Don't use finger-groove grips. Avoid Speedbeez and HKS. Get moon clips and a BMT mooner or Safariland Comp II or III.
 
I respectfully disagree with labnoti. I do about 1/3 of my handgun practicing with 22lr. I feel that it's helpful. Improving my technique during practice is more important to me than which caliber I shoot. I am a sample size of exactly one, though. YMMV.
 
I tend to agree with Labnoti.

OP, what exactly are you competing in?


I shoot primarily USPSA and 3-Gun and I can't see how shooting a 22 revolver in practice would help with either of those disciplines.
 
It does not take 10's of thousands of rounds to learn, so if the goal is to shoot centerfire, stay focused on centerfire.

Interesting. I've already fired...at least 4k rounds through my Redhawk with virtually no gain. Or, let me put it another way...after firing 4k rounds, any gains I may have made, I lost within a week of not shooting. I went on vacation, and when I came back, everything had fallen apart, and all of my skills had tanked.

So...how much ammunition does it to take to learn? And how much ammunition does it take, even to just barely maintain an absolute bare minimum of skill sets?

Edited to remove whiny rant with too many uses of the word "can't."
 
Last edited:
I tend to agree with Labnoti.

OP, what exactly are you competing in?


I shoot primarily USPSA and 3-Gun and I can't see how shooting a 22 revolver in practice would help with either of those disciplines.

It's just a local club league. It's basically USPSA type courses of fire, using mostly USPSA rules, but none of it is sanctioned. (Honestly, the weekly USPSA match is like $50 or something, and the league is $75 for 10 matches. I don't need to be in a sanctioned match.)
 
I was talking with one of the top performers in the league I shoot, and he suggested that I buy a rimfire pistol and wear it out if I want to improve.

You don't need to wear one out, but starting with a .22 revolver or pistol is what everyone should do. Back around 1971, I had little choice since I had no vehicle and had to walk to the basement range in my high school, which was limited to .22 rim-fire and bullseye target shooting at 20 yards. It turned out to be the best thing that could have happened for me. Shooting bullseye targets for group with a .22 pistol and revolver really teaches you the fundamental disciplines of sight alignment and trigger pull, without the distractions of muzzle blast and recoil.
After that, shooting center-fire pistols, revolvers, and rifles accurately was easy. So I am firmly convinced that this is a stepping stone to every shooting discipline.

So I'm thinking about buying a 22LR revolver. The two handguns I shoot are a 44 revolver and a 9mm DA/SA auto loader. I figure the 22LR revolver will let me practice the long, heavy trigger pull of the DA on both guns, as well as the short, crisp SA trigger pull on the autoloader.

Makes sense. Although, the DA pull and recoil on an auto loader may be somewhat different.
 
Interesting. I've already fired...at least 4k rounds through my Redhawk with virtually no gain. Or, let me put it another way...after firing 4k rounds, any gains I may have made, I lost within a week of not shooting. I went on vacation, and when I came back, everything had fallen apart, and all of my skills had tanked.

So...how much ammunition does it to take to learn? And how much ammunition does it take, even to just barely maintain an absolute bare minimum of skill sets?

Edited to remove whiny rant with too many uses of the word "can't."

There are two addresses to the issues you're bringing up. First is equipment, and second is technique or skills.

For equipment, it makes sense to use a .38 (or 9mm). 44 Magnum and .22 rimfire are too far extreme one way or another. You already understand the issue with the Redhawk trigger. Set it aside for a while and work with equipment that isn't working against you.

How much ammo it takes will depend on your goals and what you do to achieve them. If you're looking for the kind of skill that would pass qualification tests and score well on standardized tests, 4k rounds is more than you'll need. If you're looking to win competitions, it depends on who you compete against. There should be a strong diminishing return in terms of skill gained for the the number of rounds fired.

If you're practicing bad technique, you can burn a lot of ammo and gain nothing. It's easy to discuss appropriate equipment for learning in a forum post. It's not so easy to discuss good technique or to fix skill issues.
 
l think that you are training with the wrong type of gun for the type of shooting that you are competing in. A .44 Mag is a tough gun to master and with typical factory leadings is a good recipe for developing a flinch. Practice is a good thing but, by doing so without proper technique one is likely to ingrain bad habits, especially with a heavy recoiling round.
Don’t feel too bad about having a bad day at the range. It happens to everyone not only in shooting but other sports as well.(you should see some of my golf scores). Some days are diamonds others are stones. You have to suck it up and keep at it.
As to the .22 pistol/revolver, pick the one that is closest to the type that you will be shooting in competition. I second the Model 17 or 617. I lean toward the former because I dislike the added weight of the full lug on the 617 although some love it. Either is very accurate and a quality revolver. For target work a 6” barrel is the preferred choice of most bullseye shooters. .22 auto loaders are a different matter and S&W and Ruger both make good examples to choose from.
 
I tend to agree with Labnoti.

OP, what exactly are you competing in?


I shoot primarily USPSA and 3-Gun and I can't see how shooting a 22 revolver in practice would help with either of those disciplines.

I have successfully competed mostly in German DSB and military pistol matches and I also disagree with Labnoti. I shot IDPA when I lived in Arkansas a couple of decades ago and the master is still made at 20 yards. I have also been a shooting coach in the military and in several gun clubs and prepared shooters for matches.

When my kids were growing up we fired over 100,000 rounds through one S&W 22A alone and used rimfire for warm-ups, getting an even fast shooting rythm and transition from target to target. Rimfire handguns are excellent training tools to reinforce good habits and remember the basics that are necessary to move the personal ceiling a bit higher.

And they do that on a budget.
 
I have successfully competed mostly in German DSB and military pistol matches and I also disagree with Labnoti. I shot IDPA when I lived in Arkansas a couple of decades ago and the master is still made at 20 yards. I have also been a shooting coach in the military and in several gun clubs and prepared shooters for matches.

When my kids were growing up we fired over 100,000 rounds through one S&W 22A alone and used rimfire for warm-ups, getting an even fast shooting rythm and transition from target to target. Rimfire handguns are excellent training tools to reinforce good habits and remember the basics that are necessary to move the personal ceiling a bit higher.

And they do that on a budget.


Good for you.
My question was directed toward the OP. The particular shooting sport he's training for will dictate whether a rimfire weapon is an appropriate training tool.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top