Thunder Ranch S&W M22 .45ACP

S

smince

Moderator
Went to my dealer this morning. He said "Let me show you my new S&W .45". I was expecting one of the new 1911's. Imagine my surprise when he pulled out a 4" N-frame revolver. He told me his cost was $30 more than the Miculek model (and that he was probably paying $100 for the TR logo), but he ordered it anyway. Skinny barrel, magna-stocks, blue finish, fixed sights. The TR logo on this one is in the stocks, instead of gold-colored in the frame as in the .44 Special model.

I had read in a recent article in GUNS magazine that S&W had Mike Venturino's M22 and he hinted that a new model might be coming out. I just didn't know it was this soon.

I foolishly traded off a 1917 SW once and think I want another .45ACP revolver.
 
Hey Smince,
Where you been?
If it's kosher to mention another forum here, go to the S&W Forum and run through the 35 pages of commentary on the gun. :)
If it's not kosher to mention another forum here, don't do that. :eek:
S&W's looking at about 2500-3000 of them, will continue till demand drops off enough to not make it viable. Expect a .45 Colt version somewhere down the road, and they say "possibly" a .44 Mag.
Many are shooting way low, the factory is now offering a replacement front blade. Overall quality seems much better than the 21s.
Denis
 
Hey Smince,
Where you been?
Click to expand...

Thanks for noticing. I've been on 12hr shifts since Thanksgiving weekend til Dec. 22. Nearly to tired to enjoy Christmas. You'd think I'd have enough money to buy one of these with all the overtime, but it always manages to go somewhere.

Thanks for the additional info.
 
Mine's been a little frustrating so far in getting the front sight to work, but we're making progress. It's a project gun.
The TR grips are among the best looking I've seen from S&W, but too small for actual use, replaced by Hogues. Needs some action work to reduce the 12-pound+ DA trigger.
Got an El Paso Saddlery 1917 half-flap for it.
When done this gun'll see some daylight.
Hang in there. Always remember- you work till you don't and then you die sometime later on. That philosophy gets me through life. :D
Denis
 
Many are shooting way low, the factory is now offering a replacement front blade
Click to expand...

Low isn't bad. Easier to remove metal than to add. Maybe it's a true retro gun and has enough metal to sight it in for your load of choice.:D
 
Well.....12-14 inches low at 25 yards does leave plenty of room for filing. :)
Tried a .250" SDM gold bead front blade from Brownells, still shot way too low.
Then had my gunsmith rebuild the original blade with a gold bead. After taking off .063", still shoots three inches low. Current factory replacement is .030" shorter than what came on the first guns.
Factory has decided the wrong blades went out on the things.
Denis
 
Think you should oughta buy one, if you're a revolver man. Needs a little work, but that's about normal nowdays.
Denis
 
I didn't have to remove very much to get my elevation correct. Windage is darn near perfect. I like the retro style and don't have time or patience to crawl the estate sales looking for actual old guns. I hardly ever see the really old ones at the pushers.
M22.jpg
 
My dealer said he got to shoot his yesterday. He said he was a little scared after I sent him this link and the SW forum link.

Great news! His was dead on and 2.5" groups at 25 yds. He was very happy:) :) :) :) :) :)
 
Saw one at a gun show last month. Nice looking, but not worth the $1,275 dealer was asking for it! Instead, I bought a nice Col 1917 that had been refinished and spent a lot less!

John
 
$629 here. After NICS fee and taxes $691.

What the heck is with those prices? That would be the second dealer that I heard of trying to get twice the rightful price.:eek:
 
Last edited:
I saw one at the Eastman gun show in Atlanta in December. It was a nice looking gun, except for the internal lock.

The dealer was asking $1100.
 
The front sight problem seems to be limited to the initial run of 300 units. S&W has promised this would be a limited edition but never gave any actual number. I have seen #569 so far. Those dealers asking $1,200 are trying to snag a sucker. I paid $630 for #255 (haven't shot it yet but I am expecting it will shoot way low). I suspect S&W will keep turning these out as long as they keep selling. I think they have a winner with this one and I would be surprised if they don't follow up with more retro guns.
 
I think they have a winner with this one and I would be surprised if they don't follow up with more retro guns.
Click to expand...

They AREN'T retro guns with a big old hole in the sideplate.

And don't tell me "we have to live with it" because we don't. Think of all the SAA copies. A lot of those are even imported without a locking safety. I won't buy a new S&W because of the non-traditional lock but at least S&W can then claim "new design" and say that means they have to use it. A retro gun is supposed to be a retro gun. I would love to have a "new 21" or "new 22" but that isn't what S&W is making. IMO--- a gunmaker can at LEAST make retro or reissue guns without the locks. Otherwise how do you explain USFA's and their beautiful SAA's? Do you think those guns would sell as well if they stuck a big old empty hole on the side?

I wouldn't be happy about it but I could live with it if they found a way to at LEAST totally hide the lock from view. Why can't the new Ruger system at the bottom of the mainspring and under the grips be used by S&W? You can't see it plus it is totally out of the lockwork.

I'm glad you guys like them but it is a no sale to me. If you guys buy new ones then there are more old ones for me!

Gregg
 
POI,
See my post above on 12-30 for production figures. That's direct from a marketing guy at S&W associated with the project.
Denis
 
tulsamal- You are obviously very upset at the internal lock. All I can say is if you don't like it don't buy it. I don't like it either, but I recognize that given the realities of life in our litigious and over-regulated world the lock is probably unavoidable and will eventually be found on all new guns from all manufacturers. I doubt that boycotting or writing angry letters will change anything.

I use the term "retro" meaning it suggests an older model and tries to look like it. It certainly isn't exactly like an original 1950 or Model 22 and nobody said it was. The finish quality is nowhere near the original, and the cast parts are offensive. But, I found the pistol interesting enough to buy it and try it. This is the only S&W revolver made after 1981 that I own and so far I like it even though it means accepting some unpleasant features.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top