Smith Wesson Victory in .22 LR

I've owned .22 LR guns off and on (right now, off) since I was maybe 13. My first was a Remington Nylon 66. I regret the day I sold that rifle.

But to the point: in the ensuing 4 decades, when I thought ".22", I think rifle. I've owned about ten.

But tonight, I found a new love: the new SW Victory pistol.

Yes, I've courted .22 pistols before. I looked at both Browning and Ruger in the past, but didn't like what I saw ... or said better, I liked the concept, but didn't like the draw backs -- especially take down.

But this SW Victory seems to have nailed the solution by looking closely at the drawbacks of the competitors.

It's now on my list for a general go to the woods .22. It'll take small game good enough (50').

I'll get the SW HRT9B first -- maybe even this week. But a Victory is now on my short list.

https://www.shootingillustrated.com/articles/2016/8/30/smith-wesson-sw22-victory-pistol/

 

Another review that shows all three options. I like the camo.

http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/2016/01/07/smith-wesson-22-victory-pistol/

 

Video review.

 

I like those reviews! I'm a dyed in the wool Ruger MKII fan and used to look at reassembly like a Rubix cube puzzle until I got the trick down on the sear lever. That being said I wouldn't hesitate to own the browning buckmark or this new S&W. I've been of the mindset since my late teens that a good 22lr handgun is an important woods tool, for the last 10-20yrs I've carried my with a magazine loaded with cci stingers along with a magazine loaded with normal lead 22lr. The cci stingers are for coyotes or anything larger and the normal lead rounds for small game.

Stone with practice and a good rest you'll be able to take the small game range a fair bit past 50' with any of these pistols. We've been able to hit 20oz bottles at 80 and 100yds from a seated resting position.

 

JMJ, thanks very much for your encouraging post. You're the one to the pistol party here, and I appreciate your experienced perspective -- gives me hope that my new strategy is sound. The more I think about it, the more I think pistol for my needs, .22 pistol makes way more sense than rifle. I want another rifle in .22, but in .223/5.56 mm (Ruger American Ranch Rifle, bolt). But for small game and -- if necessary -- coyote (good tip about stingers), I think this Victory is the right one for me.

After a long and at times annoying social engagement last night ("Won't these people please leave!!!"), I watched more video reviews. Some were worth it, others just this side of ridiculo

 

... OK, I inadvertently hit "Post Reply" (damn track pads on laptops! :-( ) before finishing the post. Because of ongoing page load issues (java script console), the server won't allow me to edit, so I'll finish my thoughts here with thumbs well away from the track pad.

Some were worth the watch, others just this side of ridiculous. I'll post a couple of the better ones later in the (busy for me) weekend.

I hope others will join this discussion, and bring more info about the other major .22 pistols, regardless of whether they've had experience with the SW Victory (henceforth, SWV).

 

Great story, Andy, and good advice, too. Thanks.

Good point re the hand fit of the SWV. I learned that big time over the last two decades with 9mm. I owned three pistols before I found the one that works for me: a Ruger LC9S (before that, in reverse order, Ruger SR9c, Kahr K9 and started with a SW decades ago that was way too big. The LC9s fits my smallish hands well.

I did watch a vid review last night by a guy 6' 6" (palms basketballs) who claims it's too small for him. But I suspect it fits average people best.

There are a couple of gun stores in my region -- three, actually -- so I'm going to call around next week and see if any are around.

I'll also give that Ruger Mk II another look. IIRC, it's no longer produced ; used only.

I wish I could afford a MK IV. I just reviewed the new ones (it's been a LONG time since I've looked at them. Wow, I'm impressed -- they look really nice; they claim simple one button take down and have a 6.8"barrel -- nice -- and better looking grips (for me). But with an MSRP in the $700's, it's not going to be in my budget anytime soon.

 

OK, as long as we've opened up discussion for other models, let's think way outside the box.

I looked a bit at these a couple of years ago before buying my last .22 rifle (Remington 597 HB; tack driver, wonderfully short (16" barrel -- great for the north woods), but heavy; now sold). I'm talking Ruger Charger. This one is the cheapest, and I'm good with 10 rnds (I'm emphatically not a plinker; I make every shot count, especially these days in the age of scarce .22 ammo.)

Surprisingly, it's only 6 ozs heavier than the Mk IV (50 oz v 44). And a 10" barrel v 6.8" and 5.5" for the SWV. Hmm.

It's not really a pistol, but neither is it a rifle. I'm strongly leaning toward a pistol. Just way easier to carry. But I won't rule out anything at this point.

 

Sort of strikes me that way, also -- like some marketing executive had a dream. I've not read any reviews of them. Might do a bit of searching tonight -- just for grins. Just came back from a social dinner on Saturday night -- nothing else going on.

 

Here's a comparison of Ruger Mark IV and SWV by 22Plinkster.

At 4:35, he says, "If you have smaller hands, the Smith Wesson Victory will probably fit your hand better."

He's talking to me. Having said that, he likes the Ruger grips better.

 

Why not a revolver instead @Stone ????

 

Good question, Zack.

Nothing wrong with revolvers. I shot them for years, although never a .22.

But I'm off in semi-auto-land now. I've sold my revolvers. I just like the way pistols feel, their ease of reload -- those magazines are so fast and easy. And once I go with a platform for one gun, I stick with it for others. Just easier that way for me. Yeah, I'm a minimalist: few guns in my kit. I prefer it that way.

Having said that, when I add another rifle, it'll be that bold action Ruger American Ranch Rifle in .223.

But for handguns, semi's got me for now.

 

With .22's a revolver has some advantages, reliable feeding is somewhat of an issue with most .22 autos, particularly in regard to stovepiping, also dud primers are a common enough occurrence that just cocking the hammer for a second shot is a nice thing.
I'd look at the single six from Ruger.

 

I have no doubt the Single Six is a fine revolver. I've not shot one, but have read a LOT about them.

And a few years ago, I'd have bought one for this application.

But now, as I said above, I'm in semi-auto-land.
I think it was my move from .38 spl SW Airweight and that mod 65 to the LC9s.
Pistol just feels more right for me now than revolver.
I'm not saying revolver is bad. Far from it. For those looking for that ultimate reliability, give a look.

But I'm in a different land now: SemiAuto. I just like the sleekness and feel.

 

Another review of the SWV, with comparison to a fine Ruger.

I continue to be drawn closer to the SWV ...

 

I think the ruger 10/22 charger was meant for small bore bench rest shooting and shorter range varmint shooting from a rest. The only plus side to it I see if you wanna pop squirrels or something from discrete spot and since it's sold as a pistol you can legally later buy an aftermarket stock and barrel to convert to a rifle and back if that's something that interests you.

Also it will except ruger and butler creek 25 round magazines.

 

Check out the ruger 22/45 and 22/45 lite also @Stone. They may run a little cheaper than the MKIV.

 

Ok, just one more. Then, I'm off to bed. Busy weekend professionally.

This one addresses numerous technical features of the SWV in an efficient way.