Really, they are two entirely different revolvers, in my mind. I think of the 25-2 as a paper-puncher. In the field, you can do the same things easier with your 1911 - less weight and bulk. At the target range, the 25-2 puts its empty brass in your hands. Whether you are satisfied with its accuracy is up to you. My own opinion is that even a good one won’t outshoot a well-tuned 1911. In formal target shooting, in rapid-fire they're a big nuisance, and they’re also a nuisance also if you practice with lead. “JMHO”
The 25-5 is like the 29. Sure, you can use it for casual target shooting, but I think of it as a mid-range .45 Colt field gun. You won’t load it up like a Ruger or TC, but you can do a little better than a 250 at 850 and still be reasonably safe. Maybe a 250-270 at 950-1000, if you need it? Some might push it a little harder. Either way, a good .45-caliber 250 LSWC at 1000 FPS is nothing to sneeze at. The bigger issue with the 25-5, and the 25-2 suffers from the same, is exit bore size. Some of these guns, in both models, have exit bores of 0.455” to 0.456”, maybe even a shade bigger, which really complicates things. The 25-9 version fixed that problem, as did some of the later 25-5s, but if you have one of the older guns, the exit bore size is a limiting factor. I am not a fan of the earlier guns. They were pretty, but that’s about all, unless you could find or make the correct bullets to make them click. Nowadays, it is much easier to order custom molds, so getting over-size .45 bullets is a minor problem compared to, say, thirty-years ago. More “JMHO.”
