|
|
03-06-2010, 01:19 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 948
Likes: 64
Liked 111 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
The Highway Patrolman
I don't usually gush about guns I've just bought, but...
I used to think 4" revolvers were strange-looking, too much of a compromise between the 2" snubbies (meant to be carried) and 6" target revolvers. And don't get me started on ones with 8-3/8" barrels or longer! Especially the N-frame S&Ws with just a little bit of barrel sticking out past the ejector rod shroud. Ever since I first saw it, the modern revolver wearing a 6" barrel with full underlug was THE quintessential revolver, the pinnacle of revolver evolution, for me. The S&W 686, Ruger GP100, and (yes) Taurus 908 just had that "look".
My first revolver was a S&W 617...no, scratch that, my first revolver was an H&R "Sportsman" Double Action, built in the 1930s. This one had a skinny barrel with no underlug, and wouldn't have really fit in with my idea of what a revolver was, but it was inexpensive and allowed me to shoot .22LR while my other gun (my only other gun, at the time) cooled off (the H&K P7, with its gas-delayed blowback action, tended to get really hot after shooting a box of ammo through it). The Sportsman was unique in that it was a break-action revolver and had a 9-shot cylinder. But it was problematic right from the start: the hammer didn't seem to light off the rounds reliably. Being the tinkerer that I am, I took my only tool (a Dremel Tool!) and tried to fix it, but I ended up making it worse (surprise, surprise).
So, rather than keep trying to fix it by throwing more money and parts at it, I bought my first modern revolver, a stainless-steel S&W 617-6. It was perfect, with its 6" barrel and full underlug. That pretty much set the tone for all of the revolvers I've purchased since then, from the Taurus 905 snubbie (its ejector shroud gave it the "full underlug" look), to the Ruger SP101 snubbie (again, full-length ejector shroud), to the S&W 17-8, my first 686, and pretty much every S&W revolver I've purchased until about a year ago. I might've dabbled with other revolvers--I've owned two Ruger Blackhawks, and I bought a S&W Model 10-6 because it was cheap (it did have the heavy barrel, at least!)--but by and large, it was 6" full-underlug barrel on a target revolver, or the 2" barrel on a snubbie. I lusted after the S&W 14-5, -6, and -7 because they had the heavier barrels and ignored the S&W 14-3 and -4, for example.
But then something happened: I bought a S&W 19-3. While it had the 6" barrel, it didn't have the full-underlug. A 629-5, which also sported a 6" barrel but no underlug (and the Dirty Harry movies) convinced me that the no-underlug look was OK. The 4" barrel on a Model 15 that I traded for started looking alright. A 4" Colt Official Police brought me around to the idea of the tapered-barrel (the 15-7 has the modern heavy barrel, which isn't as beefy as the barrel on my 10-6, but not as skinny as the tapered barrel on, say, a 10-5). A .32-20 Hand Ejector Model of 1905, 3rd Change and a Model 10-9 sealed the deal.
This has culminated in my latest purchase, a S&W Model 28-2. It features a 4" tapered barrel with shrouded ejector rod. With a set of Ahrends Tactical grips, I'm absolutely convinced that this gun is beautiful:
It fills several gaps in my collection that I've wanted to address for a while now: it's a 4" revolver in .357 Magnum and blued, possibly to carry. I had been thinking about finding a 4" Model 586 to fill that role, but this 28-2 does the job nicely, and also rounds out my collection a little with another N-frame.
I feel it was priced right, at about $385 out the door. For a Model 28, it's finish is in excellent shape with barely a hint of holster wear at the muzzle and on the high points of the cylinder. Curiously, it does have the spring-loaded hammer-nose, but it dimpled some fresh snapcaps just fine, so I'm confident that it'll bust caps well enough. It's also marked "MOD 28" in the yoke, with no "-2" with it, but its serial number (S3078xx), lack of a trigger-guard screw, and left-handed ejector-rod threading means it's a -2. The weight of the big N-frame and the beefy cylinder, and the balance of the 4" tapered barrel seems to feel right in my hands, and I may even consider using it for Distinguished Revolver.
I can't wait to get it out to the range tomorrow!
|
03-06-2010, 02:44 AM
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: OR
Posts: 3,517
Likes: 5,503
Liked 1,028 Times in 351 Posts
|
|
That's a beautiful Model 28. I'm partial to 4 inch guns and love my own M-28 Wisconsin State Patrol gun. Have a great day at the range tomorrow.
Jerry
|
03-06-2010, 03:23 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Indiana
Posts: 6,629
Likes: 3,726
Liked 7,235 Times in 3,015 Posts
|
|
I've always thought the 4" guns had the best overall proportions and
I have more of them than any other length. They seem to just sit in
your hand with great balance.
|
03-06-2010, 03:51 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Great deal on a fine gun. I am a big fan of the 4". My one and only Highway Patrolman is 6", but I'd love to add a 4"...
|
03-06-2010, 04:52 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 948
Likes: 64
Liked 111 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by alwslate
I've always thought the 4" guns had the best overall proportions and I have more of them than any other length. They seem to just sit in your hand with great balance.
|
I'm starting to figure that out, at least with the standard/tapered barrel ones--they seem to be extensions of my hand. I still have more 6"-barreled guns, but 4" guns have been catching up lately: half of my last 10 guns have been 4" revolvers. I might still pick up a 4" 586, but this 28 muffles that siren call a bit
Quote:
Originally Posted by j38
That's a beautiful Model 28. I'm partial to 4 inch guns and love my own M-28 Wisconsin State Patrol gun. Have a great day at the range tomorrow.
Jerry
|
It's beautiful on the outside, but inside there was a lot of orange gunk that actually made me break out some #0000 steel wool to get it out, and I ended up soaking the trigger to get the gunk out. I initially thought it was just in the cylinder/yoke, because the cylinder couldn't spin freely, so I cleaned that out. But the timing was a bit slow, so I opened it up to install a spare N-frame hand I had laying around, and that's when I discovered the mess inside--it took me the better part of 90 minutes to scrub it all out. I even had to take out the cylinder bolt (something I've never done before).
It was tedious, but it's beautiful on the inside now, too
I should definitely enjoy shooting this thing tomorrow; after such a thorough cleaning, hearing it go bang for the first time should be a treat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SF1973
Great deal on a fine gun. I am a big fan of the 4". My one and only Highway Patrolman is 6", but I'd love to add a 4"...
|
Thanks! I've been watching the going prices for the Model 28 online, and this one popped up at my local gun store. The guy who owns the store actually called me about it and offered me first-crack at it. After inspecting it, I put it on layaway, and paid it off tonight. I'd love to find a 5" or 6" Model 27 to go with it, too.
|
03-06-2010, 07:41 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: CSRA
Posts: 2,125
Likes: 869
Liked 1,629 Times in 779 Posts
|
|
si-----------
Last edited by sw282; 07-03-2011 at 04:04 AM.
|
03-06-2010, 07:52 AM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 9,320
Likes: 34,027
Liked 10,993 Times in 3,961 Posts
|
|
I used to think that a 4" barrel was too short for an N-Frame, but after I bought an M28 so barreled I changed my mind. Now the 6" barrels seem a little too long.
I do think that 5" is perfect...
__________________
You're shy a few manners.
|
03-06-2010, 08:21 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 395
Likes: 75
Liked 87 Times in 29 Posts
|
|
At $385 you did great! I would love to have a model 28 like that, but I've never seen one at that price. Great gun!! B
|
03-06-2010, 08:41 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: south eastern pa
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
most of mine are 4"ers.
i like the look, the feel and i shoot well with them. but i also like the 6"ers, they have a good look as well, and in the big boy calibers they can bring a little more power to the table.
but i just can't get past colt's totally unshrouded ejector rods.
|
03-06-2010, 08:55 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Flash
I used to think that a 4" barrel was too short for an N-Frame, but after I bought an M28 so barreled I changed my mind. Now the 6" barrels seem a little too long.
I do think that 5" is perfect...
|
I keep noticing these 28's lately, that's a sign that I need to go find one. I'm going to the range today also, can I borrow yours?
I agree with Jack on the 5" size but the 4" is right there too.
|
03-06-2010, 08:58 AM
|
|
SWCA Member Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The kidney of Dixie.
Posts: 10,509
Likes: 49
Liked 13,410 Times in 3,290 Posts
|
|
I dunno, I always figgered the 4" revolver was THE quintessential belt gun.
Being slightly weird I think my favorite is the 5" barrel length. Off the top of my head I think that right now I only have 5 S&Ws with 6" tubes (lumping in the two 6.5" guns) while I have over a dozen 4" revolvers (again, combining the 3.5" pistols).
IMO the 6" guns shoot better but the shorter ones carry better.
__________________
No life story has happy end.
|
03-06-2010, 10:03 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 18,773
Likes: 6,048
Liked 5,762 Times in 1,992 Posts
|
|
Congratulations on your purchase and the 4 inch Model 28 is a wonderful revolver.
|
03-06-2010, 10:29 AM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Parkesburg PA
Posts: 1,441
Likes: 77
Liked 241 Times in 98 Posts
|
|
You found a great looking 28 there at a great price. I like it when the barrel fits the frame its attached to. In N frames I find the 4 inch barrels to just look right. On the other hand a 4 inch barrel on a K or L frame looks just a little too long.
Enjoy your Highway Patrolman and let us know how it shoots.
__________________
J.D. Roy
|
03-07-2010, 01:50 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 948
Likes: 64
Liked 111 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
I got it out the range today--it shoots just fine. It's a bit 'whippy' with a full-house .357 Magnum load (17.0gr H110, 158gr JHP), but it also comes back on-target very quickly. .38s (3.6gr AA#2, 158gr LSWC) are very pleasant to shoot out of it.
The sights aren't quite what I was hoping for (I'd like a taller rear sight blade with a deeper notch), but they work well enough for 50-yard Bullseye.
As it is, I'm quite happy with it. I might try a lighter .357 Magnum load, though--after just 30 Magnums (and yes, the 17.0gr is a bit more than the current loadbooks specify as max-loads), I can see the flame cutting already starting in.
|
03-07-2010, 05:06 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 766
Likes: 50
Liked 1,207 Times in 177 Posts
|
|
Nice looking 28! It's interesting that it's a 28 no dash without the triggerguard screw. I thought all the 28 no dashes were 4 screw guns. I have a 6" 28 no dash and it's a 4 screw.
|
03-07-2010, 05:34 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Sacramento,CA
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
|
4" HP owner here. It's my in the woods carry gun. I won't part with it until it's time to will it one one of my boys. They can arm wrestle for it!
Congrats and enjoy it.
|
03-08-2010, 01:09 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 948
Likes: 64
Liked 111 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nframe_is_no1
Nice looking 28! It's interesting that it's a 28 no dash without the triggerguard screw. I thought all the 28 no dashes were 4 screw guns. I have a 6" 28 no dash and it's a 4 screw.
|
Yeah, it's weird. I think it's actually a mis-marked 28-2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPM2DAY
Congrats and enjoy it.
|
Thanks, I definitely will.
|
03-08-2010, 07:07 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: France
Posts: 280
Likes: 1
Liked 20 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Hi ! Just a question : wasn't the triggerguard screw the fifth screw ?
|
03-08-2010, 07:58 AM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 9,320
Likes: 34,027
Liked 10,993 Times in 3,961 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philblack
Hi ! Just a question : wasn't the triggerguard screw the fifth screw ?
|
The first screw to be eliminated was the upper sideplate screw. Thus this is the screw a five screw has that a four screw doesn't, so it's the fifth screw.
The next one to go was the one in front of the trigger guard, so it is often referred to as the fourth screw, since a three screw doesn't have one.
If this sounds a little quirky and backwards, well, we are talking about S&W here.
__________________
You're shy a few manners.
|
03-08-2010, 09:10 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: France
Posts: 280
Likes: 1
Liked 20 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Thanks a lot for your quick answer ! I understand better now why it's actually a mis-marked 28-2.
|
|
Tags
|
22lr, 357 magnum, 586, 617, 629, 686, ahrends, colt, ejector, hand ejector, highway patrolman, l frame, m28, model 10, model 15, model 27, model 28, n-frame, patrolman, ruger, shroud, sideplate, tactical, taurus |
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|