Author Topic: Revolvers in 22 cal? (Read 4034 times)

stevinator · « **on:** September 08, 2012, 06:34:37 AM »

Taurus ,Rossi and Charter Arms all have 22 revolvers I have looked at.Do you guys have a preference of the three? The blued Rossi 98 I saw and held at my local shop felt really nice and looked nice also.

kynardsj · « **Reply #1 on:** September 08, 2012, 07:11:29 AM »

Of the three mentioned I would go with the Taurus. I bought a 4 " Stainless model 94 some years back. 9 shot, shoots great. My wife liked it so much that it belongs to her now. A few more $$$ and you could be the owner of a Ruger Single Six. The best all around 22 revolver made in my opinion.

cwlongshot · « **Reply #2 on:** September 08, 2012, 09:35:45 AM »

Of the three mentioned I would go Ruger or Smith and Wesson.

Been working for gun stores since the '80's and have seen far too many Taurus problems to ever own one... Rossi, well they are worse than Taurus

and then there is Charter Arms. Crude, but funtional.. kinda like our Handis.

I had a 44 Bull dog for a while... Then S&W came out with the 396... Sold the Charco that same day.

Sorry I am not much help accept to say, save a bit longer and go Used S&W or Ruger. I LOVE my Single sixes and 651 & 17 S&W revolvers.

CW

Bigeasy · « **Reply #3 on:** September 08, 2012, 10:25:12 AM »

Does Charter still make the Pathfinder? Back in the 1980's I had one in .22lr, and really enjoyed it as a woods walk around gun when I didn't feel the need for a big bore. Adjustable sights, compact, light weight, and fairly accurate (at least enough for plinking and close range small game). Never needed service, but understand Charter has a good reputation.

My experience with Taurus is not good. Quality varies, and if you get a good one, people are happy...BUT, if not, or you need service, good luck. Not sour grapes, just experience with multiple examples..

Rossi?, cant say, but I would do a little Google searching first, and see what people are saying. A good surface polish does not translate into properly dimensioned parts and fitting..

Rugers, both the single six line, and the newer D/A revolvers are about the best bang for the buck, both in quality and service. S&W's run a little more $, but also offer very good quality, and service second to none. You note I mention "service" a lot - it can be important. Re-sale value is also another consideration, with S&W and Ruger at the top of the heap..

Larry

quasne.inc · « **Reply #4 on:** September 08, 2012, 02:43:59 PM »

I looked at both the Taurus and the Charter and the Charter Pathfinder was much nicer. It had a much better trigger and just looked and felt higher quality so I went home with it.

mechanic · « **Reply #5 on:** September 08, 2012, 04:23:51 PM »

I would have to go with Charter of the three. Unless Taurus gets their act together and produces a product that doesn't have to go back three or four times before it shoots...

Ben

Ranger99 · « **Reply #6 on:** September 08, 2012, 05:05:44 PM »

can't speak for the new tauruses.
i have a stainless 94 i've had for a while,
and it's stood up to the bush pretty good.
or get a 999. i have one of those for a
tractor gun that's worked real well.

(or get a nice used MKII )

Ladobe · « **Reply #7 on:** September 10, 2012, 02:27:27 AM »

Kind of depends on what your uses for a 22 wheel gun will be. Any can pass as a plinker, some are OK for hunting, some way better for serious hunting.

The only two Taurus revolvers I've owned were bought in the 90's, were very well made and reliable. Not 22's though... a 357MAG and a 44SPL. Have heard mixed feelings about the newer centerfires for years, but nothing about their rimfires.

Only Rossi 22 I've ever owned was a Model 62SA pump 22 rifle bought in the mid 80's. Another well made and reliable firearm. Never paid any attention to their handguns, but don't remember hearing anything bad about them either.

Have looked as CA a few times over the years, always chose something else as they didn't impress me.

I've had other "off" brands, mostly in the 50's and 60's that were fine for then, but all of them would have a hard time even coming close to matching all the Ruger, Colt and S&W 22 revolvers I've owned, a bunch of them, even for just plinking. A pop can or shooting whatever can still be big game when pliniking.

Of your three if I had to make a choice I'd probably opt for the Taurus simply because the two I had served me well, and hope that the new ones are as good as the old were. But more likely I'd buy a used of the better instead.

Drilling Man · « **Reply #8 on:** September 10, 2012, 03:46:41 AM »

Quote from: cwlongshot on September 08, 2012, 09:35:45 AM

Of the three mentioned I would go Ruger or Smith and Wesson.

Been working for gun stores since the '80's and have seen far too many Taurus problems to ever own one... Rossi, well they are worse than Taurus and then there is Charter Arms. Crude, but funtional.. kinda like our Handis. I had a 44 Bull dog for a while... Then S&W came out with the 396... Sold the Charco that same day.

Sorry I am not much help accept to say, save a bit longer and go Used S&W or Ruger. I LOVE my Single sixes and 651 & 17 S&W revolvers.

CW

My experience has been pretty much in line with your's.

DM

gcrank1 · « **Reply #9 on:** September 14, 2012, 02:57:22 AM »

We've owned all three brands and have friends who have had them too. The CA is the best of those three, and MUCH easier to get parts/service if needed. Taurus and Rossi have been a nightmare in that regard. A broken gun you cant get parts or service for is an expensive and oddly shaped paperweight. My Taurus 94 looked pretty good but was not very accurate and had a terrible trigger pull and was 'glitchy' through the cylinder rotation. It was not a S&W kit gun clone.
We currently have the new SS snubbie CA Pathfinder and like it very much. Our purpose was specific, for all round use the longer barrel model with adj. sights would be a better kit gun.
If small size isnt required you can buy a used Ruger Single Six for less than a new CA and it will probably last a couple of lifetimes or more.

44 Man · « **Reply #10 on:** September 14, 2012, 06:34:35 AM »

I can say I've had many Charters and I loved my little 3" Pathfinder! It was always reliable and more accurate than I can shoot. I did not care for the wide rear notch and front sight. Those were much more suited for a defensive firearm. I do love my H&R 999 if you can find one. They don't seem to show up used very often as people that have them like them very much. As for the Taurus revolvers, if you check the forum you will find that most of the troubles are with the bigger center fire double actions and not much for the rimfires. I've looked at and will someday own a 94. But what I want most is a lightwt .22 revolver. I don't like the S&W price, but I will find something one of these days that I can enjoy. 44 Man

Brett · « **Reply #11 on:** September 15, 2012, 10:29:44 AM »

I bought a Taurus 4" blued 94 the first or second year they were in production. The early versions did not have the full length ejector shroud and the grip panels were a very attractive Brazilian hard wood. A real nice looker IMO, could pass as a clone of the S&W M34 kit gun. It had a decent trigger and was pretty accurate.

The only trouble I experienced with it was the cylinder gap was actually too tight. After shooting several cylinder fulls the fouling on the face of the cylinder would bind the cylinder up against the rear of the forcing cone. A couple of careful swipes with a file probably would have cured the problem but I ended up trading it away toward a Ruger MKII pistol a few years ago.

Were I in the market for a new .22 "kit gun" I would take a close look at the Charter Arms Pathfinder Target Combo. It comes with two cylinders (.22lr and .22mag.) like a Ruger Single Six only the Pathfinder is a DA revolver. My wife packs a CA .38 Undercover and it has been a good little gun.

P.S.: As a side note my wife used that Taurus 94 to qualify for her CCW. Think she had high score in the class too if I recall right.

Spirithawk · « **Reply #12 on:** September 16, 2012, 06:00:43 PM »

Anyone have any experience with the H&R Model 949 9 shot? I got one in a trade at a gun show recently. Ended up trading ittoo before I left but I kinda wish I'd have kept it.

cwlongshot · « **Reply #13 on:** September 16, 2012, 11:51:57 PM »

I have a High Standard that looks nearly exactly like your 949 Hawk...

Any one know if there is a connection between these two guns and manufacturers?

I can post a couple pics later if needed.

CW

EDIT for pics:

flagman1776 · « **Reply #14 on:** September 18, 2012, 02:46:07 PM »

S&W Kit Gun. Mine will stay as long as I am alive.

keith44 · « **Reply #15 on:** September 20, 2012, 07:37:16 PM »

I will never again own or recommend Taurus. Rossi, to my eye, is a low grade taurus.

Get either a Smith, or a Ruger, and pass it down to your grand children's grandchildren.

Crow Juice · « **Reply #16 on:** October 20, 2012, 08:48:00 AM »

I have both a Taurus 941 and a Charter Pathfinder. I have not had any trouble with either . The 941 was purchased in the mid ninety's and I have had the Pathfinder about 6 years. If I was doing it again I would go with a 94 over the Pathfinder just because of the 9 shot capacity . Both guns are good plinkers , and are accurate enough to kill squarrels at 20 yards . Farther for people that have younger eyes. I agree with 44 man the best field 22 I have ever used is the H&R 999. I have been after my brother's for 10 years.

I have put over 3000 22mags through the 941 and about 2000 long rifles through the Pathfinder. I also have a Single Six and several auto's . The 941 and Pathfinder see more service than the others because of their size.

sidewinder319 · « **Reply #17 on:** October 20, 2012, 09:00:18 AM »

What CWLONGSHOT said.^^^^

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #18 on:** November 20, 2012, 02:00:19 AM »

Of the 3 you have listed, I say the Taurus. But with that said, I would save a little more and go with a Ruger or Smith.

.22-5-40 · « **Reply #19 on:** November 20, 2012, 07:56:29 PM »

Quote from: sidewinder319 on October 20, 2012, 09:00:18 AM

What CWLONGSHOT said.^^^^

Quote from: cwlongshot on September 08, 2012, 09:35:45 AM

Of the three mentioned I would go Ruger or Smith and Wesson.

Been working for gun stores since the '80's and have seen far too many Taurus problems to ever own one... Rossi, well they are worse than Taurus and then there is Charter Arms. Crude, but funtional.. kinda like our Handis. I had a 44 Bull dog for a while... Then S&W came out with the 396... Sold the Charco that same day.

Sorry I am not much help accept to say, save a bit longer and go Used S&W or Ruger. I LOVE my Single sixes and 651 & 17 S&W revolvers.

CW

In agreement with cwlongshot..only I would also add Colt.

NickSS · « **Reply #20 on:** November 23, 2012, 01:23:10 AM »

Iown two Taurus 22 revolvers a stainless 94 and a tracker with a LR and 22 Mag cylinders. The Tracker had a problem with the cylinder locking bolt when I bought it. I called Taurus and they emailed me a shipping label that was pre-payed and I sent it back to them. I shipped it Monday and Wednesday I got a email saying they had my gun and it would take a week to 10 days to get it back. the following Wednesday I got an email saying it would be delivered Thursday and it was. I have heard all sorts of bad reports about their service but you can not prove it by me. My stainless 84 had a tight cylinder gap and I fixed it with a couple of cuts with a flat file to remove about 1.5 Thousandths of an inch from the back of the barrel. Both pistols have been performing fine ever since. A Smith they are not but then they cost half as much. I own half a dozen other taurus pistols and have never had an issue with any of them.