PDA

View Full Version : Revolver article in MSW.



Hizzie
12-15-2014, 08:51 AM
Somebody needed to look up "modern" in the dictionary. ;)

http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=13161

JR1572
12-15-2014, 09:18 AM
Somebody needed to look up "modern" in the dictionary. ;)

http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=13161

I just read it. Every time I decide to rid myself of all revolvers I read an article like this and now I want a medium frame revolver.

JR1572

Dagga Boy
12-15-2014, 09:25 AM
just commented on it over there. Good stuff and on the money as far as my observations. Just finished a good range session with my 686 SSR, and kept getting this "why am I not carrying this everyday" feeling.

rob_s
12-15-2014, 09:33 AM
Maybe I missed it in the article, is there some functional or practical advantage to the medium-frame revolver over the mid-sized polymer auto?

LSP972
12-15-2014, 09:40 AM
Maybe I missed it in the article, is there some functional or practical advantage to the medium-frame revolver over the mid-sized polymer auto?



Yes... unless you discount the difference between full-patch .357s and the Euro-Pellets, that everyone seems enamored with these days, on the receiving end.

.

TiroFijo
12-15-2014, 09:53 AM
What exactly is the great thing a steel 6 round 357 mag revolver have over a lighter pistol with 16-18 shots of modern JHP 9 mm?
Surely the reloads aren't any faster...

Would you choose a revolver like this one over a modern semiauto, for self defense, ,military, or LE duty? That’s what would show the real “relevance” IMO.

Hizzie
12-15-2014, 10:14 AM
Just to be up front, I wrote that piece.

rob_s
12-15-2014, 10:18 AM
Yes... unless you discount the difference between full-patch .357s and the Euro-Pellets, that everyone seems enamored with these days, on the receiving end.

.

Yes I do, in so many ways and for so many reasons.

is that it, then?

Hizzie
12-15-2014, 11:11 AM
What exactly is the great thing a steel 6 round 357 mag revolver have over a lighter pistol with 16-18 shots of modern JHP 9 mm?
Surely the reloads aren't any faster...

Would you choose a revolver like this one over a modern semiauto, for self defense, ,military, or LE duty? That’s what would show the real “relevance” IMO.

As I said in the article, I carried a wheelgun as a duty weapon for part of my LE career. At least the part when I could choose. Shot placement > capacity.

LSP972
12-15-2014, 11:28 AM
Yes I do, in so many ways and for so many reasons.



Then I suggest you haven't had the opportunity to be privy to the results of many shootings involving different calibers, etc.

No one in his right mind would postulate that ANY revolver is "better", all things considered, than a modern service semi-auto... and that's not what Hizzie was getting at. IIRC, the thrust of his piece was that a good DA revolver is still viable; and I agree.

I am aware of all the conventional wisdom that says "modern" 9mm bullets do much better these days, etc., etc. And I'm sure there is a lot of truth to that.

I am also aware that, when I took over the FTU, I had access to ALL of my agency's data, and I went back as far as they kept records on the various shootings we had been involved in. There was one caliber that worked EVERY time; and by "worked", I mean it put the bad guy DOWN, and OUT OF THE FIGHT, every time. Not just psychological incapacitation... REAL incapacitation or death. Some would guess that caliber would be the gauge. Nope. It was the .357.

So discount that if you wish.

.

TiroFijo
12-15-2014, 11:31 AM
Hizzie, so given the chance you would pick a revolver over a pistol...

Shot placement is no doubt very important, but a pistol can shoot just as accurate as a revolver. At least for me (BTW, I like revolvers and shoot them often, action games in DA).

I remember when I visited the FBI building in Washington DC in 1981 (I was 18 years old then :) ), and the tour included a shooting demonstration. The agent used a revolver (S&W 19 or 13) loaded with 38 spl (guesstimation by the noise), and shot pretty good. At the end there were questions asked from the public, and I raised my hand and candidly asked: "why do you still use revolvers?"... the agent looked at me funny, not amused, and did not reply, but a decade later nearly all of LE and .gov agencies changed to semiautos.

DGI
12-15-2014, 11:38 AM
I've recently acquired a number of wheel guns to train with. I figure the change in platforms can only help DA/SA transitions and I like the idea of full boogie .357 rounds for self defense.

Not planning on carrying a revolver exclusively but I do like variety. I might think otherwise if I knew for certain that I'd be going into harms way (only from a capacity point of view).

David Armstrong
12-15-2014, 11:46 AM
Then I suggest you haven't had the opportunity to be privy to the results of many shootings involving different calibers, etc.

No one in his right mind would postulate that ANY revolver is "better", all things considered, than a modern service semi-auto... and that's not what Hizzie was getting at. IIRC, the thrust of his piece was that a good DA revolver is still viable; and I agree.

I am aware of all the conventional wisdom that says "modern" 9mm bullets do much better these days, etc., etc. And I'm sure there is a lot of truth to that.

I am also aware that, when I took over the FTU, I had access to ALL of my agency's data, and I went back as far as they kept records on the various shootings we had been involved in. There was one caliber that worked EVERY time; and by "worked", I mean it put the bad guy DOWN, and OUT OF THE FIGHT, every time. Not just psychological incapacitation... REAL incapacitation or death. Some would guess that caliber would be the gauge. Nope. It was the .357.

So discount that if you wish.
.
Yep. If I was still kicking down doors for a living and had the choice I would dig out the old S&W Model 65 to put on my hip without any hesitation.

orionz06
12-15-2014, 11:54 AM
I read the article. Not sure anyone is coming to take my Glocks away.

JonInWA
12-15-2014, 12:47 PM
It was a good article, but while I enjoy my revolvers, as I/we've discussed previously here, mine will be restricted to day carry, competition, and nightstand use. Ease of reloading, combined with increased capacity make using a semi-auto (such as a Glock 19) a huge, if not determinative, plus in nighttime/low light scenarios.

Best, Jon

Hizzie
12-15-2014, 01:53 PM
Hizzie, so given the chance you would pick a revolver over a pistol...


I did in the past. If hell froze over and I ended up working a beat again I probably would pack a six gun on my hip with four speedloaders on the belt, a snubby somewhere and a speed strip in my left uniform shirt pocket behind my business cards. I haven't sold off my Glocks and don't plan to.

NorthernHeat
12-15-2014, 02:46 PM
Great article Hizzie, and I think it brings up an option for carry that most people don't even consider (weather they would agree with it or not once they do think about it).

The GP100 in a sweet rig like that JMCK is some serious old/new school.

okie john
12-15-2014, 03:12 PM
I am also aware that, when I took over the FTU, I had access to ALL of my agency's data, and I went back as far as they kept records on the various shootings we had been involved in. There was one caliber that worked EVERY time; and by "worked", I mean it put the bad guy DOWN, and OUT OF THE FIGHT, every time. Not just psychological incapacitation... REAL incapacitation or death. Some would guess that caliber would be the gauge. Nope. It was the .357.

Did any one load or type of load stand out? Hot 125 vs. full-house 158 for example?


Okie John

HCM
12-15-2014, 03:17 PM
In free America, a 3" service revolver loses a lot to a Glock 19 from a practical perspective. When that Glock 19 is restricted to 10 round (or less) neutered magazines which may compromise reliability, the 3" service revolver and 8 shot 45 autos are once again serious contenders.

Or, what if you just like revolvers ?

My 5" Pre 27 won't be replacing my Glock 17 or SIG 229 at work but it makes me a better shooter Because / passion of the gun.

Mike Pipes
12-15-2014, 03:32 PM
somebody needed to look up "modern" in the dictionary. ;)

http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=13161

well written hizzie! It was fun wasn"t it......................................cya retro

Lost River
12-15-2014, 03:54 PM
Nicely written article friend.

Let's see,

Zero equipment malfunctions. Zero ammunition malfunctions. Ultra reliable and easy enough to manipulate to get the job done. Seems fairly reasonable to me. I prefer autos for work, with a j frame snubby BUG, but I'd not feel the least bit unarmed with my choice of an N Frame .44 and some mid range SWC projectiles.

In fact in the winter months I often carry a 4" or 5" 44 as a CCW piece, especially when I have been out playing in the mountains and desert terrain that is local to me.

I can feel the passion for both autos and big bore wheelies..... plus j frames of course. In fact I just loaded up 250 wadcutters for a j frame practice session.

rob_s
12-15-2014, 04:28 PM
I guess I'm still missing it.

What's the point again? To take a class with a revolver to show that you can? Because:old-time-sake?

Sitting wherever you're sitting now, what's on your hip?

And just so I'm clear, there are people in this thread advocating kicking in doors and/or driving around in patrol cars with 3-4" revolvers in 2014? Why?

I know it sounds like I'm being obtuse, but I'm really not. I'm just having a hard time understanding, outside of the caliber debate, what the point is. Even considering the caliber debate, is there some befit in terms of caliber that isn't being met with .45 ACP, or .40, or .357 SIG, or 10mm, or something else if you just happen to be anti-9mm?

BWT
12-15-2014, 04:44 PM
I guess I'm still missing it.

What's the point again? To take a class with a revolver to show that you can? Because:old-time-sake?

Sitting wherever you're sitting now, what's on your hip?

And just so I'm clear, there are people in this thread advocating kicking in doors and/or driving around in patrol cars with 3-4" revolvers in 2014? Why?

I know it sounds like I'm being obtuse, but I'm really not. I'm just having a hard time understanding, outside of the caliber debate, what the point is. Even considering the caliber debate, is there some befit in terms of caliber that isn't being met with .45 ACP, or .40, or .357 SIG, or 10mm, or something else if you just happen to be anti-9mm?

LSP cited incapacitation on every OIS using .357 Magnum. Others said they felt well equipped with them.

Disclosure, I carry a Glock 19. However, if somebody else can shoot in the times/parameters required in a shooting class and perform well.

Does it matter? I guess I'm missing what you're missing here.

You think a Glock is better, roger. What else is there left to say? Tell all of the retired LE they're wrong until they hopefully agree?

ToddG
12-15-2014, 04:46 PM
As I said in the article, I carried a wheelgun as a duty weapon for part of my LE career. At least the part when I could choose. Shot placement > capacity.

As stated already, it's hard to imagine a practical "shot placement" benefit of the revolver over most of the LE semiautos in common use today. I'd be willing to be most folks can shoot a 5.5# Glock trigger better than a typical factory DA revolver trigger.


Zero equipment malfunctions.

You've never seen a revolver suffer a mechanical malfunction? Heck, a tiny piece of debris under the star can lock a gun up solid. Mistiming. Parts failure. Show me a revolver that has successfully made it through a typical 10-20k round LE test.


Zero ammunition malfunctions.

Huh? Squibs are still squibs. Blown cases are still blown cases. Even a misfire is still a misfire. Sure, you can pull the trigger again but now you've given up 15-20% of your on-board ammo. With a semiauto it may take a little longer to get past that one specific possible problem but your end state is likely much more capable than if it happened with a wheelgun.

There are certainly particular ways in which a wheelgun can be as good as or superior to a semiauto, but there is a reason they're extinct in the LE/military world as far as primary/issued handguns are concerned.

Lon
12-15-2014, 04:49 PM
Can it meet the needs of a self-defense shooter if he or she is capable?

To me that's the most important line of the article. I didn't come away from reading the article with a desire to trade in my bottom feeders for wheel guns. I took away the idea (which I agree with) that someone who is a good revolver shooter is not handicapped just because they are shooting a wheel gun. Is it the best choice for some? No. But it might be for others.

Good article.

Robinson
12-15-2014, 04:59 PM
There are times I choose to carry a 4" revolver over a semiauto. It's not a "carry rotation" thing. I understand and accept the revolver's limitations along with its strengths. The advantages of a semiauto are not imaginary, and I rely on one at least as often as a revolver. But I do still feel confident in the wheelgun when carrying one.

LSP972
12-15-2014, 05:00 PM
Did any one load or type of load stand out? Hot 125 vs. full-house 158 for example?


Okie John

No. Back in those days, we only issued ammunition for qualification, which was all reloads and specifically not authorized for carry. Each trooper gets a 'standard allowance' on his/her monthly expense account, part of which was to buy carry ammo. There was a list specifying bullet weight and style (JHPs, between 125 and 158 grains, any "major current brand" of factory-loaded stuff; the "current major brand" clause was added after we found one old parish trooper with frigging Super Vels in his gun- in 1990 :rolleyes: ).

As a result, there was a broad spectrum of brands/bullet weights used; no pattern, I specifically looked for one. We did, however, "ban" 110 grainers after one incident where it took five of those to put the guy down.

.

Hizzie
12-15-2014, 05:03 PM
I guess I'm still missing it. Yes you are.

What's the point again? To take a class with a revolver to show that you can? Because:old-time-sake? The point was to show, when judged by objective standards and realistic scenarios, that a revolver was still a relevant self defense tool.

Sitting wherever you're sitting now, what's on your hip?My sweat pants.

And just so I'm clear, there are people in this thread advocating kicking in doors and/or driving around in patrol cars with 3-4" revolvers in 2014? Why? I am not advocating the practice. I carried a 4" 7 shot 357 magnum until 2006. I would do it again. What law enforcement experience do you have say that there is something wrong with the practice?

I know it sounds like I'm being obtuse, but I'm really not. I'm just having a hard time understanding, outside of the caliber debate, what the point is. Even considering the caliber debate, is there some befit in terms of caliber that isn't being met with .45 ACP, or .40, or .357 SIG, or 10mm, or something else if you just happen to be anti-9mm? To each his own. Why do you prefer Glock or Sig or 40s&w or 9x23?


See comments in red.

ToddG
12-15-2014, 05:15 PM
The point was to show, when judged by objective standards and realistic scenarios, that a revolver was still a relevant self defense tool.


Whose standards? "Time to put four rounds into each of two targets at 7yd" is objective. Given equally skilled shooters, even your 7-shot revolver hasn't a chance at meeting the same performance level as the typical LE semiauto.

Whose realistic scenarios? Because it's pretty realistic to assume there will be multiple bad guys, it's pretty realistic to assume any particular bad guy may need to be hit more than once, and pretty realistic to assume that the typical police officer won't achieve 100% accuracy under realistic conditions. Again, advantage semiauto.


What law enforcement experience do you have say that there is something wrong with the practice?

Rob didn't say there was anything wrong with the practice. He simply asked why others were advocating it over, I say again, the variety of commonly issued semi autos in LE use today.

Hizzie
12-15-2014, 05:26 PM
Whose standards? "Time to put four rounds into each of two targets at 7yd" is objective. Given equally skilled shooters, even your 7-shot revolver hasn't a chance at meeting the same performance level as the typical LE semiauto.

Whose realistic scenarios? Because it's pretty realistic to assume there will be multiple bad guys, it's pretty realistic to assume any particular bad guy may need to be hit more than once, and pretty realistic to assume that the typical police officer won't achieve 100% accuracy under realistic conditions. Again, advantage semiauto.



Rob didn't say there was anything wrong with the practice. He simply asked why others were advocating it over, I say again, the variety of commonly issued semi autos in LE use today.

Whose standards and scenarios? Wayne and Darryl (nyeti) set the standards and scenarios.

I never said the revolver was superior and don't recall seeing anyone else suggest it either.

In the very first sentence of the article I say that you will most likely see a polymer framed semi auto in the holsters of LE. To each his own.

jh9
12-15-2014, 05:49 PM
He simply asked why others were advocating it over, I say again, the variety of commonly issued semi autos in LE use today.

There's not a lot of advocating it for general consumption so much as a lot of "yeah, I wouldn't feel too bad if I had to do that again." (That's how I read it anyway.)

Honestly, and as a partial answer to rob_s' question, there are two guns here not in the safe: A Ruger LCR and a S&W 686. The latter stashed away in my old IDPA rig (Ready Tactical kydex IWB and a pair of Safariland speedloaders).

Would I advocate other people use this as their house gun? Nope.

I've also got a Glock 17 in the safe that I shot a USPSA match with this weekend. I've got no plans to replace the 686. It's not a purely rational decision. But it is a decision. ;)

Wheeler
12-15-2014, 05:58 PM
I see accuracy and shot placement touted again and again until capacity gets tossed into the mix. Carrying a revolver requires a completely different mindset than most semi-auto carriers are prepared to take on.

ToddG
12-15-2014, 05:59 PM
jh9 -- I understand that completely. Choosing a 9mm 1911 over a Glock isn't the most rational position, either, but guess which one I'll be carrying the next time someone sees me at the range.


I see accuracy and shot placement touted again and again until capacity gets tossed into the mix. Carrying a revolver requires a completely different mindset than most semi-auto carriers are prepared to take on.

How so?

okie john
12-15-2014, 06:13 PM
No. Back in those days, we only issued ammunition for qualification, which was all reloads and specifically not authorized for carry. Each trooper gets a 'standard allowance' on his/her monthly expense account, part of which was to buy carry ammo. There was a list specifying bullet weight and style (JHPs, between 125 and 158 grains, any "major current brand" of factory-loaded stuff; the "current major brand" clause was added after we found one old parish trooper with frigging Super Vels in his gun- in 1990 :rolleyes: ).

As a result, there was a broad spectrum of brands/bullet weights used; no pattern, I specifically looked for one. We did, however, "ban" 110 grainers after one incident where it took five of those to put the guy down.

.

Thank you. I figured it was something like that.


Okie John

rsa-otc
12-15-2014, 06:56 PM
With the exception of a 3 to 4 year period in the late 80's when we allowed our outside personnel to carry S&W 3rd Gen .45's I have carried a revolver in my duty rig for 37 years. At this point in my life that is what I am most comfortable with.

When I am at the top of my game I can edge out my revolvers with a semi automatic. Usually the difference lies in the number of and time doing reloads. I'm usually .75 to 1 seconds slower on the revolver reload compared to the semi auto (when I am on the top of my game).

When I'm having a SO SO or worse day is when the revolver shines. At those times my revolver performance outshines my semi auto performance by a large margin. The way I see it the day I have to defend my life I can't count on being at the top of my game. So if I have my druthers like Hizzie and others I will be carrying a wheelgun with 4 speed loaders. Unfortunately in NJ a second gun for Non sworn LEO's is frowned upon.

If I was starting out as a youngster today I would go with a soulless plastic people popper of DB refers to them, working to get to the level of competence that I have with the revolver. But this old fart is sticking with his wheel(real) guns for social work and using plastic fantastic in competition. Maybe someday I will reach that level of competence/comfort with plastic fantastic and change my mind. Don't count on it though. :cool:

Lost River
12-15-2014, 08:30 PM
You've never seen a revolver suffer a mechanical malfunction? Heck, a tiny piece of debris under the star can lock a gun up solid. Mistiming. Parts failure. Show me a revolver that has successfully made it through a typical 10-20k round LE test.
.

I believe there's been a miscommunication.

I was referring to the article, and the equipment used during the class...

I'm an LE, as well a .gov armorer ( as well as end user/ instructor)on a wide variety of systems from belt feds to sniper systems. There is not a single platform that I have been around in a professional capacity that has not malfunctioned at one time or another.

Cheers!

ToddG
12-15-2014, 08:43 PM
I was referring to the article, and the equipment used during the class...

Totally my bad, dude. Apologies.

Wheeler
12-15-2014, 10:02 PM
How so?

The limited luxury of make up shots tends to make one think just a little bit more before taking a shot. That's not to say that one is better than the other, just different. I personally shoot a revolver better than a semi auto, to include the much mentioned Glock 19 in this thread. The way I see it, I can spend lots of time and money teaching myself to get as good with a semi auto as I am with a revolver, or I can stick with what I'm good with. I'd daresay that any semi-auto shooters view shooting a revolver the same way.

ToddG
12-15-2014, 10:05 PM
The limited luxury of make up shots tends to make one think just a little bit more before taking a shot.

I've heard/read this claim many times but I am unsure how one comes to that conclusion. It seems to suggest that having a semiauto in one's hands automatically makes one less precise or less concerned about hits & misses.

Lost River
12-15-2014, 10:17 PM
Totally my bad, dude. Apologies.

No worries,

That's the problem with typed word versus a face to face conversation. Pretty easy to have a simple miscommunication. Thanks for your reply though. Such replys are indicators of a person's character.

Cheers and Be Safe.

Wheeler
12-15-2014, 10:19 PM
I've heard/read this claim many times but I am unsure how one comes to that conclusion. It seems to suggest that having a semiauto in one's hands automatically makes one less precise or less concerned about hits & misses.

That is one way to interpret that, although that's not really what I said. I'm referring to the thinking/planning side of things. Not the potential inherent accuracy of a particular semi-auto vs a revolver and any particular abilities bestowed on the user by using a revolver. The revolver has been referred to as "the thinking man's gun" by many. I tend to agree with that.

Another way to look at it is the serious revolver shooter is more concerned about good hits simply because he/she doesn't have the luxury of multiple follow up shots. It's all about perception.

Let me be clear that I'm not trying to change anyone's mind on the subject. I'm simply trying to clarify that there is a different mindset that is just as viable.

Symmetry
12-15-2014, 10:45 PM
The limited luxury of make up shots tends to make one think just a little bit more before taking a shot.

When it came to shooting paper, I generally had the same mental perspective when I carried a Sig P220 .45. Fewer rounds to play with, and slightly slower recoil recovery encouraged me to make those shots count. When shooting steel though, I tend to be more careful regardless of the pistol caliber and capacity as the instant target feedback encourages one to hit the steel on the first shot so that you can move on.

The big problem is that human targets tend to behave more like shooting paper. You don't really get much feedback from the target to know if your shots are hitting anything, unless they voluntarily stop resisting(OMG! You shot me!!). I feel a little warmer and fuzzier when I can keep my follow up shots on that "paper" faster and more accurate(single action trigger) and have ammo left over to work the next unexpected hurdle in the scenario.

Dagga Boy
12-15-2014, 11:00 PM
I'll add my "rod s won't agree with" response to some of this.

The modern semi automatic service pistol is very good for being able to stay in a gunfight with minimal manipulations on the gun during that fight for a longer period of time. That is fairly logical. With modern hi-performance ammunition we are looking at being able to engage multiple bad guys without interruption and with a high level of efficiency if the shooter maintains good composure and discipline, or the shooter has the ability to have multiple fights as they appear while the combatants are maneuvering against one another. So we have good efficiency and low manipulations with the modern semi-automatic pistol. If you are looking for a counter robbery tool for use against multiple bad guys by well trained good guys, then the modern semi automatic pistol is a good choice and a logical choice. It is what I carry daily.

Now the revolver. The revolver shines as being low on administrative manipulations when handling the firearm. Being we tend to handle them far more than fighting with them, this is a good thing. I can check the condition of a revolver literally without touching it, and the process to correctly check for status verification is so simple my child can perform this task easily with little or no physical effort. The revolver tends to be very safe for off body carry when used in pockets, purses, etc. They are my number one first choice for appendix carry, and the first firearms that I saw the benefits of this type of carry. They can remain loaded for decades with no issue. Their manual of operation is extremely simple and are very good for non-dedicated users that make up a VAST majority of the population (even though many think they are far more competent than they actually are). They work well at contact distances and function well when used as an in-extremis impact tool. They are not ammunition dependent to function (which is important). This also allows bullets of any configuration to be used in their ammunition to match the mission as needed. Everything from light loads to loads for big game.
A few other issues. Many jurisdictions in this country are not "semi auto friendly". In these places being a efficient user of both revolvers and pump shotguns is a good idea. How about magazine restrictions. My 7 shot .357 Magnum revolver shooting hi-performance ammunition is no longer taking much of a back seat to an auto restricted to 7-10 rounds with some abortion of an after-thought feeding device that is critical in the operation of a semi-automatic. Oh yeah......without a magazine (the part that can be easily separated from the gun), the semi is essentially useless. Essentially, that magazine can be both a huge positive or huge negative depending on how Murphy is feeling at the moment. Let's look at ammunition restrictions. Anyone want to argue for FMJ 9mm. All of a sudden when we look at many non-hollow-point ammunition in revolvers compared to auto's, it is literally night and day with performance. The medium frame .38/.357 can also easily be adapted to multiple calibers based on restrictions in some areas. One of my customers many years ago was a world traveler on behalf of the United States government and carried all over the world. He was issued a semi-automatic pistol......that he could not carry in many places due to local restrictions. He carried a 3" Ruger Speed Six modified to shoot an array of rounds both revolver and semi-automatic and included many non-military rounds required in many places.
In regards to ammunition, like LSP972, when I was doing research at my old place I noticed the same thing as he did. One thing had an unblemished record for single round stops every time they hit a suspect anywhere.....the .45 Colt. There is something to be said for some bullet performance when that ammunition does not have to function the firearm.
Up until recently many highly regarded counter-terror units used .357 Magnum revolvers extensively and particularly for tubular assault work by point men. I have a very solid contact into that world. For shooting in very tight confines with often contact or near contact shots in chaos, what he termed the ".38 Special with a Flashbang" was a very viable tool. Do not underestimate muzzle blast. While I usually carry a semi-automatic 9mm pistol in a IWB holster, I often have a .357 or .44 magnum revolver under my leg when I am driving, especially as of late for their ability to blow an attacker off my vehicle. I like the method of operation of the revolver for this particular task. Many of the arguments in favor of the snub revolver apply to the mid size revolver as well.

Is a revolver for everyone........I would make the argument that FAR more so than the auto based on my observations of a majority of gun owners. Is it optimal as a fighting tool, nope. Are there better options....for many scenario's yes. Do they totaly suck and have no place in our world......hardly. I will say this. Hizzie is built like a tank. I would not want to screw with him in general, and especially with one or two hunks of steel that he is very good at getting into his hands. When you add his ability to make big, loud explosions attached to the bullets leaving those hunks of steel......I am great with his choice of tool.

Many here are not old enough, or have not had a job of actually doing serious interaction with very serious evil doers with revolvers. They are quite capable and a ton of good work is possible.

LSP972
12-16-2014, 03:06 AM
Do not underestimate muzzle blast. While I usually carry a semi-automatic … .45 ACP :p pistol in a IWB holster, I... have a .357… revolver… handy... when I am driving, especially as of late for their ability to blow an attacker off my vehicle.

Exactly so; which is why I built DudeShooter II; a square butt M-66, issued with a 4" barrel, that now wears a two inch tube from a M-64. Using ANY full-patch .357 cartridge, the muzzle blast and flash from this thing is fearsome. Even if I miss something important, at car distances I'm likely to set his ass on fire.

BTW, your last two sentences pretty well sums up the subject.

.

rsa-otc
12-16-2014, 04:54 AM
As usual nyeti hit the nail squarely on the head.

Hizzie
12-16-2014, 06:53 AM
Now that nyeti has made me blush. :o

I'm glad that this article has caused so much discussion. I've enjoyed the spirited discussion. Interesting how our backgrounds shape our thoughts on the subject. I really enjoyed writing this one. I think for my next article I will tackle a less controversial subject such as 9mm vs 45.

Tom Duffy
12-16-2014, 08:09 AM
ToddG wrote: "You've never seen a revolver suffer a mechanical malfunction? Heck, a tiny piece of debris under the star can lock a gun up solid. Mistiming. Parts failure. Show me a revolver that has successfully made it through a typical 10-20k round LE test."

While I've had each of these problems occur while shooting old revolvers, I genuinely do not understand this fixation with a 10-20k test or a 2000 round challenge. My revolvers and semi autos get cleaned after every range session and I am confident that the next time I bring them to the range, they will shoot 100-200 rounds of cheaper factory ammo without a problem. If I ever needed one for self defense, I'm also confident that my clean revolver will shoot several reloads of .357 without a malfunction. I also believe that a new Ruger revolver would go a minimum of 10,000 rounds without anything breaking. So, after shooting $5,000 worth of ammo though the gun, I would expect to make a $600 dollar investment in a new revolver and keep going.

Dagga Boy
12-16-2014, 08:32 AM
ToddG wrote: "You've never seen a revolver suffer a mechanical malfunction? Heck, a tiny piece of debris under the star can lock a gun up solid. Mistiming. Parts failure. Show me a revolver that has successfully made it through a typical 10-20k round LE test."

While I've had each of these problems occur while shooting old revolvers, I genuinely do not understand this fixation with a 10-20k test or a 2000 round challenge. My revolvers and semi autos get cleaned after every range session and I am confident that the next time I bring them to the range, they will shoot 100-200 rounds of cheaper factory ammo without a problem. If I ever needed one for self defense, I'm also confident that my clean revolver will shoot several reloads of .357 without a malfunction. I also believe that a new Ruger revolver would go a minimum of 10,000 rounds without anything breaking. So, after shooting $5,000 worth of ammo though the gun, I would expect to make a $600 dollar investment in a new revolver and keep going.

To expound on this. When it comes to long term hard use, the modern service pistol wins, and it is not worth discussing. On the other hand, let's look at practical reliability. Take the typical American gun owner. Most rarely shoot. Most really don't know what they don't know. I will gladly make the argument that a clean Ruger or Smith medium frame revolver with new factory ammunition will be less likely to have a shooter or mechanical malfunction if picked up and shot in a crisis over the next several decades than a fully loaded and clean semi-automatic pistol as far as "things that can go wrong", particularly on the shooters side of the equation. One thing we have seen in LE is a lot of cases of shooter induced malfunctions in actual shootings that have nothing to do with the mechanical function of the pistol, but failings of the operator. Most of the failings I have seen with revolvers tend to be clothing related and are usually "fixable" without any real process. The failings of the semi-autos will often need a practiced set of procedures to return the pistol to a functional state that many are incapable of under stress. With that said, as far as true mechanical issues, like the shotgun vs. carbine argument, when revolvers crap the bed, they usually need a gunsmith to fix them, where the pistols can often be fixed much easier.

TiroFijo
12-16-2014, 09:03 AM
Good discussion by all :)

Regarding reloading, not only is the semiauto faster, but I've seen more reloading problems (doing something wrong that takes some extra time) with revolvers than with semiautos in competition, and this is in broad daylight...

I'm just a civilian with no combat experience, but I do realize that every second counts and watching a lot of shooters do even a relatively low round count stage in IPSC with revolvers vs semiautos (just the normal "service" ones) gives me a lot to think about.

Kyle Reese
12-16-2014, 09:11 AM
Now that nyeti has made me blush. :o

I'm glad that this article has caused so much discussion. I've enjoyed the spirited discussion. Interesting how our backgrounds shape our thoughts on the subject. I really enjoyed writing this one. I think for my next article I will tackle a less controversial subject such as 9mm vs 45.

Excellent article, Hizzie. You still haven't convinced me to supplant my Glock 17 with a wheelgun, however. :)

nycnoob
12-16-2014, 09:14 AM
I've heard/read this claim many times but I am unsure how one comes to that conclusion. It seems to suggest that having a semiauto in one's hands automatically makes one less precise or less concerned about hits & misses.

I have taken SouthNarc's ECQC and EWO courses and he has stated that the intensity of the two are very different (though the course material has a large overlap) in part because people do not feel the need to "conserve ammo" when wielding a knife and there are more wild attacks because of this (this was discussed in class, if I remember correctly).

I would not be surprised if a revolver only ECQC class had a very different feel (more carefully aimed shots from a good position) then a semi-auto only ECQC class for similar reasons.

If SN could opine about weather he thinks revolvers tend to make one a bit more careful when in a FUT I would be very interested in his comments.

GJM
12-16-2014, 09:23 AM
Good discussion by all :)

Regarding reloading, not only is the semiauto faster, but I've seen more reloading problems (doing something wrong that takes some extra time) with revolvers than with semiautos in competition, and this is in broad daylight...

I'm just a civilian with no combat experience, but I do realize that every second counts and watching a lot of shooters do even a relatively low round count stage in IPSC with revolvers vs semiautos (just the normal "service" ones) gives me a lot to think about.

There is an answer for that. Buy and carry a pair of the same size revolvers. Not kidding.

Jerry M aside, I think for most revolvers shooters, extra ammo is mostly for an administrative reload, and not something I would want to rely on in a fight. I think the capacity issue, followed by weight/size, and then shootability is the reason so many are transitioning from the heavy caliber wheel gun to the 10mm semi auto in Alaska. And, Alaska is a place that you would expect to be very oriented to the heavy caliber wheel gun, given that self-defense includes bears.

Hizzie
12-16-2014, 09:57 AM
Excellent article, Hizzie. You still haven't convinced me to supplant my Glock 17 with a wheelgun, however. :)


The idea wasn't to comvin people to change from what they are comfortable with. I do hope that I've opened your eyes to the value of the revolver. Would you now consider supplementing your G17 with a revolver?

Dagga Boy
12-16-2014, 10:09 AM
Good discussion by all :)

Regarding reloading, not only is the semiauto faster, but I've seen more reloading problems (doing something wrong that takes some extra time) with revolvers than with semiautos in competition, and this is in broad daylight...

I'm just a civilian with no combat experience, but I do realize that every second counts and watching a lot of shooters do even a relatively low round count stage in IPSC with revolvers vs semiautos (just the normal "service" ones) gives me a lot to think about.

No kidding. This isn't rocket science. Reloading a single large thing into a single large hole is easier than loading six/seven/eight/ small things into the same number of holes. I don't think anyone will argue that the reload ability is a "check" in the win box for the auto. The reality of the revolver reload is another revolver as the ideal. Back to my point, the semi-auto is a better long term fight proposition. The revolver is a better administrative proposition, and a less complex tool to operate. For those that train a lot, not a serious issue........for those that don't, it is. Equally, for somebody like Hizzie who does train, they can do very solid work with a revolver. Many folks have. I know a bunch of folks who I don't want to be in front of with a revolver-period. I have also seen a training trend over the last few decades in which with the switch to semi-autos, all emphasis seems to be on speed, where in the revolver years, the emphasis was on accuracy in all the games built around each.

FredM, I don't think it was Hizzie's goal to convince you to supplant your G-17. I don't think he cares what anyone else carries. I think his goal was that there are options out there that are very viable for others that may not fit what is your ideal.

For me, I have carried both in harm's way. I have dealt with bad guys with both. I think it is important for true students of gunfighting to be able to fight with all sorts of different guns and understand how to fight with many systems. If you want to sit in the corner with your Glock 19 as all you need and everything else is stupid and anyone who doesn't carry a Glock 19 "doesn't get it" and they are not as smart as you.......peachy. Some day, you may not have your G-19. I would rather be able to function with anything than one thing. I like choices. This is again a lot like cars. Sure, your daily commuter choice that has a good balance of speed, economy, range, performance, etc. may be ideal for YOU. It might not be the best choice for someone who may need to haul a trailer, carpool a ton of kids, or operate in off road conditions. Commuting and urban operations may also suck in a F-350 Dualie. I think Hizzie did a good job of laying out why he likes to AIWB carry a 3" .357. Some people may go, wow, that would also ft my world and work for me. Others may not find it ideal for them now or ever and can totally disregard it. Others may find themselves carrying a high capacity 9mm service pistol today, and find themselves in a new job and relocation to a place where that medium frame .357 magnum is all of sudden looking like a viable option.......you now have a reference to how to make that option work.

Wayne Dobbs
12-16-2014, 10:19 AM
While I appreciate the comforts and convienence of the modern service semi-automatic pistol, I also see where a duty revolver is still a viable choice in the 21st Century. We can argue downsides and upsides until we run out of Internet but there are some truths here to be considered:

1. Revolvers met the needs of cops and armed citizens for decades (nearly a century) for shooting or managing bad guys. There were some of the worst bad guys we've ever faced during that time frame, too.
2. A review of the Texas DPS and Louisiana SP (thanks LSP 972) reveals that they NEVER lost a fight over capacity and there are very few reloads needed in fights (like single digit numbers).
3. Nobody with any sense ever said the .357 Magnum didn't process bad guys very effectively when you hit them well. Few of them hit well survived the experience.
4. Revolvers need little attention (other than corrosion prevention if the finish and/or environment demand that) and so will happily work years later if left in a drawer.

While I love my service pistols, all those K-frames I've "rescued" over the years are still useful to me and my family and while I might not carry them for daily use, they haven't become museum pieces either. Hizzie took me back a ways during that class and it was a valuable experience.

Dagga Boy
12-16-2014, 10:25 AM
Spoken from a guy I never want to be in front of with a revolver........especially the 3" .38.

1slow
12-16-2014, 10:55 AM
I've been in SouthNarc's ECQC, EWO, AMIS. I also had the educational experience during the Snubby Summit of S'Narc spinning me into a wall and putting 5 rounds of Code Eagle out of a snubby revolver (like Sims) into my T shirted back.
The snubby revolver works better in the FUT (fouled up tangle). It (particularly internal hammer variations) is less likely to malfunction from being tangled up in clothes and body parts. Many Sims gun malfunctions in ECQC.

My general impression is that the service auto is easier to: shoot well, shoot fast, reload fast, and maintain over long severe use. Also it has more rounds on board for a given size and caliber (assuming,9mm,.40,10mm,.45 size range). Paul Gomez said "high capacity gives you one less thing to have to f**k with in the beginning of your gunfight.
The revolver works better in the FUT and for large .44 Mag and bigger cartridges. It is also mostly easier for the less trained to operate and handle safely. Until the rounds in the gun are all fired it is very simple to shoot. They can be astonishingly accurate. They sit ready with no springs compressed.

I look at it like this, your categories may vary:
1)Tiny guns-mostly autos, Walther TPH,Beretta 950,21 etc...,
2)Service caliber pocket guns, S&W J frames with enclosed/shrouded hammers,
3)Holstered service autos in 9mm,.40,10mm,.45,
4)Outdoor animal protection: revolvers in .44mag, .454, .475 and .500Linebaugh etc... I really love double action 4'' .44 mag and .500 Linebaugh revolvers.
I use double action because of arthritis at both thumb bases makes single action sub optimal. I have owned and shot DE .50AE, Grizzly .45 Win Mags a lot but found them less size vs. power efficient.
10mm blurs the lines between service and large animal pistols as GJM has written about

In my early years Jeff Cooper's, Chuck Taylor's, Ken Hackthorn's, Elmer Keith's and Ross Seyfried's writings had a huge influence on me, since then S'Narc, Paul Gomez, Bill Rogers, Tom Givens, Todd Louis Green, Daryl Bolke, John Farnham, Ed Lovette, Jim Cirillo, etc.... have been influential.

LSP972
12-16-2014, 11:07 AM
Most of the failings I have seen with revolvers... are usually "fixable" without any real process. .

Ditto the mechanical side; as in keep the area under the extractor clean and dry; check the extractor rod, cylinder latch screw and stock screw for looseness every now and then; don't use crap ammunition. I have seen, as I'm sure you have, some seriously-abused revolvers that still worked when they were needed to. That's why Glocks are the obvious choice as a cop semi-auto general-issue piece; they will stand an inordinate amount of abuse/neglect and still work... usually.

But just a bit of attention and preventative maintenance fixes all of that. Unfortunately, that is more effort than most cops (and citizens) are willing to expend.

.

LSP972
12-16-2014, 11:29 AM
It (particularly internal hammer variations) is less likely to malfunction from being tangled up in clothes and body parts. Many Sims gun malfunctions in ECQC.

.

This doesn't get enough attention, IMO. Right off the top of my head, I can think of three instances where a cop's (okay, one was an FBI agent, but he was trying) semi-auto choked after the first or second shot, due to the slide contacting either the good guy or bad guy. I have read of at least a dozen more. Its why I have stubbornly held onto the J frame as a BUG, and now use a revolver as a "car gun".

Yes, the semi-auto wins in many areas: a few more beans (a lot more beans if you favor a high capacity sub-caliber :D ), generally lighter weight (combat tupperware), easier to conceal (thinner), the list goes on.

Personally, I think the capacity issue has become the most important difference. Back in my day, it certainly was not an issue. Nowadays, with the odds greatly increased that you will face multiple assailants on the street... well, that is the only reason I'm not carrying my M-12 AirWeight K frame or M-242 AirLite L-frame every day as a primary.

Tom Givens said it best: "These days, you need a three-bad-guy gun."

But you know what? The older I get, the less tolerant (and able) I become of lugging a service semi-auto and spare magazine around all day. There will come a time when I say, "FIDO, I'll take my chances", and strap on one of those uber-light revolvers as my EDC.

.

Jeep
12-16-2014, 12:20 PM
There will come a time when I say, "FIDO, I'll take my chances", and strap on one of those uber-light revolvers as my EDC.

.

^This.^ Though during times of higher tensions, such as right now, a Glock 19 makes a lot of sense.

LSP972
12-16-2014, 01:09 PM
^This.^ Though during times of higher tensions, such as right now, a Glock 19 makes a lot of sense.

Yeah. A pig or a SAW would be better...;)

.

Kyle Reese
12-16-2014, 01:29 PM
The idea wasn't to comvin people to change from what they are comfortable with. I do hope that I've opened your eyes to the value of the revolver. Would you now consider supplementing your G17 with a revolver?

Yes indeed, for no other reason than to improve my DA shooting.

John Hearne
12-16-2014, 01:44 PM
Maybe I missed it in the article, is there some functional or practical advantage to the medium-frame revolver over the mid-sized polymer auto?

When whooped with a medium frame revolver, folks tend to stay whopped?

45dotACP
12-16-2014, 04:12 PM
Damn it lads, none of this makes me want a WC GP100 any less...

Trooper224
12-16-2014, 04:32 PM
I'm getting the feeling that some folks are letting their love for old school cool cloud their opinion here, just as others who see the wheel gun as archaic and quaint seem to be missing the point of the article. I wouldn't willingly carry a revolver in today's world. However, if I was mandated to do so I'd drive on and not lose much sleep over it. My first OIS was with a revolver, an S&W Model 27. I fired three rounds in as many seconds and my gun was then half empty. Today it wouldn't be anywhere close with the semi-autos I carry now, and modern ammunition makes the whole stopping power discussion pretty moot. Anyone who's never seen a stoppage in a wheel gun hasn't shot them enough. The big difference is when they do occur they tend to be show stoppers, no simple tap-rack and bang type clearance drill will work. My take away from the article is this: if you're up to the task a wheel gun will do the job *as well as it ever has*. I agree, but that doesn't mean I'm about to strap on a six shooter any time soon though.

LSP972
12-16-2014, 05:25 PM
I'm getting the feeling that some folks are letting their love for old school cool cloud their opinion here...

Nah. Just getting a bit weary of the weight of a service pistol.

Hey, if I was still on the road, no way I'd willingly go back to a revolver either. But as a meek, mild-mannered citizen not wanting any trouble? Those super-light alloy frame revolvers are looking better and better.

.

Dagga Boy
12-16-2014, 06:10 PM
Ditto with LSP972. I did move from the revolver to the auto when I could. The big difference is that people were calling me to come handle their emergencies on a regular basis. I was also driving around looking for armed felons as my "goal". That is totally different from most folks. The reality is that everyone in my house can safely work with a mid frame revolver. Not everyone could safely operate a modern service pistol. This is true of many people. We see this in class as well particularly with our very basic class with non-dedicated shooters. Again, not everyone can handle a handgun that the ammunition functions the weapon and what is involved with safely and efficiently running one. There are also times when even dedicated shooters are better served with a revolver. There are modes of carry more conducive for them as well. In these cases they are an option. I like options. Some feel they are like a flintlock and a stupid choice......again, its an option. I pride myself on my ability to run numerous handguns systems very efficiently, others pride themselves on labeling every choice but theirs as non-efficient. Life is full of choices.

One of my current goals is to start placing in the top spots of "Production Auto" in the matches I am shooting with a revolver. I am not doing it to prove the revolver is superior or a better choice, I am doing it to improve myself as a well rounded handgun shooter and to challenge myself. I have found the people I really respect can fight efficiently with anything, that is where I want to be.

Jeep
12-16-2014, 06:24 PM
Yeah. A pig or a SAW would be better...;)

.

Spoken like a true, old-school, 11B! (Personally I think a 152mm loaded with nails would be even better, but their carriers are now all out of service, and besides they don't fit in most parking places).

Jeep
12-16-2014, 06:25 PM
Ditto with LSP972. I did move from the revolver to the auto when I could. The big difference is that people were calling me to come handle their emergencies on a regular basis. I was also driving around looking for armed felons as my "goal". That is totally different from most folks. The reality is that everyone in my house can safely work with a mid frame revolver. Not everyone could safely operate a modern service pistol. This is true of many people. We see this in class as well particularly with our very basic class with non-dedicated shooters. Again, not everyone can handle a handgun that the ammunition functions the weapon and what is involved with safely and efficiently running one. There are also times when even dedicated shooters are better served with a revolver. There are modes of carry more conducive for them as well. In these cases they are an option. I like options. Some feel they are like a flintlock and a stupid choice......again, its an option. I pride myself on my ability to run numerous handguns systems very efficiently, others pride themselves on labeling every choice but theirs as non-efficient. Life is full of choices.

One of my current goals is to start placing in the top spots of "Production Auto" in the matches I am shooting with a revolver. I am not doing it to prove the revolver is superior or a better choice, I am doing it to improve myself as a well rounded handgun shooter and to challenge myself. I have found the people I really respect can fight efficiently with anything, that is where I want to be.

I might be wrong, but I get the sense that you are pretty much there already.

Trooper224
12-16-2014, 06:34 PM
Yep, I get all of that and agree completlely.

Lon
12-16-2014, 07:09 PM
Spoken like a true, old-school, 11B! (Personally I think a 152mm loaded with nails would be even better, but their carriers are now all out of service, and besides they don't fit in most parking places).
The Sheridan?

MDS
12-16-2014, 07:09 PM
I love shooting revolvers. When I get "fun gun" money, I'll spend it on a nice revolver before a nice semiauto. But for practical purposes? I mean, I get that you can shoot people with revolvers. But to prefer a revolver over a semiauto?

My thought experiment is this. Let me clone myself - a perfect copy in terms of skill, ability, knowledge, luck - identical. (It's OK, only one of me will survive.) Now give one of me a revolver, any revolver you like. Give the other me a G19. Tell each of me to kill the other me. Is there any scenario where the revolver would be a benefit? Long-range duels, close-range duels, dark building, sun-dappled forests, ...? I'd have to give the edge to the me with the G19 in every case. Is there anyone for whom this would not be true?

Dagga Boy
12-16-2014, 07:31 PM
I like the revolver over the auto when things start getting very physical and for contact shooting.....If I was putting the thing against a skull or the body, revolver-particularly of the magnum variety. As stated earlier, it is also what I like riding under my left leg or between the seats in the car. Also, the ability to place some of them into single action does have a limited use. As most will note who have run them both, it is only after the first five or six rounds that the difference really becomes an issue. Its purely a manipulations game at that point.


I always find it interesting how many people find love for the snub, yet translated to another inch and another round, it is no good.

One set up I am looking at right now is a 3" medium frame in front appendix with the VP-9 and all its support gear in a fanny pack. May or may not work, but it is something I am looking at.

MDS
12-16-2014, 07:48 PM
I like the revolver over the auto when things start getting very physical and for contact shooting.....If I was putting the thing against a skull or the body, revolver-particularly of the magnum variety. As stated earlier, it is also what I like riding under my left leg or between the seats in the car. Also, the ability to place some of them into single action does have a limited use.

Makes sense.


As most will note who have run them both, it is only after the first five or six rounds that the difference really becomes an issue. Its purely a manipulations game at that point.

I agree. And to be clear, I feel pretty good with a snubby on the street. I feel better with a G19, though, and since this is America and I can pick, why not pick the glock? It seems like none of us would, in good faith, recommend revolvers over semiautos on practical grounds.

Malamute
12-16-2014, 08:01 PM
...Now give one of me a revolver, any revolver you like. Give the other me a G19. Tell each of me to kill the other me. Is there any scenario where the revolver would be a benefit? Long-range duels, close-range duels, dark building, sun-dappled forests, ...? I'd have to give the edge to the me with the G19 in every case. Is there anyone for whom this would not be true?

For me, there is an advantage with a revolver, I simply shoot them better when talking full size guns. Group size (sheer mechanical accuracy, or abilty to utilize the accuracy of the gun), long distance (300 yards being one of the favorite plinking targets), moving targets, faster shooting.

The plate shoots I've done, and shooting bowling pins, I've shot better times and less misses with revolvers, even single action revolvers, than I can with a 1911, so long as there isnt more than 6 targets. I've always done better on moving game shooting with revolvers, and never really been able to shoot stuff in the air with them. I'm sure I could get better with a 1911 or some other self loader, but I think it would take a lot of work, and still not sure I'd shoot better than I can with a revolver if also practicing with them.

I don't always choose a revolver, I carry self loaders in town generally. Capacity and reload speed are the obvious advantages, but I dont feel too bad when I do have a revolver.

Very much agree, the g-19 is is a lot more town gun than a J, but the g-19 takes a bit more effort to carry. J's drop in a pocket and disappear, even with no shirt on.

Wheeler
12-16-2014, 08:16 PM
I love shooting revolvers. When I get "fun gun" money, I'll spend it on a nice revolver before a nice semiauto. But for practical purposes? I mean, I get that you can shoot people with revolvers. But to prefer a revolver over a semiauto?

My thought experiment is this. Let me clone myself - a perfect copy in terms of skill, ability, knowledge, luck - identical. (It's OK, only one of me will survive.) Now give one of me a revolver, any revolver you like. Give the other me a G19. Tell each of me to kill the other me. Is there any scenario where the revolver would be a benefit? Long-range duels, close-range duels, dark building, sun-dappled forests, ...? I'd have to give the edge to the me with the G19 in every case. Is there anyone for whom this would not be true?

This falls back to a matter of perception. Trying to explain why some folks prefer a revolver over a semi auto is like trying to explain what it's like to be left handed in a right handed world. Folks think they understand but really don't.

Malamute
12-16-2014, 08:18 PM
This falls back to a matter of perception. Trying to explain why some folks prefer a revolver over a semi auto is like trying to explain what it's like to be left handed in a right handed world. Folks think they understand but really don't.



Interesting comment. Revolvers have always "felt natural" to me in the hand, autos never have, even after shooting them quite a lot. Hard to ascribe any particular quantifiable value to that, but its there.

MDS
12-16-2014, 08:45 PM
Thanks, guys. It's good to get different takes on this.

LSP972
12-16-2014, 08:48 PM
Spoken like a true, old-school, 11B!

Guilty. But that was a bloody looonnnggg time ago.

LSP972
12-16-2014, 09:10 PM
Revolvers have always "felt natural" to me in the hand, autos never have, even after shooting them quite a lot. Hard to ascribe any particular quantifiable value to that, but its there.

True. Its the other way 'round for me; probably because I weaned on 1911s. I never even held a revolver until a week before I reported to the academy. We had to buy our own iron; my group was the first-ever cadet class to get state-issued service pistols (one each 4 inch and 2.5 inch M-66s; they belong to me now), but they didn't show up until we were halfway through the program. Anyway, I found out pretty quickly that marksmanship basics are just that… basics. They apply to whatever you happen to be holding. I was highly annoyed that I couldn't tote a 1911, but I hadn't been on the road long before I realized the wisdom of that edict.

Anyway, I had a lot to learn. And I did. Transitioning to the P226 some 12 years later was a no-drama affair. Somewhere in there after we had been operating the bottom feeders for a while, we began using the thumbs-forward grip (late 90s, Ken? IIRC, you were the one who got that ball rolling with SWAT, about the time we got the G35s). Now, THAT feels natural… and holding a revolver feels awkward again, because I did my best wheel-gun work with locked-down thumbs.

Bottom line, all this revolver chit-chat has primed me to start doing some semi-serious wheelgunning again; time to start loading some more .38s.

BTW, a few have mentioned that shooting a DA revolver every now and then is good for one's grouping ability. I heartily concur; if you can hold a group at 25 yards while trigger-cocking a revolver, even the lousiest self-loader trigger will seem pretty good in comparison.

.

Hizzie
12-16-2014, 09:32 PM
Bottom line, all this revolver chit-chat has primed me to start doing some semi-serious wheelgunning again; time to start loading some more .38s.



That's cool to hear.

WDW
12-17-2014, 02:45 AM
I'm neutral on the matter, as I carry both a revolver & an auto daily, at the same time... And boom goes the dynamite !!!! Each has its place & purpose.

LSP972
12-17-2014, 09:45 AM
. I carry both a revolver & an auto daily, at the same time...

As do I. The difference between that and general revolver shooting is, I practice with the J frame like I'll use it; snatch it out of the off-side pocket, point and click… with just the off hand.

Putting both hands on a revolver grip, for 'conventional' shooting, feels odd now.

.

LSP972
12-17-2014, 09:59 AM
That's cool to hear.

Its cool to anticipate.;) In fact, I'm off today and getting ready to head to the range and give the 242 some exercise.

I'm seriously considering attending Wayne & DB's revolver symposium next year.

I'm also scouring the net for a 3" K frame at less than a king's ransom. You guys are evil…

.

Tom Duffy
12-17-2014, 10:06 AM
My thought experiment is this. Let me clone myself - a perfect copy in terms of skill, ability, knowledge, luck - identical. (It's OK, only one of me will survive.) Now give one of me a revolver, any revolver you like. Give the other me a G19. Tell each of me to kill the other me. Is there any scenario where the revolver would be a benefit? Long-range duels, close-range duels, dark building, sun-dappled forests, ...? I'd have to give the edge to the me with the G19 in every case. Is there anyone for whom this would not be true?

You and your clone run into each other in a dark alley. You both go for your guns and get off one quick shot. Neither of you cause serious damage to the other. The G19 jams. While you are reacting and tapping and racking, you are shot 5 more times by your clone. :) Who was it who said, "I prefer a revolver - for the first six rounds."

ScotchMan
12-17-2014, 10:08 AM
My thoughts on the issue: http://everydayloadout.com/revolvers-for-everyday-carry.html

nyeti has mentioned a few different times what I believe is the most important point in this discussion. It is important to keep things in perspective; the members of this forum represent the very top of the shooting community. We all are familiar with how to operate semi-autos, probably in our sleep. We've all taken at least one or two classes and likely shot multiple thousands of rounds in our shooting careers. For most of us, these numbers are probably quite low.

Contrasting with this is the average American shooter, who thinks they are the king kitten, but in reality are slow, inefficient, unprepared to actually use a firearm in defense of their lives, and in far too many cases, extremely unsafe. Instruct an NRA Basic Pistol class or two, and 5 minutes in to the shooting portion you will be entering double digits for the number of safety violations you've corrected. These students probably represent the top 25% of shooters; they're in a class! The vast majority don't go that far. I have a "project" at work, this guy who is carrying a Sig 1911, can't shoot it for crap, and it jams every 5-10 rounds. He also has the opposite mindset of what you'd like to see. He loves the thing and carries it everywhere, totally prepared to shoot someone in the face for looking at him wrong, but is confident nothing bad can happen to him while he has a 2lb .45 on his hip. He literally has the wrong idea about every aspect of armed defense. To me, THIS is the average American shooter (although, admittedly he is probably worse than average).

I would much, much rather that these people had revolvers than semi-autos. I can't overstate how significant the safety, simplicity, and reliability benefits of a double action revolver are to people who have their heads completely in the sand (politically correct version of where their heads actually are). The unfortunate truth is that they represent the majority, and we the minority.

For "us," those who take shooting safety seriously, who realize that mindset, tactics, and skill rank above equipment in the calculus of survivability, and who train hard and often, I understand the arguments in support of the semi-auto. But for the average American shooter, I think the revolver is far superior.

LSP972
12-17-2014, 10:15 AM
WELL stated, ScotchMan… and 100% correct.

.

nycnoob
12-17-2014, 10:46 AM
I would much, much rather that these people had revolvers than semi-autos. I can't overstate how significant the safety, simplicity, and reliability benefits of a double action revolver are to people who have their heads completely in the sand (politically correct version of where their heads actually are).

Could you elaborate on what makes the revolver simpler and safer for these type of shooters. I do not see the connection.

Tamara
12-17-2014, 10:49 AM
...give the 242 some exercise.

I'm still jealous, just so you know. :D

Petrov
12-17-2014, 11:07 AM
We had a guy bring a J-fram to an MDTS low light class, reloading in the dark took a looong time for that guy.
I have been mostly CZ-75 guy tried M&P tupperware and dumped it quick and shoot glock too and an S&W 627 8shot with 4" barrel. Took all 4 to defensive pistol classes of various kinds.

I am left handed but reloading the revolver is just as fast and easy as reloading for a right handed person.
My CZ-75 is DA/SA, in class you could easily see one "flyer" off on the side and a tight group in the middle, the "flyer" was just me fucking up the DA pull. Shooting the revolver helped to vastly improve my DA/SA shooting.

I can easily carry 2 spare semi auto magazines on the side. The revolver moon clip holder sucks when it comes to concealability, it is a big fat rectangle sticking out of your side:
http://www.firearmsprostore.com/images/products/detail/NorthMountainIDPA1post.jpg
It can be concealed during fall/winter months but carrying moon clips is just plain ole uncomfortable. Not gonna use speed strips to attempt to shove 8 rounds while some one is trying to kill me.
At class I slowly got the hang of reloading with moonclips, you need to have the right kind of moonclips to match the brass so they stay in there tight and go in easy. You are probably going to spend as much on good moon clips as you will on magazines for semi auto.

When I ran the S&W 627 in class I used winchester 38spl +P HP ammo. After about 350 rounds there was a large build up of carbon and or lead on the cylinder face and forcing cone increasing the trigger pull and making it inconsistent, difficult extraction too. I did not have these problems with my handloads when I used coated lead bullets 500+ rounds with no build up of any kind to be fair.
Taking a defensive pistol class with a revolver taught me a lot, and I think it made me a better shooter. Most importantly I learned something new and learned a new tool to use.

Here in NY we are now limited to 7 rounds, so my capacity between my semi autos and my revolver is the same.
I think that using different platforms makes you a better shooter.

MDS
12-17-2014, 11:27 AM
You and your clone run into each other in a dark alley. You both go for your guns and get off one quick shot. Neither of you cause serious damage to the other. The G19 jams. While you are reacting and tapping and racking, you are shot 5 more times by your clone. :) Who was it who said, "I prefer a revolver - for the first six rounds."
I may be off my rocker, but I've had my j frame lock up on me more than once. Fixing it was much more convoluted than tap rack bang.

Besides, the spirit of the exercise was to limit the variables to just the gun. I specifically mentioned that both clones had the same luck. So if one of me has the g19 FTE or whatever, then the other me gets struck by lightning. Because of that big hunk of metal, his hand burns to a crisp. As he lays there bemoaning his choice of weapon, the other, more steely eyed version of me walks over, says something cheesy but awesome, and corrects the number of me's in the universe.

[emoji41]

David Armstrong
12-17-2014, 11:47 AM
While I appreciate the comforts and convienence of the modern service semi-automatic pistol, I also see where a duty revolver is still a viable choice in the 21st Century. We can argue downsides and upsides until we run out of Internet but there are some truths here to be considered:

1. Revolvers met the needs of cops and armed citizens for decades (nearly a century) for shooting or managing bad guys. There were some of the worst bad guys we've ever faced during that time frame, too.
2. A review of the Texas DPS and Louisiana SP (thanks LSP 972) reveals that they NEVER lost a fight over capacity and there are very few reloads needed in fights (like single digit numbers).
Those two statements pretty well provide the essence of the argument for me. The revolver has a great history of success behind it and I have seen nothing to indicate that the basic parameters for that success have changed, and the main advantage of the autoloader (ease of reloading) does not seem to be that much of an advantage in very many real world incidents.

Dagga Boy
12-17-2014, 11:59 AM
I'm still jealous, just so you know. :D

We have 296's. Just keep saying "because size does matter" and it helps make the jealousy go away.

Good write up by Scotchman. The only thing I would dispute is some of the reliability stuff. Revolver and Auto reliability are simply different at what they tend to be able to deal with or where they excel. I put it as an "equal but different".

ScotchMan
12-17-2014, 12:27 PM
Could you elaborate on what makes the revolver simpler and safer for these type of shooters. I do not see the connection.

Simpler

Easily see if the firearm is loaded (no chambered round to forget about)
No magazines to worry about - Reliability, capacity, legality, etc
No safeties, decockers, DA/SA transition, disassembly levers, etc
Everyone understands how they work - if you've seen a TV show, you can probably operate a revolver. How many people think you need to rack the slide on a pistol every time you shoot it, or pull back the hammer before shooting it, because of how often this is misrepresented in the media?
Malfunction drills (pull trigger again, natural reaction for most)
No need to disassemble for basic cleaning/maintenance
Probably forgetting some


Safer

Heavy trigger pull; poor substitute for trigger discipline, but its something
Visibly see if it's loaded without handling
No chambered round to worry about (not uncommon for a new shooter to rack the slide then drop the magazine, and call the gun safe)
No bullet setback to worry about from repeated chamberings of the same round
No need to decock after normal firing
Safer to load and unload (may depend on the S/A being compared to, but in general true)



Here in NY we are now limited to 7 rounds, so my capacity between my semi autos and my revolver is the same.

The 7 round limitation was struck down a while back. I understand it is still being enforced in some remote areas, but I've been carrying 10+1 in Monroe county since the ruling, and believe that no negative consequences would ultimately come to anyone found with 10 round magazines anywhere in the state except perhaps the city.

ScotchMan
12-17-2014, 12:29 PM
We have 296's. Just keep saying "because size does matter" and it helps make the jealousy go away.

Good write up by Scotchman. The only thing I would dispute is some of the reliability stuff. Revolver and Auto reliability are simply different at what they tend to be able to deal with or where they excel. I put it as an "equal but different".

Good point. I guess I am thinking about problems with basic firing out of the box. New shooter with his Taurus 1911, or Keltec PF9. While there are unreliable revolvers, I think in general the average shooter buying a revolver ends up with a Ruger or Smith, which I think are very reliable. The average autoloader could be a lot of things, many of which I don't think are consistently reliable.

rsa-otc
12-17-2014, 12:43 PM
I will admit I am a die in the wool revolver guy.

That said for decades when people make the claims that revolvers don't fail I just roll my eyes. Revolvers are machines made and operated by humans, parts break, wear out and humans screw up.

Conversely when claims are made that when a revolver goes down in a fight you need an armorer to get it up and running something that you don't need with an auto malfunction. My experience just doesn't support that.

From the late 70's thru 1990 I was responsible for and inventory of 100+ revolvers mainly K frames with a couple of mdl 28's and J frames thrown it. From 1992 till present I have been responsible for a stable of approximately 50 K frames. Each of these guns have had a minimum of 500 rounds per year in mandatory training go through them and in some cases several thousand rounds annually if the personnel chose to attend additional training sessions available to them. When you remove dirty crappy lead reloads from the equation my experience has been if a revolver fails and can't continue the fight if the equivalent part failed on an auto that weapon would require the attention of an armorer as well.

I know that this is a small sample compared to someone like LSP972 who was responsible for a much larger inventory. So I put it out there; if we take crappy lead rounds out of the equation, restricting the ammunition to Jacketed/Plated/coated bullets loaded over modern clean burning powder; what failures did you experience that prevented a revolver from continuing to fire requiring an armorer to repair, that would not have similarly dead lined a semi-auto?

Jeep
12-17-2014, 12:58 PM
The Sheridan?

Yep. The good old M551. Great vehicle; lousy turret; useless armor, but with the best anti-personnel round in the inventory. The M60A2 also used that six-inch gun/missile system.

45dotACP
12-17-2014, 01:05 PM
I personally like the model 36 that I have. Not only because I picked it up for cheapsies, but also because it can be hidden just about anywhere, and the enormously heavy trigger pull (Apex kit incoming) has drastically improved my ability to shoot a DA/SA trigger. Would I go to carrying my model 64? Probably not, but there is a part of me that says "Yeah, carry that 4" barreled K-frame, and then the snubby as backup." and one of these days I may just listen.

As it is right now however, I still shoot every other gun I have better than I do either the J or K frame. I was brought up shooting DA revolvers because the guy who taught me to shoot was a big revo fan, but I let my practice with them lapse and got into Glocks and now the DA revolver takes a backseat :(

LSP972
12-17-2014, 01:11 PM
I'm still jealous, just so you know. :D

There's one on GB I'm eyeing: #458000652

Looks pretty clean, but lots of bids, so you KNOW its going to get retarded, price-wise, at the last minutes.

See you there???:D

.

Tamara
12-17-2014, 01:13 PM
"Yeah, carry that 4" barreled K-frame, and then the snubby as backup."

Old Skool Tacticool would have you carrying a Colt's Detective Special to back up the K-frame because they eat out of the same speedloaders. ;)

LSP972
12-17-2014, 01:14 PM
We have 296's.

I have two more beans.:cool:

.

LSP972
12-17-2014, 01:23 PM
Old Skool Tacticool would have you carrying a Colt's Detective Special to back up the K-frame because they eat out of the same speedloaders. ;)

Yeah, but the flip side of that is that many Old Skool Tacticool types viewed Colt revolvers as The AntiChrist; I mean, they work BACKWARDS, y'herd? And, with the exception of that last-ditch effort Commando model, they were twice the price of a J or K frame.

I can still hear one of my old mentors' (RIP) comments whenever the subject came up:

"I'd rather have a sister in a whorehouse than a brother who owned a Colt revolver!" :D

That said… if I ever run across a pre-ejector-rod-shroud Agent, at a non-larcenous price, its mine…

.

Tamara
12-17-2014, 01:43 PM
Yeah, but the flip side of that is that many Old Skool Tacticool types viewed Colt revolvers as The AntiChrist; I mean, they work BACKWARDS, y'herd?

I was teased mercilessly for a while about the time one of the sales staff offered me their revolver to check the timing, and I laid my fingertips on the cylinder, started to thumb the hammer back... and jumped. Visibly. :D

nycnoob
12-17-2014, 02:08 PM
ScotchMan thanks, thats a nice list.

Tom Duffy
12-17-2014, 03:04 PM
I may be off my rocker, but I've had my j frame lock up on me more than once. Fixing it was much more convoluted than tap rack bang.

Besides, the spirit of the exercise was to limit the variables to just the gun. I specifically mentioned that both clones had the same luck. So if one of me has the g19 FTE or whatever, then the other me gets struck by lightning. Because of that big hunk of metal, his hand burns to a crisp. As he lays there bemoaning his choice of weapon, the other, more steely eyed version of me walks over, says something cheesy but awesome, and corrects the number of me's in the universe.

[emoji41]

Inventive reply :), but I stand by my scenario. Perhaps you should consider a medium frame revolver as your primary gun and aG19 as your backup? Best of both worlds. :) Though honesty compels me to say that I have never had a single failure with either of my HKs using factory ammo. This somewhat amazes me based on my 1911 experiences.

Tamara
12-17-2014, 03:15 PM
You and your clone run into each other in a dark alley. You both go for your guns and get off one quick shot. Neither of you cause serious damage to the other. The G19 jams. While you are reacting and tapping and racking, you are shot 5 more times by your clone. :) Who was it who said, "I prefer a revolver - for the first six rounds."

You and your clone run into each other in a dark alley. You both open fire on each other. A flying saucer appears overhead and teleports the first six shots from each of your guns into the Danger Dimension of Planet Z. Your clone finishes you off with the remaining nine shots from his Glock.

I mean, while we're inventing scenarios... ;)

Tom Duffy
12-17-2014, 03:53 PM
Yeah, I know. I'll wait for his Glock to jam while you wait for the meddling aliens. Probably both equally improbable.

Jay Cunningham
12-17-2014, 03:56 PM
We can move this thread to Romper Room if that's what everyone desires.

Dagga Boy
12-17-2014, 04:15 PM
We can move this thread to Romper Room if that's what everyone desires.

Thanks Jay.....this went from good to silly pretty quick.

farscott
12-17-2014, 04:19 PM
As someone who still will carry a three-inch DAO SP-101 in .357, I see the following advantages for the small-frame revolver:

1) Easier to conceal in an IWB than a service pistol (no surprise as one gives up anywhere from three to thirteen rounds). This is big during the summer months in casual clothing.
2) Easier to manipulate for loading and unloading
3) The draw is faster due to the shorter length of the pistol.


The disadvantages

1) For me, much harder to shoot the small revolver accurately and at speed. More recoil in a lighter gun with a smaller sight radius does not make for my best shooting.
2) Harder to practice as shooting it is not pleasant in terms of my hands and ears. I have to make myself practice with the SP-101 versus having fun with a 1911 or P30.
3) Much slower reloads that are harder for me to carry on my belt.
4) The timer shows I am slower after the first five rounds, and I suck at tactical reloads with the SP-101. Suck so bad that I sometimes eject the loaded rounds instead of the empties.

Lon
12-17-2014, 07:35 PM
I'm also scouring the net for a 3" K frame at less than a king's ransom. You guys are evil…

.

I just bought a 3" 64 on The net. There's another one listed from the same guy. Not sure how you define "kings random", but I've rarely found any 3" K frame in decent shape for less than $500. Others are listed for $700+

Lon
12-17-2014, 07:37 PM
Never mind. I see you found the one I'm referring too. Pretty quick shipping from that guy. I bought mine yesterday. He's shipping tomorrow.

coldcase1984
12-17-2014, 07:51 PM
Nyeti, in the spirit of muzzleblast being a valuable part of the ballistic package, wondering what the absolute brightest flash 125-grain Magnum load on the market might be? Maybe the cheap Rem 125s sold at Wally World? If they're anything like the Rem 180 JSP load they'd be magnificent for shock and awe.

As referenced in another thread I sent my 3-in. SP-101 down the road, but been thinking about a 2.5 DAO 101 or even an LCR .357 for an in-car officer safety device these days.

I suspect a lot of folks have never seen autos pushed out of battery during ground tussles...

Dagga Boy
12-17-2014, 08:44 PM
Nyeti, in the spirit of muzzleblast being a valuable part of the ballistic package, wondering what the absolute brightest flash 125-grain Magnum load on the market might be? Maybe the cheap Rem 125s sold at Wally World? If they're anything like the Rem 180 JSP load they'd be magnificent for shock and awe.

As referenced in another thread I sent my 3-in. SP-101 down the road, but been thinking about a 2.5 DAO 101 or even an LCR .357 for an in-car officer safety device these days.

I suspect a lot of folks have never seen autos pushed out of battery during ground tussles...

The Remington stuff was always blasty. We had cases with auto's not firing due to body contact.

LSP972
12-17-2014, 09:09 PM
an in-car officer safety device these days..

Check your PM

.

Tamara
12-17-2014, 09:10 PM
Nyeti, in the spirit of muzzleblast being a valuable part of the ballistic package, wondering what the absolute brightest flash 125-grain Magnum load on the market might be? Maybe the cheap Rem 125s sold at Wally World?

I recollect the 110gr Remington SJHP as having an actinic white muzzle flash out of Marko's 2.5" 686 that was visibly illuminating the range wall three or four lanes to the left. It was also noticeably louder than the American Eagle 240gr .44 Magnum out of the 4" Anaconda he brought on that same range trip. :o

LSP972
12-17-2014, 09:23 PM
I see you found the one I'm referring too.

Yup. Looks a bit rough, but the price was right. More importantly, its built RIGHT; no MIM parts, no spring-loaded yoke screw, no recessed charge holes. The only thing missing is a pinned barrel.

But now I gotta run all over town tomorrow, getting a copy of the FFL, securing postal money orders (after going to the credit union), preparing the letter with FFL and payment, getting that mailed… now I remember why I don't mind paying more at the LGS. Just drop the plastic, fill out the 4473, and walk out with your new toy. This online buying gig is a massive rectal discomfort.

But I haven't seen a 3" K frame anywhere around here for YEARS.

I was kind of hoping someone would snipe that 64 out from under me; not five minutes after I bid on it, I found that Performance Center M-65. No joy on that, though… oh well.

.

Lon
12-17-2014, 09:41 PM
I think I'm gonna do a DOA conversion with bobbed hammer on mine. Then have it head blasted. Was thinking of having a tritium front sight dovetailed in as well.

I just paid with the plastic and sent an FFL via email. Worth the extra money to avoid all the hassle.

LSP972
12-17-2014, 10:04 PM
I just paid with the plastic and sent an FFL via email. Worth the extra money to avoid all the hassle.

He took your plastic? The "Payment" header in the ad said cashier's check/money order only. Hell, yes, I'll cough up the $15 or so extra for the CC fee.

Got his number here, I'll call him tomorrow.

Thanks.

Lon
12-17-2014, 10:13 PM
I thought it was the same guy. Yep, paid through GB and emailed a FFL. Took 5 minutes.

Edit: just checked and it's the same guy. Go to your gunbroker summary page and click on that winning auction. Should show a link to pay through the sight. It shows he takes plastic on the add. Musta just missed it.

Lon
12-17-2014, 10:57 PM
Was checking out the 3" K frames again and came across this $3K Model 65: http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=458528064

That's nuts.

Jeep
12-17-2014, 11:00 PM
Yup. Looks a bit rough, but the price was right. More importantly, its built RIGHT; no MIM parts, no spring-loaded yoke screw, no recessed charge holes. The only thing missing is a pinned barrel.

But now I gotta run all over town tomorrow, getting a copy of the FFL, securing postal money orders (after going to the credit union), preparing the letter with FFL and payment, getting that mailed… now I remember why I don't mind paying more at the LGS. Just drop the plastic, fill out the 4473, and walk out with your new toy. This online buying gig is a massive rectal discomfort.

But I haven't seen a 3" K frame anywhere around here for YEARS.

I was kind of hoping someone would snipe that 64 out from under me; not five minutes after I bid on it, I found that Performance Center M-65. No joy on that, though… oh well.

.

I picked up a 3 inch 64 maybe 5 years ago. Put in some lighter springs and it is a great revolver. The only downside is the lack of contrast on the front sight. I think I'm going to paint the back ridge of the sight a darker color.

Chuck Haggard
12-17-2014, 11:00 PM
I recollect the 110gr Remington SJHP as having an actinic white muzzle flash out of Marko's 2.5" 686 that was visibly illuminating the range wall three or four lanes to the left. It was also noticeably louder than the American Eagle 240gr .44 Magnum out of the 4" Anaconda he brought on that same range trip. :o

I was carrying WWB 110gr JHPs for awhile in my 640 due to it having the worst flash I could find from store bought .357mags.


The Remington 125gr rounds were loaded rather warm when we issued them at my job, running just barely under 1500fps from my Security Six, but they didn't flash nearly as bad, even from the snub.

Trajan
12-17-2014, 11:43 PM
Are the 3" guns really that big of a difference from 2.5"?

I really like old K-frames, but I don't think my brain would let me carry one when I have Glocks available.


Yup. Looks a bit rough, but the price was right. More importantly, its built RIGHT; no MIM parts, no spring-loaded yoke screw, no recessed charge holes. The only thing missing is a pinned barrel.
What's wrong with recessed charge holes? Not necessary, but a nice touch. Much like the checkering on the top of a 27.

Lon
12-18-2014, 12:05 AM
The biggest benefit the 3" has over the 2.5" is the full length ejector rod, IMHO. I just bought a 2.5" Model 19 because I won't pay the prices a 3" 66 brings. I wanted something I could turn into a steel version of the Night Guard.

I almost popped on a 3" 67-5 CarryComp but couldn't talk myself into it. They wanted almost a grand for it. The 3" 66s are going for more than that.

Totem Polar
12-18-2014, 02:36 AM
Was checking out the 3" K frames again and came across this $3K Model 65: http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=458528064

That's nuts.

For 2k less, I'd rock that.



I think I'm gonna do a DOA conversion with bobbed hammer on mine. Then have it head blasted. Was thinking of having a tritium front sight dovetailed in as well.


Who's going to do the work? Me n my 3" 65 want to know.

I don't have a whole lot to add to this lengthy and passionate thread save for this: I have shot top of my class in civvy courses 3 times in my life. 2 of those times were with 4" K-frames. On the other hand, the quals were old-school (eg. LFI-1), with 6 shot multiples on all legs. Put me in the "autos have indeed eclipsed revos for duty work, but I don't give a rats ass" camp. :D

Tamara
12-18-2014, 06:37 AM
I have shot top of my class in civvy courses 3 times in my life. 2 of those times were with 4" K-frames. On the other hand, the quals were old-school (eg. LFI-1), with 6 shot multiples on all legs.

When I took LFI-1, the high shooter was a young Army vet who shot the course clean (600) and took Mas's lunch money with a 586. Dude shot all week like pasters cost $20 and were a rare commodity. :cool:

LSP972
12-18-2014, 08:26 AM
Are the 3" guns really that big of a difference from 2.5"?

I really like old K-frames, but I don't think my brain would let me carry one when I have Glocks available.


What's wrong with recessed charge holes? Not necessary, but a nice touch. Much like the checkering on the top of a 27.

Yes. Lon pointed out the main advantage (the regular-length elector rod).

As for the recessed charge holes, they are a throw-back to the days of ballon-head cartridge brass, which was known for blowing out at the rims. Not an issue with modern brass, of course. But they introduce another potential issue (that didn't exist until the 1970's); namely, while using a speedloader, if all six rounds don't line up exactly with the charge holes when released, one or more of the rims can "hang" on the recess edges, necessitating you thumb it/them in to properly seat. With a "slick back" (no recesses) cylinder, they'll just slip into place naturally... assuming, of course, that the charge holes are relatively clean. Yet another reason why keeping those charge holes scrubbed out is pretty much mandatory for a high round count shooting session... especially if you're shooting lead bullets.

As to choosing a bottom feeder over the wheelie... I agree, even a soulless Glock will likely be the smart choice for personal defense. I think we've covered that pretty thoroughly here. But I'll tell you this... if I KNEW, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that any lethal force confrontation I might encounter would be one-on-one, or even two-on one, I'd carry an S&W DA revolver without a second thought. Of course, the odds of three, or even more, assailants are good today. A .357 revolver is a "two-bad-guy-gun".

.

Lon
12-18-2014, 09:10 AM
Who's going to do the work? Me n my 3" 65 want to know.


For the trigger and hammer work I use a friend of mine at Olde English Outfitters in Tipp City Ohio. He's a retired deputy who was a PPC shooter and armorer for his agency in the late 70/80's. He does some of the best action jobs and hammer bobs I've ever seen.
Not sure about the front sight yet. There's a local gunsmith named Scott Keller who I'm thinking about contacting. He's been mentioned by a few people I know.

Jeep
12-18-2014, 10:58 AM
Yes. Lon pointed out the main advantage (the regular-length elector rod).

As for the recessed charge holes, they are a throw-back to the days of ballon-head cartridge brass, which was known for blowing out at the rims. Not an issue with modern brass, of course. But they introduce another potential issue (that didn't exist until the 1970's); namely, while using a speedloader, if all six rounds don't line up exactly with the charge holes when released, one or more of the rims can "hang" on the recess edges, necessitating you thumb it/them in to properly seat. With a "slick back" (no recesses) cylinder, they'll just slip into place naturally... assuming, of course, that the charge holes are relatively clean. Yet another reason why keeping those charge holes scrubbed out is pretty much mandatory for a high round count shooting session... especially if you're shooting lead bullets.

As to choosing a bottom feeder over the wheelie... I agree, even a soulless Glock will likely be the smart choice for personal defense. I think we've covered that pretty thoroughly here. But I'll tell you this... if I KNEW, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that any lethal force confrontation I might encounter would be one-on-one, or even two-on one, I'd carry an S&W DA revolver without a second thought. Of course, the odds of three, or even more, assailants are good today. A .357 revolver is a "two-bad-guy-gun".

.

Though even with three bad guys, how often do they stand and fight after they hear the first shot? Very few of them have much interest in risking getting shot to help a fellow thug. From what I can tell, the chances of a civilian getting into a drawn-out firefight with a bunch of thugs is probably as close to zero as you can get. With cops, of course, things could be very different.

Hizzie
12-18-2014, 11:11 AM
My much loved and heavily carried 642 was worked over by Don Williams of The Action Works. He stipples the backstrap, chamfered the charge holes, radiused and polished the trigger, performed a duty action job, installed a front night sight and fit a set of real Spegel centennial grips. I would cheerfully use him again.

Lon - Being in Ohio you aren't that far from SDM Fabricating. I was lucky to handle a lot of his revolver work. Top notch for sure.


----------

Extended shootouts.

Are they really that common for LE? Based on the documented cases, is capacity the solution or marksmanship and tactics?


Kicking doors.

Is having a wheelgun really a problem? When executing search/high risk arrest warrants the best choice of primary weapon is:

A. Revolver
B. Semi-auto
C. SBS/SBR

LSP972
12-18-2014, 02:04 PM
Though even with three bad guys, how often do they stand and fight after they hear the first shot? .

I think that is a bit of internet lore. Bystanders/un-armed participants? You bet, they are going to put those Adidas hi-top felony flyers into high gear; ditto the home invaders who see the first guy through the door catch a load of buckshot in the chest. But three guys with guns who selected you to rob on the street? Some might suddenly decide they had urgent business elsewhere after the first one drops; but do you want to bank on that?

I don't.

.

Lon
12-18-2014, 02:20 PM
Lon - Being in Ohio you aren't that far from SDM Fabricating. I was lucky to handle a lot of his revolver work.

Yep. I checked with him. Not taking work right now.

Jeep
12-18-2014, 03:09 PM
I think that is a bit of internet lore. Bystanders/un-armed participants? You bet, they are going to put those Adidas hi-top felony flyers into high gear; ditto the home invaders who see the first guy through the door catch a load of buckshot in the chest. But three guys with guns who selected you to rob on the street? Some might suddenly decide they had urgent business elsewhere after the first one drops; but do you want to bank on that?

I don't.


.

In some ways I do. I often carry only a J frame or a small .380, but then again because of my job that is a big step up--usually I can't carry at all. My own "threat assessment" is that almost all the armed street robberies around where I live involve knives or occasionally one guy with a gun. The store robbers almost always flee after the first shot is fired.

My exception to that rule is a situation like now when you might face a mob. 15 rounds is nice to have in that situation. But even then I don't carry a spare mag. Basically, if I think there is any chance of needing spare mags I avoid the situation (though I keep them for my home defense weapons because that is a situation that can't be avoided).

It might not be the perfect situation, but I think it is probably a reasonable compromise where I live right now. If our political leaders and others keep trying to stir up riots, though, I'd start carrying extra mags, BUGs and the works.

Dagga Boy
12-18-2014, 04:59 PM
I think that is a bit of internet lore. Bystanders/un-armed participants? You bet, they are going to put those Adidas hi-top felony flyers into high gear; ditto the home invaders who see the first guy through the door catch a load of buckshot in the chest. But three guys with guns who selected you to rob on the street? Some might suddenly decide they had urgent business elsewhere after the first one drops; but do you want to bank on that?

I don't.

.

That is the crux of it. Reality rarely delivers the worst possible scenario or that 1% equation, but that is often what we are planning for. The modern 9mm semi automatic service pistol, two reloads, and a BUG and a bunch of knives is as much, or more than most cops carry on duty. We (collective on a forum like this) are the fringe and simply do not want to get caught short tow rounds in the 43 round street gunfight with the 5th dismounted Hell's Angels of ISIS Crips Triad gang.

The reality, we did a ton of bad ass cop work with 6 shot revolvers. Airliners full of real terrorists have been taken down with the point men running revolvers. We are "likely" just fine with any good combative handgun no matter how it operates.

I think a couple of the drills that we ran in the class that sort of started this thread really illustrated the issue: Hizzie had no real problem keeping up and solving the problems presented like a boss.....and loudly. What would often happen in some of the multi target scenarios is that Hizzie would be standing there with an empty or near empty gun at the end. Doesn't mean it was a failure or issue, but just a reality. He would at times have to take advantage of some segments of movement and throw a speed load in. The auto shooters still had to solve the "shooting problem", but didn't have to concern themselves as much with the logistics issues. It makes sense to carry something that is easier on the gun handling side, but as long as you keep your pyramid of Marksmanship, Mindset, and Gun Handling/Tactics in balance, the outcome should be successful baring bad luck or jacked up Karma.

Totem Polar
12-18-2014, 06:12 PM
These are some great posts, DB.

Symmetry
12-18-2014, 08:19 PM
Getting awfully tempted to get into wheel guns....

WDW
12-18-2014, 08:34 PM
Lately I'm really tempted by the new 3" Ruger LCR. That seems like it'd be a great, lightweight carry revolver

Hizzie
12-18-2014, 08:58 PM
Lately I'm really tempted by the new 3" Ruger LCR. That seems like it'd be a great, lightweight carry revolver

That grip feels great in the hand. The sights aren't bad. I think the cylinder release is a little small. I was mixed on the trigger. It was light but not as smooth as I would've liked.

SeriousStudent
12-19-2014, 12:07 AM
........... Hizzie had no real problem keeping up and solving the problems presented like a boss.....and loudly. What would often happen in some of the multi target scenarios is that Hizzie would be standing there with an empty or near empty gun at the end. Doesn't mean it was a failure or issue, but just a reality. He would at times have to take advantage of some segments of movement and throw a speed load in. The auto shooters still had to solve the "shooting problem", but didn't have to concern themselves as much with the logistics issues. It makes sense to carry something that is easier on the gun handling side, but as long as you keep your pyramid of Marksmanship, Mindset, and Gun Handling/Tactics in balance, the outcome should be successful baring bad luck or jacked up Karma.

Just to add some un-needed confirmation to this. I shot on the line next to Hizzie for the two days in the class that was mentioned. There was never any issue with him slowing anything down.

I did make sure he was on my left (deaf) side, however. :cool:

1986s4
12-19-2014, 08:52 AM
I really love my 3" M13 Smith, accurate in my hands and easy to shoot well. It handles .357 magnum well, .38s better. I carry it sometimes and have competed with it often. Auto shooters can't believe they are getting out shot by a "snub" revolver [it does look small in my largish hands]. But as confident as I feel with it I can't argue with the fact that my SIG P225 is faster to shoot, easier to carry and more efficient capacity wise.

SouthNarc
12-19-2014, 01:14 PM
While not common I've had probably 15 guys over the years come in with revolvers and contact me ahead of time so I could bring them .38 Sim. I have not seen a revolver shooter "fail" to keep up in any FoF evolution including the 2v1.

Dagga Boy
12-19-2014, 01:28 PM
While not common I've had probably 15 guys over the years come in with revolvers and contact me ahead of time so I could bring them .38 Sim. I have not seen a revolver shooter "fail" to keep up in any FoF evolution including the 2v1.

But wait...that can't be. Glock 19 or die...read it on the net.

Hizzie
12-19-2014, 02:12 PM
While not common I've had probably 15 guys over the years come in with revolvers and contact me ahead of time so I could bring them .38 Sim. I have not seen a revolver shooter "fail" to keep up in any FoF evolution including the 2v1.

Thank you Sir for dropping by with your experience on the matter.

David Armstrong
12-19-2014, 02:12 PM
It might not be the perfect situation, but I think it is probably a reasonable compromise where I live right now. If our political leaders and others keep trying to stir up riots, though, I'd start carrying extra mags, BUGs and the works.
QFT. We all compromise on what we decide to carry around with us. If someone wants to compromise at a different point more power to them, but it is still a compromise. In my situation, for example, I would put worrying about multiple dedicated attackers willing to continue the assault in face of significant opposition right up there with being attacked by a man-eating lion. If the riots get heavy or I start running with a bunch of drug-dealing gangbangers, maybe things change and I'll go down wishing I had decided to carry my G17 with an extended mag instead of compromising with my G19.:rolleyes:

Jeep
12-19-2014, 04:17 PM
Now that raises a question. Is a G-17 enough to stop a man-eating lion? I've seen lots of "what does it take to stop a bear" threads, but never one on what it takes to stop a lion.

I'm thinking, though, that my J frame with wad cutters might not quite do the trick.

LSP972
12-19-2014, 04:42 PM
Now that raises a question. Is a G-17 enough to stop a man-eating lion?

Probably not. But its enough to deter three (or more) less-fortunate yutes who are trying to turn their life around at your expense.

.

Alpha Sierra
12-19-2014, 05:22 PM
For the trigger and hammer work I use a friend of mine at Olde English Outfitters in Tipp City Ohio. He's a retired deputy who was a PPC shooter and armorer for his agency in the late 70/80's. He does some of the best action jobs and hammer bobs I've ever seen.
Not sure about the front sight yet. There's a local gunsmith named Scott Keller who I'm thinking about contacting. He's been mentioned by a few people I know.
Mike at OE has worked on almost all of my S&Ws and he does fantastic work.

I can personally vouch for Scott Keller in Bradford. He's never done any pistol work for me but the rifle and shotgun gunsmithing he's done for me has been first rate.

Lon
12-19-2014, 05:25 PM
Mike at OE has worked on almost all of my S&Ws and he does fantastic work.

I can personally vouch for Scott Keller in Bradford. He's never done any pistol work for me but the rifle and shotgun gunsmithing he's done for me has been first rate.

Bob is who does my work for me at OE. Good to hear about Scott. I'll definitely have to check him out.

Lon
12-19-2014, 05:26 PM
Probably not. But its enough to deter three (or more) less-fortunate yutes who are trying to turn their life around at your expense.

.


The biggest mistake they can make is to turn themselves around or find Jesus. Sure ticket to the morgue. Just watch the news.

Totem Polar
12-19-2014, 07:42 PM
The biggest mistake they can make is to turn themselves around or find Jesus. Sure ticket to the morgue. Just watch the news.

Or become "gentle giants". Tenacious, deceptive action-figure sized guys live a whole lot longer. You know I'm right. :D

Jeep
12-20-2014, 10:26 AM
Probably not. But its enough to deter three (or more) less-fortunate yutes who are trying to turn their life around at your expense.

.

It is amazing how many youths who are trying to turn their lives around commit that one last armed robbery, isn't it? I think that the only group more likely to be involved in armed robberies than youths turning their lives around than those who are aspiring rappers.

serialsolver
12-21-2014, 12:31 PM
I guess I'm a little different. What some folks call their everyday carry gun I call my base gun. I view being armed like dressing for winter. I put on more layers the colder it gets. My current base gun is a snubby 357. I can add a j frame to it if needed or a high cap auto if I feel the threat assessment calls for it. The base gun can be primary or back up. The base gun is a common denominator for all the situations in my day to day life. The base gun can be whatever you want or feel you need. In the past I have used a service pistol. Now it's a revolver. I still believe the revolver is a viable option for self defense. I mean no disrespect but the idea that the revolver is a two bad guy gun in a three or four bad guy world and you need a high capacity auto seems overly optimistic to me. If the bad guys don't scatter after six rounds from either a revolver or auto loader then the last bad guy in line may get you before you get to him. I'm just saying with odds like that it's gonna be a bad deal no matter what you got.

Also when the barrel length is shorter than 3 inches I prefer revolvers over semi autos.

I do have one of them 8 shot snubby 357's coming my way.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1986s4
12-21-2014, 01:18 PM
One of the most desirable revolvers S&W ever made was the 3" K frame .357. Come on S&W! You would sell every one you made. Even the likes of Beretta is back making 92Gs and 92 Brigs....

Lon
12-21-2014, 01:38 PM
One of the most desirable revolvers S&W ever made was the 3" K frame .357. Come on S&W! You would sell every one you made. Even the likes of Beretta is back making 92Gs and 92 Brigs....

Yep. 3" 19/66/65LS/PC13(without the ports) would sell like hot cakes.

JR1572
12-21-2014, 01:59 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v505/Jr1572/2B7E8E0D-3AD8-4ADA-933B-93DE692393FD.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Jr1572/media/2B7E8E0D-3AD8-4ADA-933B-93DE692393FD.jpg.html)

I passed on this 66-3 2.5. I'm holding out for a 3 inch k frame.

JR1572

LSP972
12-21-2014, 09:02 PM
I'm holding out for a 3 inch k frame.

JR1572

Get ready for felony sticker shock. but they are out there if you're willing to cough up the dust.

My 3" M-64 will be here Tuesday.;)

.

Malamute
12-21-2014, 09:56 PM
I wouldnt pass up a 2 1/2" 19 (assuming I could afford to buy one). I had one years ago and stupidly sold it. That particular gun had the slickest action of any Smith I've ever seen. My dad showed it to his gunsmith that did pretty good action jobs and asked if he could make his gun as slick as that one, he said he couldnt guarantee he could.

JR1572
12-21-2014, 11:16 PM
Get ready for felony sticker shock. but they are out there if you're willing to cough up the dust.

My 3" M-64 will be here Tuesday.;)

.

Well the $399.99 price tag on that poor 66 was somewhat shocking. I couldn't find any reasonable 3 inch guns on GB earlier, but then again I wasn't trying to keep my face buried in my phone while working extra duty today. I'm home now so I'll go check again in a few minutes.

JR1572

Malamute
12-21-2014, 11:34 PM
Well the $399.99 price tag on that poor 66 was somewhat shocking. I couldn't find any reasonable 3 inch guns on GB earlier, but then again I wasn't trying to keep my face buried in my phone while working extra duty today. I'm home now so I'll go check again in a few minutes.

JR1572

$400 for a 2 1/2" 66 doesnt sound bad.

JR1572
12-21-2014, 11:39 PM
$400 for a 2 1/2" 66 doesnt sound bad.

I'll sleep on it again tonight. It will be there in the morning. If I want it, I'll get it held. They have a 66-4 available also...

JR1572

Dagga Boy
12-22-2014, 12:05 AM
$400 for a 2 1/2" 66 doesnt sound bad.

That is actually a steal.

Want sticker shock........3" 66. The 2.5's are great shooters, but th 3" have an appeal due to both rarity and cleaner ejection.

JR1572
12-22-2014, 12:24 AM
That is actually a steal.

Want sticker shock........3" 66. The 2.5's are great shooters, but th 3" have an appeal due to both rarity and cleaner ejection.

Nyeti, would the 66-3 or the 66-4 be a better one to get?

JR1572

LSP972
12-22-2014, 07:17 AM
Nyeti, would the 66-3 or the 66-4 be a better one to get?

JR1572

Aha... you're soliciting a second opinion.

I'm crushed...;)

.

JR1572
12-22-2014, 07:35 AM
Aha... you're soliciting a second opinion.

I'm crushed...;)

.

My bad, we did have that discussion....

Steve, both of those revolvers looked rough. As far as the price, $400 isn't bad, but I guess my brain is still stuck in the late 90's when my co-workers couldn't give their used 66's and 686's away for $250 because no one wanted revolvers anymore.

I'm going to hold out for a 3 inch gun.

JR1572

Jeep
12-22-2014, 08:45 AM
My bad, we did have that discussion....

Steve, both of those revolvers looked rough. As far as the price, $400 isn't bad, but I guess my brain is still stuck in the late 90's when my co-workers couldn't give their used 66's and 686's away for $250 because no one wanted revolvers anymore.

I'm going to hold out for a 3 inch gun.

JR1572

That 2.5 inch barrel 66 is going to cost a lot more two years from now, I think, and you are going to have a very hard time finding a 3" K frame at a decent price. Where I live that 66 would already cost $450-500.

serialsolver
12-22-2014, 09:08 AM
I would get that 2.5 66 and when I found a 3 in 66 flip the 2.5.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Alpha Sierra
12-22-2014, 09:44 AM
I would get that 2.5 66 and when I found a 3 in 66 flip the 2.5.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This. The value of both is going nowhere but up.

LSP972
12-22-2014, 09:55 AM
Steve, both of those revolvers looked rough. As far as the price, $400 isn't bad, but I guess my brain is still stuck in the late 90's when my co-workers couldn't give their used 66's and 686's away for $250 because no one wanted revolvers anymore.

JR1572

And that mind-set continues in our local market... except for a few folks like us who recognize the "value" of earlier S&Ws.

If you've got the surplus funds and don't mind sitting on that gun for a while, then you can probably flip it for a modest profit. Or you can always use it like I do mine... make a bathroom gun out of it.:D

.

LSP972
12-22-2014, 09:59 AM
I'm going to hold out for a 3 inch gun.

JR1572

If a 3" M-66 is what you really desire, better be saving your nickels now. Most folks who have one know what they are and what they are going for.

OTOH, nuggets can be found... I'm going to look at a 3" M-13 today that Richard gave me a heads-up about.

.

Wayne Dobbs
12-22-2014, 09:59 AM
$400 for a 2.5" M66 is an absolute steal unless there are mechanical issues. I would grab it...

JR1572
12-22-2014, 10:09 AM
And that mind-set continues in our local market... except for a few folks like us who recognize the "value" of earlier S&Ws.

If you've got the surplus funds and don't mind sitting on that gun for a while, then you can probably flip it for a modest profit. Or you can always use it like I do mine... make a bathroom gun out of it.:D

.

I want a 3 inch gun, but at the end of the day, whatever I get I probably won't be carrying it at all.

The top strap erosion on both of those 66's looked a little to excessive to me.

JR1572

LSP972
12-22-2014, 11:19 AM
I want a 3 inch gun, but at the end of the day, whatever I get I probably won't be carrying it at all.

JR1572

By corollary, I assume you won't be shooting it much either (providing you sell all that .38 ammunition like you said?) If so, or even if you'll be shooting .38s, unless there is a deep trough cut into the top strap, it still has plenty of "life" remaining.

As we discussed, the only real advantage a three inch gun has is more positive ejection; which is a non-issue for a range toy/stash gun. If all you really want is a vintage S&W revolver, to play with and/or perhaps use for a stash piece, I'll agree with the others; unless there are serious mechanical issues as we discussed, the 66-3 would be a good "value". FWIW, mine has those same Pachmyar Goodyears on it; they are an excellent compromise stock.

If you go back to look at it, call me when you've got it in your hands and I'll walk you through a proper check.

.

JR1572
12-22-2014, 11:23 AM
By corollary, I assume you won't be shooting it much either (providing you sell all that .38 ammunition like you said?) If so, or even if you'll be shooting .38s, unless there is a deep trough cut into the top strap, it still has plenty of "life" remaining.

As we discussed, the only real advantage a three inch gun has is more positive ejection; which is a non-issue for a range toy/stash gun. If all you really want is a vintage S&W revolver, to play with and/or perhaps use for a stash piece, I'll agree with the others; unless there are serious mechanical issues as we discussed, the 66-3 would be a good "value". FWIW, mine has those same Pachmyar Goodyears on it; they are an excellent compromise stock.

If you go back to look at it, call me when you've got it in your hands and I'll walk you through a proper check.

.

I'm going to call you later on this afternoon.

JR1572

LSP972
12-22-2014, 11:26 AM
Try to get me a macro shot of the bottom front edge of the top strap, where the gas-cutting is.

.

Malamute
12-22-2014, 11:32 AM
The top strap cutting is supposedly self limiting. I wouldnt worry too much about it, seriously.*

If the general looks of the gun are a concern, stainless can be easily cleaned up/polished. Small parts can be cleaned up or replaced of dinged up, or just live with them as character. I've always been pretty forgiving about apearances, as I'm not kind to the finish on my guns. Mechanical issues, if not too outrageous, can often be remedied, especially with the resources available here.

As revolvers get harder to come by, I'm catching up on values in my head. I was stuck in the past on prices also, but the days of $225-$250 19's etc are gone. It makes me cringe, all the nice Smiths I've had in the past and sold or traded off, like the 5" 27 I sold for $375 (in the 80's). If I can get on my feet again, I want to replace a few of them, and realize its going to cost a LOT more to do so.


* ETA:

Try to get me a macro shot of the bottom front edge of the top strap, where the gas-cutting is.

.

Good idea.

LSP972
12-22-2014, 11:43 AM
Small parts can be cleaned up or replaced of dinged up.

Gotta be careful there. Truly, they "don't make 'em like they used to"... and haven't for quite some time (going on 20 years now).

I get a number of calls from former acquaintances (my friends know better than to ask) who know I have a pre-MIM parts stash, rear sight blades, escutcheons, studs & springs, etc. These goodies, not to mention hammers/hammer noses/triggers/et.al. for these older revolvers are drying up fast.

.

JR1572
12-22-2014, 11:52 AM
Try to get me a macro shot of the bottom front edge of the top strap, where the gas-cutting is.

.

If I make it over there I will get a picture.

JR1572

Hizzie
12-22-2014, 12:22 PM
This doesn't look bad and the price is "reasonable" http://www.ak47.net/forums/t_7_88/1377017_WTS_Connecticut_State_Police_Model_19_5_2_ 5_Snub_REDUCED.html

Dagga Boy
12-22-2014, 12:40 PM
Polished 3" 65 just went up on S&W forum for a good price.

Malamute
12-22-2014, 12:41 PM
Gotta be careful there. Truly, they "don't make 'em like they used to"... and haven't for quite some time (going on 20 years now).

I get a number of calls from former acquaintances (my friends know better than to ask) who know I have a pre-MIM parts stash, rear sight blades, escutcheons, studs & springs, etc. These goodies, not to mention hammers/hammer noses/triggers/et.al. for these older revolvers are drying up fast.

.



I didnt realize that parts were getting hard to find. I have a fair stash to keep mine going, and a couple contacts, but have got most extras from Brownells.

Thinking I should find a couple spare hammers that I dont have, and maybe a couple extra triggers, Think I only have one smooth "stainless" one, which I dont like (the smooth part).

LSP972
12-22-2014, 01:25 PM
Polished 3" 65 just went up on S&W forum for a good price.

It lasted longer than I thought it would; just over half an hour.

.

Dagga Boy
12-22-2014, 01:30 PM
It lasted longer than I thought it would; just over half an hour.

.

You got to be quick on these things. I looked at it within minutes of it posting and almost pulled the trigger "just because"........probably should have.

LSP972
12-22-2014, 05:52 PM
I would have jumped on it had I seen it in time. Killer price on a decent shooter. Finding one of those will be pretty much an automatic "Buy It now" thing for me.

Just got back from looking at that M-13. I are sad…

1. It began life as a four inch square butt. "They" whacked the barrel slightly into the front ejector lug… so the locking pin protrudes past the muzzle when the cylinder is closed.

2. The "round butt job" looks pretty good… until you look closely.

3. The muzzle is square; looks like they "crowned" it using a ball bullet in a drill press.

4. The new front sight is inlet into a fabricated ramp; not a bad job, actually, except for the fact that there is rust seeping out of some of the joints (under the re-blue job), and the top of the sight blade is a bit over a quarter of an inch from the top of the barrel… it'll shoot probably six inches or more low at 25 yards.

5. The mainspring has been bent, the strain screw has been shortened at least 2mm, and if the rebound slide spring has more than eight or nine coils on it I'd be very surprised ( I didn't bother to open it up and look). All of this, of course, is producing that "fabulous DA pull" I was told about. There was no push-off, so at least Bubba left the sear/hammer/trigger alone… except for removing the hammer spur, and that was about the best of the Cletus, Inc. LLC work.

This WAS a nice 13-1; D serial prefix, milled/case hardened pieces/parts. I managed not to cry in front of the proud owner.

What's the real travesty here is, the gun actually looks pretty good; until you look deep (and providing you know what to look for). Some nimrod will buy it and be all happy until he takes it to the range. As it is, it MIGHT bust a Federal primer, but I wouldn't bet a nickel either way.

.

Jeep
12-22-2014, 05:58 PM
Don't tease us. How much did "they" want for this exquisite sample of the gunsmith's art?

Dagga Boy
12-22-2014, 06:19 PM
Glad I passed on the 65.........just bought a 4" Model 28 for a good price.

LSP972
12-22-2014, 06:23 PM
$500.

I don't blame the current owner. He dabbles in buying/selling/trading as a hobby, and his specialty is lever guns and single actions. He was becoming more constipated as I continued to find 'oopsies'; I don't think he knew what a pig in a poke it is. He just traded for it last week, I believe he said.

OTOH, he might very well HAVE known, and is hoping for a sucker. Don't know; don't care. I DO know that I wasted two hours and a trip to banjo country to see that abortion.

As for my pal that turned me on to this… well, he and I are gonna have a chat…:D

.

LSP972
12-22-2014, 06:25 PM
Glad I passed on the 65.........just bought a 4" Model 28 for a good price.

Yeah, go ahead… rub it in, why don't you???:p

.

HCM
12-23-2014, 08:41 AM
LSP972,

Given that older Smith and Wesson revolver parts are becoming harder to come by what parts would you suggest for a "recommended spares" list?

Trajan
12-23-2014, 09:19 AM
Also interested in spares. I know you can still get springs, screws, and hammer noses. Not sure what else you would need that could break?

Wasn't planning on buying another gun, but this came up and was too good to pass on. 2.5" 66-1. I put a bobbed hammer in it. Plan on installing a Weigand flat blade .125 rear. Gun is really clean. So now I have the set (2.5 and 4).

I kind of have an emotional attachment to 66's. My grandfather had a nice 4" 66 no dash; first gun I ever shot. He recently passed away. My uncle now has it, unfortunately. I put a bobbed hammer in it a few weeks before he passed.

http://i1182.photobucket.com/albums/x447/OptimusTrajan/IMG_1660.jpg

LSP972
12-23-2014, 11:52 AM
I know you can still get... hammer noses.

Maybe. There are several different types. Most "magnum" revolvers have a spring-loaded hammer nose, and these have a slot for the spring. Most "non-magnum" revolvers have a free-flopping hammer nose. You need to be quite specific when replacing these, as the numerous S&W engineering changes can be quite confusing. My information is that the factory no longer has ANY hammer noses for "magnum" K frames. I'm sure they do, but I imagine they are hanging onto them for future repairs, etc.

The little rivet that retains the hammer nose is another worthwhile spare part, since, like adjustable rear sight windage screws and escutcheons, the part is trashed during removal and must be replaced with a new one. Also, staking that rivet in properly, while not rocket science, does require a bit of finesse and the proper tool. Otherwise, its easy to put the hammer nose in a bind (it MUST be totally free to move up and down in the hammer slot) when staking. This can cause several unpleasant issues if the hammer nose is binding.

If you are hard on an adjustable rear sighted revolver, better have some replacement rear sight blades (of the proper height for your piece), windage screws, windage screw escutcheons, and sight detents and springs. Those last two are the tiniest parts imaginable, and are easily lost during re-installation. In fact, during my first armorer school, Murray and Vivenzio took great pains to show us how to pre-load the detent under the sight blade to keep it in position while inserting the assembly into the sight body. You need a LOT of dexterity and patience for this otherwise-simple task, due to the tiny pieces/parts. They also showed us how to make a neat "starter tool" for the escutcheon, using the old small issue screwdriver as a "platform"... carefully filing it to shape with the hand window file was seriously tedious, but once you're done the resulting tool is worth its weight in top-grade heroin the first time you have to replace a rear sight blade.

Trust me... fixed sights are a LOT less hassle.

Let's see... what else?

1. Thumb piece screws. These go away almost as easily as Sig P-series grip screws. Checking it for tightness should be part of your frequent maintenance.

2. Rebound slide springs. Probably the second-easiest part to get away from you during reassembly, they ALWAYS fly across the room into the most inaccessible corner of your shop. Two cures; the Brownell's tool, and/or doing it inside a large transparent sandwich bag. Seriously.

3. Hands. If you shoot a lot, this is a high-wear part that eventually gets worn to the point that your timing goes away. Also, if your L-frame or K-frame has that execrable floating hand, replacing it with a normal hand will improve your DA pull tremendously. The only problem here is that you will need the new hand fitted to the ratchet... and that, unfortunately, is one of few voodoo aspects of these guns. You do NOT learn this from watching a YouBoob video. My best advice is to stay FAR away from the ratchet; unless, of course, you're an experienced mechanic, in which case you're not reading this.

Which hand to get depends. They come in different widths. Most all of the really good PPC bull-gun builders will set the timing, then send the hand off to be hard-chromed, and tweak it during final assembly/strapping up. This is the only way to minimize the wear aspect.

Remove yours, measure it with a GOOD micrometer (IOW, not the plastic crap sold for reloaders to play with), and buy one that width, and another one that is two ten thousandths wider.

I'll continue this as I think of stuff. Right now I'm getting the stink-eye from my lunch crew; its grocery time at the lab.

.

LSP972
12-23-2014, 04:59 PM
Well, after some more thought, there isn't anything else one needs that doesn't require the ministrations of a good mechanic. IOW, most things on revolvers have to be fitted to each other; ain't no such thing as drop-in internals.

Here's the bottom line; the basic S&W action is a time-tested, reasonably robust animal that can withstand an amazing amount of abuse/neglect and still work. Keep it reasonably clean, don't feed it rhino-rollers, restrict the use of full power rounds that the piece is rated for to only what's necessary, and it will probably outlast you.

IOW, if you get off on max noise, max power, and max recoil, and clean your revolver once a year whether it needs it or not… get a Ruger.;)

.

Dagga Boy
12-23-2014, 06:32 PM
Yeah, go ahead… rub it in, why don't you???:p

.

Took it out today. I am very happy with how this one shoots.

LSP972
12-23-2014, 07:42 PM
Got my 64 today. Pretty beat-up, not in nearly as good a shape as I thought; lots of endshake, both cylinder and yoke; its been shot a bunch (I mean a BIG bunch), something the seller neglected to mention. Just reinforces my usual position of avoiding on-line purchases if it ain't NIB.

OTOH, its nothing I can't remedy in an hour or so; it will make a decent range beater. But no more purchases for me unless I can lay eyeballs and hands on it. That M-13 I examined yesterday is another example; it would have looked pretty good in GB/etc. photos, but in reality had quite a bit wrong with it.

Oh well… onward & upward, and all of that…:D

.

Trajan
12-23-2014, 08:26 PM
THANK YOU! I'll keep an eye out for those parts.

My research has shown me that spring loaded hammer noses was random, some had them, others didn't. The hammer in my 4" doesn't.

I like adjustable sights. Won't own a handgun without them.

Shot the snubby for the first time today. Yeah, those cute little grips aren't for shooting... Bloody thumb via cylinder release.

Malamute
12-23-2014, 08:41 PM
Well, after some more thought, there isn't anything else one needs that doesn't require the ministrations of a good mechanic. IOW, most things on revolvers have to be fitted to each other; ain't no such thing as drop-in internals.

Here's the bottom line; the basic S&W action is a time-tested, reasonably robust animal that can withstand an amazing amount of abuse/neglect and still work. Keep it reasonably clean, don't feed it rhino-rollers, restrict the use of full power rounds that the piece is rated for to only what's necessary, and it will probably outlast you.

IOW, if you get off on max noise, max power, and max recoil, and clean your revolver once a year whether it needs it or not… get a Ruger.;)

.

Something to consider regarding parts, I keep some parts on hand that I may not be able to fit, but so long as I own the parts, I can likely find someone that can fit them. Without parts, you're stuck, even with the knowledge.

LSP552
12-23-2014, 09:54 PM
As much as I hate to say it, I would't use an old-school S&W revolver as a hard use/high volume gun. I'd be worried about a problem not easily repaired. Back in the stone age I was a pretty high volume revolver shooter. I've had multiple timing issues, at least one broken hammer nose, and broken adjustable sights. I'd hate to be worried about that stuff with a primary carry gun that might be hard or impossible to fix.

Trajan
12-23-2014, 10:22 PM
As much as I hate to say it, I would't use an old-school S&W revolver as a hard use/high volume gun. I'd be worried about a problem not easily repaired. Back in the stone age I was a pretty high volume revolver shooter. I've had multiple timing issues, at least one broken hammer nose, and broken adjustable sights. I'd hate to be worried about that stuff with a primary carry gun that might be hard or impossible to fix.

Oh, these are just cool/fun guns for me. Kind of like how 1911 experts say 1911s should be.

Glock 17/19 is still going to be carried daily.

Lon
12-23-2014, 10:29 PM
Got my 64 today. Pretty beat-up, not in nearly as good a shape as I thought; lots of endshake, both cylinder and yoke; its been shot a bunch (I mean a BIG bunch), something the seller neglected to mention. Just reinforces my usual position of avoiding on-line purchases if it ain't NIB.

OTOH, its nothing I can't remedy in an hour or so; it will make a decent range beater. But no more purchases for me unless I can lay eyeballs and hands on it. That M-13 I examined yesterday is another example; it would have looked pretty good in GB/etc. photos, but in reality had quite a bit wrong with it.

Oh well… onward & upward, and all of that…:D

.

I picked mine up last night. Was in great shape. Shot very little. Smooth action. Lock up was good. No end shake. Just needs a good cleaning. When I looked at those two on GB the pics kinda sucked for both. I made an educated guess that the one with the higher buy now price was in better shape and snagged that one. Sounds like I guessed right.

Decided to clean it up and give it to my dad. He told me the other day he needs a new house gun. He auctioned off his 60's vintage 4" 95% condition Python that he was using as a house gun.

Lester Polfus
12-23-2014, 11:17 PM
Well, after some more thought, there isn't anything else one needs that doesn't require the ministrations of a good mechanic. IOW, most things on revolvers have to be fitted to each other; ain't no such thing as drop-in internals.

Here's the bottom line; the basic S&W action is a time-tested, reasonably robust animal that can withstand an amazing amount of abuse/neglect and still work. Keep it reasonably clean, don't feed it rhino-rollers, restrict the use of full power rounds that the piece is rated for to only what's necessary, and it will probably outlast you.

IOW, if you get off on max noise, max power, and max recoil, and clean your revolver once a year whether it needs it or not… get a Ruger.;)

.

Thank you for ALL that. You know dude, I learn something just about every time you send some electrons from your keyboard to my screen. Sometimes when I do a "new post" search here, I'll click on a thread I wouldn't other wise read, just because you, or a handful of other people were the last person to post.

This may warrant another thread, but can you comment on what spare parts to keep on hand for a Ruger? In the next year or two, I'm going to acquire a Redhawk as a knocking around the woods gun. By the time I buy the gun, holsters, ammo, dies and various other impedimenta, I'll be into it for well over $1K, which is quite a bit of money for me. So a small stash of pare parts totally makes sense.

Thanks again.

LSP972
12-24-2014, 06:36 AM
Thanks for the flowers, lester.

Sorry, cannot tell you anything about Rugers except that they are truly tanks. I've only been inside one (Speed Six). That puppy had been submerged in a really grungy pond for the better part of a year. We broke it down completely, using the factory exploded views. Big parts… HUGE, massive parts, compared to a Colt or S&W. Lots of cleaning and scrubbing, multiple soaks in EvapoRust later, we got it to work and matched the reference/test bullets fired from it to an active homeycide case. This was mainly due to the barrel having been full of mud, which retarded the oxidation process so that the bore was actually in decent shape.

Anyway, in terms of ruggedness, the Rugers win, hands down. And they have some interesting design features, such as the way they do the ejector rod. We're talking the DA guns here, of course. I managed to miss out on any Ruger armorer courses during my time at the FTU, more's the pity.

.

LSP972
12-24-2014, 08:32 AM
I picked mine up last night. Was in great shape. Shot very little. Smooth action. Lock up was good. No end shake. Just needs a good cleaning. When I looked at those two on GB the pics kinda sucked for both. I made an educated guess that the one with the higher buy now price was in better shape and snagged that one. Sounds like I guessed right.

.

You definitely guessed right. This one has been "rode hard and put up wet", never been properly cleaned, and some hydrocephalic moron slathered graphite all over the hand, hammer, and trigger; buggering up the plate screws in the process, naturally. He/she even put that shit in the cylinder; to make the bullets go faster, of course. I'll need good old Mr. Lewis to clean the cylinder; its a disaster.

Its gonna be a real project just to get the revolver clean... then the tune-up begins. Got some MAJOR work to do on the yoke, and it probably will need a new hand.

But you know what? As bad a shape as it is in, it still works fine... but I bet it would spit lead like a boss. One good thing about a beat-up stainless gun; you can attack it with the wire brushes and nobody gets hurt.

Anyway... she's detail-stripped down to the frame on my bench. Gonna let the solvent do its thing while I deal with a felony bubba-up'ed SKS. I really, really, hate those things; and AKs.

NEPAKevin
12-24-2014, 10:25 AM
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-1obz4ORgzC8/VJrZ3ODjBSI/AAAAAAAAAbY/scTEjapXQQ4/w470-h225-no/archersfatherlyadvice.jpg

LSP972
12-24-2014, 11:13 AM
Your average nimrod would be content with this thing as-is (maybe they would try to clean it up a bit). I'm just OCD, big-time, about clean firearms... which this one now is... and properly-timed revolvers.

Surprisingly, the hand is usable; only two of the ratchets need some love via Mr. Barrett File. I got most of the endshake cylinder out, and will probably leave it at that... sort of goes along with the rough exterior.

A beater, for sure.

.

Lon
12-24-2014, 11:17 AM
Mine's gonna get a good cleaning, an action job and then bead blasted. A set of CTC grips and then off to my dad. I may forgive him one day for not giving me first dibs on the Python.

LSP972
12-24-2014, 02:55 PM
I may forgive him one day for not giving me first dibs on the Python.

Actually, he did you a favor...:cool:

.

rsa-otc
12-24-2014, 03:22 PM
Actually the Python is the only Colt revolver I would ever consider. You could just fall into that deep rich Royal blue job.

LSP972
12-24-2014, 03:49 PM
Actually the Python is the only Colt revolver I would ever consider. You could just fall into that deep rich Royal blue job.

And you could fall on your sword when it came time (as it would- soon- if you shot it much) to shell out for the re-time job.;)

.

rsa-otc
12-24-2014, 03:59 PM
Oh no doubt most were worse than K frames when using a steady diet of full power ammo. Actually in my limited experience most Colt revolvers suffered from this or cylinder binding on the forcing cone if fired more than a few rounds. But the Python sure was pertty and if I had money for a safe queen.......

Actually I am having dinner tonight with an exemployee who is one of the lucky ones who has had his gun for 30 plus years, shot it regularly and hasn't needed it to go back to Colt for timing issues. Of course I doubt it's been fed anything other than 38 target rounds.

Dagga Boy
12-24-2014, 04:33 PM
The guys at LA County S.O. had it figured out on the Python's. When I started in the same area, the LASD gun guys were often carrying Smolts or Couger's.....Smith's or Rugers with Python barrels installed. Great looking without dealing with Colt actions. I would love to find a 4" Couger.

Tom Duffy
12-24-2014, 04:50 PM
And you could fall on your sword when it came time (as it would- soon- if you shot it much) to shell out for the re-time job.;)

.

My Python needed a retiming and a new mainspring after forty years. The work cost $160 from the Colt factory. It's running great now and I hope it goes another forty without work, nobody will be alive who knows how to work on it. I learned my lesson though. It only get 38s, no magnums.

LSP972
12-24-2014, 04:53 PM
DB, that actually goes way farther back; to the early days of PPC (late 50s/early 60s). The 1/14 twist of the Python barrel stabilized wadcutters much better than the 1/18.75 twist of the S&W; some of the early pioneers- namely, the Border Patrol team, which dominated the sport for quite some time- began putting 6" Python barrels on their K-38s and commenced to whup up on everybody at the long line.

.

John Hearne
12-24-2014, 11:18 PM
Sorry, cannot tell you anything about Rugers except that they are truly tanks.

My first day of firearms at the academy involved shooting pool S&W's that had seen way too many full-house magnum rounds and literally shed parts on the line. I acquired a 4" GP-100 and never looked back. Scaling down a .44 magnum makes for a very sturdy, if inellegant, duty revolver.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk

David Armstrong
12-27-2014, 01:18 PM
My Python needed a retiming and a new mainspring after forty years. The work cost $160 from the Colt factory. It's running great now and I hope it goes another forty without work, nobody will be alive who knows how to work on it. I learned my lesson though. It only get 38s, no magnums.

Same here. Mine went many thousands of rounds without needing any work, and then the timing and such wasn't too much more than for a Smith. IIRC Florid and Colorado state police both used Pythons as duty guns at one time or another without any unusual maintenance issues.

LSP972
12-27-2014, 01:36 PM
Dunno about Colorado, but Florida Highway Patrol did issue 4" Pythons for a while.

From what I was told, they shot practically no magnums, and only an annual qual (i.e., they didn't get shot much).

There is a reason S&W TOTALLY dominated the PPC game; Colts wouldn't stand up to the high volume of shooting (I'm talking 50K+ rounds per year; in 1988, my "best" year, I fired sixty-one thousand rounds in matches and practice. I was practicing 3-4 times a week) without frequent attention, and Rugers are difficult to get a proper trigger action with. I played that game for 15 years, went to many Nationals (both in Jackson and Des Moines), went to a TON of regionals, and in all that time, I saw maybe a half-dozen Colt bull guns, and ONE Ruger.

That Ruger, however, was in the hands of Libby Callahan, a D.C. Metro female cop who could (and did) out-shoot most of us menses. She let me coon-finger it, and whoever did it was good; it was every bit the equal of my Davis guns (actually, Kerry Freeman did most of Bill's action work in those days, but whatever).

Anyway… ancient history.

.

SeriousStudent
12-27-2014, 01:48 PM
With apologies to George Santayana: "Those who cannot remember ancient history frequently get their asses handed to them by those who do."

I have a 3" Ruger GP100 that is rapidly becoming my favorite "fun gun". I am debating if it would be worth the effort to send it off to Gemini Custom. Now I think I just might.

LSP972
12-27-2014, 10:05 PM
The problem with getting a really smooth & light DA trigger on the Rugers is that the parts are so massive.

But it can be done; I've held the evidence.

.

Malamute
12-27-2014, 10:12 PM
I think theres also likely some little nooks and crannies that can be slicked up that dont occur to many. I went some extra steps on a couple Ruger SA's. They ended up like greased glass. It surprised me when I was done.

LSP552
12-28-2014, 12:20 PM
Guess I'm the unlucky Python shooter. When I was a fairly high volume shooter, my Python needed timing about every 6 months. This was shooting twice a week and dry fire most days. I sent it up the street and picked up an early 686. I regret not keeping it for a safe queen, since it only cost me $300 back in 1979.

Jeep
12-28-2014, 02:02 PM
Guess I'm the unlucky Python shooter. When I was a fairly high volume shooter, my Python needed timing about every 6 months. This was shooting twice a week and dry fire most days. I sent it up the street and picked up an early 686. I regret not keeping it for a safe queen, since it only cost me $300 back in 1979.

I found an internet inflation calculator. That $300 back in 1979 comes to almost $1,000 today. The Python was always a pretty expensive gun.

coldcase1984
12-28-2014, 05:20 PM
My son and I are pondering a swap thanks to this and other threads. My brother gave him a Dan Wesson .357 about 12 years ago, that he'd purchased new c. '78. He bought it with an 8-in. VH bbl. and added a 2.5-in. VH soon thereafter.

Unlike the DW I bought about the same time, my brother's didn't wear out the hand every 100 rounds or so and was quite accurate. Mine went down the road for beer money while I was in colletch after the service.

My son has fooled with it very little over the years, and felt it was too valuable to keep still a rental house, keeping an 870 for HD.

He's been reading a lot about handguns before picking one that'd be good for carry permit and outdoors use when he moves West.

He's decided my secondhand G29 might fill the bill. I like the pistol and carry it several days a month off duty. But with the G40 on the horizon, I'm willing to hook him up and maybe get him the aftermarket barrel over 4-in. long to be hunting legal here to boot.

We're both mulling, but I tipped way towards letting it rip when I found a 100-round box of Rem 125 gr. SJHP Magnums in my possibles cabinet.

I figure I'll have the near nuclear vehicle defense blaster I'm wanting and he'll have a pretty packable pistol for two roles.

Just can't remember if my DW took Python or L-frame speed loaders...

coldcase1984
03-11-2015, 11:16 PM
Necropost update: we've sidled into the swap. I qualified handily with the DW 2.5VH about a month ago shooting the Rem 125 SJHPs.finally took it up to The Ranch Last weekend and zeroed sight for 25 yards. Not spectacular at about 3 ins. For 6 rounds, then did a classic '80s drill: 3 rounds DA from standing barricade at 50 yds.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v704/elrata/image.jpg1_zpstxsqwokx.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/elrata/media/image.jpg1_zpstxsqwokx.jpg.html)

That's minute of felon for a blaster meant for car defense. May try some premium BBs soon, or the 8-in. Bbl.

Yes, part of the front sight is AWOL.

Hizzie
03-12-2015, 08:38 AM
Awesome! I gotta try the 100yd steel with mine. The Alaskan (44) damn near knocks over the stand for the regular pistol steel.

Chuck Haggard
03-12-2015, 09:04 AM
I'd try different weights from that .357, I noted back in the day that many of the guns I shot would throw 140-158gr bullets more accurately than the 125gr loads

Wheeler
03-12-2015, 12:25 PM
I'd try different weights from that .357, I noted back in the day that many of the guns I shot would throw 140-158gr bullets more accurately than the 125gr loads

There's a whole lotta truth to this. Don't get caught up in the trend that all serious .357's should be a 125 grain.

coldcase1984
03-12-2015, 06:13 PM
The 158s were best with my DW I bought thru the Beale AFB Rod & Gun Club back '78. Got it w the 6-in. VH the added the 4-in. W the profile of Smith N-frames. Every payday I'd buy a box of 50 Federal 158gr. JSPs at the BX for $12.50 (and some Fed 240 JHPs for my Long Tom nickel 29-2).

Me and my gunny buddies would go to the public range on the state park just out the north gate of the base. With my teen-aged eyes the DW would group inside 1.5-in. At 25 yards. I'd then bust big rocks past the 300 yard rifle berm easily using Keith's method.

It always seemed the .44s got there quicker and hit (of course) harder; I suspect .357 factory chow was already throttled back into the 1,200ish FPS range.

Wheeler, I'm doing the 125s because they're hot, bright and nasty: shock and awe for flash mobs that might take collective umbrage at the sight of me and my cute little cop SUV...

Wheeler
03-13-2015, 02:06 PM
The 158s were best with my DW I bought thru the Beale AFB Rod & Gun Club back '78. Got it w the 6-in. VH the added the 4-in. W the profile of Smith N-frames. Every payday I'd buy a box of 50 Federal 158gr. JSPs at the BX for $12.50 (and some Fed 240 JHPs for my Long Tom nickel 29-2).

Me and my gunny buddies would go to the public range on the state park just out the north gate of the base. With my teen-aged eyes the DW would group inside 1.5-in. At 25 yards. I'd then bust big rocks past the 300 yard rifle berm easily using Keith's method.

It always seemed the .44s got there quicker and hit (of course) harder; I suspect .357 factory chow was already throttled back into the 1,200ish FPS range.

Wheeler, I'm doing the 125s because they're hot, bright and nasty: shock and awe for flash mobs that might take collective umbrage at the sight of me and my cute little cop SUV...

Fair enough. I'm an accuracy snob so I tend to get wrapped up in that at times.

azerious
05-20-2015, 03:46 AM
i see in the article he has a JM custom kydex AIWB holster for the wiley clapp....I do not see that on his list of available guns. Does he still make them for that model?

Hizzie
05-20-2015, 10:01 AM
i see in the article he has a JM custom kydex AIWB holster for the wiley clapp....I do not see that on his list of available guns. Does he still make them for that model?


It was never listed. I just emailed and asked. Tony was very accommodating.

azerious
09-14-2015, 01:50 AM
any updates on if anyone is still carrying the WC AIWB?

entropy
09-16-2015, 06:44 PM
ColdCase,

Nice DW! The most ignored revolver! Bought this one on my 21st birthday new...a few years back.:). Over time picked up a couple more barrels but the 2.5" is my favorite. Ive ordered up a Ruger rear sight to swap out the original. The sharp edges bother my beer storage area and the Ruger is more rounded I guess. Should be more comfy AWIB. Below is some 2&3 shot drills at 7yds.

http://s2.postimg.org/xmn2r0tft/image.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
upload pic (http://postimage.org/)

DAL357
10-31-2017, 01:37 PM
After reading the first three and last two pages of this thread, I've come to this conclusion:

Carry WTF you want and screw justifying it to anyone, just be competent with it.

I choose to carry a revolver (or two) and, if it turns out to be the wrong decision in a given situation, I may pay the ultimate price; so be it.

Full disclosure: I own more than one PP (polymer pistol) and I shoot them regularly, as well as carry one on occasion; they're fun, but I love shooting revolvers. There's just something about that long DA trigger (generally speaking, SA is for clueless neophytes [unless the gun is SAO]) that, for me, is conducive to accuracy.

Take care.