.22 handgun

[notos&w]

Gun Nut - yep, it was a sigma. ashamed to admit it but it had been recommended by a national police pistol shooter and a friend. learned my lesson about taking advice w/o verification.
my father in laws 4006 is a nice, if not incredibly heavy, gun. all stainless steel it'll last a lifetime.

 

[Raven]

I think I've found a gun that interest me.

http://www.gunblast.com/SandW_317.htm

This is the new smith and wesson aluminum hybrid, and it looks like it meets all my requirements. I wonder if this gun will wear out faster, because it's built partially from aluminum.

Raven

 

[Anarchocap]

The gun will *CERTAINLY* wear faster. That is just the fact of Aluminum vs. Steel.

Oh, and by the way, its not partially built from aluminum, its *MOSTLY* built from aluminum. The only thing steel between the cylinder, frame, and barrel is the steel insert in the barrel.

Aluminum guns are normally considered "carry-a-lot shoot-a-little" weapons. You will probably get 1/3 the life of an equivalent steel gun.

 

[txwest]

Raven,
I think you've made a good choice for your use. It's doubtful that you'll ever wear it out plinking. The light presures & recoil of a .22 isn't going to bother today's alum alloy handgun. I know you'll like the weight after carrying it a couple of hrs. Wish they offered a 4" barell option, but the 3" will probably do fine. TX

 

[logical]

Buy whatever you want of course...I always do....but I disagree with the choice of the S & W 317 kit gun.

A 3 " barrel is too short to have even semi serious target shootng.

The gun is very expensive (relatively).

I understand peoples reluctance to buy a Taurus 94...mine happened to be a good one, but I agree their revolvers are a crapshoot.

I'd suggest a Ruger SP-101 in 4" or find a used S & W 63...something like this:

http://www.gunbroker.com/auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=6745450

 

[Albany Tom]

Well, it looks nice to me. Their airweight and snub guns have always been built well, and they do usually have good triggers. Three pounds? If so, that's good. You'll have something that you can shoot better than the 80% or better of LEO's that are probably carrying DAO autos.

On wear - yes, aluminum will wear faster - But -consider that a .22 should last for tens of thousands of rounds if taken care of, that S&W, as long as they're around, will take care of the gun, and that aluminum is FAR better than the polymer stuff that many LEO's are carrying.

You won't win any matches with it, but it should work just fine out to 25 yards, and with that nice glowing front sight, you'll be better off than most at twilight time.

Plus, if you ever want a carry gun (please don't carry the .22), you can get an airweight .38, and already be comfortable with it.

Sounds like a good choice to me.

 

[webley445]

The S&W Airweight Kit guns should have a heck of alot more of a trigger than 3lbs from the factory, usually 6 or more. I read that initially it misfired alot due to light weight construction so heavier spring was used, thus making the trigger pull very heavy. I think the misfire aspect of .22 revolvers is inherent with the use of rimfire ammo. I also dry fired one once at a shop and it felt alot heavier than 3 lbs.

 

[Albany Tom]

I would have assumed they would be more than 3, too, but that was from the review web page somewhere above. 2.5lbs is about right for a target .22 semi, sounds like it would be possible for the single action pull of a .22 revolver, but then again I'm not a revolver guy.

I had my High Standard gradually work it's way down to about 1.5 pounds once, that was pretty sweet, but too light. Not enough control for rapid fire. Bringing it up to match legal weight was tough getting used to, though!

.22 pistols do have a misfire reputation, especially if using some Remmington ammo. Sounds terrible to say, but it's been true for 10-15 years or more. I think they're setup for rifles, which have a heavier hit. I've had very good luck with Federals, though. CCI usually good, but lately has been driving people nuts.