I got a 325PD 4", some years back. .45 ACP. Except for the Lock hole, I like it a lot. Recoil is no problem at all. I am very pleased with it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Smith and Wesson still manufactures Scandium revolversFolks, just why did this material fall out of favor? Several years ago it was all the rage and I bought two, the 386PD and the 329PD. I think that they are great. Were there undue problems with them? Just curious. There are only a handful in the catalog now. What happened?
regards
yashua
Only an instructor that is a idiot would hand a Scandium framed revolver chambered in a Magnum cartridge to a novice studentI can think of no greater deterrent to learning how to shoot well, than a lightweight revolver chambered for a serious cartridge.
357 Magnum in a J-frame is not for everybody. There is nothing wrong with knowing your limitations and staying within them.Many years ago, I bought one of the first Model 640 revolvers chambered in .357 Magnum. I fired exactly 60 rounds through it at the range, cleaned it and sold it....and it was stainless steel. I wouldn't even consider owning a Scandium-framed piece...
Smith and Wesson never produced Titanium framed revolvers.Whatever happened to the titanium framed Smiths? I think they just made them in .22 and .38. I think they came out around '99 or so -called the Ti series. I always wondered why they never had a .357 like Taurus did, but soon after the line had been replaced by the Scandium (Si) models, which included both .357 and .44 Magnums.
I think that in order to be labeled Scandium the gun needs to contain at least 3% of that material in the alloy. Some gun manufacturers were working on a lighter alloy called "Floatinium". The idea was abandoned as a string had to be tied to the trigger guard to keep the gun from floating away.
The weight savings on the scandium J frames just doesn't justify the almost twice the price of a standard alloy similar model.