Changing Barrels
- Thread starter Mr. Mosin
- Start date
- Status
Jim Watson
Member
That is what I call a Level 2 project. Physically possible but it will be an expensive source of 7/8" of barrel.
OP
OP
Mr. Mosin
Member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2019
- Messages
- 2,113
So, unless I was rolling in money or it was my "ultimate gun desire" type affair, generally not worth the finances ?
ontarget
Member
Just going by the gunsmith rates in my area it seems that unless it was a "dream gun" type project it might be cost prohibitive.
ApacheCoTodd
member
It's funny.
Just yesterday, I was musing over the possibility of one of my listed *dream revolvers* after finding out that Taurus makes a frame-dedicated, .380 revolver... It would seem.
So, I do a skills/equipment assessment and get a *GO*.
I perform a materials availability assessment and return another *GO*.
I gin up an effort / reward scenario and am favored (or not
) with a resounding *shut the heck up and DO IT!"
See, one of my *dream revolvers* is a .380 target gun and Taurus is already making the base unit.
Sometimes, one must make one's own dreams regardless the nay-sayers.
Todd.
Just yesterday, I was musing over the possibility of one of my listed *dream revolvers* after finding out that Taurus makes a frame-dedicated, .380 revolver... It would seem.
So, I do a skills/equipment assessment and get a *GO*.
I perform a materials availability assessment and return another *GO*.
I gin up an effort / reward scenario and am favored (or not
) with a resounding *shut the heck up and DO IT!"See, one of my *dream revolvers* is a .380 target gun and Taurus is already making the base unit.
Sometimes, one must make one's own dreams regardless the nay-sayers.
Todd.
Attachments
OP
OP
Mr. Mosin
Member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2019
- Messages
- 2,113
I'd personally really, truly love something along the lines of a Ruger version of the Charter Arms Bulldog Classic, in .45 Colt; with something similar to the S&W square butt gripIt's funny.
Just yesterday, I was musing over the possibility of one of my listed *dream revolvers* after finding out that Taurus makes a frame-dedicated, .380 revolver... It would seem.
So, I do a skills/equipment assessment and get a *GO*.
I perform a materials availability assessment and return another *GO*.
I gin up an effort / reward scenario and am favored (or not
See, one of my *dream revolvers* is a .380 target gun and Taurus is already making the base unit.
Sometimes, one must make one's own dreams regardless the nay-sayers.
Todd.
OP
OP
Mr. Mosin
Member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2019
- Messages
- 2,113
If your gonna go "big bore in a small gun", go for the big "four five" and be done with itIt's funny.
Just yesterday, I was musing over the possibility of one of my listed *dream revolvers* after finding out that Taurus makes a frame-dedicated, .380 revolver... It would seem.
So, I do a skills/equipment assessment and get a *GO*.
I perform a materials availability assessment and return another *GO*.
I gin up an effort / reward scenario and am favored (or not
See, one of my *dream revolvers* is a .380 target gun and Taurus is already making the base unit.
Sometimes, one must make one's own dreams regardless the nay-sayers.
Todd.
Pat Riot
Contributing Member
If you want a hammer less 3” .357 J frame why not just buy a model 60 Pro and bob the hammer?
OP
OP
Mr. Mosin
Member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2019
- Messages
- 2,113
Stupid internal lock.
Pat Riot
Contributing Member
Ah, I see. I didn’t really think about that. I have a 60 Pro and have never had a problem with the lock. But I do understand.
ThomasT
Member
99.9% of all people haven't had a problem with the lock but it makes them feel good to bash it. Even without any real life experience with it. I have two S&W guns with the lock and had a Taurus model 85 with the lock and now a TCP 380 with the lock and it has never been a problem.
OP
OP
Mr. Mosin
Member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2019
- Messages
- 2,113
And the frame shape
I don't want a gun with an ignition switch, so to speak. Just a bang button.
Anything, I suppose, is possible. Back in the '70s dad wanted a 4" nickel round butt Model 19. He bought the 3", sent it to Smith and on the third try got it back the way he wanted it. First two were stolen in transit, a fairly common problem back then. It passed to my brother and then to is son. Beautiful gun. Cost? Couldn't have been too bad as all parts were standard issue stock.
Ratshooter,
For me it's not a "problem" but rather a "principle. There was not then and still isn't now a rational reason to put that silly lock on the side of the frame, which by the way spoiled the lines (profile) the the classic S&W revolver. You say 99.9% of people never have a problem with the IL. I would bet 99.9% of people never even use the (expletive deleted) thing.
Dave
For me it's not a "problem" but rather a "principle. There was not then and still isn't now a rational reason to put that silly lock on the side of the frame, which by the way spoiled the lines (profile) the the classic S&W revolver. You say 99.9% of people never have a problem with the IL. I would bet 99.9% of people never even use the (expletive deleted) thing.
Dave
ApacheCoTodd
member
If a fella doesn't like the lock - he doesn't like the lock.
Some don't like either the fixed or the adjustable sights on various pistols.
Just like arguing against what cartridges various members dislike on another thread - what's the point in griping over what someone else dislikes? It almost gets flavored as folk telling people that have no business liking or disliking something because of..... yup, you guessed it - a varying opinion or the insertion of fact when the conversation is more emotional that actual.
Me? I can't stand the lock but for one aspect, all things equal, it allows me to buy pistols at a lower cost than one without the lock. I KNOW it's not a problem, I KNOW S&W feels fairly obligated to integrate it (though ironically NOT on some models) and I know it bears no direct issue regarding performance.
I just don't like the hole.
Another way to look at it is Taurus' brilliance of having it on the hammer body. I can ignore it, fill it or replace the hammer. S&W? Not so much. And for my part, while I prefer to look at the right side of autos, I prefer to look at the left side of revolvers and being of an age, that hole is difficult - nigh on impossible - to ignore.
Now, in a twist, I have 2 629s, one with and one without the lock and as I intend to beat it, it's the lock-laden one I will keep and sell the other to someone who will pay a premium to not see that dastardly hole.
Todd.
Some don't like either the fixed or the adjustable sights on various pistols.
Just like arguing against what cartridges various members dislike on another thread - what's the point in griping over what someone else dislikes? It almost gets flavored as folk telling people that have no business liking or disliking something because of..... yup, you guessed it - a varying opinion or the insertion of fact when the conversation is more emotional that actual.
Me? I can't stand the lock but for one aspect, all things equal, it allows me to buy pistols at a lower cost than one without the lock. I KNOW it's not a problem, I KNOW S&W feels fairly obligated to integrate it (though ironically NOT on some models) and I know it bears no direct issue regarding performance.
I just don't like the hole.
Another way to look at it is Taurus' brilliance of having it on the hammer body. I can ignore it, fill it or replace the hammer. S&W? Not so much. And for my part, while I prefer to look at the right side of autos, I prefer to look at the left side of revolvers and being of an age, that hole is difficult - nigh on impossible - to ignore.
Now, in a twist, I have 2 629s, one with and one without the lock and as I intend to beat it, it's the lock-laden one I will keep and sell the other to someone who will pay a premium to not see that dastardly hole.
Todd.
ThomasT
Member
I don't like them either but they have never given me a problem. And yes I would prefer they didn't have the stupid lock. Make me King for a year and I will see they are gotten rid of. And yes they ruin the smooth look of the gun and its a tacit way of saying I am too stupid to own and operate the gun. S&W has cost themselves some sales. I bought a 442 a year ago and bought the no lock version. My way of telling S&W I will buy your guns but would rather not have the lock.
The good thing about S&W is that they have built so many guns that its the buyers choice on what they want. There is page after page of no lock guns on gunbroker. Just have your money ready and bid away.
SteadyD
Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2017
- Messages
- 1,747
If the lock breaks, the gun won’t work. If the transfer bar on a Ruger breaks, the gun won’t work. They probably suffer a similar failure rate, which is to say, almost never.
P.S. - I don’t like the lock, but I will no longer let it keep me from owning a gun that can’t be had without it.
P.S. - I don’t like the lock, but I will no longer let it keep me from owning a gun that can’t be had without it.
wagonburner
member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2019
- Messages
- 179
The lock can be removed and the hole plugged for about $40 and 15-30 min of your time.
wagonburner
member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2019
- Messages
- 179
I’m more worried about an anti-gun girlfriend locking my guns to “keep me safe”.
I once dated a woman who unloaded my guns for the same reason ... she was quite surprised when I showed her the door when I found out.
CajunBass
Member
Funny how this turned into an "I hate the lock" thread. 
Well, I'll kick in my two cents worth on that topic. I just made up my mind not to worry about it anymore. It's not going away, and once in a while I see a gun with a lock that I want. I don't even notice it anymore, really. It's just part of the landscape so to speak.
The same goes for the QR on the side of the new Colts. I suppose it's ugly, but since Smith and Wesson has put a short novel right there for years, I don't even notice it. Of course, Your Mileage May Vary on either of them.
There was a time when it was probably economical to change things like barrels. Back then gunsmiths were probably more common than they are today (I remember one on Main Street, in downtown Richmond, right in the middle of the business district). Labor was relatively inexpensive, so something like that could be done more economically than buying a new gun. These days, I suspect that's not the case.
Well, I'll kick in my two cents worth on that topic. I just made up my mind not to worry about it anymore. It's not going away, and once in a while I see a gun with a lock that I want. I don't even notice it anymore, really. It's just part of the landscape so to speak.The same goes for the QR on the side of the new Colts. I suppose it's ugly, but since Smith and Wesson has put a short novel right there for years, I don't even notice it. Of course, Your Mileage May Vary on either of them.
There was a time when it was probably economical to change things like barrels. Back then gunsmiths were probably more common than they are today (I remember one on Main Street, in downtown Richmond, right in the middle of the business district). Labor was relatively inexpensive, so something like that could be done more economically than buying a new gun. These days, I suspect that's not the case.
- Status