Any experiences. Pros, cons? Debating the 12oz revolver, or the 31oz Ruger semi-auto.

Application? As most of my favorites lay between said spectrum.

Hey BIGSTICK..

Nobody gives a schit what you think.

Undoubtedly you are a far better follower than a leader.

And you suck cock.

You'd stand in line for mine,if only obviously. Your taste in men is not to be slighted.

Sorry, I am straight-you are the cock sucker here.


When you aren't busy molesting girls on your fishing trips.

Your version of straight,is crooked.

...and here I thought I got some decent feedback. 24hr is going downhill fast.

Cite the application and feedback will flourish,while jim62 whines.

This is ridiculous - I have both and use both in different roles. The Ruger .22/45 has a red dot and is used for small game on private property ONLY - illegal to hunt with a semi-auto in Pennsylvania, and for casual - very accurate shopoting. The S&W 4" revolver rides my hip during deer season and has taken a few delicious porcupines who would not stop eating our front porch and finished a few white tails who were on the ground but still breathing (and suffering.) Both are exceptional weapons. Pick what works for your application and shoot a whole bunch of ammo - you will be surprised what you will be able to hit and the range at which you will be able to hit it.

Terry

Where's the best place to shoot a Deer and with what cartridge/bullet combo,so as to arrange enough time to get close and work over with a 4" rimfire wheelgun before it expired via the initial centerfire carnage? Great insight!

Had a 4" in both a 34 and 17, what model is yours Terry?

63 by landslide.

I like revolvers for field work. A 12 oz one would be tough for me to hit with though. My Taurus 94 and 651 both weigh right at 24 oz. I would like an alloy frame and a five inch barrel in paradise.

I pack a 651 22 Magnum for a kit gun and for grouse. I use solids a lot on edible stuff. The solids will go through pretty much anything you might need to. need to. An elk skull for instance.

I gave my Ruger semi to the youngest boy. He doesn't hunt much and it is at is best on tin cans.

I have a 3" 317 and can't hit crap with it, I use it for a trapline gun dispatching at a distance of feet. Nice to carry and adequate for that purpose. If I'm hunting or plan to pot something I carry a heavier revolver like a Single Six (4 5/8) or a Taurus 92 4".

A Ransom Rest would resolve where the shortcomings lie.

From another site it seems the prevailing wisdom is that the Kit Gun has much too heavy a trigger for such a light pistol making it difficult to hit much over 20 yards. I think I will consider S&W's K=frame 10 shot, or a Ruger semi-auto.

For the most part it will be a plinker but also do some time out on the boat, so stainless will be a must. It will also double as a backpack snake and squirrel gun for which I'm learning the Kit gun not a strong contender.

Thanks gents, I have it narrowed to a 4" Ruger Hunter, or the 4" Smith 617.

Again,the 63 trumps all and easily. The 617 can't hang.

Thanks, I'll look into the 63, does S&W still make a 63 or will I be looking used?

Curious though, the 63 is an 8 shot as opposed to 10, what about the 63 in your opinion makes it superior to the 617?

If a wheel has more than 6 holes in it,you are doing yourself no favors. Current versions pale to elder,in all regards.

Consider a polymer M22/45, with a Tactical Solutions aluminum Paclite upper, except that Tac-Sol builds their products in Idaho! (and YOU hate Idaho )

Only thing about Idaho I don't like, is the distance to the ocean.

That being said, I'm not sure what you are suggesting, a M22/45? A .22 conversion for a .45?

A LW upper for POS ergos. Stay the course of the wheel,given the application.

The S&W 63 is a great little gun for what you want to do. I have one of the six shooters and havent' handled the 8 shot version but don't see why they wouldn't work too.

I've shot a few and they don't lack for accuracy although I think a narrower front sight would be a great help. The 63 should be as accurate as the 617 or 17 they are just lighter and will show the errors in technique more.

Luckily,your ability to savvy isn't a mechanical reality.

Even on private company, an SA will be illegal for small game. dispatching wounded deer you shot with a rf is also illegal in PA .... or have the laws changed?

Don't be taking bait offa my station.

A Ruger Mark 2, not the new 3, in SS, 4.25" with a little trigger job and if needed drift punch the rear for windage and file the front down if need (likely to shoot high as mine did) and the gun will be light enough, steady enough, dead nuts reliable, and very low maintenance, OH and it will shoot like the Target model if you can hold it. OH, original 'luger style grip angle' not the '45' grip model fits me MUCH better. I think for a field piece 22 semi - a Mark 2 is hard to beat.

Larry is right on the 63 vs. 617 - had a 34 J frame, a 17 K frame OLD style, Heavy bbl but NO full lug under the barrel. The 617 - had a 4 inch, TOO heavy for one all day every day on the hip for me. Sold mine long ago. I believe my older 80s era 17 (ran that 17-4 or 5 around 85-88) outshot MY 617.

A 651 can do some neat work with harder bullets.

A 63 can have larger grips installed for a more secure hold if one has large hands.

Rugers are heavy in all regards,though in fairness...robust. Surprised noone has mentioned the S&W 422 ilk.

Get a J frame Smith...

My bad,I knew the 63 to be a J.

Or, even lighter and more compact, a first series Woodsman Sport...

Take the time to explain how a Colt is "lighter". It will be VERY funny!

You got me there, stick. I only got the last half of yer quote. Was actually comparing to the rugers ya mentioned...

wise ass I was advising the OP

She needs more than a little help.

A M63 with its 4" barrel weighs 1lb, 9oz.

A Woodsman 1st model Woodsman target with its 6 1/2" barrel weighs 1lb, 12 oz.

The Woodsman balances and shoots better than the M63 for me.

In my view the Woodsman is far more desireable.

Crossed eyes aren't a viable source of "intel",but the humor IS appreciated.

The only thing I do not like about my older 63 is the orange insert on the stainless front blade, would much rather have a simple black front ramp. Mine is from about 1986 and the best trigger job on a factory smith without any work done.

JM, what is the source of those grips? I thought I might have asked you before and can not find it anywhere.

Elder is more esteemed and sight inserts readily swapped.

I never found a set of grips/stocks for a S&W J-frame that would fit my hand as well as the Eagle finger-grooves on my S&W K-frames do, so whenever I buy a J-frame, I end up selling it. I sold a 651 to a guy in WY awhile back and returned to my most often carried kit guns, the humble Rossi 515 and 720.

JEff

Of the 422/622/2206 series, I like the heavier stainless 2206 the best. 1 thing that I don't like about the whole series is the cocking indicator pin at the base of the grip frame. When I bought my 1st 422 in 1987/88, I put a couple of dents in the left side of the stock on a Ruger 77 RSI when I was carrying the 422 in a belt holster on my right side. Now, I usually carry my 422/622/2206s backward, butt-forward, on my left side if I'm planning to carry a long gun with a wood stock.

JEff

PS - If you have a 422/622/2206, I highly recommend the nylon/plastic target grips/stocks that GPC sells for about $12. GPC's part # 728720. These grips/stocks are thicker and have a more rounded contour than the factors wood or plastic grips/stocks, or at least it seems so to me.

The K frame 22's are too big for me:


I prefer the J frame ones:



Or an old model Woodsman:

You know what Safe Queens have in common? Nothing. Which is profound.

What I'm suggesting .... consider the Ruger MkII, but the polymer 22/45 version specifically - considerably lighter weight than the all-steel framed version.

Then google Tactical Solutions out of Boise. They make an aluminum replacement upper for the Ruger pistols as well as Browning Buckmark. Open the site and give 'em a careful look.

A smith '63 or other J-frame is okay for a revolver (kit size), or model 17 for full-size ..... Nice revolvers, certainly!

But decide for yourself whether to get a wheelgun or pistol (not some lame-brained newby doing a poor job of a hardsell). Tactical Solutions makes an excellent product and saves a lot of weight! Giving a Ruger or Browning at least a 4inch length barrel.

Give it a looksee.

Actually if I ever get to talk F-t-F with Tac-Sel (when visiting Boise) I'd like to ask them if they would build a 10inch (or 8in) upper for the Ruger! A 10inch .22RF barrel shooting 'long rifles' still gives 93-94 percent of the performance one would get from a 16in tube shooting the .22LR.

OTOH, if small size is the most important feature desired, North American Arms makes their Mini-Master wheelgun with a 4in tube.

A model 43 is better yet.

Another thought would be a Bearcat, been toting one a long time and it does a right fair job.

For a day of woods loafing, there isn't anything much sweeter than a S&W Kit Gun with a tuned trigger, unless it's a pre-war Colt Woodsman. I own both and it is an eternal struggle which one to grab for a day of strolling in the woods. My S&W 2206 is the most accurate of all my .22 handguns, but my least favorite for some reason. It'll out shoot the Colt OM Match and 5-screw K-22, and that's saying something. The latter 3 are just more heavier than what I like hanging on my belt when all that's required is a .22 for plinking. JMO, which is worth a bucket of spent primers.

Stainless on stainless,has no peer.

Here's my array of kit guns:



Not all .22's, but all j frames....Have some experience with Buckmarks and Ruger's of various persuasions. Had a bearcat but couldn't get it to fit my hand very well, no matter how hard I tried. Single six was accurate but heavy for the caliber. Like my 22/45 and my buckmarks, along with my j-frames. Had a scandium j frame with a 3" barrel that carried great but I couldn't seem to hit with it very well.

They all have their high points.

TominBoise ..... I appreciate your post, but shifting gears a little (and you) being from Idaho, how often do you have targets of opportunity (camp meat via grouse or bunnies or hares) to use those hiking companions?

It was after three different 'hikes' or scouting trips where I came within stick-throwing distance of ruff grouse that I started looking for smallish or pocket-size .22 HG's. Of course at 3-4 foot distances a good CF wheelgun with snake shot should be effective too!

Fair amount of grouse here in the areas I hunt or hang out in. Not so many bunnies or hares, unless you count jack rabbits in the sage desert areas. Most of the grouse end up pretty close, like you said, and you could use shot or some other means. I try to head shoot, when I shoot.

Mostly I end up shooting rocks and things that present themselves that need shooting....

Most people don't know how infested Idaho is with the dreaded Western Diamondback rock. Those things are everywhere - they scuff your shoes, stub your toes, bruise your hands, they're plumb dangerous.

I also try to shoot as many as I can find...

'Western Diamondback rock !! ??' Thats also good to know!

I grew up in N.W. Florida, and actually saw 'few' snakes of the dreaded-kind because I always tried looking where I stepped or 'reached' (still never have ever walked into a buzztail buzzing!). Despite seeing every weird snake in FL at least once or twice (coral snakes and the scarlet king snake often confused with them, and even copperheads that were at their extreme southern range where my famm lived. Cottonmouths OTOH were too common and indeed mean and agressive!)

I'm eyeballing Idaho for a future residence.....

A couple or more good sidearms sound more and more like necessary tools!! (.357 AND .44 or .45C )

I prefer the Ruger single six, have had the Ruger 22/45, great shooting, accurate but a chore to take down and clean, you need a brass punch and a rubber mallet.

i have an older model 34-1 with the 4" barrel. it is really nice to carry and accurate enough for mid range small game shooting.

Wow.

Laffin.....try a model 43.....thank me later.

Alloys wheels ain't how long term satisfactions are garnered. GREAT Safe Queens though.

Forty years of satisfaction so far and not much of it in a safe. It's been drowned a time or two, once when capsized shortly after ice out. A little care and cleaning and it came through it fine.

Akin to 25yr old boots...long way of saying the wares set idle.

Not exactly idle but I didn't break it in by throwing down a shale slide.

Use does things to wares,that unuse cain't. Seen it(often).

OK, you win.

Do you figger there's any 'uses' left in mine? Or should I put it away for about 39 years? Thanks!

Looks like it ruined that rabbit's whole day.

Try knocking the new off it. Pistoles keep amazingly well,in the dark on the shelf.

It'd be .357 AND .44 AND .45C....

Do I knock the 'new' off it like breaking in a cow barreled rifle? Can the shelf be padded? Or does it have to be plain ol' wood? I'm kinda new to this whole pistolie thing. Really appreciate all the help.....Thanks!

I can only get you to water,but admit a preference to your not partaking. Keep up your harrowing hard use chronicles,it really is something!

After owning and hunting several .22 handguns, I've settled on two. One is a 12.5 oz. S&W .22 LR model 317, and the other is a Ruger Stainless Convertible. Both work very well, but do have their drawbacks.
I've never found a .22 auto, and that includes a couple of Colt Woodsman's, and a Ruger auto whose safety I trusted. While very accurate, they aren't very light. So I prefer a revolver. I like the Ruger Convertible because I've found the .22 magnum rimfire to be significantly better a small game round. But I will give the Smith K-22's their due as they have excellent triggers, hold steady and are very accurate.
The Smith 317 is a very nice gun. So light, it feels like you aren't wearing a gun. Plenty accurate and easy enough to hit whatever I need to hit between 10-15 yds. But, beyond that, I need more weight to hold it steady enough to hit the small stuff.
I'd still like to try the 651's, but I'm a little dismayed by their sharp report. It's bad enough in a 5.5 inch barrel.
As with many choices in guns, it's a matter of matching your needs with your abilities and your reguirements. E

'understand' about weight considerations, and no-knocking the versatility to shoot LR's or WRM's in a wheelgun .....

My first so-called ltwt Ruger auto was a 22/45 (frame) I combined with the RST MkII 4-inch upper. That was before finding Tactical Solutions ( their alloy uppers still retain and use the steel bolt/springs and all inner parts).

One POS .22 I briefly owned was a Phoenix Arms HP-22. Literally made of pop-metal! Fired some Stingers in it once. First one magazine of Stingers, and then only part of a second when it started coming apart!! Though amazing very accurate, junked the damn thing at the next gun show, using the proceeds to buy a used Mk I Ruger.

only when you let it get to ya. lol I keep most of the trolls on ignore, so unless someone copies their silliness, I don't see it.
I have a model 34 S&W kit gun and a Model 63. I loaned the blue 34 to my Brother, and he has had it for a few years now. Says it works fine.
The 63 is my constant hiking and camping companion. Including the holster, it weighs 27 ounces.
Squirrel accurate Mike, at 25 yards. Goes for birds too.

Beautiful 63! Might be my next purchase.


ddj

Another Kit gun with some friends.

DF

Here is a picture of my Kit Gun.


ddj

Barkoff,

Lot of good responses above, as noted above.

Had the 12.5 ounce S&W 317, though they are accurate off a bench I found it very hard to shoot offhand, the hammer drop on that light of a pistol is a factor.

The S&W 34 and the 63 are the same size frame (S&W's smallest at this time) blued & stainless respectively. For a 4 inch you have to buy used. Presently S&W only sells a 3 inch version, It catalogues at 26 ounces. They recently discontinued a 5 inch version of the 63, occaissionally one pops up for sale. Like weight, barrel length is a factor in ability to shoot accurately...the longer the better.

The S&W 17, 18 (4 inch only) and 617 are the next larger frame size. They were/are avail. in 4, 6 or 8 3/8 inch barrels. They are easier to shoot accurately, but are quite a bit heavier than the 34 or 63. I've not had nor shot the 617, but for some unknown reason S&W decided to put a full underlug on the barrel and many find them too heavy to tote about the field. The 17 & 18 are used only options while the 617 is S&W's current offering...the present and limited exception to this is either Davidson's or Lipsey's had a special run of the 18's done for them, not sure if they are still avail. Personally I'm not too keen on these as a kit gun...as my S&W 17 weighs 40 ounces.

Also, Ruger recently re-introduced their SP 101 in 22 LR; 4.2 inch barrel and weighs 30 ounces. They are now just becoming available. Not as light as the S&W Kit Gun (34 or 63), and Ruger's triggers generally don't compare with Smith's, but they excel in durability.

For Single action Kit guns Ruger has the Bearcat; 4 inch barrel, weighs around 25 ounces and is avail (or was?) in stainless. And they can be had for much less than a S&W 34 or 63. I've had a few of the single six's, but not one of the Bearcat's.

I've had a couple of Ruger's MK II pistols and presently have 3 of their MK III 22/45's. The MK III's initially didn't impress me, the triggers are sad to say the least. A Voquartsen replacement sear and a replacement hammer bushing (sam lam's..go to the MK III forum of rimfire central for more info) is a major improvement to these pistols. I've got 2 of the Tactical Solution's Barrel/Receivers that stubble duck is waxing about. My 8 1/2" 22/45 with a Tactical Solutions barrel only weighs 26 ounces.

The other pistol I have extensive experience with is the discontinued Colt Woodsman. They came in 4 1/2 and 6 inch barrels, are accurate, have excellent triggers, are a lot trimmer than the Ruger pistols and weigh 32 ounces. The Ruger pistols can not compare to them in any way, Downside, folks are asking around $700 for them.

The Colt Woodsman and the Bottom Ruger (minus the Red Dot) are my choice for field carry;


If I were picking up a 'Kit Gun'...It would be between the S&W 34 or 63 (3 or 4 inch barrel), a Ruger SP 101 or a Ruger Bearcat, or if flush with cash a 2nd Model Colt Woodsman with a 4 1/2 inch barrel.

Jerry

"Actually if I ever get to talk F-t-F with Tac-Sel (when visiting Boise) I'd like to ask them if they would build a 10inch (or 8in) upper for the Ruger! A 10inch .22RF barrel shooting 'long rifles' still gives 93-94 percent of the performance one would get from a 16in tube shooting the .22LR." Stubbleduck

Stubbleduck...Tactical Solutions used to make their barrels in 8 1/2" and 10 inch lengths. There are only (maybe) a few left in the pipeline, so if you can you should pick one up immed., Try searching Paul Zint who has a good price on the 8 1/2 inchers or emailing (don't think they listed them on their website) Rimfire Sports who has (had?) both.

http://www.rimfiresports.com/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=RSC&Category_Code=TS

Thank you for all of the replies, I think I'll go with the 63 as soon as I get this one sold. I just got the paperwork back from the DOJ, so sometime within the next couple months I'll get it sold.

Barkoff: The stainless Model 63 S&W is an awesome little tool and just about worry free.
I have 3 of them (two 4 inchers and a 2") along with a S&W Model 651 in 4" (the 22 Magnum, 6 shot in 4").
Be sure and try the Winchester gray box Power-Points for accuracy and lethality in your Model 63.
Best of luck selling your pistol - by the way if I may ask what model and price range is it?
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

260 Rem,

What holster do you carry your 422/622/2206s in? I'm curious since I have several 422s and 622s but have never seen a holster made for them, just generic cordura types that don't really fit well since they seem to be made for thicker pistols.

Chris

I believe it is a model 48-2 in .22mag. It's a nice old gun, but I want something I can use and not worry about. That old mag I don't think has been fired, and can't see dinging up what others would value more as a collectable than myself. Plus, not to fond of an 8" barrel. Not sure about price yet, haven't really looked much at that. I almost sold it for $700 a few months back, but the buyer got cold feet when I told him I wasn't sure if it had ever been registered, I think he thought it might be hot. I sent my $13 into the DOJ, and just received back the paperwork.

Barkoff: I see - thank you for the clarification and explanation.
Good luck selling the Model 48 - I have a couple of them (1970's era models) one with 4" barrel and another with the 8 3/8" barrel.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Love my 63. It's my constant companion, and I have owned both.

Yea, me too.

Been running the steel gongs at the pistola range for fun....
Double action only, two, two and two.... Gotta love it!
Guess I should buy a speed loader...somtin to drop in the dirt...

My 63 has been a great platform for teaching DIL's from non-shooting fam's the great sport of shooting..

It's surprising how a non shooter, starting out on shorts and progressing to LR, see's shooting in a whole new light.

Revolver's my favorite, too. Of the .22 semi-autos you might consider the 1911/22's. The Woodsman is another I regret selling.

Decisions, decisions....

I think some full sized stag grips are in order.

Buddy let me shoot a 63 and I am sold. A Colt Detective Special put my plans on hold but a 63 is due in the house once I get some more funds.

hehehe.....

You are bad influence Don. That 63 experience sold me. I really like the little Colt I got though so no worries on the wait. If things slow down in Jan would love to shoot some more with you.

Kurt, you guys come out anytime.

By all means carry what you feel is safe but I carried a 22/45 while coon hunting in very rough terrain for the better part of the decade with nary an issue and the safety never disengaged without my hand doing the work. Partner carried it's twin, same result. I've never even heard of an issue carrying a ruger semi with one in the pipe.

The 22/45 mention by 65BR is a good option as is the Browning micro. Ruger comes in a 30oz and the Browning at 32oz. The Browning has adjustable sights. But alas neither is still available in stainless and used 4.5" MKII's and used Browning Micro's are rare as hen's teeth. So if stainless is a requirement you're on your own. If you find one let me know, I'm in the market.

The only "kit" sized .22 revolver I have experience with is the Bearcat and we couldn't hit crap with it and on the semi auto front I've also tried the HP22 and the Bersa. Accuracy also suffered. Mine or the guns I don't know but it did and accuracy was definitely worse in my hands than Single Six's, Ruger MK's, Buckmarks and even H&R revolvers. YMMV

CB

I can hit just as well with my Bearcat as I can with my no dash 63 after I did a trigger job on the Ruger.

How about the original kit gun?





I love this little revolver, it will group pretty good at 70 yards no problem.

Winnie1300: I have never fired any of my open sighted pistols for group out at 70 yards!
I think its because I had a hard enough time qualifying when there was a 50 yard part of the course - not just 7 yards, 15 and 25 yards.
What would be your average group size with that Kitgun there at 70 yards?
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I shoot at a steel target with a 12 inch face. I guesstimated and the group was about six inches for five shots.

How much drop are you seeing at that range? As a youngster, my buddies and I loved banging targets against a clay bank at 100 yds. with .44 mags. We could keep them pretty close at that range. Probably why I have tinnitus to this day. Only if I knew then what I know now...

DF

I hold maybe foot above where the rounds hit. Six inches above the target.

Love 'em all.

I'm probably alone in not liking the M34, but the one I had back in the Seventies wasn't a good example. Part of that's likely to have been the really bad quality we saw in some handguns back when you had to stand in line to get a Smith. Mine was a nickel 4", and it was impossible to get a sight picture with the nickel front sights from the glare, but also I had to hammer the empties out of the cylinder after firing them, and that left interesting marks on my palm. I went to various versions of Beretta semi-auto 22s and have stayed with them since then with no regrets.