Quality of the new Classic Model 17 by S&W?
- Thread starter sjcslk
- Start date
- Status
Wil Terry
Member
WELL BY GOLLY....I want you to cowboy up and go buy one of the darn things, test the bejabbers out of it, and let us all know how it all turns out. Please test the 22LR loads on the market and a couple of the few available 22SHORT loads on the market. Please do all the testing from a RansomRest and furnish both accuracy results on two 10-shot groups of each load at twenty five yards plus the velocity specifications including HI, LO, EXSPRD, AVR, and STDEV.
Done right it'll not take a moment over one week.
Done right it'll not take a moment over one week.
CajunBass
Member
I don't care about the hole one way or the other, but as long as I can get an old one for less money, I see no reason to buy a new one. I know. Easy for me to say, since I've got an old one.
But I'm a used gun guy. The hunt is half the fun.
But I'm a used gun guy. The hunt is half the fun.
Classic Model 17
Well then, maybe I should refresh the question. If you couldn't find an older model 17 & you were looking for a quality, accurate 22 revolver in a 6" barrel, would you buy one of the new Model 17's? Have they been out long enough to show that they are overall a good quality & accurate gun?
Well then, maybe I should refresh the question. If you couldn't find an older model 17 & you were looking for a quality, accurate 22 revolver in a 6" barrel, would you buy one of the new Model 17's? Have they been out long enough to show that they are overall a good quality & accurate gun?
22-rimfire
Member
I don't get particularly bothered by the hole. But I would probably buy a used M-17 or M-18. Like MrBorland said, I think you will find them to be just as accurate as the older guns.
I would try to see one in person and look at the bluing job. I love the old bluing done on Smiths and Colts prior to the stainless revolution.
Guillermo
member
There are several factors that will determine as to whether a new gun will shoot as well as its older counterparts. Unfortunately it is a "shot in the dark".
Smith's quality control is spotty at best. If they press the barrel in properly and get the cylinder gap right it is most likely going to be every bit as accurate as a gun built in the 50's. As mentioned, sometimes they are even more accurate.
The disadvantages of buying a new gun are well documented but S&W has very good customer service. If you get a lemon they will most probably fix it quickly and properly.
Smith's quality control is spotty at best. If they press the barrel in properly and get the cylinder gap right it is most likely going to be every bit as accurate as a gun built in the 50's. As mentioned, sometimes they are even more accurate.
The disadvantages of buying a new gun are well documented but S&W has very good customer service. If you get a lemon they will most probably fix it quickly and properly.
mustang_steve
Member
The hole is a deal-breaker to me. It simply ruins the aesthetics of this beautiful design.
It's like someone re-making the Mona Lisa so she's got a huge toothy grin.
I own one of the last of the pre-17 models (next produciton year was the Model 17)...they're great guns. The new ones are supposed to be very good as well...at least that's what I've heard from someone at my range that claims to have one.
Pick as you'd like, honestly I don't think you can go wrong here.
It's like someone re-making the Mona Lisa so she's got a huge toothy grin.
I own one of the last of the pre-17 models (next produciton year was the Model 17)...they're great guns. The new ones are supposed to be very good as well...at least that's what I've heard from someone at my range that claims to have one.
Pick as you'd like, honestly I don't think you can go wrong here.
Minnesota Wild
Member
I have a older model 17 myself, and the ones I've seen at shows have been really expensive...in the $700-800 range with some bluing wear and showing some wear on the grips. I don't know why not to try the new one unless you can find a really good deal on a used one...
robctwo
Member
I do not own a 17 Classic. I do own a few newer Smiths with the hole. Not an issue for me.
In .22 I bought a very nice used M18, 4" barrel and 6 shot. Very accurate. I then bought a 4" 617. 10 shot, newer model. Very accurate. My neighbor then bought the 6" 617. We had it at the range Sunday. It seemed to be shooting a bit high even with the rear sight cranked all the way down. In 617 I prefer the 4" for balance, he likes the long sight picture.
The first S&W I purchased is a 6" Nickel 25 Classic, 45 Colt. That gun is very accurate. I put a Wolff spring set in it with the reduced power main spring and 14 pound rebound spring. Stoned and polished the innerds. I can break clay birds on a bank at 60 yards. Not every shot, but often enough to be fun.
I have a few other newer S&Ws and a few older. In K frames I like the 4" for the handiness, 6" for the sight picture. I was thinking I'd get a 17 after I bought the 18, but now with the 617 I like the 10 shot capacity so much that I doubt a 17 is in my future. I have put Wolff spring kits in most of my Smiths. The 25 Classic is the only one that runs reliably with the reduced power main spring.
On another note, I find the full lug look less appealing than the lock hole. The 617 is my only full lug Smith. The look that really matters to me is the sight picture.
In .22 I bought a very nice used M18, 4" barrel and 6 shot. Very accurate. I then bought a 4" 617. 10 shot, newer model. Very accurate. My neighbor then bought the 6" 617. We had it at the range Sunday. It seemed to be shooting a bit high even with the rear sight cranked all the way down. In 617 I prefer the 4" for balance, he likes the long sight picture.
The first S&W I purchased is a 6" Nickel 25 Classic, 45 Colt. That gun is very accurate. I put a Wolff spring set in it with the reduced power main spring and 14 pound rebound spring. Stoned and polished the innerds. I can break clay birds on a bank at 60 yards. Not every shot, but often enough to be fun.
I have a few other newer S&Ws and a few older. In K frames I like the 4" for the handiness, 6" for the sight picture. I was thinking I'd get a 17 after I bought the 18, but now with the 617 I like the 10 shot capacity so much that I doubt a 17 is in my future. I have put Wolff spring kits in most of my Smiths. The 25 Classic is the only one that runs reliably with the reduced power main spring.
On another note, I find the full lug look less appealing than the lock hole. The 617 is my only full lug Smith. The look that really matters to me is the sight picture.
Guillermo
member
at least the lock on a 22 is unlikely to lock itself and even if it does, it is a target gun.
Even if you are hunting and the gun binds up the chances of getting charged by a wounded squirrel are pretty slim.
MIM parts on the other hand...
Even if you are hunting and the gun binds up the chances of getting charged by a wounded squirrel are pretty slim.
MIM parts on the other hand...
robctwo
Member
I've only been fiddling around with revolvers for a year. I bought the Kuhnhausen manual.
I've taken a good look at the lock. I've thought about removing it and putting in "the plug". It's hard for me to see how it engages on it's own. I've run 5-6,000 .45 colt through the 25 Classic and 2-3,000 through the 25-13 Mountain Gun. Another 2-3,000 through the 620, albeit mostly .38 Special target loads. No hint of movement in the lock.
I can't imagine my 617 locking up. My neighbor did have a lock issue on his new 617, he locked the gun up and was lucky to have a key in his bag when he arrived at the range.
I've taken a good look at the lock. I've thought about removing it and putting in "the plug". It's hard for me to see how it engages on it's own. I've run 5-6,000 .45 colt through the 25 Classic and 2-3,000 through the 25-13 Mountain Gun. Another 2-3,000 through the 620, albeit mostly .38 Special target loads. No hint of movement in the lock.
I can't imagine my 617 locking up. My neighbor did have a lock issue on his new 617, he locked the gun up and was lucky to have a key in his bag when he arrived at the range.
- Status
