Pre27 v. Pre28: Case Closed (AFAIAC)

[Art Doc]

Took a 1954 Highway Patrolman and a 1957 "357 Magnum" to the range today.

Using 38 Special ammo that would have been standard stuff in 1950s (a 158 lead semi-wadcutter loaded to 900 FPS) I shot some SA groups and a DA group at 10 yards.

Best SA for both were very similar. The HP edged the 357 very slightly if you drop the worst flyer from each group making them with 1/4" of each other.

HP SA: (I always seem to have that one errant shot.)

357 SA:

In DA mode the smoother action and much lighter trigger pull of the "357" proved superior. One shot from the HP was off the paper.

HP:

"357":

I know some guys want to argue that the HP (28) is just as smooth as the "357" (27) but that has simply NOT been my experience in the past 30 years of owning and shooting numerous examples of both guns. I know this is just these two particular guns and this one particular shooter but like I said, this has consistently been the results in my experience over the past three decades. The Pre27 and Model 27 is smoother and has a better trigger pull. I think these did receive a bit more more attention in manufacturing than did the service grade HP and Model 28.

Keep trying to argue if you wish, but I am no longer listening.

 

[JSR III]

I agree with you the 28 is a bit smoother than the 27.

 

[05CarbonDRZ]

I agree with you the 28 is a bit smoother than the 27.

He said that the 27 was smoother,Not the 28....

 

[6mmrem]

With groups like that...dead is still dead...

 

[63expert]

My Pre-27 groups well. The flyer is all mine..


Untitled by zweitakt250, on Flickr

 

[George_in_SD]

What is your sample size, in terms of number of targets? Number of guns compared?

 

[beagleye]

You need a double blind control group to get convincing results- that's where blind people wearing blindfolds do the shooting.

But seriously, you have proven your own theory with a sample size of one.

 

[Art Doc]

No, I have proven it to myself with 30 years of experience, as I said at least twice in the original post. This comparison today was just a period at the end of the sentence. You want to believe otherwise? Go right ahead.

 

[dotdsd334]

that's where blind people wearing blindfolds do the shooting.

I thought that's who shot those DA targets

Sorry SaxonPig.... I couldn't help myself. If you are convinced of the results of your 30 year test...more power to ya.

 

[alwslate]

Have you owned both of these guns since new and know their history,
including any action work of any kind? If not your "test" is invalid. I
never cease to be amazed at the number of people who ignore the
different features of various types and makes of guns and pronounce
a gun superior to another because the trigger pull feels smoother to
them than the other. I own and have owned a variety of S&Ws and
have found that some of the best, most crisp SA pulls have been
on my plain old md 10s. Does that mean my 4" 10-5 is a better gun
than a 25-2 with target hammer and trigger? I think it means that
the related parts on one gun just happen to fit and work together a
little better than those same parts on another.

 

[71firebird400]

Those groups at 10 yards are not indicative of a shooter who is capable of determining the difference, in accuracy, between the two guns. While you may be able to say one is "smoother" than the other I'd argue that has more to do with the individual gun than the model.

Throw them both in a ransom rest, get out a trigger pull gauge. Then do it a thousand more times.

 

[DAinTX]

Well, Sax basically said that it was his opinion, based on his experience. And I believe he also said anyone is free to buy it, or not buy it, their call. I dunno...seems fair enough to me.

 

[Texas Star]

Apart from how guns left the factory, so many M-28's were honed by police armorers that they may have better actions than a stock M-27.

I've owned both models and handled many other examples. I really can't say that one is smoother than the other. The degree to which either model may have been used since it left the factory probably determines the smoothness as much as how smooth it was on manufacture.

As for those targets...I am going to be tactful and just assure any new members that either the M-27 or the M-28 will shoot a lot better than seen here. Apart from the human factor, I have not seen any real difference in accuracy between the two models. I think it's a matter of just how a particular gun was throated and made overall as to which shoots better.

But the more polished M-27 has a nicer finish, for which one paid, of course. And I've always liked the checkering on the M-27's sighting surfaces. I have seen more M-28's that developed a plum or brown tone under the blue. I don't know if this was due to the better finish on the M-27 or a matter of some M-28's being subjected to rougher use and less frequent care, given how many were used as cop guns.

I've owned only six and 6.5 inch barrels in these models. The guns are so large that this balanced them better, reduced muzzle blast, and added velocity, the very quality that gives the .357 its punch.

In defense of the basic guns' accuracy, I can only say that I have never been a truly renowned marksman, but it was not a difficult task to put all six shots (fired from "offhand") into a single ragged hole at 25 yards. I couldn't do it every time, but it happened often enough that the guns were obviously well capable of it. Even on a bad day, all six holes could easily be covered by the palm of my hand with space to spare. The same was also true of my sole M-29, and some other revolvers. A Colt Gold Cup .45 auto was also exceedingly accurate.

 

[JP@AK]

The HP edged the 357 very slightly if you drop the worst flyer from each group making them with 1/4" of each other.
HP SA: (I always seem to have that one errant shot.)

Hey, SP. I know how you can get rid of the flyer every time. Just shoot five shots instead of six!

 

[Engineer1911]

Who cares? Those are good groups no matter how the trigger was pulled! Thirty-five years ago, I could do that with a Colt Trooper Mk III at 15 yards, today not so well with M27-2. Maybe age has an affect?

 

[JSR III]

He said that the 27 was smoother,Not the 28....

I know.....

 

[Art Doc]

Some of you want to argue. Go ahead. You want to make an issue of the small sample. Go ahead. I never said this was scientific, I said it was my belief based on my experience. Of course individual guns can vary. But over the course of my 30 years or so shooting these guns the 27 wins. Period. Every time. You disagree? I don't care. Do what you want.

Once again, my conclusion is based on my experience of owning and shooting numerous examples of both models. Of course I haven't shot a thousand guns. Who has? That's ridiculous and unnecessary.

I go back to two points.

1. The 27 was the DELUXE, top of the line model. The 28 was the SERVICE GRADE revolver. It makes sense that perhaps the 27 received just a little more attention in fitting the internal parts. No, I have no proof of this, I do not state it as known fact, I say it makes sense to presume this may have happened.

2. Handling and shooting the actual guns has convinced me this is indeed the case. I have owned 7 M27s, and 3 pre models 357s. I have owned 2 M28s and a pre model HP. No, this isn't a thousand guns, but it's enough of a sample for me. Every single one of the 27s and pre27s had a smoother action than did any of the 28s and the pre28. I doubt that all the 27s had custom work done on them. They just come with lighter actions.

Am i saying the HPs are bad? Of course not. I'm saying the 27s are a little bit better. I do not believe this just subjective or my imagination. Please give me credit for being experienced enough to pull the triggers on two guns and figure out which one is lighter and smoother.

Still disagree? Fine. You have a 28 that feels better than any 27? Good for you. Want to dismiss my opinion? That's your prerogative.

 

[aphelion]

Any one who has poked into the innards of both models enough (I have) knows that no special efforts were made on the 27 compared to the 28. They certainly vary between individual specimens. And I came to the conclusion long ago the best way to smooth an S&W revolver is to shoot it. The more it is shot, the smoother it gets. But of course every one is entitled to their opinion.

 

[gmborkovic]

Hello SP, lets throw a same era 4" Python in on the next trip to the range.
I would like to read your opinion. I have gotten to old and shaky to get a nice group. Best, Mike2796

 

[G-Mac]

Some of you want to argue. Go ahead.

You are a learned man, a Ph.d.

Surely you know that starting a thread like this will create controversy.

Personally, just my opinion of course, I think that you get some kind of cheap thrill by starting posts like this and then relishing in the arguments that, inevitably, will occur.

Again, just one man's opinion.

 

[29aholic]

OK, I am not sure why you started this thread as I don't think the difference is noticeable enough by the human hand (barring an obvious mechanical issue). If one could perform the same test mechanically then I would buy into it more (I know you don't care).

Having said that, now repeat the test with the post war 357 and your pre war 357 and post the results. In that comparison I DO believe it is humanly noticeable with the pre war gun winning hands down.

You know I gotta mess with you SP and I also know you don't care.

 

[Biginge]

I am dismissing all opinions stated here. Going to my range and test fire thousands of rounds. Model 27 and 28. Then will keep results to self.

 

[Iggy]

I am dismissing all opinions stated here. Going to my range and test fire thousands of rounds. Model 27 and 28. Then will keep results to self.

A wise decision.
The responses here remind me of a site catering to black blocky shaped guns.
After 30 some years experience with both models, I tend to agree with SP.

 

[old bear]

Auh, which is better the M-27 or the M-28? The ultimate big boys pissing contest.....

 

[L Pete]

10 yds.?.....Shoot 25 or 50 yds., and vary the ammo. Shoot from sand bags, or a Ransom Rest, and take out all the other varibles. Just one ammo don't count in my opinion( one gun may like it better than the other gun). I personally don't think that is a good example of a test. I'm not saying that one gun is more accurate than the other, but I'd like to see them both shot with different loads, and an overall view can be gained with the two revolvers, not the shooter.

 

[BillyMagg]

A wise decision.
The responses here remind me of a site catering to black blocky shaped guns.

Iggy, this is a forum bro, means folks get to "express, their own opinions" no guarantee on the accuracy of the observation, Saxon was just bored and had a desire to "pontificate". I did read most of the posts, so I musta been really bored, but the sun just came out, so I'm gone.

 

[G-Mac]

I think that this thread takes away much of the credibility that Saxon Pig has built up here, for himself, over the years.

Oh well, at least he can still be the forum expert on all things +P.

 

[29aholic]

I think that this thread takes away much of the credibility that Saxon Pig has built up here, for himself, over the years.

Oh well, at least he can still be the forum expert on all things +P.

Actually although I have disagreed with SP a lot over the years, his credibility to me is his desire to debunk myths pervasive in the gun world. While I don't think his premise is misaligned I do think some of tests lack substance.

What it boils down to is he does contribute to the forum and is not a like man or a cool gun man as are several people on here that have built post count doing the afore mentioned.

 

[beagleye]

AFAIAC- "As far as I am concerned". I had to look that up, and it does slant the thread more favorably to the OP.

 

[gaucho1]

QUOTE That's your prerogative. QUOTE


I don't know about the rest of you guys, but that is either and insult or something you don't discuss in polite society......