I like J-Frame revolvers but have never owned a rimfire version. I've heard the trigger pull is quite a bit heavier. Can any 351PD or 351C owners can tell me how they compare to a 442/642. Thanks.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: bobandmikako,

I've never owned a 351, but the j frame rimfire generally due have heavier trigger pulls. I've never had the need to do it, but I've know guys who would put a lighter trigger return spring and it helped some. You don't want the trigger too light or you may get misfires with the rimfires.

It's just as jaybird indicated. I don't have a 351, but did have a J-Frame .22 rimfire, model 63 and have a 642. The stock 642 trigger pull is definitely lighter. Heavier triggers, i.e., stronger mainsprings, are common in rimfire revolvers to reliably fire the rimfire ammunition. The same type revolver in a centerfire caliber can function reliably with a lighter mainspring.

I have had a couple 351PD's which is the version with the hammer, internal lock and fiber optic front sight. I think the plain 351 is the one with the plastic big dot front sigh and internal hammer. I think they are fantastic carry guns. 7 shots, 10 oz., reliable, fun to shoot and accurate. I found that the bullet weight will slightly effect point of impact out of the 351, but just a little high/low difference depending on 30, 40 or 50 grains and really less than an inch between all 3.
Now for the trigger. Heavy pull, nothing horrible, a little heavier for sure between the other j frames but here is the beauty of the little 351PD. There is absolutely no recoil. So once you practice a little with the slightly heavier pull, you can rip off 7 shots, at 10 yards into a 2 inch group as fast as you can pull the trigger. There are also several tests of you tube now showing how the .22 magnum loads (gold dot 40 grainers) are actually performing better in gel than .380 rounds.
For summer carry when shorts and t shirts are all anyone is wearing i think its a great choice.
I only dumped mine because i found and way overpaid for a new in the box semi rare 2" 651 6 shot .22 mag. These things are beautifully made, recessed cylinder, pinned ejector, adjustable sight , revolvers that would take way to much time to make today and they would have to charge a number nobody would pay. I shoot mine alot, and you they are all steel so you can shoot them fast, with accuracy even easier than the 351PD. Very fun little revolver, but too heavy for shorts carry like i did with the 351PD.
All in all, do not pass on a 351 because of the trigger pull. I think they are great little revolvers and .22 mag is a great round.

Thanks very much. I think I'll get one. I can deal with a slightly heavier pull. As long as it's not like the 20 lb pull of my old Nagant M1895!

Thanks for everyone's advice. I did finally pick up a 351C and got to shoot it. I'm really glad I did. The trigger is not nearly as heavy as I expected. It's pretty smooth too. The recoil is nothing even though the pistol is so light. I didn't think I'd be able to tell the difference in weight too much between the 351C and my 442, but the 351C is very noticeably lighter. The nice white dot front sight is a plus too. I think this one is a keeper.

Neighbor got one for his Mom, about 60, good shape. She COULD NOT pull the trigger. We took it to the range, I could shoot it, but accuracy with that goshawful pull was iffy at best. It went to the next gun show.

I have one as well. The trigger is heavy on purpose. Too lite will cause misfires on rimmed 22 rounds (so don't mess with the hammer spring). But the trigger rebound can be lightened some (proceed at your own risk). I took one coil off mine. Still works with no issues and the trigger is better. I believe Wolf Springs has a spring kit available for these as well.

Mine goes in a sticky holster in my shorts pocket while I mow.

I love my 351c. It goes running with me every week in a smart-carry-type holster.
Incredibly light. Invisible in a front pocket.
.22 mag is no joke.
It's my "I don't have a gun" gun.

I’ve noticed mine is just a teensy bit loud.

I've had the .22mag j-frame. As many have said it has a heavier mainspring for ignition reliability. Sent it to Cylinder and Slide for an action job. Went from terrible to just slightly less terrible. I do not recommend at all. I spent a lot of time and money trying to get this to work. When I traded it in the counter jockey (who gave me a decent value on it) was a little surprised by cosmetic wear on all the moving parts.

Consider looking for one of the out of production (for now) .32 H&R mag J-frames. Loaded with Hornady Critical Defense loads this is a much better option than a .22 mag and is a 6 shot also.

quote:

Originally posted by beltfed21:
I have one as well. The trigger is heavy on purpose. Too lite will cause misfires on rimmed 22 rounds (so don't mess with the hammer spring). But the trigger rebound can be lightened some (proceed at your own risk). I took one coil off mine. Still works with no issues and the trigger is better. I believe Wolf Springs has a spring kit available for these as well.

Mine goes in a sticky holster in my shorts pocket while I mow.

I've taken mine out 3 times now. Although I was pretty happy with it overall out of the box, the trigger was still pretty heavy. I've done quite a bit of minor gunsmith work on regular centerfire J and L frame revolvers, but this is my first rimfire. I'm very happy with how my other J frame triggers turned out, so I went ahead and lightly polished/stoned the internals. I swapped out the mainspring with a Wolff 9 lb spring, which is heavier than the factory spring on a centerfire J frame but still lighter than the red factory 351C spring. I also installed a Wolff 14 lb rebound spring which is a bit lighter than the factory spring. I took it out yesterday and put 84 rounds through it, a mixture of Hornady 45gr FTX, Speer 40gr Gold Dot and CCI 40gr Maxi Mag. No failures at all and the trigger was a lot lighter. I shot it a little better as well.

I think these ultra light smiths are best in these little calibers.

I don’t understand why Ruger didn’t offer the LCR with an aluminum cylinder, and more rounds. The Taurus 94/941 from a couple years ago had 9 rnds .22LR and 8 rounds .22 Magnum! They are 16.6 oz, but waaayyyy better triggers. I love the lightweight 351 though!