TargetTalk

All,

Given advances in manufacturing, is a modern gun, eg,Taurus 94, 22 caliber revolver as good a target gun as a K 17, Colt Officers 22, etc?

Is there a performance advantage that makes it worth searching out an old piece?

Are new S & W 22's as good as the older models? Are the new S & W so much better than the Taurus as to be worth twice the price as they seem to be?

TIA

xeye wrote:Are new S & W 22's as good as the older models?

I'm not qualified to make cross-generational comparisons. I can, however, add one data point.

About 6 months ago, I saw a brand new S&W "Classic" Model 18 in the dealers case. It's a nice revolver. See: http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/ ... rrorView_Y

I bought it and shot it nearly every day for a while. About 2000 rounds in, it started to spit. It has about 5000 rounds through it now and it spits enough lead out the side to impact the booth walls and bounce the lead shavings back painfully striking my arm with nearly every shot. I've just about decided to retire it.

I don't know whether older revolvers are any better. I do know that if I ever get serious about shooting a rimfire revolver I'll spend the money to get the finest-fitted revolver ever made, a Freedom Arms. However, as this page shows, it'll take quite a bit of dedication on my part: http://freedomarms.com/m83r.htm

BenEnglishTX wrote:

xeye wrote:Are new S & W 22's as good as the older models?

I'm not qualified to make cross-generational comparisons. I can, however, add one data point.

About 6 months ago, I saw a brand new S&W "Classic" Model 18 in the dealers case. It's a nice revolver. See: http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/ ... rrorView_Y

I bought it and shot it nearly every day for a while. About 2000 rounds in, it started to spit. It has about 5000 rounds through it now and it spits enough lead out the side to impact the booth walls and bounce the lead shavings back painfully striking my arm with nearly every shot. I've just about decided to retire it.

I don't know whether older revolvers are any better. I do know that if I ever get serious about shooting a rimfire revolver I'll spend the money to get the finest-fitted revolver ever made, a Freedom Arms. However, as this page shows, it'll take quite a bit of dedication on my part: http://freedomarms.com/m83r.htm

Did you call S & W repair? They claim to warranty lifetime after 1980 or so. (I sent them a 1976)

xeye wrote:Did you call S & W repair? They claim to warranty lifetime after 1980 or so. (I sent them a 1976)

I suppose I will, eventually. Shipping guns for repair is a pain, so I've been putting it off.

BenEnglishTX wrote:

xeye wrote:Did you call S & W repair? They claim to warranty lifetime after 1980 or so. (I sent them a 1976)

I suppose I will, eventually. Shipping guns for repair is a pain, so I've been putting it off.

It was actually pretty easy. They told me exactly how to do it. I walked into Fedex, said what they said to say, done.

Although, I don't remember the specific instructions.


I guess, one would have to say that their current stuff is not good considering your experience.

Merry Christmas to all

xeye wrote:I guess, one would have to say that their current stuff is not good considering your experience.

One data point is not enough to make a judgment.

My experiences, particularly, are not worth listening to; pretty much every gun I acquire manages to break in some manner either highly unlikely or previously unheard of.

According to a S&W rep I spoke with once told me that all revolvers require hand fitting. That is going to be a factor in the cost - I would guess that is a big part of the difference in cost between S&W and Taurus.

BenEnglishTX: You should have sent it back to Smith when it started shaving lead, if only out of regard for anyone standing nearby; once a gun starts to malfunction, there is no way to know when that is going to become seriously dangerous. Frankly, I would classify bits of lead striking my arm as already in the "seriously dangerous" category.

Oh, and if you want the "best of the best" wheelguns, you might want to start saving your pennies for a Korth:

http://www.kitsune.addr.com/Firearms/Re ... volver.htm

BTW, I have a S&W M35 Kit Gun, 4" barrel, which I've been plinking with since it was new and it still locks up in battery as tightly as any revolver I've ever handled. I know, it's "only one data point", but that's enough to keep me happy.

Roger

RandomShotz wrote:You should have sent it back to Smith when it started shaving lead, if only out of regard for anyone standing nearby; once a gun starts to malfunction, there is no way to know when that is going to become seriously dangerous. Frankly, I would classify bits of lead striking my arm as already in the "seriously dangerous" category.

I guess it's a matter of perspective. My first experience with pistol competition was big-bore silhouette, over 30 years ago. At that time, M29 S&Ws were commonly used and just as commonly worn out quite quickly. They couldn't stand up to high-volume diets of full-house, heavy-bullets loads. Those of us who were shooting in those days just took it as normal that revolvers would start to shave lead after a while. I shot from rollover prone where the left arm, for a righthanded shooter, is directly to the left of the revolver. I used to get my M29 rebuilt when blood was running off my left forearm after a match. The wealthy shooters of the day kept at least 3 M29s in rotation - one to shoot, one being repaired, and one spare.

Given that I currently shoot at indoor ranges where my lead shavings hurt no one but me and have yet to draw blood, it hadn't yet occurred to me that the revolver truly needed service. :-)

RandomShotz wrote:Oh, and if you want the "best of the best" wheelguns, you might want to start saving your pennies for a Korth:

http://www.kitsune.addr.com/Firearms/Re ... volver.htm

I've handled a Korth before and was quite impressed. The FA revolvers, though, are a completely known quantity for me. A run-of-the-mill FA will shoot 3MOA, a good one will do much better, and it's not unusual for serious competitors to return them to the factory if they do any worse. Furthermore, they'll hold that accuracy over thousands of full-house rounds.

I feel sure the Korth could be as accurate but would it hold up as well? I don't know. I don't have the unlimited funds it would take to do the testing. The best medium frame DA revolver I've ever owned is my Dan Wesson and I doubt I'll ever become sufficiently dissatisfied with it that I seek out a Korth.

RandomShotz wrote:BTW, I have a S&W M35 Kit Gun, 4" barrel, which I've been plinking with since it was new and it still locks up in battery as tightly as any revolver I've ever handled. I know, it's "only one data point", but that's enough to keep me happy.

I hear you. I have a 3-inch J frame in .38 with adjustable sights, a M10 rebuilt as a PPC pistol, and a stock single-action M14. All are wonderfully accurate, shave no lead, and have stood up, collectively, to decades of use and thousands of rounds without a hint of a problem. Smiths, even fairly new ones, can be great revolvers. I just find that to be the exception rather than the rule. Over the years, I've bought and then (with full disclosure of any problems) cheaply sold or given away more S&W revolvers than I've hung onto.

Freedom Arms line bores their cylinder holes, so their will be no spitting of lead. Their actions are the next best thing to bank vaults made from steel bars. There are no castings or cut corners.
The old Smiths were hand fitted with fine steel and unless they were severely beaten up, they were very accurate. I don't buy any new guns unless they are Walther's or Feinwerkbau's, ect. You really have to pay out the nose for fine accuracy today. I wouldn't pass up a little used Smith or a Hamden High Standard Victor, made in the 50's and 60's. They are the best bargain on the market today.
Chris

BenEnglishTX wrote:

xeye wrote:Are new S & W 22's as good as the older models?

I'm not qualified to make cross-generational comparisons. I can, however, add one data point.

About 6 months ago, I saw a brand new S&W "Classic" Model 18 in the dealers case. It's a nice revolver. See: http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/ ... rrorView_Y

I bought it and shot it nearly every day for a while. About 2000 rounds in, it started to spit. It has about 5000 rounds through it now and it spits enough lead out the side to impact the booth walls and bounce the lead shavings back painfully striking my arm with nearly every shot. I've just about decided to retire it.

I don't know whether older revolvers are any better. I do know that if I ever get serious about shooting a rimfire revolver I'll spend the money to get the finest-fitted revolver ever made, a Freedom Arms. However, as this page shows, it'll take quite a bit of dedication on my part: http://freedomarms.com/m83r.htm

Is it not simply a leaded forcing cone?

If you want a (.32) revolver which cannot shave lead buy a Nagant or Toz.

JamesH wrote:Is it not simply a leaded forcing cone?

Perhaps. I doubt it since I run a brush through all chambers and the bore, including paying attention to the forcing cone, after every shooting session. That's usually enough to keep ahead of forcing cone leading.

Still, it's worth checking. I'll hit it tomorrow and shoot it next week. If that fixes it, I'll be surprised but, either way, I'll report the results here.

Brushing won't typically take lead out of a forcing cone, any machining marks are typically circumferential (as opposed to longitudinal as in the rifling) and a brush will not prize any lead out.

I've not seen a gadget for removing lead from a .22 revolver forcing cone.

JamesH wrote:Brushing won't typically take lead out of a forcing cone, any machining marks are typically circumferential (as opposed to longitudinal as in the rifling) and a brush will not prize any lead out.

I've not seen a gadget for removing lead from a .22 revolver forcing cone.

so, how do you get it out. Or do you throw a pistol away after 2K rounds?

I've used this on barrel leading a long time ago. (At least, I think it was leading - there were streaks in the bore that were not coming clean with conventional brushing and Hoppe's #9.) I don't see why it wouldn't work on a forcing cone with a little effort:

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/623952 ... ning-cloth

(I'm not pimping for Midway - it was just the first link that came up via Google)

Google also found these home-made remedies, but I've never tried them:

http://www.frfrogspad.com/homemade.htm#Lead

xeye wrote:so, how do you get it out. Or do you throw a pistol away after 2K rounds?

Oh, and if anyone is willing to throw away a .22 pistol after 2K rounds, even a S&W, let me know - I think we can work something out.

Roger

xeye wrote:so, how do you get it out. Or do you throw a pistol away after 2K rounds?

I've seen dozens (hundreds?) of procedures, most of which involve wrapping something around a brush and just brushing more. Some techniques seem to rely on voodoo. If you want to toss a conversational bomb into a group of old-timer sixgunners, just ask how to get the lead out of a revolver that's giving you problems. Suggest that you've heard firing a few jacketed bullets at the end of each practice session will cure the problem. Stand back and watch the sparks fly.

Given that this is a contentious question among some groups, I won't try to make authoritative pronouncements.

What I will say is that the Lewis Lead Remover has had a good reputation for decades. See: http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/pid=2158 ... AD-REMOVER

In this context, though, the problem is that the Lewis tool is for .32 caliber and larger. As James H notes, there's no gadget (of which I'm aware) specifically targeted for leading removal for .22 revolvers.

Most discussions of forcing cone leading in .22 revolvers tend to hit a few basic themes:

1. It doesn't exist. It's just carbon build up and you can get rid of it with a nylon brush (like a toothbrush) and your favorite cleaning fluid.

2. It mostly doesn't exist and if you'll just dry-brush the bore and cylinders occasionally there will never be a problem.

3. It does exist but it's no big deal. Just use of brass bore brush, perhaps with some added brass or steel wool strands, and run it in and out over the forcing cone.

4. It does exist and you can mimic the action of the Lewis Lead Remover by inserting a slightly oversize bronze bore brush (say, something intended for a 5.56 rifle) using a rod and handle combination that does not have a free-rotating handle. Get the brush to the forcing cone, then twist the rod to brush the forcing cone circumferentially. Feel free to add whatever magical cleaning potions work best for you and whatever phase of the moon is current.

5. It exists, is normal, and you just clean normally, occasionally using Kleen-Bore patches that are specially treated to remove lead. See: http://www.midwayusa.com/product/210159 ... ng-patches

6. Use a dental pick.

Personally, I stick with #2 in most cases. I tend to think that's why Lewis doesn't make a .22 version. This time, though, I'm going to do #1 with some extra care; it's part of my cleaning routine, anyway. Then I'll try #4 to see if it helps this particular revolver. I'm going to be very careful to rest the oversize brush against the forcing cone without entering the bore, though. The thought of spinning an oversize brass brush inside the bore, against the rifling, makes me less than comfortable.

And I try not to buy revolvers from anyone who subscribes to #6. :-)