Which is better-looking to you?

I personally like the pearl grips better on this one, but that's only because I think the stag grips are a bit too yellow in the light areas. Also the non-fluted 44mag cylinder in the top image gives the weapon a more aggressive look. Top one also has a shorter barrel on it, too, doesn't it?

Function is a different matter though. If I were going to be throwing 44 magnum lightning bolts I'd rather have the stag grips on the weapon. The pearl grips provide a little less gription (I made that word up ).

I like both of 'em though.

-MW

I prefer #1. But I'd like it much better if it was blued.

Blued, just because MoP grips are beautiful on blued guns. I have a Birdshead Single Six that is blued/ case hardened that I put MoP grips on. For something to look at, it is my favorite revolver. Now I just have to change out hammer and trigger/sear to get the feel I want.

Then the only thing left will be to build a twin and find some leather for them.

Wyman

I'm with General Patton.

In my opinion, un-fluted cylinders make a revolver look odd, almost unfinished. Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, isn't it?

I assume the real question is about grips:

I prefer stag to pearl.

I'm with General Patton.

Click to expand...

Me, too.

Actually I meant to focus on the fluted/unfluted cylinders.

Click to expand...

I think unfluted looks unfinished - like maybe it escaped half way down the assembly line.

But I think Geezer and I may well be a minority - Lew Horton has had some degree of success getting folks to pay extra to omit machining steps.

...and SBH owners may well believe it's normal.

To each their own. I dislike unfluted less than I dislike ported but more than I dislike frame locks. It's all a personal matter of what is perceived to suck less.
I tend to mostly buy none of the three but have made grudging exceptions for ported.

In my opinion, un-fluted cylinders make a revolver look odd, almost unfinished. Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, isn't it?

Click to expand...

I think unfluted looks unfinished - like maybe it escaped half way down the assembly line.

Click to expand...

I agree with this, you just don't get that classic look. It makes the gun look like it has a big D battery sitting in the middle of it. Now OTOH the LCR's fluting is a little crazy for me.

I am also not a fan of unfluted cylinders.

I vote the stag grip'd one

Fluted cylinder. Stag grips.

Les

Stag. Fluted.

+1 on stag fluted. leave the un-fluted to to the tactikool square barrel, angled shroud style.

i would go with the pearl grips, my father had a .44mag like that one in the pic it was blued steel with a pearl handled and was a John Wayne Commerative .44mag , my mother made him sell the gun cuz my mother hates guns.

Niether grip looks good. Put the wood ones back on.

+1 stag grips and fluted cylinder.

Pic #2 with fluted cylinder

I'd have to agree with the comment a few posts above -- I'm not a fan of either grip -- but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Given the choices, I'd prefer #2.

Fluted, stag

Unfluted.

Stag grips look more "manly"

Fluted.

I like the stag/fluted better.

Not big on stags and the pear stuff, well, I'll go the route of "if you can't say anything nice..." Nice wood has much more warmth and class IMO. Fluted v unfluted...on the shorter barrels, I like fluted but it sure wouldn't be a make or break issue for me. if it's for show, that one thing. If it's for use, does the game animal or target really care?