doubleh
Member
I don't believe I could have twisted my arm hard enough to walk away from that, especially after reading your post #10.
Couldn't resist
- Thread starter Charliefrank
- Start date
- Status
mcb
Member
Mmmmmmm, maybe a new 19, but the 19s of that era were prone to cracking the forcing cone if subjected to a steady diet of magnum loads. The N-frame .357s are overbuilt for their task, and that has a virtue all its own.
For an even more glorious, less practical gun, they had the Model 20 N-frame, chambered for the .38-44 Heavy Duty round- essentially a .38+P special.
I would kill for one.....
Ultimately I would rather have Model 13 over a 19 or a 27/28. I realize its weakness but the 13/19 carries so nice compared to the an N-frame. If I am going to lug an N-frame around I want 8-shots and moonclips or big bore.
Last edited:
Choctaw
Member
I have owned many Smiths but never a 28. That is one of my few failings.
OP
OP
Charliefrank
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2017
- Messages
- 578
I carried a 4" model 29 as my trail/woods gun for 20 years. I took it in trade with no intention of keeping it, but I made the mistake of taking it in the woods one day. Carried beautifully in a high ride thumb snap Bianchi holster. Shot several deer and a few hogs with it. I don't mind the extra weight. As a young man I carried a model 19 on my trap line. Nice pistol, I just prefer the N frame. I only ever carry 5 rounds in them anyway, never needed any more I guess.
OP
OP
Charliefrank
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2017
- Messages
- 578
I actually prefer the older ones, pre cnc. Back when internal parts were made slightly oversized and then hand fitted.
The Evangelist Cowboy
Member
They certainly were made better, it takes a performance center model to come even close to off the rack back then.
tbob38
Member
tbob38
Member
Maybe some newer S&W's are better than others? I have recently purchased a 442, a 686 Pro series and a 460 XVR and can't find fault with any of the three.
Hoxviii
Member
Have you ever shot an *old* N-frame?
The trigger is something that simply has to be experienced, the new S&Ws are a box of sand in comparison.
Other anecdote is on finish. Right when S&W introduced the "classic" line, I didn't know they had.
I saw a really nice model 28 and asked to see it. "What 28? All we have is a 27 classic."
"What? The matte N frame, the 28, I want to see it." "That isn't a matte gun, that's a new, blued 27 classic."
Yeah, no, the bluing on (at least the early) 27 classics should have been reserved for a 28 reintroduction.
The Evangelist Cowboy
Member
Never said they arent serviceable, but I can tell you my model 19-3 has a better trigger than my performance center 586 L Comp.
mcb
Member
I also prefer an N-frame. I own 6 S&W revolvers and four of them are N-frames. The N-frames get shot a lot more than my K or J frames (I don't own an L-frame presently) One of those N-frames is even a 357 Magnum N-frame but its a 627 so an 8-shooter. My aversion to the Model 27/28 is it is such a larger frame and cylinder for a relatively small cartridge and only 6-shots. Why would I carry a revolver the size and weight of an N-frame and only have 6-rounds of 357 when I can have the same N-frame as an 8-shooter, an L-frame as a 7-shooter or a K-frame if I want a 6-shooter. If I am going to carry a 6-shot N-Frame in the woods its going to be in 44 Mag not 357 Mag. If I am going to shoot USPSA is going to be an 8-shooter and moonclips or if I am feeling nostalgic 6-shot and moonclips with short fat cartridges like 40S&W or 45ACP. I look at a Model 27/28 and just see a lot of weight for no real advantage over other N-frame or other 357 Magnums.
This speak nothing to the higher quality and craftsmanship of many of the older Model 27/28 but I am very much a shooter and not a collector, so my point of view is very practical oriented and does not taking the collector value and historical significance into account to any great measure. YMMV
tbob38
Member
Yes. I have several.
Hoxviii
Member
If you can't tell the difference between an old SW and a new SW, I'm not sure what to say. *Shrugs*
Enjoy your shooting!
mcb
Member
I don't know I have a 625 from the earlier 90's and it has the best double action trigger I have pulled second only to a Korth I got to use once. ~8.5 lbs, very smooth and will set off any primer I feed it. In single action it is the best trigger I own in a handgun and better than most of my rifles. Too bad I almost never use it in single action...
A new S&W in the hands of a good S&W revolver-smith can produce a trigger on par with what S&W use to make IMHO.
ETA: The 625, I am at least the third owner maybe more. Someone before me had a profession trigger job done to it. I don't believe it came from the factory feeling like it does now. Not to mention the tens of thousand of round its had through it. I bought it from a competitive revolver shooter and used it as my USPSA revolver for several years.
A new S&W in the hands of a good S&W revolver-smith can produce a trigger on par with what S&W use to make IMHO.
ETA: The 625, I am at least the third owner maybe more. Someone before me had a profession trigger job done to it. I don't believe it came from the factory feeling like it does now. Not to mention the tens of thousand of round its had through it. I bought it from a competitive revolver shooter and used it as my USPSA revolver for several years.
Last edited:
tbob38
Member
Well, I've been shooting them since the late 1960's, and had a gunsmithing business for 26 years. I'm fairly familiar with them. As I originally said "perhaps some of the new ones are better than others".
tbob38
Member
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
They are actually HEAVIER than the .44 mag guns thanks to the extra thick cylinder walls!
Wouldn't want to carry any of these as a duty gun, no, but for target shooting the extra heft tames recoil and muzzle climb.
To give you an idea of my insanity, this is my grail gun:
A 6-shot Ruger .357 Redhawk- they only made them from '77-79 (next to a M27 for comparison).
They are made of unobtanium, though. I just might have to settle for one of the new 8-shot Redhawks, I do like the moon clips on the new ones.
tbob38
Member
mcb
Member
Yikes!
I though the cylinder on the new 10mm SRH looked silly that 6-shot 357 is RH even more out of proportion. No doubt all that weight would tame some really hot load but my hip sort of aches thinking about carrying that all day on my belt.Yes Moonclips Rule!
tbob38
Member
With one of those, I'd be tempted to push the .357 up to .454 Casull and .460 S&W pressure levels, ie. 65,000 psi.
Shanghai McCoy
Member
OK, I hit "Like" but only cause there's no "Like,but am jealous" button...
tbob38
Member
Driftwood Johnson
Member
Howdy
Count me as a fan of the Model 28. I currently have three of them. Here are two.
Not quite. The 38-44 round was much more potent than the current 38 Special +P. More like a 357 Magnum.
Here is one of the predecessors to the rare Model 20, a 38-44 Outdoorsman.
Count me as a fan of the Model 28. I currently have three of them. Here are two.
Not quite. The 38-44 round was much more potent than the current 38 Special +P. More like a 357 Magnum.
Here is one of the predecessors to the rare Model 20, a 38-44 Outdoorsman.
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
O boy........this is going to be interesting.
- Status