Why does a .22 airweight cost more than a .38 airweight?

[MikePGS]

I was looking on budsgunshop.com and noticed that a 442/642 is actually a hundred dollars or so less than a 317 airweight, which is kind of funny because I imagine some people would like a .22 for low cost practicing (obviously its an ammo issue, but still). Is it that much harder to make a .22, or is it simply a supply and demand issue, since the 642/442's seem to be quite popular?

 

[Spartacus451]

Economy of scale I imagine. There is less demand for the .22 model compared to the 442/642 which sell like hot cakes and are on the of the greatest products they have ever made. IMHO ;-)

 

[ugaarguy]

Here's my answer from when this was asked a few months ago:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=4559365&postcount=3

The 317 is almost entirely aluminum, to include the 8 round cylinder and steel sleeved bbl. Machining 8 chambers, flutes, and stop notches is much more involved than Machining 5 of the same on each cylinder. Sleeving an aluminum barrel shroud with a rifled steel barrel involves several more steps than just rifling a steel barrel. It's also rimfire, so the hammer, mainspring , internal firing pin, and several other parts have to be different than the rest of the J frames. The 8 round cylinder also requires it's own action parts so it's timed properly. There isn't a huge market for 22 revolvers either.

Essentially you have a relatively low production gun that requires several more machining processes than similar models, and it shares very few parts with them. That kills the economy of scale seen across the rest of the J frame line.

 

[WardenWolf]

Additionally, because it's a smaller bore, there's extra material in areas that are simply not practical to shave off, either due to mechanical reasons or physical size reasons. Effectively, despite being a smaller caliber, there's probably a similar or even higher metal weight.

 

[MikePGS]

Ahh thank you. Sorry, I should have searched.

 

[AppBrookie]

I got 317 w/ the 3in barrel about a month ago, I am impressed by it. However, I never would have purchased it without a steep discount(leo) and rebate.
I tried two seperate Taurus 94's, both brand new out of the box had lite pin strike problems and the dealer credited my money back. It is ashamed S&W does not have an affordable 22lr.

 

[JayL]

My first gun was the 317 in 3" and I really like it. It has also been a great gun to take first time shooters out with. It is bigger than you might think, though. My 637 pretty much disappears into a pocket, and you can't do that with the 317 as easily. It WAS more expensive than my 637, but cheaper and more comfortable to shoot, and a lot quieter.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

AppBrookie,
You are so right about it being a shame S&W doesn't have an affordable .22. I would really like to buy a M63 but I just can't see spending $550 on a .22 Caliber revolver. I really would like one though, a 8 shot J frame with a 5" barrel would be a nice little .22 for sure.

 

[johnnylaw53]

When S&W began making the new M63 I was disappointed that the 5" barrel was all they were making. Wasn't it offer in a 3" when it first came out years ago? Seem like that would make an ideal little kit gun.

Be safe

 

[Stainz]

Because they are worth it?

Okay, maybe if they kept their pricing from ~5 years back, they'd be a lot closer. After that SHOT Show, they reduced the 642/637, etc, by nearly a C-note to bolster sales, which had been lacking due to the .357M Airweights. The result was a rush on the .38's, making them the S&W best sellers. High volume also keeps the price down, while the machining of the 8-shot cylinder does demand more CNC time. Of course, if I could have a 317 Kit Gun for a 637 price, Santa would have me an Aluminum goodie under the Aluminum Christmas tree!

Stainz

 

[JFrame]

When S&W began making the new M63 I was disappointed that the 5" barrel was all they were making. Wasn't it offer in a 3" when it first came out years ago? Seem like that would make an ideal little kit gun.

The Model 63 may have come in a 3" configuration, but all I've seen are 2" and 4" versions...

My 63 with the 4" barrel is arguably my all-time favorite handgun...