S&W 617 22lr 6 shot

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't see why people don't like the 10 shot 617. With 10 holes in the cylinder, each shot requires less cylinder rotation. That means it cocks more easily, and it shoots a lot more easily in double action.

No matter how far the cylinder rotates, the hammer spring still has to be compressed enough to fire a cartridge. I will have to experiment, but it seems to me that will make the double action trigger pull feel stiffer, not lighter, for each shot.

As I said earlier, besides being butt ugly and muzzle heavy with the full length underlug, I don't need to load up 10 rounds per cylinder, it just makes me waste ammo.

I generally only shoot these single action anyway, so being easier to shoot double action does not matter to me either.

index.php
 
I don't see why people don't like the 10 shot 617.

I don't either. If you don't want to shoot ten rounds, load it with less. Most "Precision Pistol" shooters fired their revolvers in the single-action mode for all stages of fire (slow, timed and rapid). I've been a Bullseye competitor since the early sixties and when shooting one-handed, extra weight out front helps steady the hold for some shooters. Some of the premium target .22 autos came with weights to attach to the barrel from the factory for this very reason.
 
Last edited:
Here's an idea, just load 6 rounds and leave 4 holes empty. That will cut down on the superfluous shooting.

I have a difficult time practicing and only firing 5 shots. It's just so easy to fire all 10 which is really wasting ammo.
 
I don't see why people don't like the 10 shot 617. With 10 holes in the cylinder, each shot requires less cylinder rotation. That means it cocks more easily, and it shoots a lot more easily in double action.
I mentioned I tried one (10 shot) as a lower ammunition cost alternative to my M19-3 6" barrel w/square butt frame.

I had to special order one since the LGS didn't stock them & I had no opportunity to handle it until it came in.
Once it came in and I handled it, it felt terrible. I was used to the square butt w/the stock S&W oversized grips.
Once I shot it D/A I knew it was going back and get traded in.

It felt nothing at all like the 19-3. Nothing.

Unlike Mr. Johnson up above, I never shoot my D/A Smiths in S/A.
I always shoot them D/A.
 
I picked up a Heritage RR a year or so ago, and when looking at the 6 shot vs. more cylinder versions I ran into some discussions on the more versions running into issues with the timing, and not sure if that is true or not, or if it applies to other models, but - since I'm good with 6 and it is traditional I went with that. Anyone else ever hear that? I think I'd prefer a 10 round cylinder, but just didn't want any hassle. and being a cheap firearm, I figured I just wanted less chance of any weird issues. So far so good.
 
I absolutely love my 6 shot 6" 617. It's a bit ungainly and overkill but I'll never sell it. My most shot gun by far. Lovely trigger too.

I could be talked into cutting it down to 5" or so but I'm more likely to seek out an appropriate model 18..... The LGS had one a few weeks ago. Not perfect, but around $700... Maybe that's acceptable nowadays.
 
Driftwood Johnson said, "No matter how far the cylinder rotates, the hammer spring still has to be compressed enough to fire a cartridge. I will have to experiment, but it seems to me that will make the double action trigger pull feel stiffer, not lighter, for each shot."

Well, Driftwood, have you ever fired a 10-shot? I have, and the double action trigger pull was so easy that it was almost like firing a semi-auto.
 
the double action trigger pull was so easy that it was almost like firing a semi-auto.

But it will never be as "easy" as a good single-action trigger pull; which is why virtually all Bullseye competitors shoot revolvers in the sa mode when precision counts, even when firing the Timed and Rapid Fire stages.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top