Just pretend this is witty.
Annoyed at thread drift
- Thread starter geddylee10002000
- Start date
- Status
Just pretend this is witty.
vonn
US Veteran
When you're hot you're hot!
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOJBelBA-Fc[/ame]
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l48cq1kQRcY[/ame]
vonn
US Veteran
vonn
US Veteran
Night all,the candle is burned down and need to sleep. Pray for our country ,things are happening faster every day.
[ame]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ni8KBhnebwE[/ame]
Been working on a deal for a 19-2...ahhh, the beauty of a Smith 4 inch barrel in blue. Now I find a deal on a Dan Wesson 15 .357 with two barrels...one of which is the 2 inch I've been wanting. And then a Colt Trooper .357 gets thrown into the mix...might be the only Colt I will ever be able to afford. I've got an epic drift going in my melon right now. All because I sold a Glock. I'm starting to like Glock.
Sorry for the gun chat. So for absolutely no good reason...
Sorry for the gun chat. So for absolutely no good reason...
I find it hard to believe.....
I find it hard to believe that I, and people like me who have families, homes, jobs and productive hobbies would spend time on a thread like this one.
I find it hard to believe that I, and people like me who have families, homes, jobs and productive hobbies would spend time on a thread like this one.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Purrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrdy!
WARNING! Gun talk ahead!
Bigride,
First, keep in mind that posting your question here is bound to bring forth answers biased towards S&W.
Dan Wessons were famous for having better accuracy than most other brands of revolvers including S&W. Dan Wesson's shorter hammer fall and faster lock time helped but their better accuracy was primarily attributed to their barrels being under tension which reduced vibrations. Dan Wessons also shouldn't ever have the tiny bit of choke or constriction that is common under the barrel threads of conventionally installed revolver barrels. Dan Wessons pretty much ran all other brands of double action revolvers off the 220 meter silhouette ranges.
Having given them their due, Dan Wessons are not for double action shooters. Their short hammer arch gives the trigger little mechanical advantage while firing DA. Their DA pull is heavy, gritty and generally stinks. It gets worse as lead fouling accumulates between the cylinder and yoke then the frame has to be disassembled to clean out and correct the mess. Back when most police carried revolvers Dan Wessons were scarce in their holsters and rare on PPC ranges. Another consideration is that switching barrels requires sight adjustment. I found after a barrel swap I could count clicks up or down for a rough sight change but a proper sight in was required before anything that challenged marksmanship. One Dan Wesson was enough for me.
"Colt Trooper .357" could mean a V mainspring traditional Colt or one of the very different Mark Iis, IIIs Ivs or what ever the Mark numbers were. During the 1970s I had a couple of Colt's historic V mainspring revolvers, a .45 Colt New Service and a .38 Officer's Model which became a Tropper when I rebarreled it. If fired a lot the mechanism is prone to going out of time which both of mine did. Even though parts were not a problem back then it was tough to find a gunsmith who'd retime them. Now parts are collectors items and it can't have gotten any easier to find a mechanic will to work on one. Unlike S&Ws their double action pull stacks. I owned one of the Mark what ever revolvers about 1981. Its gritty double action was inferior to my S&Ws and it had no good features to compensate so I dumped it pretty quickly.
In my experience Colt double actions stink but I ought to say some thing good about them. Colt's post WWII fixed sighted service revolvers had larger easier to see sights than S&Ws. In that regard they've been surpassed by Ruger's fixed sighted GP 100 revolvers. That brings us to the only other brand of double action revolver that I can recommend: Ruger. Ruger's single actions are also very nice. I don't intend to compare Glocks to other modern service pistols by saying this, but I'd be proud to recycle Glock dollars into a Ruger revolver.
Been working on a deal for a 19-2...ahhh, the beauty of a Smith 4 inch barrel in blue. Now I find a deal on a Dan Wesson 15 .357 with two barrels...one of which is the 2 inch I've been wanting. And then a Colt Trooper .357 gets thrown into the mix...might be the only Colt I will ever be able to afford. I've got an epic drift going in my melon right now. All because I sold a Glock. I'm starting to like Glock.
Sorry for the gun chat. So for absolutely no good reason...
Bigride,
First, keep in mind that posting your question here is bound to bring forth answers biased towards S&W.
Dan Wessons were famous for having better accuracy than most other brands of revolvers including S&W. Dan Wesson's shorter hammer fall and faster lock time helped but their better accuracy was primarily attributed to their barrels being under tension which reduced vibrations. Dan Wessons also shouldn't ever have the tiny bit of choke or constriction that is common under the barrel threads of conventionally installed revolver barrels. Dan Wessons pretty much ran all other brands of double action revolvers off the 220 meter silhouette ranges.
Having given them their due, Dan Wessons are not for double action shooters. Their short hammer arch gives the trigger little mechanical advantage while firing DA. Their DA pull is heavy, gritty and generally stinks. It gets worse as lead fouling accumulates between the cylinder and yoke then the frame has to be disassembled to clean out and correct the mess. Back when most police carried revolvers Dan Wessons were scarce in their holsters and rare on PPC ranges. Another consideration is that switching barrels requires sight adjustment. I found after a barrel swap I could count clicks up or down for a rough sight change but a proper sight in was required before anything that challenged marksmanship. One Dan Wesson was enough for me.
"Colt Trooper .357" could mean a V mainspring traditional Colt or one of the very different Mark Iis, IIIs Ivs or what ever the Mark numbers were. During the 1970s I had a couple of Colt's historic V mainspring revolvers, a .45 Colt New Service and a .38 Officer's Model which became a Tropper when I rebarreled it. If fired a lot the mechanism is prone to going out of time which both of mine did. Even though parts were not a problem back then it was tough to find a gunsmith who'd retime them. Now parts are collectors items and it can't have gotten any easier to find a mechanic will to work on one. Unlike S&Ws their double action pull stacks. I owned one of the Mark what ever revolvers about 1981. Its gritty double action was inferior to my S&Ws and it had no good features to compensate so I dumped it pretty quickly.
In my experience Colt double actions stink but I ought to say some thing good about them. Colt's post WWII fixed sighted service revolvers had larger easier to see sights than S&Ws. In that regard they've been surpassed by Ruger's fixed sighted GP 100 revolvers. That brings us to the only other brand of double action revolver that I can recommend: Ruger. Ruger's single actions are also very nice. I don't intend to compare Glocks to other modern service pistols by saying this, but I'd be proud to recycle Glock dollars into a Ruger revolver.
Skeptic 9c
Member
5mm Remington Rimfire.
Geoff
Who thinks .401 Herters should be reserved for street chalk blocks.
Wow. A thoughtful, well-presented, fact-filled analysis and comparison of the pros and cons of revolver brands...with no mention of penguins or squirrels. We really have drifted into new territory. I'm not sure how to respond...so I'll just say...
Just pretend this is witty.
- Status
Similar threads
