I probably won’t be the first one to say that Smith & Wesson knows how to make a revolver. And a beautiful one at that. The Model 617 happens to be one that shoots .22LR, looks sexy while doing it and gives you 10 shots in the cylinder. Its K frame is about the same size as a .357 Ruger GP100 and it may be the highest priced .22LR revolvers on the market today. But it’s worth every penny . . .
Top – Smith and Wesson Model 617 .22LR; Bottom – Ruger GP100 .357 Magnum
Smith & Wesson 617 in a Galco GP100 Holster – yep, it fits.
Features
The Model 617 sports a 4 inch barrel, stainless steel satin finish and synthetic grips that aren’t oversized. Best of all, it will shoot any .22LR ammunition you choose to run through it. If you already own a K frame revolver in any other caliber, a 617 would make a fine choice for practice.
Some also call it the quintessential “kit” gun – a firearm you can stick in your tackle box or a pack for a walk in the wilderness. The front sight is basic black…I plan on changing mine out for a fiber optic version. Otherwise, the sight picture is excellent and the rear sight is easy to adjust for various ammo types.
Fit, Form & Function
To say this revolver is pretty is like saying Alessandra Ambrosio is attractive – it’s wholly inadequate. There’s just something sexy about a piece of highly polished stainless steel. All of the parts of this revolver are tightly but properly put together. There’s no wobble in the cylinder, whether it’s in the frame or not, and everything moves together in unison, just as it should.
Smiths don’t have a reputation for target-style hair triggers on their revolvers and this one is no exception. But the bangswitch on this Smith is buttery smooth, albeit slightly on the heavy side. Grit, however, is conspicuous by its absence. It breaks in the same place every time with no slop or sluggishness to speak of.
In single action mode, you get more of the same with a much lighter pull. After a lengthy range session with hundreds of rounds, my trigger finger was still ready for more. If you like an extremely stiff trigger where your finger will be sore when you’re done shooting, I’d suggest you give the Ruger LCR in .22LR a try.
A warning, though: while some gunmakers say that you can dry fire any of their .22’s, do not dry fire this one. First of all, Smith & Wesson does not recommend it and says in the FAQ section of their website that it can cause damage to your precious and very expensive revolver. Plus, I found a Smith & Wesson forum posting by someone who acquired a used Model 617 and posted the following picture.
Yikes! Appears to have been dry fired extensively.
Shooting the Smith & Wesson Model 617
With a gun this heavy and shooting .22LR, there is absolutely no recoil to speak of. The pistol appears to be a gun that shoots a bigger caliber unless you look closely or someone watches you shooting it and notices the absence of muzzle flip.
While I tried as many brands and types of ammunition as I could, I adjusted the rear sights for my go-to .22LR round – the 40grain CCI Velocitor. Once I got the sights where I needed them to be, I could put rounds just about wherever I was aiming. Distance to the target was 20 yards and 15 yards between two range sessions. I used a rest to test the gun for precision.
With proper ammo, sight adjustment, and technique, this may be a viable target or varmint pistol. Range to target – 20 yards.
As you’d expect, the 617 fired everything I could put through it without any problems. A word of caution regarding proper seating of the rounds, though. Make sure the cartridges are fully seated into their respective chambers. On one chamber full of Velocitors, one out of the ten rounds wasn’t fully seated which caused the round to fire (explode) in the chamber itself.
Some debris was sprayed back into my arms and face and the case was deformed beyond recognition. This tank of a revolver, though, didn’t skip a beat and I just kept on shooting. Extraction of empties was flawless and effortless. There was one instance where I had to use a little more force on the plunger, but nothing that required tools or heavy machinery.
Ammunition Tested:
- CCI Velocitors Hollowpoints
- Federal Premium Target Loads – Solids
- CCI .22LR Shot shells
- CCI Mini Mags Solids
- Federal Premium Game-Shok
- CCI Mini Mags – Hollowpoints
- Winchester White Box
- CCI Blazer Value Pack
- American Eagle – Federal
It was very refreshing to read the Smith & Wesson Manual. I mean . . . I was reading between the WARNINGS and legalese looking for any ammunition restrictions like “Don’t use lubed ammo in this gun! Didn’t find anything. Ammo that locked up my LCR .22 didn’t phase this pistol whatsoever.
Conclusions
If you have the money for a 617, you’ll be getting one of the best .22 revolvers made by anyone on the planet. Of course, for the price, you could pick up a 1911, a Glock and a thousand rounds of ammo for it. Or six Kel Tecs. But hey, for a revolver this shiny and that you’re great grandchildren will enjoy, it’s worth it.
SPECIFICATIONS
Model: Model 617 in .22LR
Caliber: .22LR
Magazine capacity: 10 rounds
Materials: Stainless Steel
Weight empty: 38.9 oz
Barrel Length: 4 inches
Overall length: 9.13 Inches
Sights: Replaceable, Front Pinned Partridge; Rear Sight – adjustable
Action: Double Action/Single Action
Finish: Satin Stainless
MSRP: $829.00
RATINGS (out of five stars)
Style * * * * *
As pretty as a Bond Girl, regardless of which one we are talking about.
Ergonomics (carry) * *
While you’re probably not going to be concealed carrying this firearm, it’s the approximate size of other revolvers in its class. So if you own a Ruger GP100, for example, this weapon will fit into any holsters you may already have on hand for it.
Ergonomics (firing) * * *
A dream to shoot…and a better trigger than other “ahem” .22LR revolvers out there.
Reliability * * * * *
Fired absolutely every type of .22LR I could find to put through it from CCI Snakeshot, Winchester Bulk White Box to Highly lubed Mini Mags. I even blew up a Velocitor round in its own chamber and kept shooting. I could almost hear the gun say, “Is that all you’ve got?”
Customize * *
Changing out the grips and sights is about all you can do to this gun. Perhaps a trigger job could be done if you are so inclined, but I wouldn’t mess with it. I also found out you can mount a small rail in place of the rear sight in case you want to use optics on this revolver.
OVERALL RATING * * * *
One of the finest .22LR revolvers I’ve had the pleasure to shoot. Its size and weight are the only things that caused the subtraction of a star. My grandkids will be shooting this thing long after I am gone.
Yes, I agree. I fiddled with the trigger a bit on mine, and added a front fiber optic sight. Other than that…one of the best investments of my life.
Just wanted to echo what you said. I got this gun, also in 4″, as a “trainer” for the wife. Now she doesn’t HATE going to the range with me. It’s such an easy shooting gun, with no moving parts, no magazines to deal with, and the trigger in single action is something even she finds user-friendly.
The real bonus from my point of view is that if she can strengthen her fingers to where she can do the double-action trigger pull comfortably, I feel fine buying her the big brother (686 I think it is) in .357 magnum for home defense when I’m on a business trip. The trigger, the weight, the sights — everything should be identical between the two 4″ guns.
Of course… I now have a .22 Sig Mosquito (her previous “trainer” pistol) for sale…
True greatness! Purchased my 617 early 1993 my first thought out of the
box was this shoots better than my Browning 22 rifle. Put at least 10,000 rounds
thru this gun in all kinds of weather absolute relibility! Thank You Smith&Wesson!
I have the 6″ barrel version. Great gun.
I have been tempted to try and do a trigger job on it.
When I hold a basic firearms class the participants start shooting with the 617 and move to the 686 (a .357 magnum-capable using straight .38 Special loads for training). The two guns could be twins, with the 686 (39.7 oz) weighing in at less than an ounce heavier than the 617 (38.9 oz), with virtually identical specs. The 617 is a great gun, while the 686 is reputed to be “the one gun most gun shop owners would own if they could only have one gun.” High praise and good company for the 617.
I owned a 6″ version for many years and just traded it for a 696. In my opinion the 617 was too darned heavy for a rimfire. S&W claim a weight of 44 ounces but it felt much heavier, perhaps because it was so muzzle heavy.
If you’re shopping for one get the 4″ as it’s much better balanced.
All in all it’s a fabulous handgun which is particularly great for practicing double action speed shooting.
I fired my friend’s Clark Customs 617. It is a sweet revolver. I want one!
One of the guns every serious shooter ought to own before he dies. Preferably way before.
Have a 617 with the 4″ barrel, wood grips and no locking system, 6 shot cylinder on layaway… gently used – $500 even.
Aaron
do you still have 617
@Steven Visser, I wouldn’t call it a kit gun because of its weight, which is right up there with three Subway foot-longs. I guess that the definitive kit guns would be the S&W M317 or the M63. Still, the 617 is an utterly fantabulous .22LR revolver.
Congrats Steve, your very well written review made the front page of The Gun Wire.
Thank you for your kind words.
I will not buy another S&W revolver until they get rid of that “roll over like a show dog bitch” lock no matter how good it the review is.
I couldn’t agree more. I just can’t see past that hole and will continue to look elsewhere as a result.
+1 on that. S&W continues to save me mucho $$ on new guns.
Then with Rugers you’ve got:
BEFORE USING GUN-READ WARNINGS IN
INSTRUCTION MANUAL AVAILABLE FREE FROM
STURM, RUGER @ CO.,
SOUTHPORT, CONN. U.S.A.
And brick-sh!thouse strength. And reliability. And accuracy. And NO LOCK!
Actually, most Rugers have locks, but they are housed underneath the grips where you cannot easily see them.
DaveM, removing the lock is a five-minute job at most, and anyone can do it with ease. It takes less time to remove the lock than it takes to clean the gun after a range session, and it does not leave a hole in the gun. If that’s not easy enough, S&W has already announced that it’s phasing out the lock.
What is it about these S&W revolvers that makes me drool? Just got to have one of these.
As for this being the most expensive .22LR revolver, S&W model 17 masterpiece lists at $959, and that is a 6 shooter in blued steel. I’ll probably die an old man waiting for Dan Wesson to reintroduce the .22LR pistol pac, so maybe this stainless 10 shooter is going to be my next revolver.
Who pays MSRP?
Bud’s Gunshop has the K17 Masterpiece for $753. That’s still quite a bit for a handgun chambered in 22 Long Rifle.
I’m curious what the DA/SA trigger pull weight is on the 617, and what can be achieved by later tweaking it to reduce the pull and not sacrificing firing.
I’ve had one for a few years now. I put a Wolff trigger pull reduction spring kit in it and it improved the double action trigger tremendously. I can shoot it all afternoon with no discomfort. It does occasionally misfire with some brand of ammo, but not all- you’ll have to experiment. I also found some speed loaders and loading blocks on the internet. They enhance the revolver shoot very much. I can load about 200 rounds into the blocks and speedloaders and shoot till empty. Its a lot of fun.
Way back in 1981 I bought an S&W Model 17 “K22 Masterpiece” .22 in blued steel, 8″ barrel, target sights, and added target stocks to it. With Eley 10X and CCI Green Tag target ammo, it groups around 1″ off sandbags at 25 yards. Sort of remember it costing around $400 then, which seemed pretty expensive (30 years of inflation).
But for a serious target gun, I have an S&W New Model No. 3 topbreak with target sights – a single action revolver in .44 Russian. The trigger break is incredible – like a thin icicle snapping.
Is it possible to get a clarification on what exactly happened when the case “wasn’t fully seated” and you were sprayed with debris? I can’t figure out how a round couldn’t be fully seated; on my 617, if the rounds are sticking-out the rear of the cylinder at all, the cylinder can’t be closed, and if they are mostly-but-not-quite-fully-seated, the recoil shield on the frame seats them fully when I close the cylinder.
Despite firing many thousands of rounds of all types/brands/quality levels through my 4″ 617, I’ve never had a problem like you described. A walk-through of exactly what happened might help others avoid a similar situation, which definitely sounds dangerous.
I will do my best to clarify the incident. I had 10 rounds of Velocitors in the revolver. I don’t recall exactly which round, but when I fired on the one that exploded, some shrapnel or debris came back at me and hit my forearms and forehead. I sustained no injuries. A cease fire was called for folks to change targets, and I unloaded the revolver. The casing in question was actually imploded on itself as if it had been crushed. It was not a split case or blown out case. It is as if it was crushed under pressure. I was not sure if it was a bad round, so I made an assumption that the round was slightly back from the chamber and not fully seated. What I started to do after that was after loading all 10 rounds, I would simply run my thumb over each round in the cylinder to make sure it was fully in there and not sticking back out. I had no further issues after that at all with that ammo or any other type I used that day. I am no expert by any means, so if anyone else has any insight on what this issue may have been, please educate me and the rest of us.
Sounds as if the revolver might be out of time or at least certainly was when you touched off that round. If the bullet was held up leaving it could create over-pressure and slices of lead shaved from the bullet would be blown out.
Thanks very much for the details of the issue you experienced. Steve has already talked about the cylinder not being indexed correctly for one shot, and I agree that it could cause a problem like you describe, but I wonder if it is even possible with a rimfire revolver of this type. For the cylinder to be rotated far enough to allow pressure from a round fired in one chamber to enter another chamber and deform that chamber’s round is quite a bit of rotation; too much to get a solid hit on the rim to fire the first round, in my opinion.
Another possibility would be a punctured rim on the case that was being fired, and some of that gas from that puncture (and perhaps bits of brass) blowing rearward and exiting out the sides of the frame on either side of the rear of the cylinder. A portion of that gas flowing under the extractor could have entered the next chamber and crushed the casing of the next round. Ive seen photos of center-fire casings in adjacent chambers crushed when a revolver has blown-up due to faulty ammunition, but I’ve never seen it happen during normal firing. I have some Velocitors, but I don’t think I’ve ever tried them in the 617. I’ll run a box or two through it and see if I get any problems.
Thanks again for the info!
That reference to “Steve” in the second line is supposed to read “virtualjohn”.
*sigh*
Time to hit the sack….too late for accurate typing.
“I probably won’t be the first one to say that Smith & Wesson knows how to make a revolver.”
Funny, I was just thinking S&W is forgetting how to build a good revolver. The last 640 Pro I looked at in the gun store had a canted barrel. They’re using cruddy MIM parts and include a lock because the parent company needs “gun safety device” sales.
Once you add the beauty of a load block and speedloaders this gun gets 100% better than it already is. I recommend at least the 40 round block but more is better. I also have 3 of the speedloaders with the long handles. Watch out, that box of 525 can disappear in one setting.
Can you spell SWEET???!!! Check it out at
http://ds10speed.wordpress.com/
I’ll have to get a few of those for my 617. Those look very handy!
Yup, a great addition. I originally bought the 40-shot block to go with my DS-10 speedloader, but recently added a 9-ring, 90-shot block to my range bag. Amazing how quickly you can empty a box of rimfire with a speedloader, a topped-off loader block and a fair-to-middlin’ DA revolver shooter.
Why pay 500 for a gun that cant be dry fired when you can get a Kel Wreck for 225
Because you can. And the price is actually closer to $750.00. If you don’t want to buy it, then don’t. I wouldn’t be buying a Kel Tec just so I could have something to dry fire.
I guess I don’t fully understand your comment.
Why not use a standard centerfire K-Frame revolver for dry fire? Better yet, go to the range and fire 550 live rounds from that 617. A box of 550 rounds of Remington Golden Bullets costs less than 50 rounds of 38 Special.
have 617 with the 8 3/8 barrel absolutely awsome… this 6 shooter will not close up if cartridges are only slightly misaligned… old shells that are losing shape chamber ok but here is an important caution which may be cause for your blow black, which nearly caused my loss of sight in one eye/ shooting an anchutz 22lr with old shells that should have been tossed, the brass was week and the shell casing split in the breach… no damage to the gun but microscopic peaces of brass powder and debris flashed back some how directely into my eye… the cause – old amunition which should have been disposed of. old amunition brought out of the old hunt camp we just sold… the stupidity, only time I ever fired a shot without my safety glasses.. stupid yes but hope we all learn….. through out the old amunition, wear the glasses,,, and god bless S W 617 – which handled all the crappy shells without a burp —–
I have a 617 with 6″ barrel. I love the trigger and action. I don’t fire this revolver using the, my reference, long pull on the trigger. I aim at my target, cock the hammer and then pull the trigger and the trigger let off is nearly as soft as the set trigger on my Thompson Center Hawken. It’s heaven to shoot. My problem is seeing the sights. I have looked into the fiber optics which I believe would help me to better see the front sight. I’ve heard some of these do not work well on this model. Anyone out there willing to share their experiences along this line. Maybe it’s just my 70 year old eyes, but I still love pulling the trigger and shooting pesky varmints and also enjoy squirrel and rabbit hunting. Thanks for your time and consideration.
My 10 round 617 w/6″ barrel is better than I ever would’ve expected it to be. A pleasure to shoot and flawless to boot! If you can afford it, get yourself one; lots of fun and economical too.
I’ve had the pleasure of owning a 6″ 617 for 3 months now. The only thing I can say is “Why did I wait so long!”. This revolver is my absolute favorite and a blast to shoot. When I’m at the range I always keep saying “Just one more cylinder”. It’s certainly an expensive .22 but it’s a piece that will last forever.
By some coincidence, I was at a gun store this afternoon where I saw a used pre-lock, six-shot, 4″ 617-1 for $499.
I was intrigued and asked to examine it.
Cons: gun was obviously owned by someone who shot it a LOT. Cylinder lockup had noticeable side-to-side play and endshake due to wear. I did not bring the gauges but barrel cylinder gap looked dishearteningly wide; I eyeballed it at in excess of .010″ on all six chambers. Gun was also filthy and interior of bore was crusted with unburned powder granules. Rear sight blade was noticeably loose in its slot with several hundredths side-to-side and vertical free play you could feel when you put your finger on it.
Pros: showed no sign of dry firing. And when I tried the trigger–with a folded handkerchief between the hammer and the rear of the frame, of course, there being no .22 LR snap caps available–it had the lightest, smoothest DA trigger I’ve ever felt in my life. SA trigger was better yet. Timing seemed perfect, as far as I could determine by eye.
All in all it looked like it ought to clean up nicely. Unfortunately there was no .22 LR available in the store for sale, or else I’d have been even more tempted than I already was.
Yes, these revolvers are a bit on the costly side, but I think that $499 for a used one in the condition you described, seems a bit much to me. I paid $739 + tax for brand new 617 10 shot w/6″ barrel; 3 years ago this March. I wouldn’t expect to pay more than $349 with all the work that’s needed and you say it’s only a six shot.
I just bought a 4 inch 617 for $765 on gunbroker. Ain’t cheap, but boy is it fun. Stoked that I can actually afford to go to the range regularly again!
Re: the “Yikes! Looks like it’s been dry fired a bunch” picture.
Looks like to me that the cylinder just has firing pin relief cuts in it. I have the same in some of my revolvers. When the cartridge is in the cylinder the firing pin strikes normally, but not all the way through. These cuts are in the cylinder so if the cylinder is unloaded, the firing pin will not strike hard steel and blunt or break.
Look closely, all the supposed “dry fire” stikes are cuts, not dulled indentations.
You are not supposed to dry fire a rimfire weapon, it damages the firing pin. Those marks in the cylinder do not look like they are manufactured; zoom in on them. They look like mashes to the metal, they are even ragged in some spots. My 617 has zero marks like this, zilch, nada.