EAA Windicator


PDA






SIGfiend
April 15, 2005, 02:07 AM
Anyone own one or know of them? Let us hear it.

Also, does anyone know what these features mean exactly?

http://www.eaacorp.com/handguns-witness-revolvers-windicator-description.html

(1) "Floating firing pin" -What's that do differently from a fixed firing pin?

(2) "Heavy duty crane" -What's a crane???

(3) "Steel firing train" -Don't most guns on the market have this? If not what metal do they use?

If you enjoyed reading about "EAA Windicator" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
tbeb
April 15, 2005, 12:51 PM
I've never owned one. I've heard double action trigger pull is heavy, and one shouldn't fire much .357 magnum ammo (if revolver is that caliber). You can do a "search" in the revolver forum and hear what owner's have to say. I'm sure some will reply here too.

A floating firing pin is in the frame. Hammer strikes firing pin and firing pin strikes cartridge primer. A fixed firing pin is attached to the hammer. The crane is the part between the frame and cylinder. I have never heard of a "firing train".

Standing Wolf
April 15, 2005, 09:03 PM
I just looked at the page. It's apparent some marketing individual who's not knowledgeable about revolvers was tasked with concocting bullet points. If I were to come up with:

• Latest curved trigger technology
• Round cylinder with fully machined flutes
• Integral grip frame for extra strength
• Adjustable rear sight
• Easy thumb-operated cylinder release

you'd have to figure me for being awfully clueless.

SIGfiend
April 18, 2005, 03:28 AM
This gun isn't considered a Saturday Night Special is it? At the low price point I question it, but on the other hand it is German made and them churning out junk doesn't sound like the German work ethic/pride in quality the world knows.

Ash
April 18, 2005, 05:55 PM
Oh, but the Germans have indeed put out unmitigated crap in the past. Almost any .22 SAA out of Germany in the 1950's and 60's is crap. Also, keep in mind that RG is Rhome, out of Germany, and none of their revolvers were worth much more than use as fishing weights. Indeed, most of the zinc-framed revolvers, most of the Saturday Night Specials, were German made. The Windicators are made by the same company that used to make Arminius revolvers (Weirarch, post war). They are certainly not of the same quality as Sauers or Walthers. I would rate them as the same quality as a Rossi or Charter Arms revolver, not a Ruger or S&W.

Ash

unspellable
April 18, 2005, 06:09 PM
I'll say that Rossi beats out the Windicator for overall design and quality of manufacture.

The Windicator looks functional, but also looks clunky and the finish is not as good as Rossi's.

BTW: The name "Windicator" is a bit of PC. It was originally called the "Vindicator" and then the name was changed to "Windicator". I forget the details, but it was for reasons of political correctness.

Years ago we had an RG in 22 LR. It went bang on cue. It never blew up. Given the price, I don't know that you are entitled to ask much more than that. On the other hand, I've heard stories about RG's that didn't go bang on cue, or even went KB, so maybe we were lucky.

Guess I'd have to the say the Windicator is a better piece than the old RG.

We are doing comparetive road tests on junk! The Rossi is the only one here that barely makes it out of the junk category.

SIGfiend
April 18, 2005, 08:17 PM
I always knew there was a hidden connotation behind the windicator's name. The fact it sounds too similar to a real word is evidence enough.

The gun is really made by Weihrauch--which we should be calling it instead.

Weihrauch also manufactures pellet rifles that are world-class, so it'd seem atypical of them to make junk real guns and excellent pellet guns. :confused:

Standing Wolf
April 18, 2005, 08:52 PM
...on the other hand it is German made and them churning out junk doesn't sound like the German work ethic/pride in quality the world knows.

Trabant.

mountaindrew
April 18, 2005, 08:59 PM
I just bought a windicator in .357 and it seems to be perfectly functional to me. I shot several cylenders of .357s and about 50 rd of .38 special, and it was very acurate. The gun is clunky and heavy, however the grip is very ergonomic, especialy for those with small hands. I t is really not any heavier than a comparable size k-frame 2 inch or a security six 2.5 inch at about 30oz. The trigger is a little heavy, but not unbearably so. I think I got a great deal for $130 (used)

SIGfiend
April 19, 2005, 03:58 AM
Okay so why are these things so low-priced...

unspellable
April 19, 2005, 07:34 AM
I said the Windicator was better than the RG.

Ash
April 19, 2005, 08:34 AM
As I said, they are comparible to the Charter Arms offerings (in addition to Rossi, but I don't know Rossi's that much). Why they are so cheap...perhaps it is that SIG's and H&K's are so expensive. If the Germans can make a plain-jane basic but otherwise serviceable revolver...

Of course, why are Witnesses so cheap, comparibly, when they are such a good design? Perhaps it lies in the finishing of the Windicator, the over all tolerences of the revolver, or just that the mark-up is so low because there is not the slavish following other brands might have. There is almost no advertising for the Windicator, and it is under the EAA umbrella, not Weihrauch or Tanfoglio (or Baikal last year).

Ash

unspellable
April 19, 2005, 10:19 AM
Contributing factors in low cost:

The Rossi has a better design and better finish than the other three, but has the advantage of low cost labor in Brazil. I'd nominate it as the best of the four. In fact it's good enough to just make it up out of the junk category.

The Charter Arms has a rather simple design for a revolver with fewer manufacturing operations than most, the finish is Plain Jane. Servicable. I'd nominate it as second best of the four.

The Windicator is also a rather simple design for a revolver with fewer manufacturing operations than most, the finish, if it can be said to have one, is a quick and dirty job. Servicable. I'd nominate it as third best of the four.

The RG's are just plain junk, using pot metal castings for some of the parts and minimal fitting. Not really servicable. I'd nominate it for fifth place out of the four.

SIGfiend
April 21, 2005, 01:07 AM
why are other people mentioning other brands??? im only talking about the windicator here!

by looking at weihrauch's other offerings, it makes me wonder how it can be poorly made:

http://www.weihrauch-sport.de/englisch/e_startseite/e_index.htm

i mean look at the quality of the airguns they sell, theyre rather top of the line. ill be darned if their airguns are better than their real guns

coltrane679
April 21, 2005, 02:07 AM
Perhaps it's just me, but this REALLY turns me off:

"Note: (*) Alloy model cannot be sold in SC, WI, Il or other states or cities with frame melt point laws."

http://www.eaacorp.com/handguns-witness-revolvers-windicator-TP.html

I'll take a used Ruger, please.

Ash
April 21, 2005, 09:21 AM
If Rhome came out with a modern revolver, one that was good quality, one would still suspect because of the crap they used to make. Arminius wasn't as bad as some, but they were not high quality (talking about post war Arminius). Weihrauch made some real low-brow products in the past. Just because Daewoo makes good rifles, does that mean their cars are good? Or, with Yugo's history, would you buy a new one?

Yet, that said, the Windicator is not a bad revolver. It is not in the class of RG, the earlier Arminius products, Clerkes, or akin to Jennings/Lorcin/Davis/etc. The Windicator is a plane-jane basic revolver without any frills and with at best, moderate fit and finish. Guntests trashed it pretty bad (but Guntests is not scientific at all and their conclusions are nothing more than anecdotal). The alloy frame revolvers are zinc with a low melting point (just like the old Saturday Night Specials, which is why the laws ban them). Any company that makes a zinc revolver is already dancing with the devil. In any case, the steel-framed ones are not bad. They're just not great. They are not to the revolver world that Walther or Sauer is to the auto world. If it were an auto, the Windicator would be a Llama (which is a darn sight better than Lorcin).

Ash

mfree
April 21, 2005, 10:21 AM
"Just because Daewoo makes good rifles, does that mean their cars are good?"

Mine was excellent, till I tried to knock over the center divider on I-40 with it :)

unspellable
April 21, 2005, 12:27 PM
I have owned two or three Llamas, still have one. They all worked well, no problems. Finish better than a Windicator.

I had an AMT, it was a jammomatic.

I had another supposedly quality pocket piece like the AMT, it was not as bad as the AMT, but still jammed pretty regular.

I would rate Llamas as clearly of better quality than a Windicator.

The AMT and the whazzit had better finish than a Windicator but they wouldn't go bang when they were supposed to. From what I've heard the Windicator will at least go bang.

(Reminds me of an old story about a Purdey that wouldn't go bang.)

Ash
April 21, 2005, 02:15 PM
My Llama IX-III was reliable but not accurate at all. Finish wasn't too good (some kind of black phosphate) and machinging was crude. Based on my experience, I would indeed rate the Windicator alongside the Llama. Others have different experiences but this is mine.

Ash

SIGfiend
April 22, 2005, 01:12 AM
"Any company that makes a zinc revolver is already dancing with the devil."

Why?

Ash
April 22, 2005, 09:04 AM
My point there is that the once racist-termed-but-not-in-this-case Saturday Night Specials, the cheap, poor quality revolvers made in the 1950's, 60's and 70's were zinc-framed. Just like Lorcin, Jennings, Raven, Davis, and now Cobra autos, which are crap (and perhaps the ultimate evolution of the SNS, considering they are the pistols most used in urban crime), the earlier revolvers were, well, crap and any company that produced a revolver with a zinc frame, even if the revolver weren't terribly bad (no zinc revolver is good), is keeping one foot in the dark side of the force.

Put it another way, the aforementioned Lorcins et al. are crap, which we all know (for this discussion, anything made by Haskel, Hi-Point, Beemiller, etc are ignored), are all single action, striker-fired, blow-back operated, zinc framed automatics. Now, if SIG or H&K, or Glock came out with a zinc-framed, single action, striker-fired blowback, they would be producing something in the same class as a Lorcin or Bryco. Now, arguably, a SIG made pistol of Lorcin design would be better made. Conversely, a 220 design made by Lorcin would be poorly made. Yet, if SIG were to make said zinc auto, they would be "Dancing with the devil" in that they would be making an auto of the same overall construction as the modern day SNS.

SIG would not think of making a zinc auto. They use aluminum alloys, which are much, much better than zinc, but also much more expensive to machine. There is just about no machining in a zinc auto, their frames, slides, grip serations, indeed most features are not machined but cast in that configuration already (which is why zinc autos are so cheap). Any company that did resort to a zinc-framed auto would already be admitting that they are willing to produce something in the same class as the SNS.

By the way, zinc has such a low melting point, you can melt it with a common blow torch. If you doubt me, take any modern penny, put it on a hunk of steel such as a vice, and apply heat. They melt quickly because they are mostly zinc. You could take a Jennings and try the same experiment, but a penny is cheaper than $45.

That Weihrauch is willing to produce a zinc-framed revolver, which is exactly what the old SNS was, then they are "Dancing with the devil" of the Saturday Night Special. They might not be in bed with him, the way RG, Rhome, (and even Weirarch was with some of their Arminius revolvers, many of which were indeed zinc SNS's) were, or Lorcin, Jennings, Davis, Ravin, Corbra, and the like were and are still today. Yet, they have their foot in that cauldron of zinc that they pour to make some revolvers.



As such, they dance, man they dance.

Ash

Onmilo
April 22, 2005, 09:30 AM
Weihrauch is a pieces parts manufacturer.
They produce, among other things, very high quality small caliber hunting and sport shooting rifles marketed mainly in Germany and France.
They also continue to produce a low cost line of 'servicable' handguns.
These handguns tend to turn up, in one form or another, in all countries that still allow the private possession of handguns.
Perhaps there are some here old enough to remember the old 'Arminius' and 'Herters' lines of revolvers, same manufacturer.
The handguns they produce are 'servicable', some even good enough to be used in informal sport shooting events, but the quality is no where near the same league as the top American and Brazilian manufacturers.

They gun will serve you well enough until you can save up and buy something better.

Ash
April 22, 2005, 09:35 AM
Another way to look at it is that Weihrauch, in producing steel Windicators, is redeming themselves from their SNS past. For example, Robert Byrd of West Virginia was once a member of the KKK. Now, he gets re-elected over and over again, odd since he was indeed a Klansman, even odder being a Democrat (not really, as they are the epitome of hypocracy, but I digress), but he does because he claims it was all a youthful mistake, the results of peer pressure, and that he never was nor is today a racist. It is up to you to ponder whether or not he is a liar. Bob Byrd was once in bed with the devil as a Klansman. He got out and now claims to be reformed. Now, lets just pretend RG, Clerke, etc were the Klan (no, not really, I know, but just humor me). When Weihrauch abandoned the Arminius brand, many of which were indeed SNS's (some were not, to be true), they took off their hoods.

But, they still produce some zinc framed revolvers. That means that while they don't pay their Klan dues, don't show up for rallies, don't wear their white hoods, don't burn crosses, they still do some Klan-like things. Bob Byrd might still tell an off-color joke about ethnic minorities (only in private, of course). He might not be in the Klan, but in uttering such a joke, he would still be keepping one foot in his past. In truth, I cannot say if Democrat Byrd is anyway keeping his roots as a member of a violent racist organization(according to many, a leapard cannot change his spots, but who am I to say). He might be truly reformed. There are those who believe that George Wallace was repentent as well. In the same vein, the Windicator might be completely shed of its SNS past relatives. Yet, in having a zinc-framed brother, it still keeps that hood around somewhere.

Now, before anybody gets their panties in a wad, the above example is just that, an example with no basis in fact. I do not claim that Weihrauch is a supporter of the KKK, the Nazi party, or any racist group. I do not say that any of the SNS manufacturers were in any way racist or part of any such group. I only admit that Robert Byrd was once a member of the KKK, by his own admission. I do not even claim that SNS's were or are in any way as bad as such groups (even if gun banners want to associate all firearms with such groups). But, just as the KKK in modern guise is, well, crap, SNS's and most firearms made from zinc are crap, even if their smell is different.

And any member of the Klan can still be a bank president or senator. They can still do good things. Ford did make the Pinto, Chevy did make the Monza, VW did make the Rabbit Diseal.

Ash

Ash
April 22, 2005, 09:37 AM
Now, Arminius revolvers made prior to WWII were NOT made by Weihrauch and are of a different quality. It would be as if Walther failed as a company and Lorcin started producing their pistols under the Walther name.

Ash

unspellable
April 22, 2005, 01:01 PM
All of the Herter's revolvers I've seen were made by Saur. Saur did not have the reputation of making the best revolvers around but they weren't all that bad either, sort of middle of the pack.

SIGfiend
April 22, 2005, 03:56 PM
Can Walther revolvers still be bought?

SIGfiend
April 22, 2005, 10:44 PM
I got the chance to see one in person and it was pretty darn nice. Fixed sights that are virtually impossible to break (the ones on my smith broke from a short drop).

only thing I didn't like was the tough cylinder release switch and the heavy weight.

my metallurgy isnt too good, does anyone know which is heavier, zinc or steel?

Onmilo
April 23, 2005, 12:42 PM
Freidrich Pickert of the Zella-Mehlis region used the Arminius trade name until 1940 if anybody needs clarification on that matter.
Walther had absolutely no connection with him.

Sauer and Sohn has not used the Herters trade name for any product they have marketed.
None that I am aware of or have ever handled anyway.
Herters was a large trading firm however, it wouldn't be beneath them to market a revolver such as the Rohm RG with a mispelled and surious 'Saur' trade name stamped on the gun along with or including a Herters stamp mark.
Herters did in fact import and market Weihrauch revolvers with the Herters name stamped on them and examples can still be found.
Picture reference can be made in pre 1970 Gun Digest catalog sections. HTH

I'm not trying to slap down Weihrauch products, the company makes some high quality stuff.
Check out the HW-9 .22 lr Sport Revolver line if you happen too come across one.

unspellable
April 23, 2005, 02:01 PM
For a number of years Herter's sold single action revolvers chambered in 357 magnum, 44 magnum, and the 401 Power Mag. They had Herter's name on them. In 40 years I have never heard their manufacture credited to any one other than Saur. These were more or less similar to a Ruger Blackhawk and were of decent quaility. At least they were all steel.

Did Herter's ever pedal a double action revolver?

Iron or steel are heavier than zinc. The revolver parts mentioned here were probably cast from a pot pot metal. The pot metals are a category of alloys that are relatively easy to cast and take the mold well. They have fairly low melting points, a desireable feature for easy casting. many, but not all, of these alloys contain zinc. Usuall the main constituent is either zinc or aluminum. Tin, copper, & lead may be among the metals alloyed with the main one. Pot metels generally tend to be lighter than steel.

SIGfiend
April 23, 2005, 06:59 PM
:confused:Wouldn't this be a health hazard unless you washed your hands after touching it?

unspellable
April 24, 2005, 01:36 PM
I don't think you would pick up much lead from handling a pot metal object with a small amount of lead in it. I don't think most pot metals contain a very high percentage of lead.

I would suppose that in this day of political correctness, pot metals containg lead, no matter how little, have been banned.

It should be noted that kitchen faucets are usually made out of a pot metal. I've seen warnings saying that for the first use of the day you should run enough water to flush the faucet out before taking any as drinking water as the water standing in the faucet over night will leach lead out of it. I very much doubt that they deliberatly put lead in the alloy, it must be a small trace as an impurity.

Onmilo
April 25, 2005, 09:22 AM
Speaking of Walther revolvers,,,,Walther does indeed offer a revolver on the European market.

The handgun is actually made by Smith and Wesson and is basically a 3" or 4" Model 66. These are being phased out and a new offering of the 7 shot 686 L frame will or has been introduced.

These guns are marked as Walther but actually made by S&W.

SIGfiend
April 25, 2005, 09:41 PM
So is the Windicator a Saturday Night Special?

SIGfiend
April 27, 2005, 01:47 AM
So is the Windicator a Saturday Night Special?

Ash
April 28, 2005, 04:36 PM
No. The Windicator is better than a SNS (at least the steel-framed ones are). I would have no problem owning one, personally. I wouldn't get a zinc-framed one because it too closely related to SNS's. But a good old steel-framed Windicator, while incapable of winning any beauty pagents, would still make a good revolver for the price.

Ash

Shear_stress
April 28, 2005, 07:03 PM
Hi SIGfiend.

See my post in "Handgun: General Discussion" about the approval status of the Windicator in California. Long story short: it's approved, City-Arms in Pacifica has one, and you can find out more on the California DOJ website:

http://justice.doj.ca.gov/safeguns/safeguns_new.taf

Hope that helps.

SIGfiend
April 28, 2005, 10:06 PM
Shear - thanks buddy. its a shame though that only the .38 caliber snub is allowed here and not the other 3 models. :(

Ash - if you look on that same DOJ link Shear provided it says that the alloy ones also contain steel: 'Windicator/EAR38B2 / Steel, Alloy' So does it still contain Zinc? And even if it does, doesn't the steel in there make up for it? :confused:

gvass
April 29, 2005, 03:51 AM
Hi,
some of this topic is have some prejudice against Weiharuch's Arminius revolvers.

They made some really junk pieces in the past, but nowdays most of the products are absolutely useful, and approvable product.

They made some very high quality steel-framed target revolvers (HW9 line), which are capable of great accuracy and many 1000s rounds. (Good barrel, sights, trigger).

Their .38 Special or .357 magnum revolvers are totally acceptable as inexpensive (not cheap) home defense guns.

Because Smith and Wesson once made the zinc-slided SIGMA-380, it do not means, that Smith and Wesson is a pot-metal-gun manufacturer!

Ash
April 29, 2005, 12:07 PM
Steel is in the barrel, cylinder, hammer, trigger etc. Zinc alloy is in the frame.

Ash

22luvr
April 29, 2005, 04:10 PM
I owned Windicators in .38 spcl and .357 mag and had nary a problem with either one. Sure, they're large and heavy (mine were about 30 oz loaded) but very comfortable to shoot with their Pachmeyer-style grips.

They are a bit too bulky/heavy for concealed carry.

My .38 spcl had adjustable sights and is still the most accurate snub I have ever owned.

Mind you, I did not shoot a lot of rounds through either gun and never any +P or handloads......just factory standard pressure ammo.

If it is all you can afford and you need a good home defense or glove box gun, I would recommend them highly.

SIGfiend
April 30, 2005, 09:28 PM
thanks for the good write up 22 lvr

what is meant by pot metal? why are pot metals low in quality (as I am guessing the inference to be)?

SIGfiend
April 30, 2005, 11:12 PM
Ash--thanks for the clarification on the steel and alloy part breakdown.

I can't believe people make this whole Zinc argument. For the Zinc frame detractors I ask you two things:

-If say a high quality gun like a Sauer 220 were made with Zinc frames, would the 220 become an abject piece of crap solely because of the material the frame was made out of?

-If Zinc's melting point is at an estimated (rounded up) 800 degrees F' would you have even a remote chance of surviving the same envrionment where your Zinc gun is melting? (I know I would be long dead and either dried up or melted... :barf: )

unspellable
May 1, 2005, 11:55 AM
I thought we went through this before. The melting point in and of itself, has nothing to do with how good the gun is or isn't, it's merely a convenient hook to hang an antigun law on. Same as if we said revolvers with right hand threads on their ejector rods will be legal, but ones with left handed threads will be banned. The melting point thing was chosen for its propaganda value as the low melting point alloys are associated with "cheap saturday night special" in the public mind. As in all such cases, they don't want the issue decided by emotion an not clouded with facts.

The pot metals are a class of relatively low cost alloys primarily designed for easy casting. Since they are desigend for easy casting they have relatively low melting points. They are aluminum based with various other metals such as copper, tin, lead, and zinc as additives. They are not noted for their strength. They have often been used in children's toys and kids can be rough. Rightly or wrongly, they have become associated with the idea of "cheaply made". There is also a class of zinc based alloys that are similar but are not generally called "pot metal".

None of these alloys are even remotely close in strength to steel, titanium, or the aluminum alloys used in quality firearms.

SIGfiend
May 4, 2005, 05:50 AM
unspellable, so are you saying that by your contention of a manufacturer's metal selection, the windicator is not a quality firearm? :confused:

SIGfiend
May 4, 2005, 06:09 AM
hey 22luvr--i have some questions for you since youve owned (and know a lot about the) windicator

are those grips really rubber or plastic? i hear they are rubber but they feel very hard like plastic

is the frame of the 38 cal only version zinc?

why is the small 2" barrel version so darn heavy???

a couple times my gun wouldnt fire (the cylinder seemed obstructed by the shell casing rings and the cylinder would not turn...). has this happened to other people? isnt this dangerous if you need to depend on it as protection?

anyone else that can answer these questions please feel free to join in and answer if you know. thanks

unspellable
May 4, 2005, 11:00 AM
The Windicators I have actully seen on the hoof were all steel.

Use of zinc alloys and pot metals in a firearm is generally a cost cutting measure pretty much confined to the lower class of firearms. And where do you draw the line between between pot metal and the high strength alloy used in say, a Ruger P89 frame or Blackhawk grip frame? I'm sure the metallurgists have clear cut distinctions but for us, the great unwashed masses, how do we know the difference?

Cheaper metals do not automatically mean quality is totally lacking though. For years Ithica sold a martini action 22 styled to look like a lever action. The frame or receiver was cast of some alloy that I suspect was not a high strength alloy. But they were nice little rifles for what they were, never heard any complaints. I had one when I was a teenager. Kind of wish I still had it.

But to face reality, there are a lot of cheap junk firearms out there. Ones that cannot be relied upon to bang when they are supposed to. And some supposedly better ones that don't go bang when they are supposed to. I guess you would cal them well made junk. (I include going boom in the category of not going bang.)

22luvr
May 4, 2005, 12:57 PM
The rubber grips on mine sure felt like rubber to me.

Also, both of mine were heavy because I am almost positive that both were solid STEEL. Also, they hold 6 rather than 5 rounds.

I have had a couple of rounds get hung up in other revolvers I have owned because they were cheap reloads and the case-ends had expanded, due to poor quality control.
(Never had an issue using factory fresh ammo.)


Still think they're a best bang for the buck.....an ideal bedstand or glove box gun.

Hectordude
December 11, 2006, 05:21 PM
:confused: Wow, save some acid for ME man! what about the revolver? :rolleyes: :D

Hectordude
December 11, 2006, 05:42 PM
I wouldn't be too concerned about the alloy. Its probably more aluminum based than zinc, but I'm sure they came up with the best thing they could. On that note, however, EAA lists the steel version as the same weight - 1.8 lbs. w/ the 2" barrel. Metal fatigue is always a problem with aluminum, so given the lack of weight difference, its pointless to go with the alloy model. "Pot metal" means recycled metal. Because of the variability of materials and lack of proper smelting, pot metal products are more subject to unexpected breakage. If the 1.8 lb model is too heavy for you, might I suggest martial arts? I can't imagine anything lighter being effective or tolerable, save a knife. :scrutiny:

unspellable
December 11, 2006, 07:35 PM
The term "pot metal" does not mean recycled. The pot metals are a group of alloys primarily designed for ease of casting to reduce production costs. Since that is the primary objective, low cost constituents become a secondary objective. Ease of casting means a relatively low melting point and good flow and mold filling characteristics. It does not mean that there is no quality control. Changes in the alloy can screw up the casting. The pot metals are not, however, famous for their strength.

MCgunner
December 11, 2006, 08:28 PM
I had a neat little German made single action .22 sold under the "Hawes" name when I was a kid. It was cheap and shot well.

I really like this one...."€ Round cylinder with fully machined flutes"...:D So, that's as opposed to a square cylinder with partially machined flutes????? ROFLMAO!

I particularly like Rossi revolvers. I've owned a number of 'em and they were all good quality for a reasonable price. The designs were basically Smith and Wesson. I have a little jewel of a .22 kit gun in the Rossi M511 and I have a really accurate, tight, perfectly timed example of the M68 with 3" barrel that was new in 1981, before most folks think Rossi acquired some quality control. That little gun shoots very well.

BleysAhrens
January 16, 2011, 11:30 PM
So, over all is this a good gun to have, or not? Damn the Zinc crap, is it reliable?

If you enjoyed reading about "EAA Windicator" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!