Because Who Doesn't Have a Barrel Vise in Their Truck

[Jared]

I like Taffin.

I remember being overseas reading old mags fantasizing about being out in the woods with a sixshooter.

Reading Taffins articles was part of my adolescence. I have at least three of his books on my shelf. I don’t really hate Taffin, it’s just that he has a horribly annoying tendency to repeat the same info every other month and after a while I just wanted him to maybe, I dunno, type something different.

[Jim Watson]

Both test guns exhibited light hammer strikes on factory ammunition, and the transfer bar on the .45 Colt model broke. They were returned to Traditions for repair and came back performing flawlessly.

Commonly seen on gunboards. "Good customer service." Price seems not a major factor.

"Tweaking" the barrel in its threads is SOP for CAS sixgun setup. I don't know why so many single actions shoot left.
Maybe they are like Glocks, we aren't holding them right.
My Italian copy got twisted and the cut that squared the rear sight notch was biased to the right.
Close examination shows the cant of the front sight, but at least it shoots where it looks.
The Colt was on to start with.

There is one shop that bends barrels instead of turning them. The curvature is said not to be obvious. Except on a Sherrif's Model with little length to get in the correction. And the front sight stays vertical.

[RevolverRob]

Imagine trying to write a feature on a red '68 Camaro and a "How to build a Chevy small block" article every month while working for Car Craft.

This, is exactly why I haven’t read Car Craft in 20+ years.

Also, this is exactly why I haven’t read more than the occasional piece on line in American Handgunner in a dozen-plus years.

[BillSWPA]

This is a tough crowd. Old school sight adjustment called for clamping the barrel in your bench vice, with some grabby padding of course. Then you just stick a hickory hammer handle (they always specified hickory) through the cylinder window and start turning. This was supposed to work, although I never tried it. Taffin no doubt has, and still does. (smile)

Dave

I do appreciate your perspective, as well as the information in Hamilton Bowen's linked article in another post. However, that must have required multiple trips between the range and the workbench where the vice was attached before the sight was finally correct. One doesn't really crank a revolver frame with a hickory handle with micrometer precision, and hundredths of an inch make a difference.

At my stage in life (running my own patent law practice, married, two kids), I want my range trips to be focused on meaningful practice for me and some combination of meaningful fun and learning for my daughter (and in a couple of years my son as well), not that sort of frustration. I have little to no time or patience for things that do not work out of the box.

Geometry is not exactly new math, and iron sights are not new technology. Engineering the sights so that they are properly regulated from the factory should not be asking too much.

[oregon45]

Geometry is not exactly new math, and iron sights are not new technology. Engineering the sights so that they are properly regulated from the factory should not be asking too much.

Only if the shooter is willing to use one load only. There is a reason British double rifles often were marked with caliber, bullet weight, and velocity on the barrels: they were regulated to that specific load. The same could be done with fixed sight revolvers, but I suspect most manufacturers choose a middle of the road “close enough” regulation on the theory that most shooters don’t deviate too far from mainstream loadings, and those that do understand how to regulate revolvers for themselves.

[BillSWPA]

Only if the shooter is willing to use one load only. There is a reason British double rifles often were marked with caliber, bullet weight, and velocity on the barrels: they were regulated to that specific load. The same could be done with fixed sight revolvers, but I suspect most manufacturers choose a middle of the road “close enough” regulation on the theory that most shooters don’t deviate too far from mainstream loadings, and those that do understand how to regulate revolvers for themselves.

For my semiauto pistols, I can buy fixed sights from Novak, Trijicon, Dawson, Tru-Glo, etc., center them on my slide using a sight pusher and digital caliper, and they will be fine for anything I shoot through that pistol up to at least 25 yards, and sometimes even 50 yards. Of course at greater distances the deviation increases. Are revolvers that different?

Most or all of the Smith & Wesson fixed sight revolvers I have shot have placed their hits within a few inches of the point of aim at 60-75 feet. I have never checked to see what load the engineers used to tailor the sights, or whether I was using that load. At least one revolver maker is generally getting this right. Unfortunately I have not had the same luck with Colt or Ruger revolver fixed sights.

[jtcarm]

Wha? He found a running truck for $500?



Imagine trying to write a feature on a red '68 Camaro and a "How to build a Chevy small block" article every month while working for Car Craft.

True dat.

Taffin always turned me off. I don’t think I ever read one of his loads that wasn’t maximum or beyond and didn’t shoot sub-MOA.

I distinctly remember when I quit reading the gun rags.

It was a 1993 issue of AH. On the cover was a Les Baer 1911 declaring “Les Baer builds the best damn 1911, period.” Inside was a feature article with the same title.

Inside the front cover was a full page ad for Les Baer with a banner stating..,wait for it...”Les Baer builds the best damn 1911, period.”

I never had any illusions of gun writers being purely objective when advertising is the life blood of publishers, but, damn, at least don’t let the feature editors write the ad copy.

[beenalongtime]

I was going to guess "John Taffin." I was right.

I need to go to bed. I was trying to figure out why the Bar Rescue guy, was writing gun articles.

[Stephanie B]

There is one shop that bends barrels instead of turning them. The curvature is said not to be obvious. Except on a Sherrif's Model with little length to get in the correction. And the front sight stays vertical.

There was a discussion awhile back about how, back in the day, experienced gunsmiths at both the S&W service centers and large police departments would use sash weights to bend the barrel to bring the sights into alignment.

[Stephanie B]

This is a tough crowd. Old school sight adjustment called for clamping the barrel in your bench vice, with some grabby padding of course. Then you just stick a hickory hammer handle (they always specified hickory) through the cylinder window and start turning. This was supposed to work, although I never tried it. Taffin no doubt has, and still does. (smile)

Dave

I led with the barrel vise crack was because it made for better snark. More to the point was that Traditions sent two guns to a guy whom they knew was going to write a review of them and both guns were defective.

Lester P was right.