.22 Revolvers: opinions wanted, please

[KJS]

Given the addictive nature of firearms, I'm tempted to buy another gun. Given the high cost of ammo, I'd like to make it a .22. I enjoy my Ruger MKIII, but it seems like a .22 revolver would be a nice toy to have as well. I like revolvers and a .22 would let me shoot without concern for ammo cost (and without having to learn to reload). I love how a revolver will fire anything that fits without being at all picky about the specific ammo.

My list of demands/wants:

-It must have adjustable sights.
-I deem weight to be a good thing.
-I deem larger size to be a good thing.
-I'd have a very strong preference for DA, even though I always cock a hammer manually.

It's unfortunate that Ruger doesn't offer any DA .22s, as I'd prefer to go with them. In new guns it seems an S&W 617 is one of the few to meet my list of wants. How many of you own a 617? 6 or 10 shot & 4" or 6"? Is there any reason to go with only 6 rounds in .22 other than, I guess, to be just like a standard CF revolver?

I'd be very fearful of buying a Taurus, though if any have positive tales to tell of their Taurus .22 I'd be interested in hearing about it. Fearful as I'm the unfortunate owner of a PT92 that looks more like it was deported from Brazil than exported.

Charter Arms makes a .22 DA, but I have to toss them from consideration due to their fixed sights & I want far more heft than a 20 ounce aluminum frame.

I've never handled a SA revolver, so my preference for DA is based entirely on sticking with what I'm used to. I'm willing to consider a SA .22, which Ruger seems to have a bunch of.

I'm not clear on the point of a SA .22 revolver though. My understanding was that SA provides a more solid gun than a swing-out cylinder could -- which I guess is a valid issue for a Freedom Arms .454 or .50 Wyoming Express, or a BFR in any of their massive big bore choices. DA guns also allow for faster reloading, which is great for a .22 where ammo comes in packs of 500 & ammo cost isn't an issue. How much longer does reloading a SA gun actually take once you're used to it? Also seems like the loading gate is on the "wrong" side for right handed folks like me. I seem to recall a discusson once on this forum as to why it's on the right, with the general consensus being tradition started by the left-handed Samuel Colt for whom right would be the correct side.

Well, I look forward to any imput all of you fellow revolver lovers can offer me. Thanks.

 

[colt1911fan]

look at the taurus 94 series

 

[oldfool]

if you look at the Taurus 94 series you better look really really close before you buy
"I'd be very fearful of buying a Taurus" pretty much applies to that particular line (but not all of their revolver line)

consider S&W 63 if looking for a small DA frame, S&W 617 if looking for a full size DA frame
and don't dismiss the Ruger Single Six lineup too quickly, just because you haven't shot SAs before, a lot of bang for your buck, very popular for very good reasons

 

[MaterDei]

Adjustable sights...check
Big...check
Heavy...check
Double Action...check

Or, if you prefer, for just over double the money you can get a S&W Classic.

 

[ClemY]

I am not a fan of Taurus. I am a fan of S&W 17 and 617. I have a few examples and they are great .22s; they work very well as understudy guns that I use for practice to keep down the cost of centerfire stuff. Works well.

 

[nhlivefree]

I have a Ruger singel six convertible. It comes with a 22 mag cylinder also if you feel like shooting something a little more powerfull than .22. A SA does take a little longer to load than a DA but not much once you get used to it you can do it pretty fast

 

[warnerwh]

If you want an excellent revolver I'd go with the Smith 617 or a Dan Wesson .22. You'll not wear either out. Both are very accurate and have good triggers. The Dan Wesson is a bit heavy as it is built on the .357 frame.

 

[sixgunner455]

S&W are great. My buddy has a model 17 I've shot quite a bit. Nice, nice revolvers.

Single Sixes are great, too. I have a Single Six, and like it a lot. It does take a little longer to load/unload, but who cares? When I'm shooting that gun, I'm relaxing, I'm plinking, I'm not decimating hordes of zombie chipmunks, I'm not in a fast draw competition, I'm not training, I'm just playing. It's a range toy. My kids love it. My wife likes it okay, but prefers the Ruger semi auto.

 

[Prosser]

"I'm not clear on the point of a SA .22 revolver though. My understanding was that SA provides a more solid gun than a swing-out cylinder could -- which I guess is a valid issue for a Freedom Arms .454 or .50 Wyoming Express, or a BFR in any of their massive big bore choices. DA guns also allow for faster reloading, which is great for a .22 where ammo comes in packs of 500 & ammo cost isn't an issue. How much longer does reloading a SA gun actually take once you're used to it? Also seems like the loading gate is on the "wrong" side for right handed folks like me. I seem to recall a discusson once on this forum as to why it's on the right, with the general consensus being tradition started by the left-handed Samuel Colt for whom right would be the correct side.
"

Single sixes are a work of art, and I think, an incredible value at their price point right now.
There are better used DA guns. Colts Trooper series was made in .22lr.

As for reloading the gun, it is bothersome, compared to swinging the entire cylinder out, one ejector push, and your reloading again.

I've always tried to have a SA that was the same as my SA revolvers in design.

Last one backfired on me. I ended up with a 252, which, due to matchgrade tight chambers, and the ammunition I have in bulk not matching, was no fun at the range.

That said, I have a SA SS to emulate the hold, and mechanics that I have to have to use my SA big guns, and, also to easily identify when I've shot them too much, meaning my hands are shaking, or, I'm flinching.

 

[cackalak]

Just FYI, Ruger will be selling DA .22's soon. I'm eagerly waiting.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=600745

 

[Ala Dan]

Give me a Smith & Wesson model 17, 18, 34, 35, 43, or 617~!

 

[G27RR]

I know you said you preferred a DA, but the SA Single Six is a lot of fun and meets your other preferences. Mine has the .22LR and Mag cylinders you can swap out.

If you want DA, I'd go for one of he S&Ws.

 

[ColtPythonElite]

Get out your wallet and go shopping for a Colt MK III Trooper. It is a full sized gun.

 

[Leadhead]

The new Ruger SP101 will find it's way in to a holster near me when they start selling.....

 

[stiletto raggio]

If you think you would like a single action, the Ruger Single Six Hunter is next on my list. Call me crazy, but I think the Hunter series is the best looking set of single actions available anywhere. http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-Hunters.htm

I've also got the .45 Colt Bisley Hunter, the .45 Colt Blackhawk Hunter and several other Ruger single actions. They are built like absolute tanks, easy to tweak and balance very well in the hand.

 

[Hoppes Love Potion]

You might also consider the S&W Model 63, an 8-shot stainless steel J-frame available in 2.25" and 3" barrels.

It's smaller and lighter than the 617 but feels sturdy and balances well. Makes for a nice kit gun. It's also about a hundred bucks cheaper than the 617.

 

[BCRider]

I just got an older model Single Six. Love shooting it as it's great practice for my other single action guns for cheap. But like my other SA's I hate loading and shucking the empties. But it is a totally different shooting experience from a DA style gun due to the difference in the grip shape and hold method.

Now that I've got an SA .22 it'll certainly be my last due to the loading and clearing issue. I far and away feel that .22 is a cartridge that begs to be shot in goodly volumes and the typical SA "one at a time" method just gets in the way for me.

If you're after a long term ownership sort of deal there really is only one or two proper answers. The main and most easily found one is the S&W 17 or 617 depending on if you want classic blued or modern raw stainless. The other is a good condition Colt Police Positive Target or Colt Officer's Match. I believe these Colts are the same gun with different names but either way they are the classic old Colt DA guns chambered in .22LR.

A gun from either of these lines is certainly the top end of the food chain when it comes to .22 revolvers. As such none of them are cheap even in good used condition. But any of them would set you up for a lifetime of shooting and the cost should be viewed in that light rather than how it compares to the other inferior guns out there.

One other option, if you can find it, might be a Dan Wesson revolver if they were made in .22. I'll leave it to others to say more about those since I've read little and never seen one.

Any other options other than these and you won't be getting as nice a trigger unless you do some upgrading and custom work on the gun. And if you end up paying a smith to do such work the final cost of a cheap gun + work will likely put you up in the same price range as just buying one of the S&W, Colt or (maybe) Dan Wesson guns.

Although to be honest I see one of the new Ruger SP101-22's in my future to sit alongside my S&W 17. The lure of the short barrel and 8 shot swing out cylinder is calling to me.

 

[918v]

Puny 22's Bwahahahahaaha!

 

[wrs840]

I'd be very fearful of buying a Taurus, though if any have positive tales to tell of their Taurus .22 I'd be interested in hearing about it.

I have a Taurus 94 4" and a S&W M63 5", both bought new within the last two years.

The M63 is a good revolver and I like it. The Taurus 94 feels good in my hand and is actually heavier. It's accuracy is as good or better than my M63 in my hand. And although I've had no malfunctions with the Taurus 94, the trigger-pull and hammer is really stiff... so much so that my wife, who is a good gunner and no wimp, basically refuses to shoot it.

My .02...

 

[oldfool]

your wife has good taste, wrs !

(no, I don't dislike all Taurus handguns, I own several on purpose, "keepers", but I have shot the 94, and that's why I don't own one... do own S&W 4" 63 and 4" 651, but sounds like OP is looking for full size DA, anyway)

PS
918v, that looks like mebbe an FA there ?
mighty nice, puny NOT !

 

[gdesloge]

"-It must have adjustable sights.
-I deem weight to be a good thing.
-I deem larger size to be a good thing.
-I'd have a very strong preference for DA, even though I always cock a hammer manually."

The Ruger Single-Six is built on a slightly smaller frame (80% or so) than the Blackhawk models, and the blued versions also utilize an aluminum grip frame and ejector rod housing.

The stainless models use stainless for these parts, and are consequently a bit heavier.

If you think that you might have an interest in single-action revolvers, you should attempt to shoot one before purchasing. There is something unquantifiable about the fun one can have with them, if you are that type of person.

And, if you really desire a shooting work-of-art, you can look into one of these (no adjustable sights, but they seem to shoot to point-of-aim):

http://www.usfirearms.com/cat/12-22.asp

It is heavier and full size.

gd

 

[918v]

918v, that looks like mebbe an FA there ?

Yeah, I ran across it by accident, wanting a target pistol actually. It turns out this gun blows away any handgun I own in terms of accuracy, including the expensive toys.

 

[22-rimfire]

I also prefer a double action (DA) 22 revolver over all the single actions. Sure, I'd like to own a Freedom Arms SA revolver, but I would probably still shoot the DA's much more.

I can only give you my opinion. As of today, I would probably wait for Ruger to bring out their new 8-shot SP-101 prior to making a decision unless you intend to have more than one.

In general, I think you are much better off if you simply decide to buy either a Colt or S&W DA revolver. The old SP-101 wasn't great in my opinion, so until the new one hits the shelves, I reserve the right to make a decision then.

As far as what is commonly available, I definitely lean toward a S&W M17, M18, or M617 these days, or a Colt Trooper Mark III if you can find one. They normally sell for about the same price as the M17's. They aren't big collector revolvers yet. But the best is probably the Colt Officers Model Match or Diamondback of more recent Colt manufacture.

I generally favor buying the better 22 revolver first even though they are more expensive than the Taurus models or the Charter Arms Pathfinder. Shoot a Smith and you likely won't be shooting either the Taurus or Charter Arms 22's much after that point. So, go with the better revolver right out of the gate.

I was totally sold on Colt 22 revolvers. But over the last 5-years, I have come to appreciate the M17, M18, and M617. I also like the current M63 for a woods carry gun. I have not purchased a M617, but they are great revolvers. I have the others covered (Colt and S&W).

 

[Dapperdan]

When Ruger brings out the SP101 in 22, that will be a neat gun. However, if you and can live with SA, the Ruger Single Ten looks interesting, as well. Of the two, I'd opt for the SP101. The sight setup on either one looks great. I've not owned a Ruger handgun in a few years, but I guarantee there will be a huge market for the SP101. I owned a 4" heavy barrel one of these many years ago. With fully adjustable sights and the half lug barrel, it should be an instant success, even at the price. I would stay away from Taurus 94's, I've owned 2 of them, an Ultralight and an all steel, both with 2" barrels. Had trouble with both, but maybe I was unlucky. I don't currently own a rimfire handgun, but that may change soon with the addition of the 22 SP. Whatever you decide, buy quality, it pays for itself in the long run. Happy 4th!

 

[KJS]

I generally favor buying the better 22 revolver first even though they are more expensive than the Taurus models or the Charter Arms Pathfinder. Shoot a Smith and you likely won't be shooting either the Taurus or Charter Arms 22's much after that point. So, go with the better revolver right out of the gate.

I fully agree with the idea of buying a good gun to start with even if it costs more. The cost of a gun ultimately ends up being the least costly part of shooting when a gun should last a lifetime & then some.

I seek value, not simply the lowest cost. Being the son of a cheapskate, I fully recognize the futility of saving some money only to end up with stuff you hate for years, wishing you'd spent more for something better. Especially important when dealing with something like guns that will likely outlive you.

Charter Arms is already out of the question. I have no interest at all in an aluminum gun that weighs a mere 20 ounces with 4" barrel (monstorously long by Charter's standards where everything else is a snub nose). My MK-III weighs twice that and it sure doesn't seem too heavy to me. Add in Charter's fixed sights and I'm running away from it at full speed. Sure, if I magically got a Charter .22 for free I wouldn't refuse it, but actually paying money for one isn't going to happen.

I also recognize no company is perfect, and I think S&W prices are inflated due to the massive brand equity of their famous name, though I'd still feel more confident that an S&W is going to work properly than a Taurus.

The new Ruger SP101 certainly sounds interesting, though I really wish it were built on a larger frame with a longer barrel and a couple more rounds.