S&W 317

[Gun Guy in NJ 10]

I am thinking about buying the S&W 317. Does anyone have one? Opinions?

Also what is a “Kit Gun”. Please tell me it’s not like a model plan kit where they send me the parts and I have to assemble it

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

A kit gun simply means a small, lightweight gun that will fit in your "kit" - a rather archaic term. S&W used the term kit gun to designate their .22 & .32 caliber small-frame (I or J) revolvers before they started using model numbers. I have a .22/.32 Kit Gun which is a pre-model 34.

 

I don't have any experience with the 317, but it is extremely light weight with both the cylinder and the frame being aluminum. I would say that it would depend on what you want to use it for. If you want something just to stash in your tackle box or whatever (yeah, like we could do that here in the PRNJ, ha!) then fine. If you are looking for a paper-puncher, then you would probably be better served by a different gun. I've heard people call into question the accuracy of the 317 - but that is hearsay. If it is the size you like, look for a model 63 or model 34, preferably an older one (these are built on the same size frame as the 317 - the J-Frame, but are steel). If size isn't a problem a model 17 or 617 (medium frame size - K) - which in pre-model number parlance was the K-22. Probably the best choice (and again preferably an older one - not a fan of aluminum cylinders and internal locks) for paper punching , learning shooting fundamentals or just plain having fun.

 

Good luck!

 

Adios,

 

PIzza Bob

[Gun Guy in NJ 10]

Thanks Pizza Bob, You sure know your stuff. My propose for this revolver is for the woman that have asked me to show them how to shoot. I currently have a Ruger 22/45. My wife has problems with this gun. When she needs to work any controls (safety, mag release, and bolt hold-open) she tends to turn the gun sideways to look at the controls. While she is good with keeping her booger hook off the bang switch we need to work on muzzle control. I thought a simple revolver would be better for learning to shoot. I first looked at a 617 with 4” barrel but thought it would be too heavy, on seeing the 317 I thought that the smaller frame and lighter weight would work for the girls. Maybe once I see a 317 and a 63 and my wife gets to handle one we will make a decision.

 

Thanks again

Thomas T

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

Thomas:

 

The concept that it seems is hardest for new shooters to grasp is that weight is a good thing. It helps you hold the gun steady and it absorbs recoil. I can understand that even a K-frame may be big for smaller women and the J-Frame is a good fit. But, especially for your intended purposes, don't make the mistake of buying an ultralight handgun. An all steel model 63 or 34, with a 4" barrel is a great gun to learn with and makes a great plinker after you've mastered the fundamentals. It also makes a great transition piece to other J-Frame SD revolvers in larger calibers. There is a big difference between standing at a gun counter with lightweight in your hand, and being on the firing line squeezing the trigger. Unlike in life - in this case, weight is our friend - and I speak from experience on both counts.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[axeman_g 128]

A 317 would be an expensive training tool, I dont think I have ever seen one under $400. And having shot one and wanted to buy one I will say this, they are so lightweight, that the trigger pull in DA does effect it's accuracy. SA is not a problem. If you would like to get her a .22 revolver try a Taurus .22, Charter Arms .22 or find an old steel Smith like Bob recomended. 317s are backup guns for ankle holsters or deep cover.

 

Do you own a glock? How about a .22 conversion for a glock since they are point and shoot interfaces?

[Gun Guy in NJ 10]

When it comes to my wife, money is no issue At least that what she tells me.

[Gun Guy in NJ 10]

Thanks for the replies; it has really helped me decide on a new revolver.

Pizza Bob, you are right about the weight. The 317 would be too light. The 617 seemed too much for the girls to hold up for any long length of time. I think the 63/34 weight would be a good balance. My wife really liked the weight and feel of the Ruger, it was just the controls that where the problem.

Axeman, The price of the S&W are high but I had a bad experience with a Taurus I had 18 years ago. (Broke apart in my hands). I have heard that the quality has improved but…I did look at the charter arms and I am now thinking about the, 72240 Target Pathfinder. Its under 350 on gunbroker.

[axeman_g 128]

Thomas... I personally have had a good experience with a CA 22 Pathfinder... friend owned one for rodent control around his cabin. That being said... the Taurus revolvers have been much better for the past 10 years. You will find a lemon in any bunch. Heck, I owned a HK that sucked... nobody beleives it though.

 

The one thing i would say about a .22 revolver is do not, repeat do not get one with more then 6 rounds. The timing can get screwed quickly and rimfires are so picky with where that hammer falls.

[Wolfy 51]

I have a 10 shot 617 and never had a problem with it.