valkyriekl
Member
I don't usually gush about guns I've just bought, but...
I used to think 4" revolvers were strange-looking, too much of a compromise between the 2" snubbies (meant to be carried) and 6" target revolvers. And don't get me started on ones with 8-3/8" barrels or longer! Especially the N-frame S&Ws with just a little bit of barrel sticking out past the ejector rod shroud. Ever since I first saw it, the modern revolver wearing a 6" barrel with full underlug was THE quintessential revolver, the pinnacle of revolver evolution, for me. The S&W 686, Ruger GP100, and (yes) Taurus 908 just had that "look".
My first revolver was a S&W 617...no, scratch that, my first revolver was an H&R "Sportsman" Double Action, built in the 1930s. This one had a skinny barrel with no underlug, and wouldn't have really fit in with my idea of what a revolver was, but it was inexpensive and allowed me to shoot .22LR while my other gun (my only other gun, at the time) cooled off (the H&K P7, with its gas-delayed blowback action, tended to get really hot after shooting a box of ammo through it). The Sportsman was unique in that it was a break-action revolver and had a 9-shot cylinder. But it was problematic right from the start: the hammer didn't seem to light off the rounds reliably. Being the tinkerer that I am, I took my only tool (a Dremel Tool!) and tried to fix it, but I ended up making it worse (surprise, surprise).
So, rather than keep trying to fix it by throwing more money and parts at it, I bought my first modern revolver, a stainless-steel S&W 617-6. It was perfect, with its 6" barrel and full underlug. That pretty much set the tone for all of the revolvers I've purchased since then, from the Taurus 905 snubbie (its ejector shroud gave it the "full underlug" look), to the Ruger SP101 snubbie (again, full-length ejector shroud), to the S&W 17-8, my first 686, and pretty much every S&W revolver I've purchased until about a year ago. I might've dabbled with other revolvers--I've owned two Ruger Blackhawks, and I bought a S&W Model 10-6 because it was cheap (it did have the heavy barrel, at least!)--but by and large, it was 6" full-underlug barrel on a target revolver, or the 2" barrel on a snubbie. I lusted after the S&W 14-5, -6, and -7 because they had the heavier barrels and ignored the S&W 14-3 and -4, for example.
But then something happened: I bought a S&W 19-3. While it had the 6" barrel, it didn't have the full-underlug. A 629-5, which also sported a 6" barrel but no underlug (and the Dirty Harry movies) convinced me that the no-underlug look was OK. The 4" barrel on a Model 15 that I traded for started looking alright. A 4" Colt Official Police brought me around to the idea of the tapered-barrel (the 15-7 has the modern heavy barrel, which isn't as beefy as the barrel on my 10-6, but not as skinny as the tapered barrel on, say, a 10-5). A .32-20 Hand Ejector Model of 1905, 3rd Change and a Model 10-9 sealed the deal.
This has culminated in my latest purchase, a S&W Model 28-2. It features a 4" tapered barrel with shrouded ejector rod. With a set of Ahrends Tactical grips, I'm absolutely convinced that this gun is beautiful:
It fills several gaps in my collection that I've wanted to address for a while now: it's a 4" revolver in .357 Magnum and blued, possibly to carry. I had been thinking about finding a 4" Model 586 to fill that role, but this 28-2 does the job nicely, and also rounds out my collection a little with another N-frame.
I feel it was priced right, at about $385 out the door. For a Model 28, it's finish is in excellent shape with barely a hint of holster wear at the muzzle and on the high points of the cylinder. Curiously, it does have the spring-loaded hammer-nose, but it dimpled some fresh snapcaps just fine, so I'm confident that it'll bust caps well enough. It's also marked "MOD 28" in the yoke, with no "-2" with it, but its serial number (S3078xx), lack of a trigger-guard screw, and left-handed ejector-rod threading means it's a -2. The weight of the big N-frame and the beefy cylinder, and the balance of the 4" tapered barrel seems to feel right in my hands, and I may even consider using it for Distinguished Revolver.
I can't wait to get it out to the range tomorrow!
I used to think 4" revolvers were strange-looking, too much of a compromise between the 2" snubbies (meant to be carried) and 6" target revolvers. And don't get me started on ones with 8-3/8" barrels or longer! Especially the N-frame S&Ws with just a little bit of barrel sticking out past the ejector rod shroud. Ever since I first saw it, the modern revolver wearing a 6" barrel with full underlug was THE quintessential revolver, the pinnacle of revolver evolution, for me. The S&W 686, Ruger GP100, and (yes) Taurus 908 just had that "look".
My first revolver was a S&W 617...no, scratch that, my first revolver was an H&R "Sportsman" Double Action, built in the 1930s. This one had a skinny barrel with no underlug, and wouldn't have really fit in with my idea of what a revolver was, but it was inexpensive and allowed me to shoot .22LR while my other gun (my only other gun, at the time) cooled off (the H&K P7, with its gas-delayed blowback action, tended to get really hot after shooting a box of ammo through it). The Sportsman was unique in that it was a break-action revolver and had a 9-shot cylinder. But it was problematic right from the start: the hammer didn't seem to light off the rounds reliably. Being the tinkerer that I am, I took my only tool (a Dremel Tool!) and tried to fix it, but I ended up making it worse (surprise, surprise).
So, rather than keep trying to fix it by throwing more money and parts at it, I bought my first modern revolver, a stainless-steel S&W 617-6. It was perfect, with its 6" barrel and full underlug. That pretty much set the tone for all of the revolvers I've purchased since then, from the Taurus 905 snubbie (its ejector shroud gave it the "full underlug" look), to the Ruger SP101 snubbie (again, full-length ejector shroud), to the S&W 17-8, my first 686, and pretty much every S&W revolver I've purchased until about a year ago. I might've dabbled with other revolvers--I've owned two Ruger Blackhawks, and I bought a S&W Model 10-6 because it was cheap (it did have the heavy barrel, at least!)--but by and large, it was 6" full-underlug barrel on a target revolver, or the 2" barrel on a snubbie. I lusted after the S&W 14-5, -6, and -7 because they had the heavier barrels and ignored the S&W 14-3 and -4, for example.
But then something happened: I bought a S&W 19-3. While it had the 6" barrel, it didn't have the full-underlug. A 629-5, which also sported a 6" barrel but no underlug (and the Dirty Harry movies) convinced me that the no-underlug look was OK. The 4" barrel on a Model 15 that I traded for started looking alright. A 4" Colt Official Police brought me around to the idea of the tapered-barrel (the 15-7 has the modern heavy barrel, which isn't as beefy as the barrel on my 10-6, but not as skinny as the tapered barrel on, say, a 10-5). A .32-20 Hand Ejector Model of 1905, 3rd Change and a Model 10-9 sealed the deal.
This has culminated in my latest purchase, a S&W Model 28-2. It features a 4" tapered barrel with shrouded ejector rod. With a set of Ahrends Tactical grips, I'm absolutely convinced that this gun is beautiful:
It fills several gaps in my collection that I've wanted to address for a while now: it's a 4" revolver in .357 Magnum and blued, possibly to carry. I had been thinking about finding a 4" Model 586 to fill that role, but this 28-2 does the job nicely, and also rounds out my collection a little with another N-frame.
I feel it was priced right, at about $385 out the door. For a Model 28, it's finish is in excellent shape with barely a hint of holster wear at the muzzle and on the high points of the cylinder. Curiously, it does have the spring-loaded hammer-nose, but it dimpled some fresh snapcaps just fine, so I'm confident that it'll bust caps well enough. It's also marked "MOD 28" in the yoke, with no "-2" with it, but its serial number (S3078xx), lack of a trigger-guard screw, and left-handed ejector-rod threading means it's a -2. The weight of the big N-frame and the beefy cylinder, and the balance of the 4" tapered barrel seems to feel right in my hands, and I may even consider using it for Distinguished Revolver.
I can't wait to get it out to the range tomorrow!
