Please recommend a DA .22 snubby

C

Candiru

New member
I'm interested in buying a .22 snubby for DA shooting practice. My reasoning is that if I can learn to shoot a snubby well in double-action, the Kahr I carry for self-defense will seem easy by comparison. Thus, I'm looking for something that has a long and heavy DA trigger pull, but one that is relatively smooth and has no staging. Since this will be used for practice, longevity would also be nice.

I've looked at both the Taurus Model 94 and Smith & Wesson's M317. The Taurus is appealing for its lower price and slightly higher capacity, but I've read reports of light strike malfunctions. I'm really tired of sending guns back to the factory, so I would like to get something that comes with a reasonable expectation of functioning as intended. I've heard few function complaints about the S&W 317, but it does cost a lot more.

I'd love it if I could get input from those who've shot one or the other (or both!) and drawn a conclusion as to the quality of the guns. Also, if there are other .22 snubbies I haven't considered that would meet my criteria, please tell me!

My shooting skills thank you in advance, but my sore trigger finger is already muttering grumpily...
 
They are out of production but, Ruger made the SP101 in .22. It would fit your bill nicely.
Other than the two you mentioned, there aren't many .22 snubbies out there.
 
Might be

a little hard to find, but I have a nice High Standard .22 snub. They`re out of production, but aren`t expensive if you happen to run across one. I got mine at a gun show for just over a hundred bucks.
 
My first question would be.....why limit yourself to a snubby? If your stated purpose is to practice double-action shooting, why not buy a 4" or 6" S&W and get a nice shooting .22 in the bargain.

Second question....is your Kahr a 9mm or larger? If so, practice with a .22 may give you the trigger practice but will not in any way duplicate the blast and recoil of a more powerful round.

My advice: if you carry the Kahr, practice with the Kahr; it's the gun you depend on.
 
I do practice with the Kahr; however, I can't afford to shovel 100
rounds of 9mm through it on a weekly basis. Therefore, I shoot enough
to keep myself familiar with its handling and do plenty of dry-fire
practice. My interest in a snubby was so that I could get feedback on
my trigger technique, and plenty of it. On further reflection, I might
be better suited with a revolver in a larger caliber so that I could
hone my trigger technique on a heavier trigger using dry-fire practice
and not end up buying an additional gun just for practice. That would
be even less expensive than using .22, which would free up funds to buy
a Mountain Gun that much sooner.
 
I may misunderstand the situation, but it sounds like you want a less expensive way to train for 9mm semiauto shooting, and you are thinking to use a snubnose 22 revolver for that?

If you want to improve performance with a specific firearm, I would either dryfire the 9mm with snapcaps, or, better yet, get a .22LR that mimics the size, action, controls of your 9mm (as close as possible). A few possibilities are the Ruger Mark II, Walther P22, Beretta Neos, no of which are too expensive.

I do think that .22 training is more effective than dryfiring, because you get a resulting target pattern to measure results with, and you still have a discharge sensation. At about $0.02 per shot, the .22LR is ideal.
 
I'd go S&W 317 with 3" bbl and adjustable sights. I have the Colt Diamondback in 22 w/4" bbl, the Ruger SP101 w/4" bbl and the S&W Ladysmith 2" with fixed sights. Of the three, the Colt is the most fun to shoot, the Ruger the most durable and the S&W the most concealable. I would have gotten the 317 I described but that wasn't produced just yet. As for Taurus, forget it. Look at the internal mechanism and compare it to a S&W and you'll see why the S&W is a superior gun.
 
I have to admit to looking for the same thing. I am still trying to decide whether to bite the bullet and take a chance on a charter arms .22 revolver. They are substantially cheaper than the S&W and even the Taurus. Uneven quality and charter's bankruptcy have me doubting the wisdom of the move. On the other hand, how much stress does a .22 revolver have to hold up to? If I get one that works, it should stay working for a long time.
Driving myself nuts.
Yeah, I know, it was a short trip.

Mikey
 
Hi! Can not recommend Taurus PT 94. I had both S&W 317 and the Taurus 94. There are big differences in quality, trigger pull etc.. So now a ihave only the S&W 317. I have reduced the trigger pull (fabric it was very heavy).

I love my 317:-) Same quality as all Smith & Wesson!..
 
I had a Taurus 94, it went belly up a few times and I ditched it. Cylinder froze - back to Taurus. The adjustable sights wouldn't hold.

Also had a SW 317 - I just didn't like the trigger pull which I found extremely hard. Sold it. Might have played with the springs but didn't feel like it.

Since I wanted a plinker I bought a Ruger SS Bearcat - not a snubby or DA but that's what I did.

I like the 317 - if they had a hammerless Centennial version with a decent trigger - I know that rim fire rounds are iffy, blah, blah - but if they did I might consider one as a backup, snake BUG.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top