Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 10/24/2006 7:59:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/24/2006 8:01:01 PM EST by JeepCherokee]
I want to get a 22 revolver. I've narrowed my choices down to these two:

A Smith & Wesson 317 Airlight - this is an 8 shot 22lr, I'm looking at the model with wood grips and 1 1/8" barrel. I heard heard a rumor that the trigger on this one sucks. Any truth to this?

or

A Smith & Wesson 617 - this is a 10 shot 22lr, I would be looking at one with either a 4" or 6" barrel, I haven't decided yet. Does anyone know the difference between the 6 shot and the 10 shot models?

Both are about $500, and mostly used for plinking.


Which would you get and why?
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:09:09 AM EST
I have a 617 10-shot and it is fine revolver that never misses a trip to the range.

IMO, a .22 revolver is primarily a plinking and informal target shooting gun, so I would select the longer sight radius of the 617 to best realize the potential accuracy.

Snubbies are BUGs that should be chambered in major calibers.

I think you will get more enjoyment out of the 617, because it's any easy handgun to shoot accurately. I use it to introduce new shooters to the sport and they always enjoy it because they can quickly get decent results. Their subsequent results with centerfire pistols are usually more humbling.
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 11:05:26 AM EST
Love my K22 (pre-mod17 6" bbl) but a 4" bbl on a K frame feels best to me,
Smith used to make a J frame .22 kit gun that was very nice (a smaller frame), were I to get another .22 revolver I would buy the J frame, fits me better
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 8:21:14 PM EST
I tried the trigger on a Model 317 when it first came out and it was really heavy.

Plus, since it’s lightweight and has both fixed sights and a really short barrel, I’d think accurate shooting would be a challenge.

Frankly, I don’t see the point of this pistol and if I were looking for something along these lines, I’d definitely go with the 317’s 3-inch version with its longer sight radius and adjustable sights. (Actually, I’d first look long and hard for a used S&W kit gun such as a Model 63 since IMHO they are much superior to the model 317.)

The 617 is a much nicer revolver to my mind, though a bit heavy with that barrel underlug. My understanding is the 6 shot version has a steel cylinder while the 10 shot version has an aluminum cylinder.

If I were going to get one of these, I’d go for the 10 shot version with the 4-inch barrel (the 6 inch just puts too much weight out front).

Even with the 4-inch barrel, the 617 is pretty heavy, but it looks like it’d be a lot of fun to shoot.
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 1:27:10 PM EST

Originally Posted By 199:

The 617 is a much nicer revolver to my mind, though a bit heavy with that barrel underlug. My understanding is the 6 shot version has a steel cylinder while the 10 shot version has an aluminum cylinder.

If I were going to get one of these, I’d go for the 10 shot version with the 4-inch barrel (the 6 inch just puts too much weight out front).

Even with the 4-inch barrel, the 617 is pretty heavy, but it looks like it’d be a lot of fun to shoot.


Th 10 shot 617 did at the beginning have an aluminum cylinder, but are now made with a steel one. I have the 4" model and really like it. Trigger is a little heavy compared to my tuned 686, but the rimfire needs good hammer pressure to reliably set off the rimfire rounds. I got mine used for around $425 or so and use it when I don't have any 38 Specials loaded up.
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 7:51:58 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/27/2006 7:52:19 PM EST by JeepCherokee]
You guys think I should get the 6" barrel over the 4"? No place in town has one in stock so I cant go fondle one.

Link Posted: 10/27/2006 8:20:34 PM EST
I wouldn't have had a problem getting the 6" version if it was offered to me at the price I got the 4" one I have. The longer sight radius would be a plus. The extra weight would not bother me. I shoot a 6" 686, so no big difference to me there.
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 9:38:33 PM EST
i shot a used 317 a long time ago when they first came out and it was a tack driver. The trigger sucked as you mentined. needless to say i was really surprised with the accuracy, but i opted for the 617. i would still get a 317 tho if i found a good deal.

when the 617 came out, they cylinders were made of aluminum w/inserts, but they didnt sell and S&W changed to all SS cylinder. i doubt you will find an aluminum cylinder 617 but who knows. Its easy to tell the dif when you see the aluminum cylinder in the SS frame/barrel too.

i have both 4 & 6" bbls in the 617. The 6" has a hogue gripper and after a while, i begin to feel the extra wt on the 6" barrel. thats why i bought the 4".

if youre using it for plinking, i dont think you can go wrong with any of your choices.

BTW. on any you opt to get, try to get the WO rear sight. its makes shooting black targets easier.
Link Posted: 10/27/2006 10:31:34 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/27/2006 10:32:07 PM EST by JeepCherokee]

Originally Posted By 22LR:
i shot a used 317 a long time ago when they first came out and it was a tack driver. The trigger sucked as you mentined. needless to say i was really surprised with the accuracy, but i opted for the 617. i would still get a 317 tho if i found a good deal.

when the 617 came out, they cylinders were made of aluminum w/inserts, but they didnt sell and S&W changed to all SS cylinder. i doubt you will find an aluminum cylinder 617 but who knows. Its easy to tell the dif when you see the aluminum cylinder in the SS frame/barrel too.

i have both 4 & 6" bbls in the 617. The 6" has a hogue gripper and after a while, i begin to feel the extra wt on the 6" barrel. thats why i bought the 4".

if youre using it for plinking, i dont think you can go wrong with any of your choices.

BTW. on any you opt to get, try to get the WO rear sight. its makes shooting black targets easier.


Thanks for the reply. Could you explain more on the WO rear site? What does WO stand for?

And where in Oregon are you?

Link Posted: 10/28/2006 6:03:58 AM EST
I think the WO stands for white outlined as in the rear sight notch has a white outline on it to make it easier to see.....never cared much for that myself.
Link Posted: 10/28/2006 4:11:55 PM EST

Originally Posted By JeepCherokee:

Originally Posted By 22LR:
i shot a used 317 a long time ago when they first came out and it was a tack driver. The trigger sucked as you mentined. needless to say i was really surprised with the accuracy, but i opted for the 617. i would still get a 317 tho if i found a good deal.

when the 617 came out, they cylinders were made of aluminum w/inserts, but they didnt sell and S&W changed to all SS cylinder. i doubt you will find an aluminum cylinder 617 but who knows. Its easy to tell the dif when you see the aluminum cylinder in the SS frame/barrel too.

i have both 4 & 6" bbls in the 617. The 6" has a hogue gripper and after a while, i begin to feel the extra wt on the 6" barrel. thats why i bought the 4".

if youre using it for plinking, i dont think you can go wrong with any of your choices.

BTW. on any you opt to get, try to get the WO rear sight. its makes shooting black targets easier.


Thanks for the reply. Could you explain more on the WO rear site? What does WO stand for?

And where in Oregon are you?




as sheldon stated, the WO is White Outline on the rear sight. i mostly shoot paper and with the black target, black front sight and black rear sight, its sometimes difficult whats what. thats why i say to look at the WO rear sight.

im in PDX
Top Top