S&W price sanity check!

[CraigC]

I don't understand the appeal of ol 6-shot .22 revolver of same size and weight as .357 version
Modern versions hold up to 9 .22 cartridges in cylinder.
LGS had 67-? .38 in very good condition for $700, I thought it was useful revolver for reasonable cost.

The same size/weight is kinda the point. I wouldn't take one of the 10-shot 617's if it were free.

 

[Pat Riot]

I don't understand the appeal of ol 6-shot .22 revolver of same size and weight as .357 version
Modern versions hold up to 9 .22 cartridges in cylinder.
LGS had 67-? .38 in very good condition for $700, I thought it was useful revolver for reasonable cost.

@adcoch1 @I6turbo and @CraigC pretty much summed it up.
Back in the 80’s I knew police officers that bought S&W model 17s and 18s (.22LRs) as closely configured to their model 19s (.357s) as they could get them so that they could target practice using cheaper .22 ammo to get better sight and trigger control.
When I bought my model 19 ten years ago I also bought a model 17 a short time later mostly for nostalgia. I wasn’t a police officer, but I thought the concept was cool. That and I had always wanted a 19 and a 17.
I should get a photo with them together.

My 17-3


My 19-4


Edit: they really aren’t alike, overall. The 19 has a target hammer and trigger. The trigger pull weights are slightly different and as you can see the barrels are different on the 17 as the ejector rod is not shrouded.
That’s okay. I didn’t buy them to be identical in the first place.

 

[argonn]

Both of these are 3 T’s, one is a 22, the other a 38. Built in the 70’s, both with the blue, metal cornered boxes.

 

[argonn]

6.5 inch 45acp. Was my bowling pin gun. Wood fitted box. Late 70’s.

 

[Bill B.]

I don't understand the appeal of ol 6-shot .22 revolver of same size and weight as .357 version
Modern versions hold up to 9 .22 cartridges in cylinder.
LGS had 67-? .38 in very good condition for $700, I thought it was useful revolver for reasonable cost.

If you ever shot a Pre War S&W K frame 22 you would understand. That's coming from someone that has S&W 617 10 shot & a S&W 63 8 shot. Those old pre war S&W 's are just works of art & steel.

 

[Rockrivr1]

Lack of pinned barrel and type of box suggests early 1990s manufacture (pre-plastic box vintage).

Actually my bad. I messed up typing. Fixed for correct date.

 

[tubeshooter]

If you ever shot a Pre War S&W K frame 22 you would understand. That's coming from someone that has S&W 617 10 shot & a S&W 63 8 shot. Those old pre war S&W 's are just works of art & steel.

Yeah, I used to wonder what all the fuss was about.

Then I picked up a beater grade pre-model 17 that had e-pen work and what turned out to be a slightly bent ejector rod for cheap. Not quite pre-war; dates to 1947.

The daggone thing outshot most any other .22 I had, even with the bent rod. Now that I got a replacement rod it's pretty sweet (thanks Jack First).


If I had to choose between selling it or the modern-day Colt KC Target, I'd probably sell the Colt. They both shoot better than I do, but the Colt would bring more $ and would be easier to replace at this point. Plus the trigger is so sweet on the Smith; outstanding. The bent rod probably meant lower actual miles at the end of the day, to my benefit.

 

[halfmoonclip]

Modern versions hold up to 9 .22 cartridges in cylinder.

The 'more than 6 shot' Smiths don't have as satisfying a mechanical feel, or, at least, are more challenging (for me) to smooth up. Revos are what they are, an enjoyable anachronism. I still have a bunch, like to shoot them, sometimes carry a Centennial of one sort or another.
But I'm better served with an auto these days.
Pavel, your analysis of the vintage of the M60 sounds spot on. It's about the age of my current one. BTW, somehow the round butt, exposed hammer Js seem much smaller than the enclosed hammer guns. They really are small, and a reminder of the breakthrough nature of the design.
Moon

 

[halfmoonclip]

I wouldn't take one of the 10-shot 617's if it were free.

I have a 317, and don't like it as well as its M63 cousin. But as an actual 'kit gun', it's hard to argue with the size and weight. As mentioned before, I have trouble slicking up a 'high capacity' Smith cylinder.
Moon

 

[crestoncowboy]

I don't think I've ever really "over" paid. I have safes full of guns and I doubt anything in them could be bought cheaper than I paid at the time. They usually appreciate at least enough to match inflation. For the most part any old gun you see today will cost more in the future.

One I've fussed about for years I saw was a 44 desert eagle with 7 mags for 900 out the door. We didn't have internet on our cell phones back then and I didn't buy it. Googled it when I got home and the mags were worth quite a bit. Gun got gone by the next time I went. Probably wasn't a "steal" or anything but I still wish I'd bought that one.

I almost always buy off private parties though. You won't get a great deal at a gun store 99% of the time. Same for gun broker. Dealers watch those and know values. Vast majority of the time People come to me with a gun to sell. I tell them what it should bring and usually offer well under that. Same for chainsaws, tractors... etc. I tell them my offer will stand when ever they get tired of trying to sell it and now they know the value so nobody else can take advantage of them. I've priced entire collections that way when widows have asked me to as well. Sometimes several months later they call and I buy them. 25 years ago I worked in a factory and passed on a lot of good deals. 400-500 dollar pythons and 3 spas 12 I could have paid 1k for all three. (I paid 4 or 450 for one). I just didn't have the money and the over draft fees and divorce it would have caused would make the bargain much less of a bargain. Lol. I've also put some of those people in touch with someone who would pay way more than I would. I had a buddy who collected cars and colts. I could have got a few colts cheap that I sent to him because I knew he would pay more. Same for a few old cars.

Guns have always baffled me though. Most are mass produced. I'd bet at least 80% (probably way more) that were made on the past 100 years are still in existence and in working order. Even most ww1 and ww2 war guns were abused, used heavily yet still exist and are plenty usable today. They almost never wear out. They don't expire. They don't rot. They don't get outdated and obsolete.... yet sell millions and millions every year. Cars wear out AND get outdated. Tvs. Appliances clothes etc. Yet despite the fact that those wear out and/or get outdated or expire people don't buy 3 or 4 of the same thing. You don't have 6 stoves "just in case". You don't buy a 60, 65, 70, and 80 inch tv just to have the set. You don't buy the Samsung s23, the 23+, the s23 ultra all. And those actually do wear out and break. Most People don't go buy 3 or 4 hammer just alike knowing they won't ever wear out one hammer much less multiple. They may get lost but guns normally don't despite the talk of many boating accidents. I get why all those are billion dollar markets. But guns are an oddity. I worked in manufacturing for years. Management as well as production. I get planned obsolescence. I get going for markets that are perishable. But guns just shouldn't sell like they do. Lol. I'm glad they do but when you're seeing hundreds of thousands or millions of 100+ year old designed 1911s and damn near 50 year old AR pattern rifles still selling every year.... it's an awesome industry to be in yet defies logic. Nobody is standing in line to buy a 50 year old 32 inch tube TV and you couldn't give away an old clicky rotary telephone. Old cars sell to guys during their mid life crisis but when they realize how bad they sucked they get over it. An 80s sig/ glock/ hk/ Smith revolver/ ruger revolver/ mossberg/870 etc is pretty much still made today. No difference. Nothing much changed. Still sell and still relevant today. Drag out an old 80s car and take it to drivers Ed class and you will get laughed out of the room. 125 hp 25 mpg sloth with a tape deck and bad heat... can't even merge into traffic in today's roads. And 100 hp was the GT/SS/iroc/RT version. Lol. Not the cheap one.

And I'm as guilty as anyone. I have safes full. Duplicates of guns i know for certain I'll never wear out. Many i likely will never shoot. But coming from manufacturing in a multi billion dollar a year company I'm always baffled by the gun industry. I can't think of any other industry that can change so little, isn't a necessity (one can possibly argue A GUN might be necessary but it would be incredibly hard to make the argument multiple guns are) while making a product that basically lasts forever and bankrupted so many companies yet is a multi billion dollar a year industry. Companies go broke every year in the industry yet the industry GROWS year over year. People pay 2500 dollars for a python that didn't sell well for 500 dollars as late as the 80s. They pay 800 for a smith that was 300 20 years ago. In 40 years the "new" smiths will sell for stupid prices because people will equate old to better. Both Smith and colt and been bankrupt and bought despite being "desirable" still. Smith and Ruger tried their very best to piss off and sell out their own customers yet are still desirable. Things that are pretty much frowned upon in any other industry.

I've read books on it. We have discussed it in meetings. I'm not the only one who is baffled by the industry. Other industries would LOVE to be selling 100 year old designs as quick as they can, simply by adding a new color or adding and then removing finger grooves.

 

[crestoncowboy]

I have a 617 10 shot and two old ones. I prefer the 617 probably. I couldn't care less if i fall on it. It won't rust. Accuracy is pretty close despite my 617 having less barrel length. It doesn't "feel" as good in action but as far as squirrel and rabbit.... they taste the same. If I had to sell one it would be the new one simply because the other two are harder to find. I'm not going to be out running my chainsaw with my old ones on me. I do with the new one.

I DID have to send both my gp and 617 10 shots back to the companies to get them to fire. Quality control sucked. Lol. Neither would go 10 rounds without at least a couple light strikes so no way they fired even a full cylinder through them. But both come back fixed.

I think it goes back to my old argument. People relate older to better regardless of wether it was or not. Your old car was slow and unreliable. 150k miles without a transmission or motor was an anomaly where it's expected now. I own a shop and make good money off of them. 15 second 1/4 miles was fast. Etc etc. Yet people say " they don't make them like they used to". I drive my 66 and come home and say "thank God they don't make them like they used to". I have a lot of old rifles. Some old winchester and Remington worth a lot of money. They can't shoot as well as a 200 dollar axis. So which is "better". (I'll never own an axis. Just saying)

 

[Rockrivr1]

I have a 617 10 shot and two old ones. I prefer the 617 probably. I couldn't care less if i fall on it. It won't rust. Accuracy is pretty close despite my 617 having less barrel length. It doesn't "feel" as good in action but as far as squirrel and rabbit.... they taste the same. If I had to sell one it would be the new one simply because the other two are harder to find. I'm not going to be out running my chainsaw with my old ones on me. I do with the new one.

I DID have to send both my gp and 617 10 shots back to the companies to get them to fire. Quality control sucked. Lol. Neither would go 10 rounds without at least a couple light strikes so no way they fired even a full cylinder through them. But both come back fixed.

I think it goes back to my old argument. People relate older to better regardless of wether it was or not. Your old car was slow and unreliable. 150k miles without a transmission or motor was an anomaly where it's expected now. I own a shop and make good money off of them. 15 second 1/4 miles was fast. Etc etc. Yet people say " they don't make them like they used to". I drive my 66 and come home and say "thank God they don't make them like they used to". I have a lot of old rifles. Some old winchester and Remington worth a lot of money. They can't shoot as well as a 200 dollar axis. So which is "better". (I'll never own an axis. Just saying)

I know this is a S&W thread, but if money becomes an issue, you cannot beat a H&R Model 999 Sportsman. 10 rounds, break top 22LR revolver that can be had for a couple hundred dollars. Just as accurate as my K-22 S&W 22LR.

 

[adcoch1]

I know this is a S&W thread, but if money becomes an issue, you cannot beat a H&R Model 999 Sportsman. 10 rounds, break top 22LR revolver that can be had for a couple hundred dollars. Just as accurate as my K-22 S&W 22LR.

I have had several over the years, but I sold my last one about ten years back and I haven't seen a decent one under 450 since. They have a following around here. I have a hi standard double nine, nine shot double action SAA lookalike. My son claimed it. It's fun but no s&w