You sir are correct. I just checked on the Smith website and they clearly state that the 617 is a k frame design. My confusion must stem from the fact that both designs have full underlugs. I happened to own both until recently and they are similar in size so I did a bit more digging around. Found some interesting info on the smith & wesson forum:

Quoted From:
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/200519-617-k-l-frame.html
They are actually quite close in size and a 617 will actually weigh MORE than a 686 with the same barrel length. As for why, smaller bores in the cylinder and barrel means that those parts weight more.

As for the key difference, the cylinder in the K frame is 1.45 inches in diameter and the cylinder on the L frame is 1.56 inches in diameter. Because of this the window in the frame on the L frame is 0.11 inch "taller" and the barrel is 0.055 inch further away from the center of the cylinder. Finally, the stub that threads into the frame on the L frame is a bit larger than the stub that threads into the K frame, so barrels cannot be swapped between the 2 frame sizes.

Beyond those differences due to the larger cylinder, the K and L frame are basically identical, length of the frame windows are the same, the top strap has the same width and thickness, and the area under the frame window is bascially identical. Also, the K and L frame use the same grip frame from one of the poster's there.

Bascially, the L frame is a K frame that was enlarged just enough to correct the slight weakness that the K frame demonstrated with the 357 Magnums that were used with light bullets loaded to maximum pressure. By raising the barrel be 0.055 inch in relation to the center of the cylinder the flat on the underside of the barrel to clear the gas ring on the cylinder was eliminated in the L frame. At the same time they enlarged the barrel stub that extends into the frame by IIRC by 0.02 inch. The result was no more split forcing cones in the Magnums in a revolver that wasn't much heavier. BTW, the greatest weight gain in most of the L frames is due to the full length barrel underlug that is featured on most L frames. However, the 686 Mountain gun which features a Tapered semi lugged barrel is listed at a weight of only 32 ounces, which is actually 2 ounces LESS than the weight of my 4 inch tapered barrel model 67-1 K frame. However, I have a sneaking hunch that when that 686 Mountain gun was actually weighed it didn't have the grips mounted because I would expect that with the standard Hogue rubbers it will actually weigh in at 34 to 35 ounces, basically the same as my 67-1.

My vote is a SS sp101.

Or a nice Uberti 22lr that holds 12 rounds.

Love my 2.25 inch sp101 in .357 mag. It's my daily carry and I don't even notice it carrying iwb. It's meaty for it's class but they are built sturdy.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

I've owned three bad revolvers:
Taurus P-85 .38 special stainless. Firing pin spring broke making it impossible to load or cock unless gun was pointed in the air.
Charter Arms Undercover .32 SW Long: Gun would lock up, couldn't cock, pull trigger, or open cylinder without wiggling it around for awhile.
High Standard .22: Barrel shot off and went flying downrange a few feet.

Yeah, I pretty much ignored the whole concealed carry aspect. There really aren't any small revolvers that are fun to shoot all AND make good defensive guns.

Master the trigger on a double action revolver and nothing will seem difficult to you.

Well that's a pretty solid testimonial to avoid buying shitty revolvers.

Oh, I've had problems with Colt, SW, and Dan Wesson revolvers too.
But those three I mentioned made me avoid the brand altogether...the whole thing about the gun suddenly being unable to fire.
(Weird though, because I had an older Taurus P-85 that I never had a problem with.)

I had a thread on this not too long ago.

I ended up getting a Ruger gP100 6" Talo

I totally agree with this synopsis.
But...you left out Colt. Colts cost more, but they never go DOWN in value!

Soooo true! I still use the hammer but my revolvers only come out at the range. A revolver in Single action 2-3 lb trigger pull= fun shooting!

Sorry golddigger14s, can't agree that Taurus makes good revolvers. They don't.

Unfortunately, both S&W and Ruger are having QC issues with their revolvers. Look and feel before you peel (off those hundred dollar bills). But a good S&W or Ruger is better than a "good" i.e. made to their spec Taurus. I do like the Taurus rubber grips on their big bores.

Thanks for the great advice. Now I have a list to take to the rental range and keep an eye out in the For Sale section.

Agree with Zombie66.

I first had a .357 LCR that I traded for a 3"ish SP101. In hindsight I should have kept the LCR and paid cash for the SP101. They both serve a purpose.

LCR in my pocket is 99% undetectable when I stand. Especially when I had my cell phone in the other pocket. People always guessed the cell phone was the gun.

LCR is is a bit tough to shoot if you like to practice with magnums. But, .357 frame with .38 +Ps are easier to handle.

I love my SP101, can shoot anything out of it and enjoy it all day. Cannot conceal nearly as easily as the LCR but still doable.

My advice is get both.