S&W 63 (.22lr) DA pull

D

DealHunter

New member
Have a new model 63 coming in at week's end (took a while to find one and not break the bank), I have read that the .22 J-frames have rather stiff DA pulls.

My only experience in S&W .22 wheel guns are my model 17s/617s which I love but are larger (and older so typically smoother) revolvers. My SP101 .22 smoothed out over time but it took a while...

Anyone here have any experience with the J-frame .22s as far as what works and what doesn't when it comes to springs or tricks to lighten the DA pull? I know w. 22s it's sometimes iffy since rimfire rounds need a good whack to set them off (why I didn't mess w. the SP101).

Thanks for the info!
 
Don't mess with the main spring. You need the whack. Possibly replacing the rebound (trigger return spring) will help. If the rebound slide is metal it can be polished to a near mirror using a flat plate and some super fine 1000 grit or finer aluminum oxide paper and a few drops of oil and then some green rouge. if you have a small stone you may be able to dress the frame where the rebound slide rubs....clean all the grit out and by the way clean all the grit out after polishing. Test fit the rebound slide and then clean out all of the grit. Then reassemble with the medium spring from the wolf spring pack and see where you are. If the trigger freely returns you may be able to shift to the light spring.
 
BOTH of our J-frame 22 pistols, 4", 5", have a perfectly usable DA trigger pull. Matter of fact I rarely use the M63-4 in SA mode as it is as easy to shoot DA and faster to boot. We've put well over 8M rounds through it the few years it's lived here without a problem and my wife can pick the buttons off your shirt at 50 meters with it...NO foolin' !
AND remember, the smoothness of the DA trigger pull is all that counts; weight mean nothing IF you know how to shoot.
And so it goes...
 
Since 99 percent of my shooting is DA, I parted with $50 and had a gunsmith polish up mine.

I left specific instructions with him, though, don't even think about touching the springs at all

It's slick as glass.
 
Since the Model 63 rarely gets talked about on these gun forums, pics would be nice. So here's mine:
:)

2-4-11snowguns003.jpg
 
I have a 63 that is smooth, but moderatly heavy esp. Compared to a centerfire j frame. The 617 i have is lighter, its just pure physics. More space to get the needed force to whack a rimfire.

I will say the 617 wins hands down over a sp101 in 22 lr. They are ungodly heavy unmodified.
 
As an old fart that has been shooting handguns for decades, I have to put in my standard comment about these little guns. I have K-22's and stacks of rimfire autos that I use for plinking or hunting or target shooting. All actually very easy to shoot well. Then I have the two that make you realize you aren't Superman. A 1960's Ruger Bearcat and a S&W M63-1 made in 1987. I grew up shooting the Bearcat since it is the gun my Dad always took with us when we went to some farm pond to fish. It has killed a whole lot of snakes and turtles. I learned early on that the sights were dead on but it took a lot of care to be able to shoot it well. When I bought the M63, I found the same thing. At first I wasn't even coming close to getting anything you could call a "group." I was all over the place. And getting frustrated.

Finally I recalled the Bearcat and forced myself to slow way down and concentrate on the fundamentals. And the gun started to shoot. So that's what I mainly consider these two guns... my revolver trainers. Put 50 rounds a month through these guys and really pay attention to what you are doing. Hand placement has to be the same every shot. Amount of pressure on your hands has to be the same. Trigger pull must be smooth and gradual and absolutely straight back. Sights must be dead on, there must be follow through. Screw any of those up... the darn things will shoot two feet to one side. They are unforgiving. But truly great trainers.

Gregg
 
Finally I recalled the Bearcat and forced myself to slow way down and concentrate on the fundamentals.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I have a SS Bearcat (more recent production) and I found it easier to be accurate with despite the longer lock-time than the Sp101. Different strokes I suppose...

Also, despite its small size, that gun always seems to fit my hand just perfectly :)

I tried the D/A action on the 63 now a few times "dry" (cylinder open, latch pulled back so f-pin not hitting chamber face) and it was actually pretty good, will give it a real try later this week(end).
 
Well, looks like I got a good one since the DA is very smooth right out of the box (hit or miss I suppose these days). Accurate, portable, easy to shoot; overall very happy with it.

Might play around with it later on but for now I think I may just leave it stock since as it stands it doesn't really need the work :)
 
Polish and Smooth

Back in the day,when revolvers ruled,my close friend was a Captain and firearms instructor for our local police dept.3 times to S&W armorers schools,and a 100+ officer dept.helped him hone his skills.By only careful stoning and polishing he made my S&W34 2" .22 one of my most cherished firearms.:D
 
The trouble with modifying the springs is that you can compromise reliability. You can certainly get the trigger smoothened, but when you start playing with the springs, you've just tossed all the engineering calculations out the window.

In the old days, we would cut up to two coils off the rebound slide spring. Dunno about the newer S&W revolvers as they've changed the springs.
 
I have a 5" M63. Can't complain. Nice revolver even though they are difficult to find a factory holster that fits. Used to think the barrel was a bit long for me as I liked 4" 22 revolvers. But it works well with the extra inch.
 
It takes more momentum to fire a rimfire than a center fire. If the hammer is light, as it is in a J frame, that means the mainspring has to be heavy to get the momentum needed. Smoothing up the action can help, but the laws of physics get you in the end.

Jim
 
James K said:
It takes more momentum to fire a rimfire than a center fire. If the hammer is light, as it is in a J frame, that means the mainspring has to be heavy to get the momentum needed. Smoothing up the action can help, but the laws of physics get you in the end.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify a bit: I agree the laws of physics make it problematic to reduce a J-frames spring energy, but it's the J-frame hammer's length, more than mass that's the problem.

Power (the product of energy and speed) sets off primers, not momentum. Since the J-frame hammer is shorter, the firing pin is closer to the pivot, so it's forward motion is slower, even if its angular speed is the same as, say, a K-frame. And being a J-frame, the length of the arc is likely shorter, too, so the hammer has less distance through which to accelerate. A heavier spring, then, is needed to get the hammer traveling faster and with more power.

As far as mass, a lighter hammer travels faster and delivers more power, so, all else equal, a lighter hammer delivers more power and actually helps reliability.
 
Perhaps, but quite a few folks who have "dehorned" J frame hammers (with no other change) have had misfires with the lighter hammer.

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top