Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Rimfires S&W .22 Kit gun.

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.