.38 special +p?

[-db-]

If you can visualize the action of the hand upon the ratchets, you realize that the amount of lateral force applied to the cylinder is negligible, if not in fact nonexistent. In short, it doesn't matter which way the cylinder turns as the hand on a S&W isn't pushing the cylinder out of the frame any more than a Colt's hand pushes it into the frame.

 

[shawn mccarver]

...and everybody, here's a ? for all: Anyone place any credence in the theory that the Colts did not require a front locking lug since the cylinder rotated to the right, 'into' the frame, as opposed to the Smith cylinder rotating to the left, 'outside' the frame? That the lug added some measure of strength...

If I recall, some of the original Smith hand ejectors (whatever they're called) did not have that barrel lug.

Again, I am not too worried about it.

Theories have been floated over the years concerning the clockwise versus counterclockwise cylinder rotation and how that plays into the strength. An alternate theory to the one stated about Colt locking into the frame and having a beefier hand is that S&W added the feature simply to give them a supposed advantage over Colt.

Is the second lock point better? I say yes. Is the weapon going to come unlocked allowing the cylinder to fall open when shooting +P? I hardly think so. As proof, I would offer the relatively recently made AND released to the public 100 year anniversary M&P Model 10-13, made in 1999. Notice anything missing? That weapon will fire +Ps without worry. The S&W "legal department" would have doubtless forbidden release of that model if there had been a concern. Photos from Lee Jarrett's album. That said, since none of us, without proper in person examination of the revolver in question, can really speak to its safety, I would not shoot it, especially with +P.

 

[FLASHnumber17]

So..what exactly is a front locking lug..? 0___0

 

[shawn mccarver]

So..what exactly is a front locking lug..? 0___0

Look under the barrel in the two photos. In one, the ejector rod is not attached to anything, like yours, which had its lug removed at some point, and in the other the ejector rod locks into a lug under the barrel.

 

[FLASHnumber17]

Mmmm! Interesting..Ok I see now thanks