The case for a .22 plinker...

[oldfool]

old Colts, old Dan Wessons, old S&W Ks, old S&W Js, any vintage FAs
about as close as it comes to "magic" in rimfire revolvers
my problem is that at one nice gun a year, can't own 'em all, running out of years

but I think Craig is pulling our collective leg just a bit
"$200 Ruger Single Six"
I don't have one in hand to look at, but that appears to have quite a few screws in it, and those don't look like off-the-shelf stocks to my fuzzy old eyeballs, either
pretty gun, that, to be envied

PS
not meaning to pick on Waywatcher, but your discretionary time is worth a LOT, including reloading time
and it gets ever more valuable as the years drift on by, friend
just 2 hours a week at local range is what I look forward to all week long

 

[CraigC]

Well, the sixgun was $200.......ten years ago. The XR3 grip frame was $75 and the fancy claro walnut stocks were another $200. The steel ejector housing $35 and I forget what the bullseye ejector set me back.

 

[oldfool]

uuhh huhh, yup
(my mama raised a fool, not an idiot child, Craig)

 

[glockky]

Well i wish i had not looked at this thread because i have always liked 22's and not i have a desire for a 617 probably gonna be my next purchase. A 22 is hard to beat for just all around fun.

 

[BCRider]

1-Because maybe you don't understand the difference between a cheap 22 revolver and a higher end 22 revolver. [I know I didn't when I first started shooting revolvers.]
2-Because that is all you can afford.
3-Because you might only shoot it occasionally. The classic kit gun approach.
4-Because you're "frugal".

1- I'd like to think that the reason the OP asked is to try to find out a bit more about what is "cheap" and what is "cheap junk". Hopefully we've pointed him towards some less costly but still decent to shoot options.

As for 2 through 4, it's taken me a goodly portion of my life to realize that "cheap" isn't always as cheap as it sounds. I've learned that spending a bit more to get one of the "best bangs for the buck" is cheaper by far in the long run. A "frugal" person will be the one that understands this and uses his hard earned and all too few spare hobby bucks to buy the best possible value. For some of us fortunate ones this comes down to a nice shiney new Freedom Arms or S&W17 Classic line. For others it may be a nice clean H&R from a pawn shop. The key is to read up on these guns and find one that at least starts with a good barrel and action. If the trigger turns out to feel like stirring a stick in a bucket of gravel at least that can be modified for a bit more effort or money. But if the basics aren't there then the gun is doomed from the get go.

As for item 2, if the OP can afford to buy ammo and throw it downrange then he has to have at least a fairly decent amount of hobby cash to do so. Shooting guns is not the most expensive hobby out there (ask me about my 5 year stint with motorcycle racing ) but it's FAR from the cheapest thing one can do. So in the end the difference in cost between the cheapest possible hunk of metal out there and one that is maybe double or triple the cost equates to a half or full case of rimfire ammo. Over the life of the shooter is that too much to invest into the tool which will be used to send the bullets downrange? Well, again hopefully we've "edumacated" the OP and any other like minded souls that it CAN be worth waiting and saving a little more.

In the end I totally agree with your summation as well as old fool's and CraigC's. We're all of like mind but with slightly differing positions on the teeter totter.

Hell, for all I know, not having ever shot one, the Heritage may be a fine little shooter with a trigger that's easily slicked up so it shoots as nicely as the best Single Six out there. The trick would be to look into how well it stands up over a few cases of ammo and a couple of years of use.

 

[CraigC]

uuhh huhh, yup
(my mama raised a fool, not an idiot child, Craig)

The devil is in the details.

But of course, that money was not all spent at one time. I'd long gotten my money's worth out of that $200 Single Six when the XR3 and fancy walnut came around.

We're all of like mind but with slightly differing positions on the teeter totter.

That's a good way to put it.

 

[22-rimfire]

BC, I think Stainz started this thread to have a collective thread to make folks think about their choices when buying their first 22 revolver. In my opinion, they are usually dollars ahead of the game if they choose a good one after shooting it a while. Of course, there are always lemons. This is opposed to elliciting responses like ....I'm not spending $500 on a 22 revolver. I'll buy a 357 mag for that.

Stainz already has nice stuff as do I. I encourage people toward Smith products now because my favorite Colts have gotten so expensive. What? A Colt Diamondback 22 for $1200, I can buy a Smith for a lot less than that which of course I know. That's why I have been buying pre-lock Smiths for the last couple of years.

 

[JFrame]

Well i wish i had not looked at this thread because i have always liked 22's and not i have a desire for a 617 probably gonna be my next purchase. A 22 is hard to beat for just all around fun.

I hear ya...The S&W 617 hadn't even been on my radar of guns to get -- but now it might have gotten bumped up to the top of my list along with some sort of AR variant...


.

 

[BCRider]

22-rimfire, I didn't realize that was the goal. But it's certainly given up a lot of good thoughts. Now hopefully the future "cheap gun shoppers" will find this and stop to think about what the difference is between a good bang for the buck and truly cheap.

As noted it doesn't always need to be a S&W, although those of us with them love them. I've seen lots of threads around here from folks that are happy with the better cheap options such as some of the lowly H&R's and some other less expensive .22 revolvers. Heck, even my very cheap Hi Standard Double 9 shot nicely once I got over the hellacious trigger pull even in single action mode.

 

[YumaKid]

Keep telling myself that I 'need' a .22 revolver for all of the reasons stated here. Probably "needed" a .22 wheelgun more than my two BP wheelguns; but I gotta say that I do love my Eye-tal-yun Remmies!

And BCRider; I'll see your 5 years on motorcycles and raise you 10 years of horses (and harnesses, saddles, trailers, farriers, vetrinarians, 24K-"gold-plated" alfalfa hay, the list goes on and on and on) - see which one of us has to fold and leave the table first!

Back on-topic for the OP: IMHO, the best .22 revolver would be a K-Frame S&W that hasn't been used to drive railroad spikes during its lifespan.
"24-yr-old single-malt taste on a Coors budget" means that I don't have one yet - but that doesn't mean I don't poke around in pawnshops regularly, looking for that elusive buried treasure!

 

[Stainz]

I have no question about the worth of a good DA-capable .22 revolver. Three years ago, I sold my ten plus year old Ruger MKII, a KMK-678GC, eight mags, HiViz sights, scope rail, scope, etc - all pristine - to fund most of my new 4" 617's cost. As I could, I regripped it, changed the springs, changed the front sight, added DS-10 speedloader, etc. I had a window of opportunity to purchase a LNIB 5" 63 from a friend's estate - did so - improved it as I could. I sold more goodies to pay for my 3" 63, when it arrived before Thanksgiving.



I have a good retirement income. It's less take home now than it was ten+ years ago due to medical premium increases ($204/month last October, for example!). Add my SS retirement, and I'm staying above water. What's a 'COLA', anyhow? But - every purchase - new S&W or parts - is a concession - if this, not that. Everyone feels 'the pinch' - it will get worse. Plinking with a .22 will extend your shooting in dire times. I am blessed, no doubt. Some severe soul searching can likely reveal some 'excess' tools or even firearms you can convert into new revolver(s). I, after realizing my woodworking days were numbered (After the return of my childhood asthma!), even sold some cypress, oak, and walnut I had, as well as some bench and stationary tools. I never thought cypress I bought nearly 15 yr ago at $.82/bf would get $6/bf - and the buyer thought it was a deal! It's all in just how important things are to you.

Stainz

 

[.45Guy]

Why does it have to be double action? I enjoy the Hell out of my 400 dollar Ruger....

 

[Hanzo581]

I am going to start taking 22s to the range more, just picked up a new Marlin Model 60, for the price of the gun and of course the ammo it takes, you just can't beat it.

 

[22-rimfire]

Yeah, I like the M60 too. I just hope the quality control doesn't go down much with production moving to NY.

 

[Hanzo581]

Mine was made in Kentucky, am I safe?

 

[22-rimfire]

That is where Remington makes the 597's. I hope you're safe. I just figured production would go to Ilion. Guess it's Western KY for the M60.

 

[powwowell]

I have owned a 617 and a 63. Fantastic reviolvers. I liked the older 63 over the 617. A lot more. You'll hear no knocks against them from me.

But, I sold them both and picked up a used Taurus 94, SS with a 4" barrel. I like it the best. The fit and finish is good. It is accurate and has gone bang every time. So, the DA trigger pull is outrageous. I knew that going in. In short, the 94 serves my .22lr revolver needs.

The worse .22lr handgun I ever had, came from Charter Arms. The new Charter Arms. The second worse was a Heritage Rough Rider. It worked, but it shot way low and way way left. I'm definitely not a gun snob.

I'm looking forward to the new Ruger SP101 in .22lr. But, for now my 94 fills the bill.

 

[Gato Montés]

Hey Stainz, those M63's with the 60 Pro grips look OUTSTANDING! The three inch strikes me as being near perfection!

Speaking of the 63, how is the trigger pull in comparison to other J-Frames; bout the same (heavy)?

 

[oldfool]

"Speaking of the 63, how is the trigger pull in comparison to other J-Frames; bout the same (heavy)?"

Stainz hasn't gotten back yet, so...

(mine is the old model 4" 63, also have the 4" model 651 WMR)
yes, compared to a k-17 or k-48, it will feel heavy, to be expected J vs K

mainspring is also tad stiffer for reliable rimfire ignition than a typical centerfire J
so mine do feel a bit heavy vs. my snubbie J-60.. but you get used to it real quick, no problem, rapid DA shooting fun

 

[GLOOB]

Before you shot up the entire sixth bulk pack of .22's, actually in less than 3k rounds, you'd have broken even - your ammo cost savings would have 'paid' for that 617!

And if you get a Buckmark/MkIII and a McFadden Ultimate Cliploader, your gun can pay for itself in one crazy session!

 

[Gato Montés]

(mine is the old model 4" 63, also have the 4" model 651 WMR)
yes, compared to a k-17 or k-48, it will feel heavy, to be expected J vs K

mainspring is also tad stiffer for reliable rimfire ignition than a typical centerfire J
so mine do feel a bit heavy vs. my snubbie J-60.. but you get used to it real quick, no problem, rapid DA shooting fun

Thanks, figured as much.

I would love to have a nice light trigger but I don't want to give up the portability and weight savings of the J frame. As a plus it will probably be a good trainer for my 642.

Still gonna wait to see what the Ruger is all about, but if the triggers match I'll stick with the 3 inch 63.

 

[Brian Williams]

For me I chose a S&W 35-1, a J frame with adjustable sights and a 6" barrel.
It would be better with a 5" barrel.

 

[Stainz]

My 5" 63 was 24 rounds from new when I bought it, so it was pretty stiff. I smoothed the trigger rebound slide, cleaned and lightly lubed the innards, linstalled the middle rebound spring, and installed the strongest Wolff hammer spring from their J-frame kit. I didn't check the OAL of the HiViz sight I used - just it's height - it overhangs at the rear of the sight ramp ~1/16" - but works great! Great improvements - still not as smooth or as light as the similarly treated 617. The 3" 63 came - right out of the box - brand new - as good as the 'tricked' 5". After breakin, the 3" 63 is close to my 4" 617 in lightness and smoothness. All references to the triggers refer to DA - they were the usual VG+ in SA right out of the box - improved to Exc+ post breakin.

The Ruger Single Six I owned for a short time some years back, a beautiful 'commemorative' model, was a heck of value. It's fixed sights were way off - a horrible experience - short lived, too. If I'd sprung for a SS Super Single Six, ie, one with an adjustable sight, I'd likely still have it. The moral here is simple - buy 'enough' revolver! A couple of range-friends tried the Heritage 'Rough' Riders - and the Taurus 94. You can get a good 94 - but it's trigger will still be stout.

Stainz

 

[Rodentman]

I had a Taurus 94 but couldn't deal with the trigger. It just wasn't a fun gun for me. I traded it for a 617 and am much happier.



As far as the "learning about money" goes, I'm still working on that.

 

[welldoya]

This thread reminds me of one of my favorite old Colt ads :