need a 22 revolver

[flexjr]

i am going to buy a 22 revolver once uncle sam pays me back. i am thinking right now about the single six, one of the older charter arms pathfinders, or the older taurus 94. i want this for shooting 22 long rifles not the magnum, and if not for that, i would most likely go with the single six, since i have three blackhawks already. i know where a flattop round gate is for 450 but it has seen much better days and would require more money to get back good than i am interested in spending right now. i also know where an old model single six is that looks nearly new. were these bore diameters correct for 22 long rifles and not magnums that would shoot long rifles? the charter i have heard was a great gun in its day, but knowing two of the original bulldogs personally, their rear sight was not the best idea in the world and i have heard too much negative reviews on the new line charters. this brings me to the taurus. my dad has a 441 that will honestly shoot inch and a half groups at 1oo yards consistently. i think the 94 was made on that same frame. personally i prefer single actions for hunting and whatnot, but could be swayed to the dark side of double actions if there was a good enough case for them. i would consider an older smith,but i am sure that cost would be more than what i really want to spend on a 22 and the new smiths with the lock just don't appeal to me. it is like the high school beauty queen with a big ol pimple right on her nose-she may be pretty but all you see is that pimple. i would get a new ruger because i can ignore the grip located idiot safety altogether. any input would be greatly appreciated.
matt

[Ken ONeill]

I would buy a stainless New Model Single Six in whatever barrel length you prefer. My experience with owning and shooting Single Sixes goes back nearly fifty years. I bought 2 more last year and they are the best finished and fitted of any I have previously owned. I don't like ramp front sights on anything, so I quickly replaced these with the patridge front sights manufactured for the Mk. III Target pistols (easily obtained by calling the Cust. Svc. dept in Prescott Az.)
It has gotten to the point where the older Mdl. 17 Smiths are tough to find in my area, if one is after one in excellent condition. Personally, I don't believe that any Taurus or Charter Arms compares to these 2 possibilities in terms of value.

[SAA]

IŽd say the best 22lr revolver you can buy is an old S&W mod.17, but a Single-Six is nice to have when you already own Blackhawks.

I guess that wasnt much helpful was it..

[rockbilly]

Hands down...Smith and Wesson model 63.   

[Dand]

I have an old Colt Frontier Scout and from it I would ask, do you expect to do a lot of plinking? I found it a little tiresome poking out the empties compared to dumping them from a swing-out cylinder double action. If you are in no hurry, the single six is a good gun - I've shot a few. Do you want smaller? Is Ruger still making the Bearcat?  Seems like I read a number of good reviews about it. A K22 in good shooting is still on my wish list - don't care if its real old or newer - just so it works right. Could even be ugly on the outside. The newest 17's and 617's with full length barrel lug don't appeal - too much weight and bulk for a 22 - tho I hear they shoot well.  I have been wondering about the New Charter guns recently as they might be more in my price range than my wish list is.

[Dand]

Flex - check out the rimfire handgun forum a few rows down. There are some excellent discussions on revolvers going on right now. I have shot a friends S&W 63 and it was very nice too. Just getting very expensive.

[Robert357]

Wow, what a nice topic.  22 handguns are really great for sharpening your target shooting skills and thinking about accuracy in choosing a 22 revolver is a great idea.

First, an important component of handgun accuracy is sight radius, which usually boils down to barrel length.  That is, the longer the barrel, the better the sight radius and theoretical accuracy, all things being equal.  (After a while the buntline extra long barrels just get too heavy to hold and cause muscle fatigue when shooting). 

As to the specific 22 revolver you have identified a lot of good ones.  I like Ruger single actions and have a bunch in many different calibers.  I will say that all of the single action 22 revolvers that I own (two), have two cylinders so I can shoot both standard 22 rimfire rounds and 22 WMR rounds.  You can't do that with a double action revolver.   

I think you will be happy with any 22 quality revolver you purchase as long as it has a 4-inch or longer barrel.  It will also help you with accuracy and improving your shooting skills.
In looking for one, I would put in a snap cap and see about how well the trigger action works as that will also be a factor in ultimate accuracy.

The bargins available in used 22 revolvers are just incredible as hardly anyone buys them anymore.  Now a days the market is in semi-auto's. 

You will find something great if you just shop around.

[Dand]

One thing to remember if you are planning on hunting w a 22 handgun. From chronographing,I have learned that the power of the ammo is considerably diminished in the short barrels. I tried shooting a marmot once with my 4 3/8 Colts and the thing scampered down its hole after I hit it somewhere in the head area - it was all I could see. I could hear it down the hole but didn't dare reach down to get it out. That's where the 22 mag might  help - it boosts the bullets a bit more - but might not upset the heavier jacketed loads.  I have done well on grouse and a few rabbits with hand guns.

[zoner]

since you already own Blackhawks i'd go with the single six.....mine's a 5 1/2" stainless with a bisley grip frame,hammer,and trigger...kind of a home made single six hunter

[S.B.]

Hands down...Smith and Wesson model 63.  

Still, I prefer my K22s over all else.
Just saw this one:
http://smith-wessonforum.com/guns-sale-trade/127238-fs-s-w-63-no-dash-4-a.html
Steve

[painted horse]

As far as a 22lr/22mag in a swing out double action, sure you can.  The Hi Standard double nine. Don't even know if they still make them, I've had one for over 40 years with thousands of rounds through it. It shoots where you aim it and is still very solid. Not the prettiest girl at the ball, but has been and still is quite servicable and has taught several grandkids how to shoot. My brother in law has one in 22lr only thats got to be darn close to 60 years old, pretty much all the blueings gone, but it still shoots fine. Most accurate 22's I own are a 40s vintage Colt Match Target, and a Browning Buckmark, both minute-of-beercap at 25 yards, but both semi-autos. 

[williamlayton]

S&W K-22.
Blessings

[painted horse]

Saw a S&W 22lr only pistola the other day, don't know what model it was, but it pretty much destroyed an 800 dollar bill, thats a lot of schekels for a 22 I'm thinkin. 

[S.B.]

Price is no object to a philanthropist like you paintedhorse. HEHEHE
Steve

[Blackhawk44]

Sorry to bring word to the Colored Cayuse, but the High Standard double nine and Sentinal passed on with the closing of the orginal High Standard Manufacturing in 1974.  While others have reincarnated the High Standard semi-autos, the Double Nine, Sentinal and Crusader have not been resurrected.   

[woodsie57]

If you'tr thinking used, don't overlook the older adj. sighted  H@R revolvers. Double action trigger pull will be heavy and long, but S.A. can be pretty decent. Good guns, shouldn't be over $200, even in this market.

[Rex B]

I'll echo some of the sentiments here.

Single Six - everyone ought to have one. I have a blued NM, will buy a stainless next chance I get. And also a .32 H&R version if I can find one.

H&R - You can still find a mint 949 (blued) or 950 (nickle or HC?) for $200 or less.
Nice gun for the money, don't pass one up.

[ohiobenito]

have you entertained the possibility of a TC contender  in 22lr?  closed action; more muzzle velocity. less noise.  and you won't find a finer single action trigger anywhere.   load six now or one at a time later.   Hope you enjoy wichever you choose

later

[Hodr]

I worked on High standard double nines as an armorer in the Army.  Tough, and mighty tough is a man 5"4" tall going into a tunnel with two knives, a tomahawk, a high standard double nine and two pockets full of .22 short.  The army had a name for some of them that I knew well, Ranger.

blindhari

[Old Griz]

I've got several .22 LR revolvers and love them all: S&W 17, 617, and Ruger Bisley, and SP101. The Smiths are my favorites. The 617 is scoped and has taken more tree rats than any other gun I own. Surprisingly, however, the most accurate .22 handgun I have is a S&W 2206! Usually revolvers outperform automatics, but the 2206 does have a 6" fixed barrel and it is a tack driver. I enjoy shooting the wheelguns the most, but it's hard talking other guys into getting revolvers these days because of the ridiculous prices. You could buy two Ruger autos for the price of one S&W revolver. I've wanted a 3" S&W 317 from the first moment I saw one, but the $800 price tag (and the fact that I already have five .22 handguns) has kept me from it.

[Autorim]

I suggest looking hard for a Smith 617 4 inch - maybe hard to find, but worth it. I bought another 617 6 inch a few weeks ago for 500.00 ANIB. It has the combat grips and target hammer and trigger. I probably have at least a dozen .22 handguns and the 617's are my favorites. The older Smith 63's are also nice - lighter and easy to carry, but not as easy to shoot well IME.


Ken

[flexjr]

i finally pulled the trigger so to speak and put a single six on layaway. that seville i bought a while  back chewed up what i was going to spend on a 22 and lay away is best right now. i looked at the taurus 94 and while it seemed well made, the ruger felt more solid. if one of those mythical $350 k22s were to show up i would have definately looked to a smith. the price for a smith 617 is more than i want to cough up at the moment. i had even considered a ruger mark 2 auto but the revolver will digest anything without jamming up like the auto pistols. thanks for the input and insight
matt