Best gun to build PPC Revolver

[m4bgringo]

I like shooting PPC but I take a different view of it.

I do it as a practical competition. I use stock revolvers and factory ammo. I use .38 Special, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP.

We have people using custom guns, light loads, even .22's. They outscore me, I don't care, I am there to have fun and use the ammo and guns I would use everyday of the week.

Heck, I haven't even had any trigger work done on any of them. I have shot a custom gun and it has a beautiful trigger, great balance, very, very nice gun. The owner shoots awesome with that gun!

 

[Dave Nash]

I am wondering if their are advantages on building a PPC Revolver on certain models. I know I want a stainless steel revolver. I see most are made out of model 64's. Are there advantages with using a 64/67. I have a model 65 and a model 66. All are older firing pin on the hammer style. Is there advantages of using a 38 to a 357. I know I will be shooting 38 spcl wadcutters. Any advice or comments are welcome.

"8-Shot"

There's some great information here already but if you give me a second, I'd like to throw my own 2¢ in.

As you already know, that while keeping within whatever rules you must observe, there is a tremendous amount of personal preferences at work here.

That said, traditionally, N-Frames were not used as foundational guns for several reasons. One (a minor one in terms of performance)) was availability. As opposed to K's and later L's, there just weren't that many around in a .38 or .357 and those that were, tended to be more expensive; especially for something that generally was going to be made into something else anyway.

Second is the size of the grip frame on those guns. It's just too large for many people. While some of the aftermarket K/L frame stocks seen on competition guns are more "handfilling" than the stocks that originally came on such guns from the factory, most don't make the guns anything like the N-Frame grip proportions.

Finally, and perhaps the biggest issue is that for as neat and well engineered as the action (lockwork) of the N-Frame really is, it still dates back to a period in time when Double Action guns were generally shot Single Action. And while things have been done in the last 20-30 years to enhance them, traditionally there were issues with the huge and (in the case of .38/.357 charge holes) heavy cylinders being whipped around at high speeds and their relationship with the cylinder stops that I won't bore you with here.

K-Frames were popular for they not only fit the hand, could be tuned, could be shot a lot, and could be modified in an endless number of ways, but they were plentiful and affordable.

When it came on the scene, the L-Frame had a lot of followers who wanted a heavier gun to begin with and one that out-of-the-box was available with a number of beneficial-to-the-game sighting options (a low Patridge for conventional aiming, a high Patridge for a neck hold at greater distances, and even the adjustable front sight borrowed from the N-Frame silhouette guns to allow the same hold at all distances). The problem was that the overwhelming number of the guns were .357's and while I shot several competitively that were tack-drivers, when firing .38spl ammo, most people were (rightfully leery) of their accuracy potential in that combination for they were (and I still am) in agreement with several of the contributors here that (in theory anyway) the bullet jump issue (that is, the amount of free travel after it is expelled from the casing, passes through the ball end diameter of the cylinder, and finally hits the forcing cone) can affect things negatively.

(Although to be fair, others will correctly argue that a lack of concentricity between the bore diameter and the individual chamber diameters as well as, separately, incorrect or inconsistent ball end diameters can contribute to a less-than-optimum accuracy as well. But those are generally manufacturing issues, which can sometimes be addressed by a good gunsmith as opposed to a "set" design matter that shy of radically altering the chamber/cylinder/barrel relationship is something that cannot be changed.)

In "the old days" there were also doubts about using stainless steel guns as a foundation for it was felt that they wouldn't hold up as well with the huge numbers of rounds fired through these devices and the generally even greater number of times they were "dry fired" in practice. But as the hammer and trigger turned out to be flash chromed carbon steel, they weren't any different than those parts found on the blue guns and I don't believe people saw any worse wear to the bearing surfaces of the cylinder, star, breech face or crane/yoke either (although I am willing to be shown otherwise for I am not 100% sure about that).

So, as most of these things have not changed since what one of your posters called the "heyday of PPC", looking for an affordable, previously unaltered K-Frame might be the best way to go. I realize that one of your own later, follow-up posts to this thread indicated that you had obtained a tightly-locking, rough-action, non-factory round-butted, ceramic-coated Model 64-1 that you were going to send off as the basis for your gun. And if your gunsmith is willing to do that (and not have to charge you a premium of some sort to undo or work-around those alterations), fine. But if it were me and you can somehow find something not already played with, I might do that instead.

Who knows what the "coating" might have affected? And is it going to be left on or stripped off in the final version? Why is the action rough? Did it come that way from the factory or was there some other "outside" work done to the gun that caused it? But the thing that really concerns me is the non-factory round-butting. I used to do that too back in the day when people wanted their 4" service guns made in that profile for work but I took the time to reprofile the front strap and deal with the strain screw and strain screw counterbore issues (see This has been touched on in many threads in the... and "rhmc24" Thank you for the information....). Not everybody does that and your man might have to spend time (and your money) not only building up what you want but also redoing things here too depending on what the original person did to the firearm.

If you are having a rib installed, then a fixed sight gun like you already have is the way to go but one of the reasons the L-Frame became popular in some areas was because for some people, it weighed enough as it was and it already had the adjustable sights attached as discussed earlier. So if you go looking for something else (or if your 'smith tells you to), you might want to consider that frame size as well before completely making up your mind.

Otherwise a Model 10 (a blue steel, fixed sight .38) or a Model 64 (a stainless steel, fixed sight .38) is probably your best bet.

The other thing to consider (depending on what rules you must follow, how heavy the gun should be for your needs and preferences, and finally, how you plan on viewing and participating in this sport) are the remarks made by "m4bgringo" regarding the use of "stock revolvers and factory ammo". I'm not saying that you should shoot a .22 but one of the nicer "out of the box" Smith & Wesson PPC guns was their Full Lug Model 14. If that is a thought or a possibility, go here and read this thread on why it was developed in the first place back in the 90's: "Origins of the Model 14 Full Lug & An Introduction to the SWCA"

Finally, I must also agree with "Nick B.", for while you tell him that you want "get something that is not wore out and in good shape" (and I can fully understand that), there can be some real bargains out there in terms of beautifully crafted and little-used PPC revolvers for many times people in this game change their minds and their guns more often than they do their uniforms at work in a never-ending quest for the newest best thing and you could benefit from their hyper-activity in this regard. I know that I have.

And as a word of caution, unless you are exactly sure of what you want weight-wise and again with a focused eye on what the rules allow, I would consider some sort of removable weight system that attaches and detaches to the barrel of your choosing. Your man at The Brush Creek LTD. offers such a thing for their MOJO guns and it will allow you to experiment to find out what works best for you rather than taking the chance of buying a too-heavy gun to start with and being stuck with it.

Hope this helps.

 

[noah gladstone]

I used an L frame 681. One of the last guns built by Ron Power it is a work of art. The trigger is supper smooth.

 

[Sammy]

I have a PPC built by MoJo in the 80's for my father, as well as several guns he has done for me, since he has been back. YOU WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED. He takes great care and pride in his work.

I have also seen the work that MoJo has done! I've seen the older stuff he has built and the stuff he is currently building. It is all TOP NOTCH! I've shot bgjr1966's revolver and i have shot a recent build by MoJo. They are very smooth and seem to be a great value as well. YOU WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED. As far as K or L frame, I can't comment, I don't shoot well enough to notice the difference. I personally prefer the feel of the L frame. I have a slab sided 586 that is my goto and i also have a beautiful k frame weddle as well.

BTW bgjr1966 you should post some pics of your fathers L frame. That is an absolute work of art. Well at least in my opinion.