Looking for a Cheap But Reliable .22 DA Revolver.
- Thread starter dgludwig
- Start date
Aguila Blanca
Staff
The process is the same, but a .22 can be made of less costly materials. Back in the 1960s I bought a German-made .22LR SA cowboy style revolver for $25. It was the size of a Ruger Single Six, blued, six shots, very nicely finished, and shot very well. I had that gun for years -- it disappeared when I moved in the mid-90s.smee78 said:
$25 then equates to about $200 today, allowing for inflation. The cylinder was steel, the frame was Zamack. (And I don't remember if the barrel was all steel, or if it was a steel sleeve in a Zamack tube. Actually, I never knew, so I can't possibly remember. Back then I didn't know anything about sleeved barrels.)
A lot of .22 handguns are made using Zamack as a primary material. That's a lot cheaper than ordnance steel or firearms-grade aluminum alloys.
Rather funny
The cheapo guns of the 1950's have become somehow better over time.
One could purchase a High Standard semi auto at the local gunshop, or one could buy virtually the same thing at Montgomery Wards or Sears. The Monkey Wards gun or the Sears gun may be exactly the same. In most cases the Dept. store gun would have plainer wood, and/or a generally lower level of finish vs. the same gun without the private label name on it.
The dept. stores also sold the name brand. My Colt 1889 New Navy was sold by Montgomery Wards in Chicago, in 1895. Colt was producing Navies with and without cylinder stops, mine has no cylinder stops.
My Sears rifle is the finest rifle I own. It's an FN Mauser made by High Standard for Sears in the early 50's. Yet it's a department store mutt.
The cheapo guns of the 1950's have become somehow better over time.
One could purchase a High Standard semi auto at the local gunshop, or one could buy virtually the same thing at Montgomery Wards or Sears. The Monkey Wards gun or the Sears gun may be exactly the same. In most cases the Dept. store gun would have plainer wood, and/or a generally lower level of finish vs. the same gun without the private label name on it.
The dept. stores also sold the name brand. My Colt 1889 New Navy was sold by Montgomery Wards in Chicago, in 1895. Colt was producing Navies with and without cylinder stops, mine has no cylinder stops.
My Sears rifle is the finest rifle I own. It's an FN Mauser made by High Standard for Sears in the early 50's. Yet it's a department store mutt.
Yep, and a lot of people consider them cheap crap. Because usually, they are. And then there's the various import laws so most of the cheap foreign ones haven't been imported since 68.
A $60 Jennings "jam-o-matic" or a couple hundred+ for a "better made" gun?
The thing with .22 revolvers, and especially DA ones is that we are fooled by the relative low cost of semi auto .22 rifles and most semi auto pistols.
Yes, they many parts can be made of cheaper materials than centerfire ones, and the simple blow back design of semis means no locking system is needed, but not so a revolver. You can make the frame from a cheaper material, even the barrel, than a centerfire, but the same machining is needed, the same degree of tolerances must be used, in the mechanism, so it will work.
So, while you might start with a degree of savings in total raw material cost, there is no saving in manufacturing cost (time, tools, wear on the tooling & machinery, etc) and they sell a lot FEWER .22s than they do centerfires, so its a niche market. Cost to make is nearly the same, or even higher than centerfires because sale volume is lower, and doesn't defray as much of the manufacturing expense.
Onward Allusion
New member
Revolvers in 22LR can be made using less expensive materials. Hell, the frame could be poly or that cheap alloy that Ruger is using for its Wrangler. The barrel needs to be steel, however, who says a poly shroud couldn't work? Even the cylinder could be a less expensive material using steel inserts. It's all about greed. The gun companies know they can sell the 22LR revolvers at a premium because ammo prices are so dang low compared to centerfire.
TruthTellers
New member
I never thought of that, but it's true and normally the more you mass produce something, the cheaper it's supposed to be, but with revolvers, they require a lot more machining and precision, so they're generally always going to cost money to make a good one.
I expect, in regards to American made revolvers at least, the majority of the cost is not about the materials being used but about the labor costs to fit and finish those materials together.
For instance the cost savings of the Wrangler are probably realized because the materials are easier to work with and the finish is not time consuming to create. The cost of the materials, while not irrelevant, probably has little to do with the final cost in comparison to the labor.
For instance the cost savings of the Wrangler are probably realized because the materials are easier to work with and the finish is not time consuming to create. The cost of the materials, while not irrelevant, probably has little to do with the final cost in comparison to the labor.
Onward Allusion
New member
Take a couple of S&W's as an example. A 642 hovers around $350. A 63 (also a J-frame) hovers around $600. Just one example of a 22LR revolver costing more than their centerfire counterparts.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
That used to be true but, in the case of firearms, it's not so true today.Lohman446 said:
I've toured the Colt factory twice. The first time was before Colt had moved heavily into CNC machining. I watched everything being machined by union workers, on machines that dated to my grandfather's day. That was the period when you might buy a new Colt and, out of the box, the barrel bushing and recoil spring plug would be off-center in the slide.
The second time was after Colt had installed new CNC machines. Frames and slides are now made using automated, CNC machines. They are more precise and more repeatable than humans ever could be, and they don't require paying a highly-skilled (or not!) machinist to stand there and turn handles and take measurements while he whacks away at a chunk of steel. So the labor cost is less of a factor now than it was just 20 or so years ago.
I got my Charter Arms Pathfinder back from Charter Arms today after it locked up new. The repair ticket said they filed the rear sight screw that was hitting the cylinder and test fired it 24 rounds. I shot it about 250 rounds as fast as I could load it to make sure it worked properly hot and to smooth the already good double action trigger. I received it back from Charter Arms exactly 5 business days after they got it. It is all steel stainless and it shoots well and accurately.
There is a $25 rebate with a hat or T-shirt from April first through August (I missed it).
There is a $25 rebate with a hat or T-shirt from April first through August (I missed it).
Or something...Onward Allusion
New member
Let me correct myself... IT'S ALL ABOUT THE PROFITS
A S&W 63 costs almost twice as much as a 642? I don't think it's due to the extra inch of steel shroud. Maybe it's the extra chambers that need to be drilled? Maybe it's the fiber sight?
If Armscor would make a 22LR version of its M206 or M200, they would corner the market.
A S&W 63 costs almost twice as much as a 642? I don't think it's due to the extra inch of steel shroud. Maybe it's the extra chambers that need to be drilled? Maybe it's the fiber sight?
If Armscor would make a 22LR version of its M206 or M200, they would corner the market.
It is based on profit but profit is based in part on the cost to produce the product. The cost per unit of a product depends on supply and demand. I think the majority of the demand for revolvers is for personal protection and a 22 caliber is considered inadequate for the job so the demand for double action 22 revolvers is low. A machine for making a particular part can cost a lot of money and the cost of the machine is divided over the number of parts made and sold as the machine cost is the same whether they make one or a hundred thousand. Years ago, you could buy a fender for a Ford F-150 for under $70 while the price for a fender for a Dodge D-100 was around $600. The cost to make the Dodge fender was much more than the Ford fender because the machinery cost was much more per unit made since the initial cost was similar and they didn't make many Dodge fenders.Let me correct myself... IT'S ALL ABOUT THE PROFITS
A S&W 63 costs almost twice as much as a 642? I don't think it's due to the extra inch of steel shroud. Maybe it's the extra chambers that need to be drilled? Maybe it's the fiber sight?
If Armscor would make a 22LR version of its M206 or M200, they would corner the market.
It is also based on perception. Look my 360 is not a heritage piece. Even firing .38 it may have to be replaced some day just from routine practice. Its going to be beat on and carried.
If I buy a .22 revolver it will be to teach my children to shoot on and eventually pass down. Because it is an "heirloom" piece I'm willing to pay more.
Now those looking for a .22 DA to throw in the tackle box or such... that kind of sucks for them.
If I buy a .22 revolver it will be to teach my children to shoot on and eventually pass down. Because it is an "heirloom" piece I'm willing to pay more.
Now those looking for a .22 DA to throw in the tackle box or such... that kind of sucks for them.
Driftwood Johnson
New member
As a former CNC programmer and machinist, that is only part of the story.
First off, those old guys you are denigrating were far more skilled than you imply. Secondly, most of them were using fixtures which took a lot of the guess work out. No stopping to take measurements and 'whacking away' at a chunk of steel. The part was placed in a fixture, and the precise amount to be removed was dialed in, then removed. In those days specific machines were set up to do one operation at a time. So bins of parts moved from one machine to the next for each operation.
The advantages of CNC are that the cost of labor is lower because one operator can monitor several machines at a time. And the operator does not have to be as highly skilled as an old time machinist, so he does not get paid as much. The other factor is called repeatability. Meaning that if everything is set up correctly, one part will be almost the same as the next. No, they will not be identical, that is impossible. But they will be very close. +/-.0002 is often quoted as the tolerance achievable with CNC equipment. But that is highly subjective, depending on several factors.
Anyway, yes, double action revolvers are traditionally more complex to make than semi-autos, and some of that is do to the complexity of the parts. And that does not change whether it is a centerfire revolver or a rimfire revolver.
Anyway, I am always on the lookout for quality used revolvers.
The best deal I have gotten is this S&W K-22 Outdoorsman that rolled off the assembly line in 1932, made by those old hacks the old fashioned way.
Don't let the worn finish fool you, that is why I only paid $500 for it. I have a whole bunch of 22 revolvers, but this old girl is the most accurate of the bunch.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
I wasn't denigrating anyone, just stating a fact. The best human machinists, even working with jigs, can't match the precision of CNC machines.Driftwood Johnson said:
That's pretty much a capsule summary of my point.