One of the lady shooters at my club is our only revolver IPSC shooter at present. She usually shoots a 6" .357 686-4 AFS (identical to my own), but for some time now has been thinking about changing to a 9mm revolver for the additional 2 round capacity and quicker moon clip reloading..

This morning she came to the range with a brand new Jerry Miculek 929 PC revolver, which had everyone drooling and lining up to try it out.

At first sight I thought it both attractive and a little strange. Attractive because although I like shiny things, the subdued brushed SS finish looked nice to me. As a carry gun it not would not stand out in low light. (I once had uniform items shining like a beacon when walking across a paddock in moonlight to where a mentally disturbed person had secured himself in a house with a gun, so I tend to notice things like this.)

But the underlug profile just did not look "right" until I realised it was a shroud and not a fully machined barrel profile.

The owner mentioned that the trigger felt a lot heavier than her usual gun, and when I tried it I had to agree. My own 686 is stock except for a Wolff standard power ribbed mainspring and a #12 trigger return spring. Now it just so happened I had my 686 at the range this morning and in the lid of the box is a small bag holding two spare Wolff mainsprings and the remainder of the 5 reduced power trigger return springs I bought a few years ago. Without asking permission I removed the grips and found something unfamiliar with the internals.

Okay I know that since my -4 was made there have been a lot of upgrades to S&W revolvers, with MIM manufactured hammers and other parts being used. But still, not having those pinned in place add on parts to the hammer was a bit disconcerting.

I was surprised to find a ribbed mainspring already installed. I'm not sure if it is a Wolff spring or a S&W copy, but I left it alone. I did however replace the trigger return spring with the #14 Wolff one I had on hand (the #13 is in my Victory model at present). Somehow during this procedure the link at the base of the hammer that the mainspring locks into dropped loose and it took me a bit of time to realise that it slots into the hammer from a high swinging position not low. Once reassembled the trigger was definitely much lighter and easier to work in double action.

If I was shooting in Revolver Division I would be tempted to buy one just like it.

Just being a PC gun does not mean it will have a light trigger.

My 637 PC has a utterly beautiful and very light DA trigger, and SA trigger that is frankly too light to be useful, which is fine for my purposes.

Conversely, my 686 PC had the heaviest DA trigger I have felt on a Smith, and, as I often post about, suffered from very frequent light strikes as well. I replaced the springs with a Wilson set and the firing in with an Apex XP and all is well. But I was shocked at how heavy the trigger was on a PC gun. I suspect the extra money you pay for a PC is mostly for the features rather than the fit and finish, which is sad.