detructo4130
New member
What kind of prices should i be looking for (new or used). I have seen a used taurus 454casule for 350 which seems like a good deal at the same shop they had a used (not sure brand) .22 for 300?
Looking to buy .17 or .22 revolver
- Thread starter detructo4130
- Start date
If I was looking for a .17 revolver, I would be checking out the new Ruger Single Six Hunter. You get one revolver with two cylinders. One for .17 HMR and one for .17 M2. It's an easy gun to scope as well. I don't really _need_ one myself but I keep looking at them anyway!
They do make the Single Six in .17 without the dual caliber/cylinder capability and that is $100 cheaper. But I think that feature is too good not to get!
Gregg
They do make the Single Six in .17 without the dual caliber/cylinder capability and that is $100 cheaper. But I think that feature is too good not to get!
Gregg
Sir William
New member
The 17 is a toy novelty. Ignore it and it might go away. LOL You might loo for Commanche 22 revolvers or the Taurus Tracker 22. The better choice would be the S&W 617/648.
hmmmmmm
i tried the single six 17hmr for a week. bought the pistol brand new, took it out shootin one time. chucked the pistol 2 days later at the gunshop. traded it for a vxII 3-9x40.
i dont know what it was but i couldnt get it to shoot. finaly i had enough and borrowed my buddies mkII 22lr. with it i could shoot 50-75yds acuaretly bustin clay pigeons. the 17hmr was lucky to stay on a sheet of paper at 20yds.
so ya i chucked it the same week i bought it but ohhwell a learning exsperince i guess. the pistol either didnt shoot, or it clashedwith my personality or something.
just to put things in perspective i was way more acurate with my 44mag and 357 snubby.
im not trying to scare you away, just telling you bout my exserince with the caliber in the little ruger frame.
Evan
i tried the single six 17hmr for a week. bought the pistol brand new, took it out shootin one time. chucked the pistol 2 days later at the gunshop. traded it for a vxII 3-9x40.
i dont know what it was but i couldnt get it to shoot. finaly i had enough and borrowed my buddies mkII 22lr. with it i could shoot 50-75yds acuaretly bustin clay pigeons. the 17hmr was lucky to stay on a sheet of paper at 20yds.
so ya i chucked it the same week i bought it but ohhwell a learning exsperince i guess. the pistol either didnt shoot, or it clashedwith my personality or something.
just to put things in perspective i was way more acurate with my 44mag and 357 snubby.
im not trying to scare you away, just telling you bout my exserince with the caliber in the little ruger frame.
Evan
Something was wrong there somewhere! The .17 rimfire is one of the absolute most accurate things you can shoot. Rifle or handgun.
I've got the Shooting Times' review of the .17 Single Six Hunter right here in front of me. He used four different types of ammunition and got five shot groups at 25 yards from 1.35" to 1.75". If you put a big scope on it, I'm quite willing to believe you could average under 2" groups at 50 yards off sandbags. That's pretty darn good!
Gregg
it was one of those deals were i bought it on a wim, it didnt work out for me and i traded it of for what i had in it as fast as possible.
mine was the reg model that didnt have scope mounts.
i had also heard they shoot very well, my reason for trying it.
i may try another one day but not anytime soon in a hmr.
mine was the reg model that didnt have scope mounts.
i had also heard they shoot very well, my reason for trying it.
i may try another one day but not anytime soon in a hmr.
Model 17-K-22
Hello:
I would sway toward's a K-22. They are out there for around 300.00 and are cheap to shoot. I have seen alot of hype about the new 17 But ammo is alot higher.. I also love the action of the K-22 as they are older in production and seem to have better finish qualiities about them. Here is a picture of a K-22 1967 Vintage.I have no problem with the 617 but prefer a shorter barrel than S&W offer's and have heard in the 17 caliber one need's length to allow the powder to burn right. Regards, hammer It..
Hello:
I would sway toward's a K-22. They are out there for around 300.00 and are cheap to shoot. I have seen alot of hype about the new 17 But ammo is alot higher.. I also love the action of the K-22 as they are older in production and seem to have better finish qualiities about them. Here is a picture of a K-22 1967 Vintage.I have no problem with the 617 but prefer a shorter barrel than S&W offer's and have heard in the 17 caliber one need's length to allow the powder to burn right. Regards, hammer It..
OK, I'll give you $300 right now for that revolver and diamond grips! OK, $350!
It's not very sporting to say "you can get you for $300" and then trot out an example that is going to go for a lot more!
I like the K-22/M17. It is a great K frame size gun. But it is too easy to shoot! I think the finest "learning .22" S&W ever made was the four inch M63. If you can train yourself to get small groups with that J frame, then you can _easily_ shoot larger and heavier guns. And the M63 is a great gun for open carry in the woods. It's one of those guns I take with me "when I don't need a gun." You can pack it along with a little 50 box of .22's and never even notice it. I had a heck of a time getting groups out of mine until I really worked on my grip and trigger pull. A light gun like that will not tolerate any mistakes! Great, great training gun. And the original Kit Gun. My choice in .22.
(Although the new five inch Model 60 sounds like a real sweetie. I may have to get one for "testing.")
http://gunblast.com/SW60_KitGun.htm
Gregg
K-22
Hey Gregg:
I bought this for 310.00 out the door.... I then had a refinish done to it.. You are right it "NOW" cost's more than that but the inital investment was stated.. I forgot to mention it also came with these "RARE" Roper grip's on it..They are dated on the rear 1936 and I saw a pair sell on E-bay recently not as nice as these for almost 400.00.
in light of that the K-22 was a "GIFT" Now that was a deal !! Regards, HammerDown.
Hey Gregg:
I bought this for 310.00 out the door.... I then had a refinish done to it.. You are right it "NOW" cost's more than that but the inital investment was stated.. I forgot to mention it also came with these "RARE" Roper grip's on it..They are dated on the rear 1936 and I saw a pair sell on E-bay recently not as nice as these for almost 400.00.
in light of that the K-22 was a "GIFT" Now that was a deal !! Regards, HammerDown.
44mag@ucnsb.net
New member
The 17 is far from a toy. Many people are attached to the .22lr as I was before shooting the .17hmr in both Rifle and Pistol variations. I have a CZ452 and a 17 Tauras Tracker. Both guns print ragged holes under .75" at 50yrds on par with my .22lr's and to be honest the .17hmr's are more consistant. I have always had a love affair with the .22lr from the day I was handed my first k22 that I tried my best to wear out as a kid, to the Mark III Hunter I bought 3 weeks ago. I probably own more .22's than I do all my other guns combined. The .22lr in most it's variations is capable of superb accuracy, I have found that the .17hmr is just as capable of such superb accuracy, even better at longer ranges. The .17hmr extends the range and accuracy of a good .22 almost twice it's range and shoots flat to a 100yds. Someone mentioned barrel length, in the 17hmr this is not an issue in my experience. Buy either one, both can give you great accuracy and a good time. The .22lr of course will be cheaper to plink with.
I would point out that one large issue lies within these words. You gave up on the gun in two days. Of course that is your right, but seldom is a gun perfect for you out of the box. With a little more than two days of shooting this gun you would probably have been shooting the ragged holes that I do every weekend. I am sure if you ever pick up a .17 again and spend some time with it, you will have as much fun as I have found. Good luck and have a great day.
.44mag