Spyvie
Member
+1 QTFSeafarer12 said:
I think you hit the nail on the head Seafarer, the Python was considered drop dead gorgeous and has set the style of a “cool looking revolver” ever since.
Dumb Full Underlug Barrels!!!!
- Thread starter Confederate
- Start date
- Status
I think you hit the nail on the head Seafarer, the Python was considered drop dead gorgeous and has set the style of a “cool looking revolver” ever since.
Virginian
Member
I will take a full triple underlug over any type of porting. UGH !!! Or ARGH!! to quote that pirate.
"That tremendous extra weight is ridiculous !!" but "Those entirely natural looking slots cut in the barrel, that quadruple muzzle blast, are wonderful assets, especially when you really need to use it... with no ear protection!!"
Get serious. And please stop confusing, or trying to sell, opinions with facts. You have a right to your opinion, and you are not going to change mine anyway.
"That tremendous extra weight is ridiculous !!" but "Those entirely natural looking slots cut in the barrel, that quadruple muzzle blast, are wonderful assets, especially when you really need to use it... with no ear protection!!"
Get serious. And please stop confusing, or trying to sell, opinions with facts. You have a right to your opinion, and you are not going to change mine anyway.
DougDubya
Member
Doesn't the GP100 come with optional tapered barrels?
The GP100 did/does come with 1/2 lug barrels. I have one in 6" stainless which I believe is discontinied.
Confederate, nice revolvers, we have similar tastes. I didn't realize the snub sec six has barrels in differing thicknesses, my 2.75" version appears to be heavy also.
I like that 6" Sec six. They look kingd of goofy but I sort of want one for no particular reason. What is the marking on the side opposite the cylinder release?
Confederate, nice revolvers, we have similar tastes. I didn't realize the snub sec six has barrels in differing thicknesses, my 2.75" version appears to be heavy also.
I like that 6" Sec six. They look kingd of goofy but I sort of want one for no particular reason. What is the marking on the side opposite the cylinder release?
DawgFvr
Member
I think the full underlug is just down right purdy...
Porting, however is purely functional...reducing muzzle flip by 70 %
Porting, however is purely functional...reducing muzzle flip by 70 %
DougDubya
Member
I'd rather not have the gasses from those ports shearing off my eyebrows (and blinding me) if I have to fire a shot from the retention position.
DawgFvr
Member
Oh...don't worry yourself about the retention position...wish I had a nickel every time somebody brought that old arguement up. I doubt you will ever have to fire a weapon in self defense your entire life...let alone from a retention position...eh? Oh, and by the way, if you actually had to fire a weapon defending your life, I highly doubt a powder burn will even be on your radar screen.
If all that weight out front was a hinderance to coming up on target PPC shooters wouldn't use bull barrels. I think it's all a matter of preference and if you feel strongly an extra couple of ounces are a hinderance or an asset you have other issues.
Seafarer12
Member
DwgFvr, Whats the point of even having a barrel with porting that far back on the barrel.
Griz, Competition shooters use both, based on their personal preference sometimes. Other times, it's just because their hasn't been any other option exept full underlugs! The current trend is to add a model 28 barrel to a 627. Why? Because we have issues. 
Piedmont Plinker
Member
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2006
- Messages
- 941
The revolvers I've shot haven't ha full underlugs (then again, I need to get and shoot more revolvers). I like the way both of them handle, and one's an RG. Yes, I like that RG. Its a .32 S&WL, which is a dying caliber that I like (thank God for .32 Mag and .327 Mag). However, the revolvers I've shot, without full underlugs, and the ones I've handled without, just feel better and more natural than the ones with full underlugs. The security (or something, could never tell them apart) six I handled felt better than the full lug GP, which just felt a little top-heavy.
I'd have to shoot both, though, to know for sure.
Also- the M28 felt better than the 686. LONG LIVE THE N-FRAME .357! THANK GOD FOR S&W BRINGING IT BACK!
I'd have to shoot both, though, to know for sure.
Also- the M28 felt better than the 686. LONG LIVE THE N-FRAME .357! THANK GOD FOR S&W BRINGING IT BACK!
DawgFvr
Member
Seafarer12: Weigand Combat hybra-porting design...Mark Morganti did it for me at Gemini Customs...he is a fantastic gunsmith...and...all I know is that Jack Weigand is a genius. 5% loss in velocity but 70% reduction in muzzle flip. Recoil is still there...but I am able to acheive rapid follow up shots with hot .357 magnum rounds...which is my ultimate goal in CCW. Fast...accurate...lethal and I have moon clips for quick ejection and reloading. It really is the ultimate revolver set-up.
http://www.jackweigand.com/profile.html
http://www.jackweigand.com/profile.html
OP
OP
Confederate
Member
What, and miss the chance of taking out two bad guys on either side of me? No way! The best of all possible worlds is to get a ported Taurus. Not only will you get the guy in front of you, but the blast shooting out on both sides combined with the lead being shaved off the forcing cone spitting out in both directions, and you're taking out three people with one cartridge. Even an autoloader won't do that!
But seriously, arguing that you can get on target just as easily with a heavy underlugged barrel (and staying there as the target moves) is not very realistic. I mean, all one has to do is try it! If the target is standing still, the underlug is just fine. But if he's moving back and forth and sideways to boot, that heavy underlugged barrel will be swinging all over the place.
As much as I love my 6-inch 686, it's strictly for shooting fleeing felons, and only as long as they don't zig-zag on top of that!
Again, 4-inch barrels and below is NOT a problem, per se, though some might disagree. A 6-incher is more difficult to keep on target than a 4-incher, and when you add a full underlug barrel to the mix, it gets much, much worse.
When the GP100 revolvers first landed on shelves, I purchased a 4 incher w/ non-underlug after not locating any with the feature. Afterwards, I only regretted not waiting to see if it would be offered with full underlug, and traded it off quickly....
DawgFvr
Member
Weapons with ports are not actually louder decibel wise. They are perceived louder because, the report becomes omnidirectional and not projected forward. Hearing damage, if any, will be exactly the same with or without a ported .357 magnum. Now, the "perceived" report will seem much louder from others nearby when you fire the weapon.
OP
OP
Confederate
Member
The marking is because that particular gun is an FBI Academy commemorative. I got two of them years ago for almost nothing, then found that both of them had light rust on the insides. Sent them both back to Ruger and they fixed both so well that they looked factory new.
I'll load some more photos later as I have time.
OP
OP
Confederate
Member
Okay, here are a couple of photos of the FBI Academy Security-Six. At first I thought they might have some extra value, but Ruger made so many commemoratives that I understand they really don't, expect for the presentation boxes that came with them. I contacted the FBI Academy to see if there was any interest on their part of acquiring one or both of the guns, but no one answered, so I suppose not. As a result, I'm going to add the 6-inch to my shooters later this year.
I just purchased my first 6" .357 magnum. I made it a Ruger security six. I love my S&W 617 but don't love the balance or aesthetics of a full underlug. The old Rugers are still great guns and the current production S&W revolvers are out of my price range.
I am not a competitive shooter, and I don't carry for self defense, but I feel that action of the fully lugged gun in my hands is unnatural when dry handling. Shifting targets feels the same. The weight out there feels dead. Like a sledgehammer. The shock transmitted to my hands is lessened but it lacks finesse. Sometimes the balance just doesn't suit an individual and there are better choices available.
The fully lugged barrels will always have a place in my collection but they are not my preference. In my opinion they take a very organic design inherent to many revolvers and add the unnaturally obtrusive element of "add strength here".
I am not a competitive shooter, and I don't carry for self defense, but I feel that action of the fully lugged gun in my hands is unnatural when dry handling. Shifting targets feels the same. The weight out there feels dead. Like a sledgehammer. The shock transmitted to my hands is lessened but it lacks finesse. Sometimes the balance just doesn't suit an individual and there are better choices available.
The fully lugged barrels will always have a place in my collection but they are not my preference. In my opinion they take a very organic design inherent to many revolvers and add the unnaturally obtrusive element of "add strength here".
- Status
