BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

Keyser Söze

On 1/14/16 3:59 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 14:04:21 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

I've always liked revolvers. A few years ago, I bought a new Ruger
GP100, a stainless steel six shooter in .357/.38 Special, with a six
inch barrel. Great shooter, very nicely made, but for reasons I could
never discern, I never could balance it properly when shooting off-hand
without working at it.

The reason *may* have been the barrel was just too long for me to shoot
the way I wanted. In any event, I sold that revolver to a federal law
enforcement guy, and got a S&W 686 with a 4" barrel. That revolver
weighs about the same as the Ruger, but for me it balances better.

I don't see any qualitative differences between the two revolvers.
They're both well-made. The single action pull on the S&W is the best
I've encountered on a full-size, "heavy" ammo revolver, a tad better
than the pull on the Ruger. Double action isn't bad, either.

I don't really have that much experience with revolvers but I do like
my old Colt OM Match. It is basically like the "trooper" 357 I have
but it has the bull barrel. I assume you would not like the balance.
It is 40oz or so empty and a lot of it is out front. That does make
muzzle flip pretty much non existent with wad cutters over 2.5 gr of
Bullseye.
My other 3 revolvers are 2 antique Saturday night specials and a Colt
Frontier scout (.22 rf version of the SA Army)

The S&W I now have has a bull barrel and full underlug, but as it is 2"
shorter than the Ruger, the balance is more to my liking.

I had a nice Ruger six shooter in .22 LR/.22MAG for a while, and it shot
nicely but I didn't much like emptying out the "empties" one at a time
with the plunger. If I were in the market for a .22 revolver, I'd get a
double action model with the hinged cylinder.