Smallest "good" .22 Double Action?

[rodfac]

Micro.

the world needs a quality DA smaller than a J frame

....I don't have overly large hands (tho do take a size "L" glove), and find that I need bigger stocks on my J frames to keep my trigger finger in DA fire, from contacting my thumb while firing. When it does, it invariably knocks my shots off to the side of the group...sometimes by a considerable amount, especially at speed. I guess what I'm saying is that for DA fire, the J-frame is about the practical limit on how small you can go without interfering with firing function/accuracy. What say you? Rod

 

[osbornk]

I love my Charter Arms Pathfinder

 

[Bill DeShivs]

There were some pre-1968 imported revolvers in .22 short that were interesting. I believe Galef imported one called the "Sable" that was pretty well made. Most, like the RGs were junk.

I did manage to find a rare Rossi "Prince" .32 long revolver that is "I" frame size, and very well made.

 

[TruthTellers]

Micro. ....I don't have overly large hands (tho do take a size "L" glove), and find that I need bigger stocks on my J frames to keep my trigger finger in DA fire, from contacting my thumb while firing. When it does, it invariably knocks my shots off to the side of the group...sometimes by a considerable amount, especially at speed. I guess what I'm saying is that for DA fire, the J-frame is about the practical limit on how small you can go without interfering with firing function/accuracy. What say you? Rod

It is difficult to aim and accurately fire the Young America with a DA pull, which is why I consider the DA feature to be a point and shoot or belly gun/get off me tool. That said, when I cock the hammer for single action I can get hits out to 7 yards, which for such a small gun is not bad.

Definitely better and easier to shoot than an NAA mini revolver.

 

[CajunBass]

Looks like it's about the size of a J frame, if not bigger. Not something I would put in the very small category like the Rossi Princess or HR Young America.

I put focus on the "smaller than a J frame" because my thinking is if I'm gonna carry or otherwise use a J frame revolver, I'm not going to choose .22 over .32 or .38, however for a revolver with a smaller frame and lighter weight (the H&R weighs 7oz) I would.

Actually a Hi-Standard Sentinel is about the size of a K-frame Smith and Wesson. I used the same holsters for mine.

 

[Bill DeShivs]

We were talking about the Hi Standard Derringer, not the Sentinel.

 

[ThomasT]

In post #4 the OP says he didn't specify a 22. So he is open to other small rounds. My bud bought an I-Frame in 32 long that is really nice. Its smaller than a J-Frame but not by a large amount. He never shoots it but I'm not going to try and talk him out of it. Besides I have 4 other J-Frames in 32 caliber.

I don't know of any small revolvers off the top of my head. If I were looking for a SD gun smaller that a Jframe but bigger than one of the NAA guns I would get a Kel-tec P-32 again. I stupidly sold the first one and I can't figure out why. It was totally reliable and so easy to carry. That would be my best recommendation.

 

[Ricklin]

Technology vs. Geometry?

I've a Taurus 94, a J frame size .22 double action. I enjoy it, and it is accurate. Invariably I am shooting it single action. It's that two men and a boy trigger pull.
I spent a fair amount of time and effort smoothing it up, and had some success.

Now it is smooth, but still heavy. In researching the issue I learned that the frame size and the healthy whack required for rimfire combine to make it darn near impossible to reduce pull weight significantly and retain reliable ignition.

That is where I settled, reliability is #1. I can shoot it double action, I can shoot it better single action.

 

[TruthTellers]

In post #4 the OP says he didn't specify a 22. So he is open to other small rounds. My bud bought an I-Frame in 32 long that is really nice. Its smaller than a J-Frame but not by a large amount. He never shoots it but I'm not going to try and talk him out of it. Besides I have 4 other J-Frames in 32 caliber.

I don't know of any small revolvers off the top of my head. If I were looking for a SD gun smaller that a Jframe but bigger than one of the NAA guns I would get a Kel-tec P-32 again. I stupidly sold the first one and I can't figure out why. It was totally reliable and so easy to carry. That would be my best recommendation.

I said I didn't specify .22 Long Rifle because I didn't want to exclude any .22 rimfires from the discussion. I left it open to ALL other .22 rimfires including the Short, Long, and Magnum.

 

[ThomasT]

OK gotcha. The only small 22 I have anymore is a 4" model 34-1 flat latch. I did have an older like from the 1990s Taurus model 94 22lr with 3" barrel and truly regret selling it. But it was still a J-Frame sized gun. It sure shot good though.

People have been calling for a smaller than J-Frame sized 22/32 for a long time. I would be surprised if one is ever offered. I bet it would sell.

 

[rodfac]

It is difficult to aim and accurately fire the Young America with a DA pull, which is why I consider the DA feature to be a point and shoot or belly gun/get off me tool. That said, when I cock the hammer for single action I can get hits out to 7 yards, which for such a small gun is not bad. Definitely better and easier to shoot than an NAA mini revolver.

Truth: Good points, for sure. In my use, the .22 Smith M-63 that I own is an understudy for my M-60 & M-36, .357 & .38 Spl's.

I made an effort to shoot these centerfires, DA 90+% of the time and actually found that my DA groups weren't significantly larger than my slow fire SA efforts. That's the reason I want a good/excellent DA trigger pull....just wish I could find a local (Louisville, KY), area gunsmith that could do the work in less than a year's lead time. All the old LEO armorers are long gone from this area, sad to say. I'll admit also that I routinely carry all three as trail, plinking guns.

While the SA triggers on the above mentioned Smiths all share S&W's well earned reputation for superb SA feel (Inch groups at 10 yds +, are routine), I'm greedy enough to want the same from my DA triggers as well...ah...the search continues. Best regards, Rod

 

[TruthTellers]

Truth: Good points, for sure. In my use, the .22 Smith M-63 that I own is an understudy for my M-60 & M-36, .357 & .38 Spl's.

I made an effort to shoot these centerfires, DA 90+% of the time and actually found that my DA groups weren't significantly larger than my slow fire SA efforts. That's the reason I want a good/excellent DA trigger pull....just wish I could find a local (Louisville, KY), area gunsmith that could do the work in less than a year's lead time. All the old LEO armorers are long gone from this area, sad to say. I'll admit also that I routinely carry all three as trail, plinking guns.

While the SA triggers on the above mentioned Smiths all share S&W's well earned reputation for superb SA feel (Inch groups at 10 yds +, are routine), I'm greedy enough to want the same from my DA triggers as well...ah...the search continues. Best regards, Rod

It doesn't help accuracy with the small grip of the .32 Young America combined with the heavy loads I shoot from them having a fair bit of recoil and the heavy, yet smooth DA trigger. I expect the .22's trigger to be heavier for DA, but it also will have no recoil and that may help for DA shots.

Overall, I view these Young America revolvers as enhanced versions of the NAA mini revolvers, just with better ergos, higher capacities (7 vs 5) or bigger caliber (.32 vs .22), and of course a double action trigger. Yes, they are larger than the NAA revolvers, but it does get to a point where small is too small.

If I can't hit worth a spit at 15 yards with them, that's fine because that's not what the gun is meant to do. 1 inch groups at 10 yards is nice, but is it really necessary for self defense? I don't think so.

 

[Drm50]

Snub nose m34 kit gun is as good as it gets. I’ve dont extensive looking for the perfect 22 for everyday carry. I’m not talking about a SD gun. I’m talking about a 22 that is small and light enough to be out of the way when engaged in outdoor chores. Also accurate enough that it’s practical. I got the snub m34 and found the gun was capable but I wasn’t. I had to go to 4” 34 for something worth carrying. I went the whole range of 22 pistols too. I had all the 32 frame jobs I could find, a few plastics and 2/3 scale 1911 models. Some of these small pistols and revolvers are novelties and range toys. They have no practical value. Most don’t even make plinker class. That’s not to say you may get a fluke that shoots much better than it should.
The only way to determine accuracy is to shoot groups of a rest. If you have one that will group, if you miss it’s your fault. I case you are wondering I ended up with S&W 422, 4” Target as carry piece. It’s light and flat, shoots as well as 4” m34. Bonus being if you fall in the creek, it’s a lot easier to strip and clean than a revolver.

 

[Brian Williams]

This is going to be my choice.
A 22/32 Kit gun.

 

[rodfac]

OOOOOOOO. That's a beauty, Brian. Rod

 

[TruthTellers]

Some years back I pestered this forum with the idea that the world needs a quality DA smaller than a J frame. It was not well recieved.

I'm not surprised in the least that something new would be derided by people on gun forums as it seems anything outside the box is rejected by people set in their ways. I can understand not personally wanting a .22 the size of a Rossi Princess or HR Young America, but let's be frank, input by people on gun forums comes with a very narrow view.

How many women are out there with small hands and are recoil sensitive and want a smaller option for carrying a revolver than what's currently offered? If at one point in time there were double action .22's that were smaller than J frames, what's the argument that there is no market for such a gun? What, simply because no one has made a Ladysmith or HR Young America for 80+ years?

Rodfac replied to you and said

for DA fire, the J-frame is about the practical limit on how small you can go without interfering with firing function/accuracy.

He has good reason to make this statement because he has difficulty shooting a J frame with standard grips, however he is but one person with one experience.

 

[Pumpkin]

This is going to be my choice.
A 22/32 Kit gun.

I think you win!

 

[rodfac]

How many women are out there with small hands and are recoil sensitive and want a smaller option for carrying a revolver than what's currently offered? If at one point in time there were double action .22's that were smaller than J frames, what's the argument that there is no market for such a gun? What, simply because no one has made a Ladysmith or HR Young America for 80+ years?

Rodfac replied to you and said
Quote:
for DA fire, the J-frame is about the practical limit on how small you can go without interfering with firing function/accuracy.
He has good reason to make this statement because he has difficulty shooting a J frame with standard grips, however he is but one person with one experience.

Yep, your comments regarding a woman's small hand size better fitting the J-frame's size are valid.

I'll add that in addition to the back strap to trigger face distance dimension being a problem, the deep gap between the 2nd finger and the frame also causes problems...and not with just larger hand individuals. I find it a problem with S&W's K and N frames as well when fitted with the old "Magna" grips.

One way to make the J-frame easier to shoot with accuracy and speed, aside from custom grips, is to employ a grip adapter...fitted behind the trigger guard, it fills the gap above the 2nd finger. In doing this, it does not increase the distance between the back of the grip frame and the trigger, a critical dimension for good, sustained, accurate fire for folks with smaller hands.

Best regards, Rod

 

[Armybrat]

....

 

[Armybrat]

PS - I do not know how to post the full open photo.