Ruger's don't come with S&W triggers, but if you don't mind stoning the contact parts, you can make them really really good.
Ruger's don't come with S&W triggers, but if you don't mind stoning the contact parts, you can make them really really good.
In reply to Rodan :
After looking into it more the 69 is a stronger, cheaper, easier to get 696 that also shoots magnums.
Seems like a better idea really
Some more historical trivia about the M27/M28, which were originally called the "357 Magnum" and "Highway Patrolman" (S&W didn't use model numbers until ~1957): S&W developed the .357 magnum cartridge in the 1930s due to the demand for a higher powered cartridge for law enforcement. In the early 1950s, the 357 Magnum was really the only gun available in the cartridge, but it was highly finished and expensive. S&W released the Highway Patrolman in 1954 due to demand for a less expensive variant for police use. It was essentially the same gun as the 357 Magnum, but without the fancy high polish blue and checkered top strap. At the time, there was a $35 difference in price between the two, which was about 2 days pay(!) for the average cop. The image below is from a later catalog (~1960), but prices were pretty stable through that period.
My Highway Patrolman was made in the first few months of production in 1954, and it's one of two S&Ws in my collection that were introduced to the market as "cop guns". The other is also from the first couple of months of production, but from 1917. It's a Regulation Police, in .38 S&W, on the much smaller, 5 shot 'I' frame.
It's very interesting to see the progression of what was considered necessary in law enforcement equipment in the 37 years span between these two revolvers. We think of the Law Enforcement 'arms race' as a modern thing, but it really isn't...
Speaking on .357, I have it in my head that I need 5" of barrel to give a reasonable chance of hitting anything. Is that true or would 3.5-4" be sufficient? It sure opens up a few options as for what to actually buy.
In reply to barefootcyborg5000 :
Nope.
I was recently shooting my 2.5" M19 and had no issues hitting torso sized steel at 50+ yards, double action. In the past, I used to shoot a 3" M65 at 100yds and hit reasonably sized targets. It mostly comes down to the shooter.
Barrel length mostly helps with accuracy in handguns due to the increased sight radius (distance between the front and rear sights). More sight radius promotes a more precise alignment, and better accuracy.
Barrel length also becomes important with magnum cartridges like 357 and 44 because of the slower burning powders used in magnum loads. A short barrel doesn't always provide enough time for the powder to burn fully and you will experience extreme muzzle blast and lower velocities. There are 'short barrel' loads available that use faster, low-flash powders to maximize performance out of shorter barrels.
It's really comes down to how you're going to use it. For a general carry gun, a 3-4" barrel is probably optimal. Down to 2.5-3" for concealed carry, and up to 6" for hunting or competition target shooting.
In reply to Rodan :
What I'm hearing is, "Average is between 4-6" and should work in most situations."
and I always tell folks I'd be perfectly average if I was 4'10".
4" is a pretty safe bet.
I'm kind of partial to 3" barrels in a K frame .357 myself because it's a really nice size to carry, concealed or otherwise. My two N frame .357s are 3.5" and 4".
6" guns can be a little awkward in a belt holster, but aren't bad in an old school vertical shoulder holster.
I always wanted a 2" .357. If I don't hit the intruder they'll be bind and deaf at least (I choose to ignore that I will be too)
In reply to bobzilla :
Having driven several snubby 357s, I can say I don't share the sentiment. "Rough" is the word that comes to mind.
barefootcyborg5000 said:Speaking on .357, I have it in my head that I need 5" of barrel to give a reasonable chance of hitting anything. Is that true or would 3.5-4" be sufficient? It sure opens up a few options as for what to actually buy.
Depends what you want to do with it. A 6 inch adds more velocity and a longer sight radius. In fact some of the Buffalo Bore heavy 357s can hit nearly 900ft lbs of energy in mine. 4 inch is perfectly fine and easier to pack though.
jharry3 said:On a S&W revolver the serial number is on the frame at the bottom of the grip.
In the case above you need to remove the wooden grips to see the serial number.
Does anyone have a firearm that zeroing is a PITA? My 365XL has been super sensitive to getting the zero set at distance.
I typically zero something by starting quite far back and see if I am on the paper. If I am I go from there. If not I then go to 25 yards for a rifle and 5 yards for a pistol and zero it there and then work my way out. For a rifle, I usually then go to the 50-yard or directly out to the 100 Yard. I zero all my rifles at 100 yards. Depending on the rifle anywhere from sub 2 MOA to sub 1 MOA makes me happy. At the moment I don't have a rifle that is greater than 2 MOA. Even my X95 which is considered acceptable as a 4 MOA gun can be sub 2 MOA if I am on a bench.
Pistols I do the same thing just moving back in 10-foot increments till I am 40 or sometimes 50 feet back. It is depending on the particular firearm. I use 4" round targets that I put on regular copier paper with 4 per sheet (that I made in AutoCAD). At 40-50 feet with a pistol I like consistent 4" groups of 10 shots (yes a flyer happens but I usually know it as soon as I fire. It is always either my grip or how my finger is on the trigger. I have big hands so on small pistols I really have to pay attention to this.
Anyway My 365 has just been a PITA the irons were way off. I purchased the slide separately so not unexpected. I put a Holosun HS507K-X2 red dot on it and finally figured out that at 5 yards my irons are about 8" low and 16" left. Dialed that in the red dot and then started backing up. What I found out is the 365XL is super sensitive to proper sighting the further back you go. At 20 feet I can be dead on but at 30 feet I am an inch to the left and at 40 feet I am 2 inches left and I have to then dial that in. Once it was dialed at 50 feet it is a tack driver at all distances but I have never had a pistol that was so sensitive to having the sights set up so perfect at distance. Usually, if I get it good at 15-20 feet I may have a very slight one at 40 or 50 feet. At the moment this is the shortest-barrel pistol I have. I typically use full-frame pistols so maybe that is why?
Anyway, I got it dialed in today and then sent another 100 through it. It is a really accurate pistol at 50 feet I was keeping 3-4" groups. That made me happy. But man was it ever sensitive to distance during the sighting process.
Anyone else have a particular firearm that just seems to not want to be sighted in?
yupididit said:
So, it's a Model 27. S/N dates it to 1983.
Have you told us what's all over it? Paint? You might try some careful cleaning with acetone. That usually won't damage the bluing, but may work on the paint. Brake cleaner is another option.
If you can clean it up, and it decent underneath, it's easily a $1k gun.
I need to check on a couple of the other stampings, it may have gone back to the factory for work at some point.
dean1484 said:Does anyone have a firearm that zeroing is a PITA? My 365XL has been super sensitive to getting the zero set at distance.
...
Anyway My 365 has just been a PITA the irons were way off. I purchased the slide separately so not unexpected. I put a Holosun HS507K-X2 red dot on it and finally figured out that at 5 yards my irons are about 8" low and 16" left. Dialed that in the red dot and then started backing up. What I found out is the 365XL is super sensitive to proper sighting the further back you go. At 20 feet I can be dead on but at 30 feet I am an inch to the left and at 40 feet I am 2 inches left and I have to then dial that in. Once it was dialed at 50 feet it is a tack driver at all distances but I have never had a pistol that was so sensitive to having the sights set up so perfect at distance. Usually, if I get it good at 15-20 feet I may have a very slight one at 40 or 50 feet. At the moment this is the shortest-barrel pistol I have. I typically use full-frame pistols so maybe that is why?
Being that far off at 5 yards, you should be able to easily see something physically wrong with the iron sights. On the 365XL, the rear sight is part of the piece that's removed when you mount the optic, so are you talking about the original Sig sights, or the 'built-in' rear sight on the 507K? The integral sight on the 507K is very low, so I could see that being a problem for elevation, but on mine it wasn't anywhere near that far off. An 8" windage problem usually means the front sight isn't centered in the dovetail, or the rear is significantly off center. That shouldn't be a problem with the 507K unless the slide was machined improperly. Is this a Sig slide, or something else?
FWIW I have 365XL, and 365X, both with 507Ks and neither was an issue to get zeroed. I usually start at 10yds, and final zero at 15yds. One thing that I have found students to have an issue with is the adjustments at close range. Even a 1 MOA 'click' is only 1/4" POI shift at 25 yards, so lots of clicks are required for big adjustments.
The smaller the gun, the harder it is to be consistent. At 10 yards, the gun is mechanically capable of cloverleafing the rounds, so to get a solid, precise zero you absolutely have to shoot off a rest. There was a time I could do it offhand, but now I use a rest to guarantee the results.
The 365XL is an amazing little gun, and shoots way better than it has a right to for its size. Running timed drills I can usually get within a close percentage of what I'm shooting with full-sized guns. I recently switched to a Wilson Combat grip module... still trying to decide if I love it or not.
It sure looks like there's something on it. The exterior surface should be polished smooth and it looks like some kind of liquid has dried on it. Try a little acetone on a couple spots and see what happens.
In reply to Rodan :
It's an easy hole to fall into, even for broke folks like me. I hate running my 308 back to back with my 556. I spent a bunch more building the 556, and the PSA 308 just feels clunky and cheap in comparison. So of course I priced all the hardware to make things comparable, despite the fact that the PSA is a sub-MOA weapon as-is. Still, a trigger, grip, and stock would make it a much nicer piece...
I'm not a 'gadget guy', and like to keep my ARs simple, but still end up spending $$ to get them 'right'. LOL
A 308 AR is never going run n' gun like a 5.56.... just too big, and too much reciprocating mass. The new Ruger SFAR might be an exception... haven't had a chance to shoot one yet.
I've been working with a Sig 716i for a couple months, and getting it dialed in ergonomically has been a process. I think it should be better than 1.5 MOA, but haven't got it there... yet.
My AR with the Radical upper with the 20" ss barrel is amazingly accurate. Added a 1-6 LPVO to it and it is a fun distance shooter.
In reply to Rodan :
The upper was purchased separately so there is no telling if the irons were ever made even close. I agree that it is a really great pistol. Once I got it zeroed it is 2-3 inch groups all day long at 40 feet. It is very sensitive to proper grip and trigger pull but that is user error and the old problem of big hands on a smaller pistol. I really like it.
You'll need to log in to post.