Smith & Wesson model 63-4 (.22lr) range report

[General Geoff]

So I finally took my new 63 out to the range and put about 300 rounds through it. I must say, I was pleasantly surprised.

Before I purchased the 63, I've only owned two .22lr handguns: A Walther P22 which I sold to a friend after discovering how finicky it was on cycling, and then later I picked up a Ruger Mark III 22/45 Hunter, which I still have and enjoy shooting. But I wanted to get a .22 revolver for the sake of simplicity and reliability with any kind of rimfire ammunition (no need to worry about failures to feed or extract). The Ruger has been very reliable, but it still gets hung up once in awhile; no fault of the gun, it's just the nature of shooting rimfire. So anyway, I ordered up a new model 63 after doing some research on current production Smiths (I was originally going to get a 617, but I did want something a bit smaller, and once I discovered that S&W is making a new 63, I jumped on it).





I was honestly expecting slightly worse groups than I've been getting with the Ruger Mark III, at least when shooting double action. Much to my surprise however, I seem to be more accurate with the 63 than the Ruger. Throughout the range session, I never once had a failure to fire, or any other issues with it. The double action pull was very smooth, much better than my friend's Taurus model 94 (though I did pay about twice as much for this gun as he did for his).

Yes it has the internal lock, no I'm not really bothered by it. The gun points very well for me, the sights seem to line up naturally when I bring it up to eye level. The stock rubber grip is comfortable, though I'm looking into replacing it with cocobolo grips (started a thread on that a couple days ago). Here's a picture of it at the range after expending my limited ammunition supply. Nice and dirty, the way a working revolver should look:





And here's two videos:

Me shooting the 63
Picture of a target being shot from ~10 yards, two handed, double action


So in summation, this revolver was worth every penny I paid for it ($699), and I'm very happy with it. Highly recommended for anyone who wants to add a .22lr revolver to their collection.

 

[tom327]

General--great post and pictures. I bought a 63-4 for much the same reason you did. They're nice shooters, and better ammunition and grips only improve their accuracy. However, they're kit guns, meant for trail/plinking, not target shooting.
Since I was more interested in target work, I traded mine in for a model 617. Groups at that range are about the size of a quarter.
I wish S&W had the model 63 in 3 or 4 inch barrel. (Basically a stainless steel version of the model 317.) I think it would be a hit. --Tom

 

[Carl Levitian]

[General--great post and pictures. I bought a 63-4 for much the same reason you did. They're nice shooters, and better ammunition and grips only improve their accuracy. However, they're kit guns, meant for trail/plinking, not target shooting.
Since I was more interested in target work, I traded mine in for a model 617. Groups at that range are about the size of a quarter.
I wish S&W had the model 63 in 3 or 4 inch barrel. (Basically a stainless steel version of the model 317.) I think it would be a hit. --Tom]


I did the same thing. I had an older model 63 kit gun with the 4 inch tube, and it was okay, but I traded it for a 617 4 inch 10 shot because I do more target shooting than plinking. My 617 is more accurite shooting than my old 63.

BUT;

A buddy just recently got one of the new 5 inch 63's like the original poster's, and I shot it, and I now wish I'd held off a couple years buying the 617. You wouldn't beleive how that extra inch of barrel improves the 63 kit gun. My old one was finicky, in that you had to be very carefull with your sight picture and trigger squeeze. It was just enough lighter than the 617 to mack accurite shooting off hand a more exacting thing. But another inch of barrel puts just enough weight out at the end of the gun that it is noticably easier to hold steady, and the longer sight radius makes for a better shooter. The new 5 inch 63 has closed some of the gap between the 63 and 617. It's still not the target gun the 617 is, but it's closer now, and with the 8 shot cylinder, is a better woodsgun.

I just may have to go buy a new 63. With a 5 inch barrel and 8 shots, it's a whle new and better kit gun.

 

[Stainz]

I bought a new 4" 10-shot 617 last Sept. I love it! Then, a friend wanted a new S&W - and bought a new 5" 63.

Well, it was one of the three I wanted (My 617, it, and the 317 Kit). I had to shoot it that day he brought it out to the range - wow! Sadly, the grips are just inapproriate for my hands. My 617 had gotten the new 'Retro Targets' in cocobolo from Ahrends - perfect fit, for me.

My problem is simple - I like the 5" 63 - and if Ahrends were to make a nice J-frame grip to fit it - like the Retro Targets - I'd really consider it. I had one in my hands New Year's Eve AM at the gunstore. Sadly, they closed early - by the time I got back from lunch. After the first of the year, no more $50 rebate - and a price increase - made a $100 increase.

Heck, the 317K still looks good, too. I seem to have 'discovered' .22 shooting, much to the chagrin of my .44 & .45 revolvers (The .38s still collect significant 'range-travel miles'.). I guess it's revolver-gluttony at it's worst. I still want a 5" 63 - and a 317K!!

Congratulations on a fine revolver - you are making great use of it, too.

Stainz

 

[CDH]

I wish S&W had the model 63 in 3 or 4 inch barrel. (Basically a stainless steel version of the model 317.) I think it would be a hit. --Tom]

Well, I've got a Model 63 in 4" and you're right, it's a big hit (with me ).

The Model 63 (up to recently typically called their "Kit Gun") is a fun as hell pistol. It's because it's a small frame pistol that it's so fun in that caliber.

I bought mine brand new about 20 years ago (IIRC) so it's obviously a "pre lock". No, it's not going to feel like a "Target" pistol if you compare it to a 617, but I wouldn't give up this little 4" puppy for anything.