Oh boy! I want one too!
-
If you are having trouble with your password change please click here for help.
Review: Smith & Wesson SW22 Victory Target Gun
- Thread starter toobaroque
- Start date
-
- Tags
- s&w smith & wesson victory
This thread is going to cost us all some money.
Well, I'm back from the indoor range (open 24/7, I might add) and here's my report. I'll start with the simple stuff.
Trigger Pull (straight out of the box): Using my handy Lyman electronic trigger pull gauge I took 5 measurement of the SW22 just as it came out of the box. I put a snap cap in the gun to simulate a cartridge and to prevent any potential damage to the firing pin.
#1: 5lb 5.5oz.
#2: 5lb 4.0oz.
#3: 5lb 2.0oz.
#4: 5lb 5.0oz.
#5: 5lb 2.5oz.
The average for these 5 pulls was 5lb 4.0oz. right out of the box.
In contrast, I took measurements on competitive guns which obviously were NOT right out of the box. I'll spare you the details and just give the averages. These trigger pull measurements were as follows:
Ruger Mark III Hunter: 3lb 13.3oz.
Ruger Mark II Slab Side: 4lb 2.5oz.
AMT Lightning (VQ parts): 2lb 1.3oz. (this is my competition gun)
I started the shooting test next and that will be in a subsequent post. Overall I believe I put 200 rounds through the gun this trip out, with 100 of those rounds being CCI Standard Velocity. The other ammo used during test was Fiocchi 40gr, CCI Mini-Mag 40 gr, Federal 40 gr HP, Remington Cyclone, Aquila SuperExtra 40gr round nose, Federal AutoMatch, and CCI Quiet. I had a TOTAL of 4 failure to feeds (except for the CCI quiets, which would NOT cycle the gun), and all the FTFeeds were with the Remington Cyclone. All of the other ammo worked perfectly. The CCI Quiets would fire and eject, but they would not cycle the bolt far enough to pick up a new shell.
Both magazines performed as expected. Loading is just like the Ruger mags and I didn't have any problem getting the shells to load. I loaded all the magazines by hand because I wanted to know if they would pose any problems, and they did not.
Since I'm on the Trigger Pull subject, I'll let you know that after all the shooting was complete, I took five more measurements of the trigger and found a different result. This was not really a surprise that there was a difference, but the amount of difference was somewhat curious.
After the smoke cleared:
#1: 4lb 0.8oz.
#2: 4lb 7.3oz.
#3: 4lb 9.6oz.
#4: 4lb 10.9oz.
#5: 4lb 5.2oz.
Average trigger pull after 200+ rounds fires was 4lb 6.8oz.
... more later on the shooting.
Trigger Pull (straight out of the box): Using my handy Lyman electronic trigger pull gauge I took 5 measurement of the SW22 just as it came out of the box. I put a snap cap in the gun to simulate a cartridge and to prevent any potential damage to the firing pin.
#1: 5lb 5.5oz.
#2: 5lb 4.0oz.
#3: 5lb 2.0oz.
#4: 5lb 5.0oz.
#5: 5lb 2.5oz.
The average for these 5 pulls was 5lb 4.0oz. right out of the box.
In contrast, I took measurements on competitive guns which obviously were NOT right out of the box. I'll spare you the details and just give the averages. These trigger pull measurements were as follows:
Ruger Mark III Hunter: 3lb 13.3oz.
Ruger Mark II Slab Side: 4lb 2.5oz.
AMT Lightning (VQ parts): 2lb 1.3oz. (this is my competition gun)
I started the shooting test next and that will be in a subsequent post. Overall I believe I put 200 rounds through the gun this trip out, with 100 of those rounds being CCI Standard Velocity. The other ammo used during test was Fiocchi 40gr, CCI Mini-Mag 40 gr, Federal 40 gr HP, Remington Cyclone, Aquila SuperExtra 40gr round nose, Federal AutoMatch, and CCI Quiet. I had a TOTAL of 4 failure to feeds (except for the CCI quiets, which would NOT cycle the gun), and all the FTFeeds were with the Remington Cyclone. All of the other ammo worked perfectly. The CCI Quiets would fire and eject, but they would not cycle the bolt far enough to pick up a new shell.
Both magazines performed as expected. Loading is just like the Ruger mags and I didn't have any problem getting the shells to load. I loaded all the magazines by hand because I wanted to know if they would pose any problems, and they did not.
Since I'm on the Trigger Pull subject, I'll let you know that after all the shooting was complete, I took five more measurements of the trigger and found a different result. This was not really a surprise that there was a difference, but the amount of difference was somewhat curious.
After the smoke cleared:
#1: 4lb 0.8oz.
#2: 4lb 7.3oz.
#3: 4lb 9.6oz.
#4: 4lb 10.9oz.
#5: 4lb 5.2oz.
Average trigger pull after 200+ rounds fires was 4lb 6.8oz.
... more later on the shooting.
ok where is this range that is open 24/7?
You asked (with skepticism perhaps) Lol I am so jealous. More or less a private range at odd hours.
http://www.theoutdoorstrader.com/th...lection-ticket-good-for-all-drawings.1103819/
I just picked one of these up myself. Hoping tomorrow will be decent enough weather that I can try it out.
While I love my Buckmark and MkIII 22/45, this gun is really a great alternative, and the price was right at $399 (will probably be down to $350-ish once the newness wears off).
I'm really curious on how well it shoots groups. The Ruger is a tack driver out of the box, and the Browning isn't bad either. If this can keep up it's other features will definitely make it into a favorite.
For one thing it's really well made. Much better than the MkIII 22/45. Fit and finish is outstanding and I couldn't find any tooling marks at all (sorry Ruger, but the 22/45 is kind of a hot-mess there.)
The second thing I noticed is that this gun is a snap to clean. Loosen a single hex-screw in front of the trigger guard and the whole upper unlocks and comes right off. Pull the bolt out the back and you are done with the field strip. Putting it back together is just as simple. I did both in less than a minute, something impossible to do with either the Ruger or (God forbid) the Browning.
Last but not least is the interchangeable barrel system. After field stripping it, you loosen another hex-head screw and the entire chamber/barrel comes out of the receiver as a single unit. Right now they are only selling the bull-barrel version the OP shows, but they will be delivering threaded barrels and lightweight barrels as well.
Volquartsen already has a couple of really nice barrels available, although you are talking VQ prices ($290 MSRP). Smith is coming out with their own line which should be much cheaper (more in the $100 range). The barrels look to be idiot-proof, with only one way to slip-fit them, and the lockup between the barrel and receiver seems very positive.
The gun also has removable side-panels, so you can be sure that there will be lots of different grips coming out for it over time. The factory's plastic parts are decent though, with good ergo's and pretty decent one-size-fits-all dimensions.
If the accuracy is similar to the Rugers, they may finally have a semi competitive to the Mk II/III series.
.
While I love my Buckmark and MkIII 22/45, this gun is really a great alternative, and the price was right at $399 (will probably be down to $350-ish once the newness wears off).
I'm really curious on how well it shoots groups. The Ruger is a tack driver out of the box, and the Browning isn't bad either. If this can keep up it's other features will definitely make it into a favorite.
For one thing it's really well made. Much better than the MkIII 22/45. Fit and finish is outstanding and I couldn't find any tooling marks at all (sorry Ruger, but the 22/45 is kind of a hot-mess there.)
The second thing I noticed is that this gun is a snap to clean. Loosen a single hex-screw in front of the trigger guard and the whole upper unlocks and comes right off. Pull the bolt out the back and you are done with the field strip. Putting it back together is just as simple. I did both in less than a minute, something impossible to do with either the Ruger or (God forbid) the Browning.
Last but not least is the interchangeable barrel system. After field stripping it, you loosen another hex-head screw and the entire chamber/barrel comes out of the receiver as a single unit. Right now they are only selling the bull-barrel version the OP shows, but they will be delivering threaded barrels and lightweight barrels as well.
Volquartsen already has a couple of really nice barrels available, although you are talking VQ prices ($290 MSRP). Smith is coming out with their own line which should be much cheaper (more in the $100 range). The barrels look to be idiot-proof, with only one way to slip-fit them, and the lockup between the barrel and receiver seems very positive.
The gun also has removable side-panels, so you can be sure that there will be lots of different grips coming out for it over time. The factory's plastic parts are decent though, with good ergo's and pretty decent one-size-fits-all dimensions.
If the accuracy is similar to the Rugers, they may finally have a semi competitive to the Mk II/III series.
.
I broke my shooting groups down into 5-shot groups. Since I was getting used to the trigger and the gun for the first time, I wanted to have enough shots to be able eliminate a potential flyer or flinch. All of my test shots were using CCI Standard Velocity ammunition.
My first 5 shots at 10 yards (I chose this distance because that's where my steel plate competition shooting starts and I wanted to be sure and hit paper) was a surprise. Right out of the box, this gun shot a pretty decent group. The picture below tells the story on that.
All of my shooting was free hand, so there could be some shots that are "out there". Sorry about that, I know it's not the professional way of doing it, but I was really wanting to get a feel for the gun as well as run the tests. I think I was able to accomplish both.
Here's the picture of the gun's first 5 rounds.
My first 5 shots at 10 yards (I chose this distance because that's where my steel plate competition shooting starts and I wanted to be sure and hit paper) was a surprise. Right out of the box, this gun shot a pretty decent group. The picture below tells the story on that.
All of my shooting was free hand, so there could be some shots that are "out there". Sorry about that, I know it's not the professional way of doing it, but I was really wanting to get a feel for the gun as well as run the tests. I think I was able to accomplish both.
Here's the picture of the gun's first 5 rounds.
My next 5 shots were not quite as good, but still pretty decent. I was a little closer to center because I took a little more time on this round, but I quickly became convinced the factory has assumed a longer distance than 10 yards.
Next 5 shot group as follows. I'm still getting used to the feel of the gun and the trigger, but it fits very nicely.
Next 5 shot group as follows. I'm still getting used to the feel of the gun and the trigger, but it fits very nicely.
Next, I lowered the point of impact 3 clicks on the rear sight. I actually got 2 hits on or close to the X, and a couple shots were a little high. Probably because I didn't take enough time. Oh well... still getting used to my new baby.
Breaking out a new target, still at 10 yards, I decided to try and focus more closely on accuracy and forget about the feel of the gun and the trigger. I settled into my concentrated shooting form (in spite of the 52 degrees temperature in this place) and see what I could do. I'm no Jerry Miculek, of course, but I was happy with the result that follows for my next 5 shots. I think given some time to really get used to this gun, I would be able to shoot it competitively.
Clean target, 5 shots free hand, slow pace:
Clean target, 5 shots free hand, slow pace:
