[Das1]

Internally , is the Detective special more like the K.C. , Anaconda - or like the Python?

I guess what I'm asking is as it relates to timing. Am interested in gen 3.

Tell me if I've asked a stupid question.

I'm considering one for carry. Or a glock 27. (I know;))

[Old Fuff]

Colt's D-frame revolvers, which included the Detective Special, Cobra, Police Positive Special and Diamondback - among others, had lockwork that was sized down from the Official Police and by extension, the Python. The Diamondback had a wide-spur hammer similar to that in the Python.

No, you didn't ask a stupid question...

[gvf]

Detective II is worth more money and has that classic look with the unshrouded
ejector rod. I have one: sweeeet shooter, really accurate, low recoil.

[spwenger]

All the earlier Colt double-action revolvers used a similar V-spring action. The relative downside to that system, for most people who shoot double-action, is that the trigger tends to "stack" toward the end of its stroke. "Stacking" means that there is a palpable increase in the poundage or resistance as you approach the let-off point. While stacking cannot be totally eliminated, it is actually very easy to reduce the stacking. The procedure is described on page 121 of Jerry Kuhnhausen's The Colt Double Action Revolvers: A Shop Manual, Vol. 1.

[Old Fuff]

The stacking is caused when the two leafs of the "V" come together before the hammer is released. Do not use Jerry's solution and try to reform the spring using a pin for a wedge on an older revolver (pre-World War Two or early post-war) as you can break the spring, and they are VERY difficult to replace.

[PX15]

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a73/Laserlips/100_5058.jpg


I like mine.... ;)


j. Pomeroy

[Baldy]

Now that is a real beauty you got there Mr Px15.

[Standing Wolf]

While stacking cannot be totally eliminated, it is actually very easy to reduce the stacking. The procedure is described on page 121 of Jerry Kuhnhausen's The Colt Double Action Revolvers: A Shop Manual, Vol. 1.

I've found this is better done in iterations than all at once.