Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 111 to 118 of 118

Thread: Short Fuse Enabling

  1. #111
    Quote Originally Posted by JWintergreen View Post
    The old Six Series is a still great option for folks that want a .357 Magnum revolver with K frame balance and heft, without the downsides of having a clearanced forcing cone or a deleted gas ring.
    How does a deleted gas ring affect a revolver used with smokeless powder? I thought the main reason to have one was black powder fouling.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  2. #112
    Lives to Enable Revolvers Stephanie B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    East 860 by South 413
    Quote Originally Posted by JWintergreen View Post
    The model number for the Six Series Safariland speedloaders is J-R4C. The old Six Series is a still great option for folks that want a .357 Magnum revolver with K frame balance and heft, without the downsides of having a clearanced forcing cone or a deleted gas ring. The only mid size S&W .357 Magnums that offer similar size efficiency are the sadly overlooked 619/620 and the 686 Mountain Gun.
    If they had a stainless Security Six, I'd be on that. But I don't have a hankering for another fixed-sight .357.
    Living the fully-vaccinated life.

  3. #113
    Quote Originally Posted by john c View Post
    How does a deleted gas ring affect a revolver used with smokeless powder? I thought the main reason to have one was black powder fouling.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Probably the best short and sweet definition of what a gas ring does is summed up in Mike Wood's excellent L frame article over at the Revolver Guy blog. "The gas ring’s purpose is to prevent carbon and lead from building up between the axle (“arbor”) and the cylinder itself, which would impede the rotation of the cylinder." A gas ring is even more important on a blackpowder revolver, however it is still an important part on a modern revolver. There are obviously variables at play when it comes to encountering issues on these guns (type of power used, how often the cylinder is removed for cleaning, b/c gap, etc...)

    The K frame magnums have a long history of gas ring related issues. Extreme heat and recoil from firing magnum rounds caused the cylinder mounted gas ring to move and impede cylinder rotation. Massad Ayoob stated in the Sept./Oct. 1980 issue of American Handgunner "The Combat Magnum is theoretically ideal for use in law enforcement. The only problem is that, especially in the stainless version, it is not unknown for the gas ring to move foward and bind the gun due to buffering from magnum recoil." S&W knew this and actually made a design revision in 1972 to all k frames (not just the magnums). They moved the gas ring from the cylinder to the yoke. This opened a whole new can of worms and infuriated police officers and competition shooters (a lot of crossover there too). Guns with the yoke mounted gas ring allowed carbon to build up much faster on the cylinder and impede function. There were so many complaints that S&W went back to a traditional cylinder mounted gas ring in 1977. If you look at a 67 no dash and a 67-1 side by side you will notice this.

    With the new model 19, 66-8 and model 69 there are no gas rings at all. This will make all of those models more prone to sluggish cylinder rotation than other S&W revolvers. The K frame magnum is always going to be a rob Peter to pay Paul type of revolver. The deletion of the gas ring was unnecessary on the model 69. S&W could have done what Taurus did on their mid size .44 Magnums, and just went with a slightly shorter cylinder.

    All of this is easily avoided with the tragically overlooked half lug/lighter barrelled L frame revolvers. The 619/620 is within an ounce of a model 19/66 and the 686 Mountain Gun weighs even less. These also allow the use of a seven round cylinder with offset cylinder notches. It really makes no sense to bring back the K frame magnums when this can be done. The lighter barrelled S&W L frames might just be the most underrated revolvers of all time. Sadly, poor timing, poor marketing, concerns over the two piece barrel/lock, and new model numbers caused the 619/620 to be stillborn in 2005. The 686 Mountain Gun was never a long term standard production item. With the revolver's comeback in popularity, I think it would be a good idea to give the lighter barrel .357 L frames another chance.

    Speaking of black powder, the S&W breaktop replicas (Model 3, New Model 3, Schofield, etc...) suffer from this as well. Instead of slightly stretching the frame to allow for a longer cartridge, Italian makers simply eliminated the gas ring for more clearance. This is one reason why these revolvers are not nearly as popular as a SAA in SASS shooting.

    I am not dogging the new 66-8, 19, or 69. I have read great reports from folks, including those on this forum. This is not something that will bother everyone. However, it does open a new can of worms and would be avoidable altogether with a half lug L frame. Hopefully someday folks will re-discover the lighter barrel .357 L frame and it will make a comeback.

    Here are some great links and the article referenced above:

    https://revolverguy.com/the-smith-wesson-l-frame-story/

    http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-rev...new-model.html

    http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-rev...-cylinder.html
    Last edited by JWintergreen; 06-14-2021 at 11:04 AM.

  4. #114
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie B View Post
    If they had a stainless Security Six, I'd be on that. But I don't have a hankering for another fixed-sight .357.
    I really wish Ruger would resurrect the Security/Speed Six family. The only thing keeping me from buying one of these is the future spare parts issue.


    Okie John
    “The reliability of the 30-06 on most of the world’s non-dangerous game is so well established as to be beyond intelligent dispute.” Finn Aagaard
    "Don't fuck with it" seems to prevent the vast majority of reported issues." BehindBlueI's

  5. #115
    Quote Originally Posted by okie john View Post
    I really wish Ruger would resurrect the Security/Speed Six family. The only thing keeping me from buying one of these is the future spare parts issue.


    Okie John
    I love the Six Series and I was once in that camp. I now think a six shot .38/.357 SP101 would be much better for the current market. There is only a 0.05" difference in cylinder diameter between the SP101 and other D frame sized revolvers. This second frame revision would not make any noticeable weight difference, and it would still fit the D frame size holsters that makers offer for the SP101. A six shot SP101 would be lighter/easier to carry than a mid size revolver (e.g. Six Series), and allow Ruger to compete with the Charter Police Undercover, Taurus 856, Colt Cobra, Colt new King Cobra, and Kimber K6S. Ruger recently made a frame change to the GP to fix the seven round rimlock problem and increased cylinder diameter. If they can do that to the GP, they can do it to the SP. Condidering the size efficiency, existing acessories (grips, holsters, etc...), and the current state of the market, I am shocked that Ruger has not done this yet.

    You are tearing me apart Ruger
    *Insert Tommy Wiseau voice here*

  6. #116
    Quote Originally Posted by JWintergreen View Post
    I now think a six shot .38/.357 SP101 would be much better for the current market.
    It might be better for the market, but I have K-frame sized hands. I've shot a number of SP101s and I'm impressed, but they're just a bit too small for me to run well in a hurry.


    Okie John
    “The reliability of the 30-06 on most of the world’s non-dangerous game is so well established as to be beyond intelligent dispute.” Finn Aagaard
    "Don't fuck with it" seems to prevent the vast majority of reported issues." BehindBlueI's

  7. #117
    Quote Originally Posted by okie john View Post
    It might be better for the market, but I have K-frame sized hands. I've shot a number of SP101s and I'm impressed, but they're just a bit too small for me to run well in a hurry.


    Okie John
    Heck, when it comes to what feels best in the hand, I am one of those weirdos that likes N frames. A half lug N frame also really has no weight disadvantage to most of the full lug medium frame revolvers.

    I agree that a K frame and the Six Series revolvers balance wonderfully in the hand. The tapered barrel Model 15/67 and the 70s/early 80s "skinny" barrel Security Six are really sweet. Medium frame revolvers and small frame revolvers (J and D frame sized) play different roles and the market should always offer both categories.

  8. #118
    Site Supporter 03RN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by JWintergreen View Post
    Probably the best short and sweet definition of what a gas ring does is summed up in Mike Wood's excellent L frame article over at the Revolver Guy blog. "The gas ring’s purpose is to prevent carbon and lead from building up between the axle (“arbor”) and the cylinder itself, which would impede the rotation of the cylinder." A gas ring is even more important on a blackpowder revolver, however it is still an important part on a modern revolver. There are obviously variables at play when it comes to encountering issues on these guns (type of power used, how often the cylinder is removed for cleaning, b/c gap, etc...)

    The K frame magnums have a long history of gas ring related issues. Extreme heat and recoil from firing magnum rounds caused the cylinder mounted gas ring to move and impede cylinder rotation. Massad Ayoob stated in the Sept./Oct. 1980 issue of American Handgunner "The Combat Magnum is theoretically ideal for use in law enforcement. The only problem is that, especially in the stainless version, it is not unknown for the gas ring to move foward and bind the gun due to buffering from magnum recoil." S&W knew this and actually made a design revision in 1972 to all k frames (not just the magnums). They moved the gas ring from the cylinder to the yoke. This opened a whole new can of worms and infuriated police officers and competition shooters (a lot of crossover there too). Guns with the yoke mounted gas ring allowed carbon to build up much faster on the cylinder and impede function. There were so many complaints that S&W went back to a traditional cylinder mounted gas ring in 1977. If you look at a 67 no dash and a 67-1 side by side you will notice this.

    With the new model 19, 66-8 and model 69 there are no gas rings at all. This will make all of those models more prone to sluggish cylinder rotation than other S&W revolvers. The K frame magnum is always going to be a rob Peter to pay Paul type of revolver. The deletion of the gas ring was unnecessary on the model 69. S&W could have done what Taurus did on their mid size .44 Magnums, and just went with a slightly shorter cylinder.

    All of this is easily avoided with the tragically overlooked half lug/lighter barrelled L frame revolvers. The 619/620 is within an ounce of a model 19/66 and the 686 Mountain Gun weighs even less. These also allow the use of a seven round cylinder with offset cylinder notches. It really makes no sense to bring back the K frame magnums when this can be done. The lighter barrelled S&W L frames might just be the most underrated revolvers of all time. Sadly, poor timing, poor marketing, concerns over the two piece barrel/lock, and new model numbers caused the 619/620 to be stillborn in 2005. The 686 Mountain Gun was never a long term standard production item. With the revolver's comeback in popularity, I think it would be a good idea to give the lighter barrel .357 L frames another chance.

    Speaking of black powder, the S&W breaktop replicas (Model 3, New Model 3, Schofield, etc...) suffer from this as well. Instead of slightly stretching the frame to allow for a longer cartridge, Italian makers simply eliminated the gas ring for more clearance. This is one reason why these revolvers are not nearly as popular as a SAA in SASS shooting.

    I am not dogging the new 66-8, 19, or 69. I have read great reports from folks, including those on this forum. This is not something that will bother everyone. However, it does open a new can of worms and would be avoidable altogether with a half lug L frame. Hopefully someday folks will re-discover the lighter barrel .357 L frame and it will make a comeback.

    Here are some great links and the article referenced above:

    https://revolverguy.com/the-smith-wesson-l-frame-story/

    http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-rev...new-model.html

    http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-rev...-cylinder.html
    I was getting excessive leading inside the crane on my m66-8. It also had undersized throats. I had them honed and now I'm going 500+ rounds between cleanings of cast/unique ammo(I do keep under the extractor brushed)

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •