Is it possible the intent was to reduce recoil on a hunting pistol without blast out the top for fast followup shots? By the looks of he machine work someone spent a fair amount of time on the project.
Model 57 - Odd Ported Barrel
- Thread starter SFIDEC
- Start date
Does not look overly functional to me from a muzzle flip perspective. BUT the milling work looks to be well-executed and I really, really like the look. It pegs my "cool meter" and I think it would be a fun gun to own (and shoot at dusk for the fire show).
No way, I would do a barrel swap or cut the barrel on that one-of-a-kind Magnum. To all those that recommend a cut or swap, I would say "just buy another gun".
Apply the cut/swap funds towards one more S&W - a good reason, (for those of us who need a reason) to buy "another one".
No way, I would do a barrel swap or cut the barrel on that one-of-a-kind Magnum. To all those that recommend a cut or swap, I would say "just buy another gun". Apply the cut/swap funds towards one more S&W - a good reason, (for those of us who need a reason) to buy "another one".
Last edited:
You have a good point about possibility of use for hunting. Here are two closeup pictures of frame showing scars of what could be where a scope was frame clamp mounted during its life. There are no extra drilled holes for a scope mount.
I have a M14-5 that came with a frame clamped mounted scope that luckily didn't leave scars when removed.
Ray
Attachments
cowboy4evr
Member
I agree with post 20 . It's a chop job to 4" to " cure " it . I personally have never cared for / wanted any firearm with porting , be it a rifle or handgun . On Youtube a " now " retired LEO made a bunch of video's . He used revolvers and semi auto's . A couple of his revolvers he had ported them . My personal opinion was , " well you just ruined a couple of otherwise nice S&W revolvers " . That's just my opinion , not one shared by all . Regards Paul
Jim Watson
Member
I saw the plain front sight, too. A guy here had a full house Magnaport Ruger, R/W sights, action, holes. The ports would smoke up the front sight insert in one cylinder full.
The first thing to do is SHOOT THE GUN! If you can get a similar gun without superfluous holes, compare the recoil action.
The first thing to do is SHOOT THE GUN! If you can get a similar gun without superfluous holes, compare the recoil action.
I agree, those marks are from a clamp-on scope mount.
LittleAugieMo
Member
Guess my 1st question would be "how is recoil/muzzle flip compared to non-ported barrel?"
Pizza Bob
Member
When I saw the picture of your 57, it reminded me of a gun that I ran across in New Mexico - except that it looked like the ports had been done with a hack saw and a rat-tail file. Get a good chuckle from the price (this was probably 5 years ago). I offered them $500 (with an eye to changing the barrel) - which I thought pretty generous, considering, but they wouldn't budge on the price. Probably still there. LOL
Adios,
Pizza Bob
Adios,
Pizza Bob
nate-dogg
Member
Thats an awesome 57!
Patrick L
Member
It reminds me of the old Remington 11-48 skeet gun in .410 bore. Because they were recoil operated (ala the Browning A5 system) and the .410 generated such little recoil impulse, the skeet model had "reverse" porting to increase recoil impulse in the .410 bore to help function. Granted, increasing the recoil on a .410 bore is not so unpleasant. Doing that on a .41 Magnum is something I would NOT want to do.
Sometimes even Bubba does nice machine work...
Sometimes even Bubba does nice machine work...
Muzzle brakes work by directing gasses outward, instead of inline. That function works regardless of what side of the barrel tip they are on. So bottom ports work same as side ports. Top side ports can reduce muzzle rise by directing some gas upwards. No go on this one, as there is a sight on top.
Original owner may have thought number of ports was more important than their location. He may have been right.
Original owner may have thought number of ports was more important than their location. He may have been right.
Brother, you are right. Most folks don't understand how porting REALLY works. I worked with Michael Plaxco at S&W. Michael was a Team S&W world class shooter and (if I remember right) 4 times International IPSC champ plus countless other major championships. He is a fantastic and very fast shooter. He is also a hell of a gunsmith and did a tremendous amount of research on porting to include some serious scientific testing by outside labs. He knows what makes ports effective and it has very little to do with the "jet effect". He talks about it in his book and we have discussed it in detail at times we were stuck in sales meetings at the factory. I should add that I am talking about handgun pressures and velocities. Rifles pressures are a whole new ball game.
Last edited:
