I'm just taking exception to the blanket statement of "any DA .22lr having a tough trigger because they need to". They don't all, nor do they need one if it's designed right.
I
own an SP101 in .22lr and I have checked out the new model with the big fiber optic sights in a couple of local stores. Almost bought one for mom to match up with the GP100 she appropriated out of my safe but she chose a Buckmark instead (her choice...she wanted an autoloader).
The rimfire SP uses the same springs inside as the centerfire SP. The entire fire control group is the same except for the firing pin, which is offset instead of centered.
The only differing part in the FCG is the cylinder hand (mine is a six-shot like the .32/.327 models, the new rimfires are 8-shot, and the .38s are 5-shot...each require a different hand). Unless the cylinder is binding or tough to turn, this should have no bearing on DA trigger pull going between the different round count models.
Those same springs are used in the GP and SRH too.
I've still got the factory springs for my SP in the gun. The only work that was done on it was a polish job. The DA measures 12lb, which is about the same as on my .38 SP101. But with a gun as heavy as the 4" rimfire SP it is actually easier to manage the trigger on my .22.
I do agree that the Taurus and Smith small frame rimfires do have heavy triggers. I don't know what they use for springs inside but yes both the Taurus 94 (have owned two of em) and the Smith 317 (owned by a friend) are heavier than their centerfire counterparts. These two designs have a lighter hammer than the SP. Maybe the lower rotating mass requires a heavier spring to give consistent ignition?
I can't speak for the old 22/32 kit gun, the K22, or the Colt Diamondback since I have no experience with em. The old H&R and IJ double actions are usually big enough framed guns that you can get a good handle on their tough triggers.
And as I mentioned above, I take pretty much everything I've seen on TTAG blog pages with a grain of salt because there have been many cases that have contradicted my experiences with the same models.
Sure, Mr. Farago writes with overly "fluffy" language in his SP review (and the follow up that describes the initial break-in that darn near any new firearm will need, and his other blog pages) but that does seem to be used to cover up his lack of technical expertise. He should stick to ramrodding the rag instead of writing for it.
There...I haven't vented about TTAG for a while. I'm good for another year or so again.