what does the future hold for revolvers.

[FLA2760]

They are not going anywhere.

[larvatus]

I've met very few that would prefer a 1982 Cadillac Cimarron to a 2008 CTS. But nearly every poster in this thread would prefer a 1982 S&W to a 2008.

You can count me among the deviants rating Bangor Punta guns well below the current production. Then again, I estimate S&W as a third-rate gunmaker at its best, circa late Thirties, in comparison to the Colts and Mausers of the day. At this point, their products are first-rate in comparison to their competitors, and fourth-rate in comparison to their predecessors.

The notion that a large number of Joe Blows are ignoring the online fora and buying it, or something similar, is guesswork for both of us at this point - unless you have sales figures you're saving for later.

S&W made 185078 revolvers in 2006. This website allegedly reaches over 281K U.S. monthly people. If it were a bellwether of customer dissatisfaction with S&W, I would have expected the accursed lock to have vanished by now. My take on our role is different. As Tuco told the corpse of his would-be assassin, "When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk." There's them that talk, there's them that shoot, and never the twain shall meet.

Online fora favor tire kickers. I have enjoyed countless hours discussing guns with like-minded online personae. But I never expect online debaters to be representative of paying customers. Taking S&W's design and manufacture standards as a measure of its esteem for our cavils, neither do they.

[Jart]

Don't look now but you've been quoted in the current lock thread. I believe the first of the tire kickers has already taken umbrage at the characterization.

Internet conventional wisdom holds that a thread is safe from being read after it runs 4 pages so we may be safe in operating a peanut gallery from this vantage point.

You can count me among the deviants rating Bangor Punta guns well below the current production.

We have found an area of agreement. Somewhat. Most of my older S&Ws are no older than the Bangor Punta days. Some seem rather nice but a couple of the pinned and recessed examples were accurately described by Tamara as having been fashioned with a flint axe.

But, if you think you get villified for a low opinion of Bangor Punta era S&Ws you should drop in on a thread where I acknowledge that two of three Pythons I bought sucked out loud. I still am of the opinion that hand fitting is an advantage only when those doing the fitting weren't operating with a blazing hangover, on a Monday, looking forward to a union strike meeting. More to the point, the things proved difficult enough to get serviced I gave up two as a bad job at considerable financial loss if one doesn't consider one's attitude and blood pressure to hold monetary value.

I believe that the service revolver market is tanking due to low sales but tend to agree on the online scene as a market indicator. Some seem to simply state an opinion or buying preference but many, I would bet, are looking for a podium more than a firearm - regardless of who makes it with what features.

[Tamara]

RE: The online scene as a market indicator.

To read the gun boards, S&W should have folded the day after they dropped blued guns from their lineup, as all real revolver fans hate soulless steel guns and revere their carbon counterparts. This is droll to those of us who have been in the business long enough to watch six 686's sell while the 586 next to them on the shelf quietly gathered dust. If everyone who yammered about blued revolvers bought one, they never would have been 86'ed from the catalog.



RE: Bangor Punta heresy.

Oy, vey. To watch somebody go into transports of ecstasy over a Model 19 because it's PINNED and RECESSED when it's a godawful Bangor Punta gun made in darkest 1977 and hasn't a plumb line or square corner on it is perhaps the best way to brighten up an otherwise dull day at a gun show. I think one of S&W's best quality periods came in the early '90s, right after Tompkins PLC shelled out the big bucks for all that shiny new CNC machinery. (And for really nice guns, that was when Liebenberg was still hands-on in the Performance Center, back before it had been reduced to a shiny badge to sell funny-shaped product, much like AMG has for M-B.)



RE: The 1930s.

What a time for getting nice guns. There's something about 25% unemployment rates that makes craftsmen diligent. When you're the guy at Remington putting the polish on that hardware-store Model 31, and you can look out the window over your bench and see the line of guys wanting your job, you tend to put a bit of extra elbow grease in it. I've seen some rack-grade models from the Depression Era that have bluing jobs worthy of a Dakota today...

[Jart]

Three posts in a row NOT singing hosannas at the altar of BP Pinned And Recessed?

Is that a record?

[tipoc]

Well I'll toss in my 2 cents...

Wheelguns will be around for a long time. That includes guns with 4", 5", 6" and longer barrels.

In no particular order ponder the following:

More people shoot today than have shot than at any time in the last 5 decades.

More shooters shoot more ammo than folks who did shoot used to shoot.

There are more gun mags these days than at any time in the past.

There are more websites devoted to all aspects of shooting than at any time in the past (well websites aren't all that old of course).

Most of the new rounds introduced for handguns in the last 20 or so years have been introduced for the revolver (many can also be used in long guns), .480 Ruger, .500 S&W, .327 Federal, .17 HMR, etc.

Ammo manufacturers offer improved loads and bullets for revolver rounds, sell a good deal of them, and offer more. There are better commercially available loads for the .44 Spl., 45 Colt, & .38 Spl (to name just three) than at any time in the last century.

True S&W no longer makes their guns with beveled cylinders and with as smooth triggers or as good looking as a post war .44. But the guns it does make are stronger and built to tighter tolerances. It's .44 Magnums no longer shake loose after 200 or so rounds. For some extra money (and it's usually worth it) a good trigger job and a little other work can be done by a gunsmith to set it up just as you like it.

The revolver market will continue to lag behind the market for semis. In the U.S. it's done that since the mid 80s or so. For personal self defense the revolver will continue to lag behind the semi-auto as it has for the last 25 years in the U.S. and longer in Europe.

For sport shooting the revolver will dominate among hunters. For action pistol matches it will lag behind the semi but hold it's own. In target shooting, plinking, etc. it will hold in second place as it does now.

100 years from now folks will be shooting guns based on the Colt SAA and the S&W M&P. No armies will, but they don't now and haven't for over 50 years. Get over that. With a few exceptions cops don't use wheelguns and haven't for for 25 years. Get over that as well.

For as long as we use knives and the Louisville Slugger is more than a baseball bat the wheelgun will stick around.

tipoc

[Jart]

More people shoot today than have shot than at any time in the last 5 decades.

I would view that as pretty good news if it included handguns and didn't lay all the increase on the CAS crowd.

Where'd you come by that stat? NSSF?

Dare I hope the increase is percentage of population rather than a simple head count? Well, even a simple head count is good news. I really didn't know that - 'course there's a universe of stuff I didn't know.

True S&W no longer makes their guns with beveled cylinders and with as smooth triggers or as good looking as a post war .44.

To continue the heresy, the most manageable DA trigger I have is on one of those outer space looking things - A 627V8. I don't have a tuned S&W to compare it to but it's subjectively nicer than any other S&W I have (less than 2 dozen with the oldest from 1948).

[Tamara]

Originally Posted by Jart

To continue the heresy, the most manageable DA trigger I have is on one of those outer space looking things - A 627V8. I don't have a tuned S&W to compare it

My PC627's trigger isn't all that spectacular, but then it's still stock. It is certainly worse than my also bone-stock '64 Model 27-2.

Besides, a good DA trigger isn't something you get out of a box. Not from a Smith. Nor a Python, Manurhin, Korth, or anything else. (Well, okay, in my very limited experience with Korths, they're quite good...)

[larvatus]

Originally Posted by Tamara
Besides, a good DA trigger isn't something you get out of a box. Not from a Smith. Nor a Python, Manurhin, Korth, or anything else.

As shown on the diagram, the rebound slide in the Manurhin MR-73 (#114) rides on four rollers (#115). Another roller (#116) serves to vary the leverage of its engagement by the trigger return spring (#157), which is independently regulated for tension by a screw (#120). The mainspring (#313) is regulated in the S&W fashion by another screw (#135). This arrangement results in a crisp SA trigger pull and a linear DA trigger pull, both of which can be adjusted with hand tools without removing service stocks. I cannot think of anything a gunsmith could do to improve the action as it comes from the factory.



I have no complaints about the stock trigger pull on my S&W Registered Magnum. While many shooters object to the way DA trigger pull stacks on a Colt Python, I try to shoot my 1957 specimen in double action as if it were a double stage SA trigger.

[Tamara]

So you're saying that the Manurhins I've tried were stuck with those triggers? Ah, well, at least it's better than being stuck with an out-of-the-box Smith trigger.

(Let's see... Mill away most of the frame leaving only a narrow surface for the hammer to bear upon and then mirror-polish that surface, a la a really good trigger job. I haven't taken a loupe to Manurhin lockwork, so I'll trust that in addition to the roller rebound slide that all mating surfaces already come with mirror bright finishes from the factory, although I am skeptical on that count.)

[larvatus]

Originally Posted by Tamara
So you're saying that the Manurhins I've tried were stuck with those triggers? Ah, well, at least it's better than being stuck with an out-of-the-box Smith trigger.

Have you tried adjusting spring tension?

[Jart]

It would perhaps be more accurate to describe the trigger of the 627PC as compared to my small S&W collection as "sucks less".

It sucks a great deal less than a 28-2 from, how did you put it, darkest 1977. It sucks a little less than a purportedly factory tuned Python and a couple of the Smiths that may have not been left totally unmolested by previous owners (though I believe they're stock). It sucks less than the balance in varying degrees.

Actually, I do have one 686 that's considerably nicer than the 627PC but I don't count it as it makes a mockery of "six of sure". It may or may not run 100% with handcrafted Federals but it won't light Fiocchi. I guess I'm going to have to include "too nice a trigger" in my evolving revolver check-out ritual.

Having come to revolvers from mutant 1911s I was appalled to discover I was expected to shoot these things DA. I'm adapting but the road has not been smooth and lined with buttercups.

[larvatus]

I tune my DA trigger pull for non-existent military .357 Magnum ammunition with hard primers. It yields peace of mind at the cost of extra finger strain.

[Jart]

Whoever did the deed to my 686 should be flogged. S&W doesn't sell strain screws for square butt frames anymore, Brownell's shows as discontinued and I didn't want to open an account at Numrich for a lousy screw.

I think the trigger is "smooth" but I couldn't swear to it - it's hard for me to discern "rough" when the strain screw's been filed. I'm hoping the strain screw was part of a decent trigger job but "hope" isn't the same as "expectation". My expectation is that it will hit'll a 4.5 out of 10 on the suck-o-meter once I replace the strain screw.

[larvatus]

Numrich will ship for a credit card payment. Make sure that you are buying original factory parts rather than aftermarket replicas.

[Tamara]

Originally Posted by larvatus

Have you tried adjusting spring tension?

Spring tension has less to do with an excellent DA trigger pull than most laymen would think, all other things being equal. I did mention a couple of things in my post that go into an intensive trigger job...

[Tamara]

Originally Posted by Jart

It sucks a great deal less than a 28-2 from, how did you put it, darkest 1977.

Why I love my '64 27-2. There's a lot to be said for pre-Bangor Punta Smiths.

[45_Shooter]

So you're saying that the Manurhins I've tried were stuck with those triggers? Ah, well, at least it's better than being stuck with an out-of-the-box Smith trigger.

By the diagram it looks like they're just a gussied-up S&W anyhow. Everyone knows that you need a V-Spring action to really get a smooth trigger pull

[larvatus]

Originally Posted by Tamara
Spring tension has less to do with an excellent DA trigger pull than most laymen would think, all other things being equal. I did mention a couple of things in my post that go into an intensive trigger job...

I read that statement as a backhanded admission of never having pulled the sideplate off an MR-73. The finish on bearing surfaces rivals that of the best Thirties' production S&W actions, and the steel is both harder and tougher.

[Jart]

(Let's see... Mill away most of the frame leaving only a narrow surface for the hammer to bear upon and then mirror-polish that surface, a la a really good trigger job. ...

Would that be an uptown version of what one might try with Power Custom sideplate shims?

I gave them a go on the problem child 28. The hammer was "scratched white" on one side and the trigger had similar issues. The flint axe you spoke of had removed anything resembling a boss and the washers seemed to do some good. Of course, now I have little parts falling out when I disassemble the thing but what the hey. Same theory? And if so, who does that sort of work (the right way, not the washer way)?

[Jart]

Why I love my '64 27-2. There's a lot to be said for pre-Bangor Punta Smiths.

Sure, rub it in.


Us Johnny-come-latelys took an interest after Hughes did horrible things to transferable pricing and the rest of you snatched up any reasonably priced S&Ws.

Bangor-Punta seems to have cut a wide swath across the 20th century and I'd guess 85% of the stuff I've found has come from those times. Fortunately, it doesn't all seem to be bad - it's rather like a box of chocolates.
I was needing an education in checking out revolvers anyway.

[Tamara]

Originally Posted by larvatus

I read that statement as a backhanded admission of never having pulled the sideplate off an MR-73.

Read it as you like. No, I've never done the pulling, but I've seen the results after the plate was pulled on a couple-three.

Originally Posted by larvatus

The finish on bearing surfaces rivals that of the best Thirties' production S&W actions, and the steel is both harder and tougher.

A poor standard for comparison. Both the finish and the total area of the bearing surface is important. Go to a PPC match and ask the winner for a peek under the sideplate of his sixgun.

Since you seem to know and I'm curious, what's the RC of the steel immediately surrounding the hammer stud on a '50s K-38 versus an MR-73?

[Tamara]

Originally Posted by Jart

And if so, who does that sort of work (the right way, not the washer way)?

I could throw out names like TJ or Ron Power, but the attendees of any local PPC, ICORE, or bowling pin match should be able to give you the name of a local guy who'll do 90% of the job for 50% of the price.

[larvatus]

Originally Posted by Tamara
Since you seem to know and I'm curious, what's the RC of the steel immediately surrounding the hammer stud on a '50s K-38 versus an MR-73?

I base my statement on observed and recorded differences in surface wear and action durability. If you can provide a '50s K-38 and access to a Rockwell hardness tester, I will supply an MR-73.

[Tamara]

As we're both aware, there's a tired old saw that avers "the plural of anecdote is not data".Given that both guns are constructed of 4140 ordnance steel and that heat-treating protocols have varied over the years with both firms, I'd wager that one could find as many differences between two identical models from the same firm as one could between two guns, one from each manufacturer. I must therefore conclude that there is no solid data to back your statement (which, again, may be true, for all I know.)

(Also know that, while I respect the MR revolvers as high-quality pieces of hardware, I am not given to believing brochurespeak, and my experiences with a sad string of various PP(x) pistols over the years have left Manufrance with feet of clay in my internal gunmaker's pantheon.)