Colt Diamondback .22 vs. S&W Model 17

Status
Not open for further replies.

vanfunk

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2003
Messages
1,227
Location
The widening gyre
Hello Gents:

Just looking for some comments regarding this face-off. I'd love to hear opinions as to which you think is better, and why. I have a Model 17-9, and am contemplating a NIB Diamondback .22LR.

Thanks!

vanfunk
 
I own a pre-17 and would not trade it for a diamondback, or much of anything else for that matter. I certainly wouldn't mind adding a diamondback to my collection.

That said if I had niether, and I was ready to purchase one or the other, and they were in equal condition and no real price difference, I would flip a coin.
 
I own both of the revolvers mentioned. I choose the Model 17 over the Diamondback whenever I head to the range. That said, a .22 Diamondback is a scarce gun and would be a much better investment.

In truth, I would not shoot a NIB Colt Diamondback revolver.
 
I had both, decided to thin down, and kept the Smith. The Diamondback has the same weaknesses that Colt D-frames have, and my gun started to develope slight timing issues.....very slight, but they were likely to get worse with wear. I've never had anything like that with a S&W .22. As mentioned above, if you are looking for a gun you can shoot, and shoot a lot, get the Smith, especially if the Diamondback is going to be too pretty or valuable to shoot............
 
I have both a 6" M-17 and a 4" Diamondback...I even had a 6" Diamondback that I thought would be a good companion for the M-17, but it just didn't feel right.

I was told the 6" barrel would offer more accuracy, but I've found the shorter sight radius of the Diamondback to be every bit as accurate.

As I got away from SA shooting and more into using the DA trigger, the Diamondback really came to the fore...it feels just right in my hand and the trigger is just better.

I should add that both of my guns have had their actions tuned, with the main difference being that the M-17 has both a Target hammer and trigger.

While I understand the timing issues that occur because of the tighter lockup (at ignition) of the Colt action, it has been my experience that this is mostly incidental to the .357Mag loading. I've never seen a D-frame chambered in .22lr develop any looseness
 
Thank you for the feedback, Gents! Hmmmm!

I've really been getting back into Colts lately, and now that I've been turning more frequently to the economy of rimfire practice, the Diamondback seems like a good choice. I love that they look like "baby" Pythons, but I suspect the similarities end there. Did the Diamondbacks receive the careful hand fitting and tuning of their bigger, more costly brothers, or are they really "gussied up" Detective Special .22's with full-lug barrels?

I think I'm going to get it, though it sounds like I can't expect better accuracy than my Model 17.

Thanks again,

vanfunk
 
Diamondbacks (DBs) are not as nicely tuned as the Python. They are equivalent to the Detective Special in that regard. However, there is nothing wrong at all with the Det Spl. The DB is my favorite 22 revolver, hands down.

I was told the 6" barrel would offer more accuracy, but I've found the shorter sight radius of the Diamondback to be every bit as accurate.

I also found the 4" to be just as accurate as the 6" Diamondback. The 4" is my favorite size in the DB.

You get a lot of "looks" at the range with a DB. They are just downright beautiful little revolvers. I think the Colt D-frame is the perfect size for a general shooting 22 revolver. If I were looking for the best accuracy with a Colt 22 revolver, I would get an Officers Model Match which often are priced less than a DB.

Back when competitive shooting involved revolvers, it was the Officers Model vs the Model 17 (K-22). You will find folks in both camps as far as favorites and what's best.
 
My old man has a 617 and it was always my favorite .22 revolver to shoot. I've never owned a .22 Diamondback, but have owned a .38 Diamondback. If it were me personally, I'd buy the Smith if I were looking to shoot it and I'd buy the Colt if I were looking for an investment and didn't plan on shooting it.
 
Diamondbacks (DBs) are not as nicely tuned as the Python. They are equivalent to the Detective Special in that regard

That is simply not the case.

The DB and the Python were tuned down to the proverbial "gnat's ass" and both are smooth as silk.

Come on by the house, I have a DS (a 72), a DB (2.5 inch 38) and a Python (4 inch). The difference is staggering.
 
Scarce in my Neck of the Woods.

Around here you seldom see a Colt. I would like to fondle one. You know, rub it and tickle the trigger a little. :rolleyes:

I have a 17-3 and may have another next weekend. (Gunshow) I can find 17 and 18 Smiths regularly but a not a Colt.
 
I would think that the Officers Model vs. the S&W 17 would be more of an apples to apples comparison, both being mid sized frames.
 
I would think that the Officers Model vs. the S&W 17 would be more of an apples to apples comparison

Maybe I'm confused, but an auto compared to a revolver being more of an apples to apples comparison?
 
The DB and the Python were tuned down to the proverbial "gnat's ass" and both are smooth as silk.

I beg to differ. I really like Diamondbacks, but they aren't as smooth as a Python out of the box. I've owned a lot of Diamondbacks, but only a couple Pythons.
 
Last edited:
My first handgun was a 6" Diamondback .22, and of course I still have it. I added a 4" Model 17 a few years later. I have come to simply prefer the "feel" of Smiths and while I have no plans to dispose of either, if I had to choose I'd take the Smith. But the Colt is so pretty, don't make me choose.
 
A 6" DiamondBack, while worth more, at least as accurate and very pretty is extremely nose heavy. The 6" Model 17 was balanced just right and easily maintainable. My 6" DB is a safe queen, it's .22 MRF sister brought almost $3000 a few years back on gunbroker. I have 2 Model 17s, one with target trigger and hammer and an early one with out. I shoot them both, the earlier one is slightly more accurate.
 
Thanks Folks!

Looks like the Diamondback is a somewhat controversial character. I love the looks of the revolver; the full lug only looks good on a Colt, IMO. I've been offered a NIB specimen for a very, very attractive price and I think I am compelled to get it. Will it shoot any better than my S&W? Dunno...

I am also thinking about adding a nickel Trooper Mark III in .22 magnum to the stable. Again, a very attractive price is attached to this one. Not sure of the utility of the beast, though, but I believe it's a rare bird...

Thanks again!

vanfunk
 
My biggest problem with the Diamondback is that they are so expensive these days and you almost hate to shoot one if it is nice. The nickel Trooper Mark III in 22WMR has potential collector value as well. I suspect it is probably one of the best 22 WMR revolvers available along with the Smith.
 
I have a Trooper MKIII in .22 Mag and it IS somewhat rare but also an extremely fine shooter . Get those Colts if the price is right and don't look back. They are GOLDEN investments IMHO.
 
I wouldn't sell the Diamondback but a single six is just as fun and accurate (maybe a little better) and won't make you cry when shows signs of use.
 
Maybe I'm confused, but an auto compared to a revolver being more of an apples to apples comparison?

I believe that the other poster was referring to the Officers Model Target/Special/Match as a comparable revolver to the Model 17.
 
Maybe I'm confused, but an auto compared to a revolver being more of an apples to apples comparison?
If the mention of Officer's Model brought to mind the sub-compact Colt .45ACP, it is a common mistake. That pistol is incorrectly referred to in that way, when it is really the Officer's ACP model and is commonly shortened to OACP in 1911 circles.

The Colt Officer's Model was a revolver chambered in .22lr and .38spl for NRA Bullseye competition
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top