Really nice wheel guns pogo2. I only own one. For now. But I think there might be more in my future.
Printable View
Really nice wheel guns pogo2. I only own one. For now. But I think there might be more in my future.
I feel your pain- I only have one wheelgun too, but, on that same note, I only have one 1911 too...:frown:Quote:
Originally Posted by oldnfat
Sounds to me like you need to buy a Colt.
Beautiful collection! Love that 19 in nickle......Quote:
Originally Posted by bmcgilvray
I hate you, I really really hate you!Quote:
Originally Posted by bmcgilvray
:wink:
Oh yeah, OD*!
Well, you have better revolvers in my view!
And then there are all those .45 automatics around your place!
Humph!
My round guns ain't worth a hill of beans compared to yours!
I've seen examples that would indicate otherwise, right here on the Forum.
Reliabilty? No, that is not a factor; I have autos that have never malfunctioned, and have owned problematic revolvers. Good examples of each can be as reliable as a mechanical device can be. I happen to really enjoy shooting revolvers, and nothing is more accurate in my hands. On a good day, if my training is up to date, I can shot a good 1911 auto about as well as a revolver. If I am having a bad day, or my training with the auto is not so up-to-date, well, I will know that I am gong to be more accurate with a Ruger GP100 or K/L-frame S&W revolver. (N-frames are a bit to big for my medium/short fingers.) My skills with a medium/large-framed DA sixgun are less perishable than my skills with any auto.Quote:
Originally Posted by SFCDan
Back on the original topic, there are multiple past versions of the GP100, that are no longer inproduction, if one wants to add some variety. Look closely at my avatar, at left. That is a 3" GP100, with adjustable sights, a quite uncommon variant. I also have a 4" fixed-sight GP100, with a non-lugged barrel, and a 6" adjustable-sight with a non-lugged barrel.
There are just too many ways one can spend money on firearms...... Since I already own a Ruger GP-100 with 4inch barrel I'm looking for something completely different. I only own one Smith....a pocket 642 with no lock. Since I already have 3 Rugers and only one Smith.....I'm probably going to add a Smith. I have no interest in Smith's new offerings since I just hate the appearance of that lock on the side of the frame. At this point in time I'm leaning heavily on a Smith model 66...... Is there one version that is better than the others? I've been to Wikipedia and have seen a description of the various releases, but have no real experience with them. The one I purchase will get shot.....a lot....
I appreciate that, Brian.Quote:
Originally Posted by bmcgilvray
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLittle
I agree with you and refuse to have anything to do with the baggage that is the lock! I have experienced a lock-related failure on another person's new Smith & Wesson Model 329, the revolver shutting down. None of my Smith & Wesson revolvers will ever have a lock-related issue because they are without the silly thing.
Good question about the Model 66 design revisions. I like the "pinned and recessed" versions best of all but that's just a nod to the craftsmanship of the age and the esthetics of the extra attention given the revolvers having these features. There was a post over on "Big Blue" Smith & Wesson forum just this week touting the later K-Frame Magnum revolvers for what the poster considered to be design improvements characteristic of the post-1981 revolvers. These revolvers won't feature the pinned barrel or the recessed cylinder. In the poster's view these later revolvers were better for actually shooting and who's to say he's not correct. I've never happened to have any experience with a later vintage K-Frame Magnum.
I've never had a moment's trouble out of the K-Frame Magnums owned while using full-powered handloads and these are never fired with .38 Special loads. There are .38 Special chambered revolvers on hand for that. None of the K-Frame .357 Magnums around here have seen especially high round counts though and I don't still have the ones that were the most heavily used. The rise of the internet forum has saddled the Models 13, 19, 65, and 66 with the reputation of being prone to shooting loose and occasionally suffering cracked forcing cones where the forcing cone is relieved to receive the yoke when the revolver's cylinder is closed. It is said that the full-powered .357 Magnum is straining the capabilities of the 1899 vintage K-Frame design, especially with the hot 125 grain factory loadings. I've not personally seen either issue in my revolvers nor in revolvers of other close associates who own these models. I haven't babied my revolvers but tend to use them with ammunition featuring 158 grain bullets. There is probably a grain of truth deep within the hyped up rumors of K-Frame Magnum issues but I'm firmly convinced that the problem is way overblown.
The intermediate-sized L-Frame .357 Magnum revolvers were introduced by Smith & Wesson in 1980 to obviate any issues connected with K-Frame Magnums, providing a fully formed forcing cone with no relief cut and a slightly beefier frame. Of course the L-Frames also introduced the full-lugged barrels to the Smith & Wesson line, something which was once uniquely the province of the Colt Python. The L-Frame has well proven its mettle at this point, being considered robust for extended use with the heaviest .357 Magnum loadings. The full-lug barrel also serves to dampen perceived recoil. There is a marked difference in perceived recoil when shooting a given load in a 4-inch Model 19 and a 4-inch Model 586. The full-lugged barrel is also popular with many who feel it steadies the revolver while aiming. Lots of folks also love its looks. The full-lugged barrel's popularity took off like wild fire and is still popular. One is "in style" when he has an L-Frame and is likely considered an old fogy if he is sporting a Smith & Wesson model without the chunky barrel.
I don't much care for the full-lugged barrels, finding them to be an offense to the eye and ill-balanced and front-heavy. While I don't like 'em I'm in the minority. Despite the reputed benefits of the L-Frame, I really love the slightly smaller K-Frame .357s or the larger N-Frame .357 revolvers. Since both K-Frame and "traditional" N-Frames (being the Models 27 and 28) are now discontinued, they may only be acquired as used guns.
For the folks wanting a .357 Magnum for shooting quantities of full-powered factory loads or experimental heavy .357 Magnum handloads, the N-Frame Models 27 and 28 are without peer among double-action revolvers. A Ruger Blackhawk could afford the shooter equal durability if he was willing to go the single-action revolver route. The big N-Frame guns exhibit great accuracy and are so nicely balanced yet soak up recoil so well. They are durable and hold up to all sorts of fun handloaded ammunition creations. A fairly unknown secret about the N-Frame revolvers is the fact that they accomplish double-action shooting uniquely well due to their heavy cylinders. This is something that must be experienced to appreciate. The N-Frame's my favorite revolver for doing .357 Magnum. If a shooter is looking for a .357 Magnum for range use, hunting, or bedside self-defense he can do no better than a Smith & Wesson N-Frame revolver. These large .357 Magnums when fitted with 3 1/2-inch or 4-inch barrel may be carried concealed with thoughtful holster selection. I'd like to have a 3 1/2-inch Model 27 for the purpose.
It just doesn't get any better than a Smith & Wesson Model 27 or Model 28. Of course that is only an opinion. Now all the fans of the double-action Dan Wesson and Ruger .357 Magnums along with those who love the vaunted Colt Python can rise up and pounce on the pontificating above. They're entitled to their opinions too. Thing is, there are a host of really great .357 Magnum revolvers out there and all can well serve for a number of handgunning chores. The "real" full-powered .357 Magnum is an amazing cartridge and this is from a fellow who loves the old .38 Special, its flexibility and capabilities.
My Model 10-10 from Bud's has the best trigger of any guns I own. It's probably been dry fired a zillion times, and is SMOOTH. My Bud's Model 10 also has a non-serrated (non-grooved is probably a better way to describe it) trigger. None of my other K-frames have this, but i really like it.Quote:
Originally Posted by msgt/ret
I like your Model 19 in the pic, and own a 19-3 that looks just like it.
I'd also like to know. Can any of you wheelgun experts enlighten us? :redface:Quote:
Originally Posted by MLittle
The dash 4 Model 19 and earlier revisions are pinned and recessed. The dash 5 eliminated the pinned barrel and counterbored cylinder. The dash 4 revision specifically covered the change of the gas ring from the yoke to the cylinder. The dash 3 revision covered a change in location of rear sight leaf screw. The dash 2 revision covered the elimination of the cylinder stop screw. The dash 1 revision covered the change from right hand to left hand threads on the extractor rod.
On the Models 13 and 65 the dash 1 was the iniitial product offering, the dash 2 covered the gas ring change from yoke to cylinder, and dash 3 eliminated the pinned barrel.
On the Model 66 the dash 1 covered the gas ring change from yoke to cylinder, the dash 2 covered the elimination of the pinned barrel and counterbored cylinder.
Source: "Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson" by Supica and Nahas
