Revolver Picture Thread

This is going to ride with me for a few days. 1973 Colt Cobra. Bobbed hammer and white sight insert. Comfortable way to carry six rounds.

739c2e14ec4454411e028d272e53dad7.jpg

303d980dc7d5c23fde0c6dfcc76dae50.jpg

eb02c548e67c9b623d7d11ac5ce2d432.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Those 2x2x2 pouches are just plain cool. I have one for hiking mounted to my pack.

Absolutely. I dislike heavy pockets and would have a hard time carrying a reload with my wallet, keys, and iPhone if it were not for the pouches. Here are some additional pictures for folks not familiar with the pouch. It folds and snaps around the belt. A quick pull exposes the rounds for a quick reload. For me, it is faster than the speed strip.

9b2508f0c1a862584864f95513eb0572.jpg

79974c9e63f172d6718caff895564c78.jpg

7eb254fe34402922d4035180469212fa.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
In my view, the Smith & Wesson 442 is one of the best all around CCW guns. It is lightweight (aluminum frame), reliable, and hold 5 rounds of .38 or .38+P (depending on "-" number). All can handle +P for carry.

The greater majority of 442 have blued carbon steel barrel and cylinder with matte black alloy frame. However, a few of the earliest "no dash" models had a matte nickel finish. These are made on the smaller original J frame (not J Magnum) and have forged internals. I found one [emoji4] ..... A matte nickel 442 (no dash) with matching box and docs. Here are some photos:

2bf4778321f6a855fd54b6307b067716.jpg

92ee9fa932b4c073b017688f50ba6484.jpg

aaeb922ae94473afd4ab06220a079beb.jpg


I've got a few others, all Models 442-2. One with the lock and two without. Swapped a titanium cylinder for the stock cylinder on one of them. It's the light gray cylinder. I'll never be without a 442.

3dc13be6890248a2d530f3cd05f35166.jpg

7d44b9e053a631b55114561ed2bb8198.jpg

48ee9261426494439ef07dab2d9220a0.jpg
 
Last edited:
Love 'em. I want a dark finish for carry. I don't want to beat up my M36
 
Love 'em. I want a dark finish for carry. I don't want to beat up my M36

442s are good like that. The one on the right, with the Barami Hip Grip, is about 12 years old. I've carried it a lot. In fact, it spends a lot of the summer tucked into my sweaty waistband without a holster (because of the grip). No rust on the barrel or cylinder.
 
It is lightweight (aluminum frame), reliable, and hold 5 rounds of .38 or .38+P (depending on "-" number). All can handle +P for carry.
Explain that sentence if you don't mind...

Looks like it says they may or may not be able to handle +P (depending on the dash model), but then says they can all handle it? The ammo obviously fits, so to say they call all handle +P for carry surely implies you'd fire it, not just carry it. :D

Thanks for any info!
 
Leave it to The Master to help me get a grip.
Thanks @Prosecutor!!!!!!!!! :D

IMG_5362.JPG

Before
IMG_5354.JPG
IMG_5360.JPG

After
IMG_5364.JPG
IMG_5367.JPG
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5362.JPG
    IMG_5362.JPG
    170.9 KB · Views: 8
  • IMG_5355.JPG
    IMG_5355.JPG
    148.8 KB · Views: 8
  • IMG_5360.JPG
    IMG_5360.JPG
    129 KB · Views: 6
  • IMG_5365.JPG
    IMG_5365.JPG
    166.7 KB · Views: 5
  • IMG_5367.JPG
    IMG_5367.JPG
    136.8 KB · Views: 5
Nuce! Or you could toughen up your hand some by going bare bones with that light weight S&W.

413451860.jpg

I prefer having soft, dainty hands so I can pretend to be a doctor. :cool:
 
The last thing that I need is another damned holster...but could not pass this up. Stopped by Cabelas in Fort Mill, SC today and saw this stitting in the "Gun Library" display case...a Simply Rugged Sourdough pancake holster with the Chesty Puller harness. It can be worn across the chest for or on the belt. A chest harness is useful when carrying a backpack with waist strap or stomping through wet swamps in Eastern NC bear country. I stole it at only $39.00. Looks new, to me.

Only one problem...it's built for a 4" N Frame. All of my Smith N Frames are 5"-6.5". This is a perfect excuse to buy a 4" Model 29 or 629. This 5" 629 pokes out just a little.

ff632ca387aae6c9b6324dbe5aabe930.jpg




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
You needed an excuse????? :confused:
 
Nothing new today...just what I'm carrying. Olivia's 2017 Colt Cobra. Cold and rainy today...perfect for something stainless.
She doesn't mind you borrowing it?
 
Well, it's sort of a trade off. I get to use her revolver right now and she can inherit all of mine later. Probably works out okay for her. :)
So, has Olivia signed off on this or is this merely speculation?
 
So, has Olivia signed off on this or is this merely speculation?

We discussed it. Also, because she's my kid, she knows that it's not cool to carry a new revolver. A good carry revolver is at least 20-40 years old. So, I'm just function checking and putting some scratches on it so that she can take over in 20 years and 4 months.
 
Last edited:
We discussed it. Also, because she's my kid, she knows that it's not cool to carry a new revolver. A good carry revolver is at least 20-40 years old. So, I'm just function checking and putting some scratches on it so that she can take over in 20 years and 4 months.
LOL She's a lucky young lady to inherit your stuff.
 
A pawn shop rescue (1950s C prefix pre Model 10) , and just one that I found interesting because of the serrations on the cylinder ( 1970s Taurus Model 80). The S&W suffers from some slight rust and a few pits but came cheap. I likem with character.
 

Attachments

  • 216178AB-C35E-4850-AB0F-D3134DA0B948.jpeg
    216178AB-C35E-4850-AB0F-D3134DA0B948.jpeg
    224.8 KB · Views: 27
  • E4F60945-6E92-4180-9101-2052FC78E2A5.jpeg
    E4F60945-6E92-4180-9101-2052FC78E2A5.jpeg
    200.6 KB · Views: 27
  • F7D1CC24-9AB8-4A86-84AD-41202DB264D8.jpeg
    F7D1CC24-9AB8-4A86-84AD-41202DB264D8.jpeg
    196.8 KB · Views: 27
I posted this gun a few months ago when it was new to me. It is a 2009 or so Smith & Wesson 40-1 from the "Classic" line. It is a blued carbon steel Centennial J Frame, chambered in .38+P, with a grip safety. The seller erroneously listed this online as a Model 42, the Model 40's aluminum framed "Airweight" relative. Glad it stayed with me...it is a GREAT carry gun.

I prefer older revolvers. Even joked recently in a thread that it's just not cool to carry a revolver that isn't at least 20 years old. But, it's true that modern production Smiths can be very nice. The fit and finish, particularly the bluing, on this 40-1 is excellent. It locks up rock solid and the trigger (MIM) is exceptional. I'd really like to pick up a nickel version of the same gun.

cff44d794baa0fd76eb0e6c9844e63c4.jpg
 
Last edited:
As you know, I'm a total newbie to revolvers. All I know is they have that spinny thing and no hole for a clip. :rolleyes:

Does the presence of that grip safety allow for a significantly lighter trigger pull?
 
Does the presence of that grip safety allow for a significantly lighter trigger pull?

Nope. It does not impact the trigger pull. Trigger has the same resistance because of the rebound spring / slide and hammer spring.
 
Thanks for that but I shoulda used the word "permit" rather than "allow for". What I was trying to say is that I have the impression many revolvers intended for pocket carry/high concealment have heavy triggers as something of a safety precaution. I often read of owners swapping out springs to lighten the trigger pull while preserving the firing reliability.

So, what I was trying to ask is whether that grip safety would make the owner more likely to tinker with the springs.

Hell, now that I read this, even I can't figure out what I'm trying to ask. I'm going back to bed!

As you were. :confused:
 
Prosecutor might be able to explain the history on the Centennials better then I. When Smith discontinued the old small frame breakopen lemon squeezers before WWII that left a gap in the lineup. Lemon squeezer referred to the grip safety. Smith came out with the Model 36 in the early 50s and the Models 40/42, all chambered in .38 Special. The 36 was a steel framed DA/SA gun, the 40/42 had the enclosed hammer and grip safety. The reason of the grip safety was Dan Wesson found that his grandson could fire the older DA breakopen, so he designed the grip safety as an additional safety feature (somewhere around 1890!). The grip safeties models made between 50-76' could be pinned back. Other was a white dot on the grip safety which lined up with a hole and you inserted the supplied pin to lock it back if you didn't want that feature. Wasn't put back on the latest Classic 40/42 series as on Prosecutor's 2009 made gun.
The humpback series (38/49) replaced the DAO Centennials in Smiths lineup for years but there's something simple about a small, snag free, DAO revolver. The 442/642 Airweight Centennials (minus grip safety) were introduced around 90/91' and are one of Smiths leading sellers.

CD
 
Thanks for that but I shoulda used the word "permit" rather than "allow for". What I was trying to say is that I have the impression many revolvers intended for pocket carry/high concealment have heavy triggers as something of a safety precaution. I often read of owners swapping out springs to lighten the trigger pull while preserving the firing reliability.

So, what I was trying to ask is whether that grip safety would make the owner more likely to tinker with the springs.

Hell, now that I read this, even I can't figure out what I'm trying to ask. I'm going back to bed!

As you were. :confused:

In my experience, the difference in pull between a stock J Frame trigger and one that's been lightened so much that it will not function properly isn't great. It's really just a few pounds. If a person, in view of the grip safety, aimed for an extraordinarily light trigger pull they would run into the "failed trigger" zone long before light trigger pull became a safety concern. That said, I've found the Wilson Combat and Apex J Frame spring kits to be reliable, even without an extended firing pin.

For those unfamiliar with J Frame revolver internals...you have two main springs, the "rebound spring" and the "hammer spring." The rebound spring is compressed straight back on trigger pull and it's primary function is to return the trigger to firing position. The hammer spring runs from the bottom of the grip frame up to the hammer and is compressed by the pulled trigger forcing the hammer backward.

A hammer spring of insufficient tension will not reliably drive the hammer nose / firing pin into the primer with sufficient force. You get light strikes. A rebound spring of insufficient strength will not reset the trigger fast enough. This might not be a problem until you need fast follow-up shots...but it will feel sloppy.

In my view, a double action revolver should not feel like a 1911. The greater majority of stock S&W or Colt triggers are just fine out of the box. Trigger pull on a snub nose revolver is more of an academic than practical concern anyway. 95% - 97% of my revolvers have either a stock trigger or one that's been slicked up the old fashioned way...shooting.
 
Last edited:
Look what just rolled into town from a seller in Bozeman, Montana.

It is a 1980 Smith & Wesson Model 10-8 with a 3" barrel. The 3" Model 10s are harder to find these days...getting sort of expensive as well. This is one of those impulse buys. Visited GB and apparently everyone was asleep at the wheel. It was going for a well below average price and had 1+ minute left on the auction. Logged-in just fast enough to put in a bid.

a10e57fdac5def5fd34e8835b570d3a3.jpg

db38101e4d9d04fa849c80ad85b60482.jpg

be24f2daa2813c4c5c10dbe84e20dbd6.jpg

218c8ea978d85a1800a0e61e6b4b1f36.jpg


Here it is with a few other blued 3" K Frames. Top to bottom: (1) 10-8, (2) 10-7, (3) 13-3, (4) 13-3

12b1b40d3ec808ac4c6422e09b0c5a36.jpg

c9a1995fc570830646b5575b46b46242.jpg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom