Great perspective, Ed.
One of the most popular powders for the .357 is Hodgdon’s H110. This powder was originally used by the U.S. for the M1 Carbine hence it’s slow enough for an 18” barrel. As a pistol powder it’s definitely a slow burner but despite that it performs well in short barrels, like a 3” barrel. The standard issue for GIGN operators is 5 1/2” barrel.
S&W 586/686 or a Ruger GP100 could be refined by competent smith and made very close to MR73, if not better, in accuracy and shootability. However, durability such as 150 rounds of full power 357 Magnum daily, indefinitely, is another issue. Barrel forcing and front face of cylinder will be "eaten" by erosion on revolvers made from standard steels used now.Just to stay firmly on earth, I believe
that most shooters can be served just
as well by a S&W 586 or a Ruger GP
100. True, not nearly as refined nor
probably as durable, but for most
a still doable goal in "shooting
like a Frenchman."
BUT!!!! IF I were younger, I'd sure
as heck consider paying for the
Manurhin 73.
To what extent will the hammer and trigger design limit things?
Chapui uses the latest in high-precision 5-axis CNC machines. How could 'tweaks' by Ruger match the quality and beat the cost?
If we are talking about work done by smiths, on top of action job comes custom made cylinder. BTW, decades back I found in an article that custom smiths were able to adjust timing on S&W revolvers in such extend that top shooters won or ended up very high in bullseye competition. I guess they first selected revolver to make sure that bores are uniform and positioned properly.
As BSME, worked half of my carrier in aerospace industry, specialized in tooling and manufacturing (example; main gearbox for military helicopter) I can tell you that could be considerable difference from plant to plant in quality, even all of them used modern CNC machines. In addition to quality on M73, I found that certain production of this revolver is not as glorious as we generally assume. They had their ups and downs. Apparently, earlier guns were better built than when production was just transferred to Chapuis. I am aware that this video will be "opening can of worms" because it states "MR73 The unbreakable revolver BROKEN":
.
As the thread drifted in that direction - we have to consider the time frame of the said revolvers, to fully understand why MR73 was designed and put in production. MR73 was designed in 1972 - by that time, there was no S&W L frame revolvers. If you wanted a S&W in .357 Mag you had two options - K frame, or N frame. Too small, or too big - L frame 586 was introduced nine years later, in 1981. Ruger introduced the Security Six in the same year as MR73 (1972) and 13 years later the GP100. BTW, Colt had the Trooper Mk. III released in 1869, but obviously the French liked very much the S&W lockwork and didn't care for Colt's one, so they decided to build a similar revolver but to their specifications, hence the MR73. In that time, they just didn't have much to choose from. And let's not forget that Manurhin is one very FINE revolver - no need to change for something different when the government is paying for it... But yes, I agree - most shooters can be served just as well by a S&W or Ruger, they will not be able to tell the difference.
If we are talking about work done by smiths, on top of action job comes custom made cylinder. BTW, decades back I found in an article that custom smiths were able to adjust timing on S&W revolvers in such extend that top shooters won or ended up very high in bullseye competition. I guess they first selected revolver to make sure that bores are uniform and positioned properly.
As BSME, worked half of my carrier in aerospace industry, specialized in tooling and manufacturing (example; main gearbox for military helicopter) I can tell you that could be considerable difference from plant to plant in quality, even all of them used modern CNC machines. In addition to quality on M73, I found that certain production of this revolver is not as glorious as we generally assume. They had their ups and downs. Apparently, earlier guns were better built than when production was just transferred to Chapuis. I am aware that this video will be "opening can of worms" because it states "MR73 The unbreakable revolver BROKEN":
Take a look at 1:34, pay attention to aft end of barrel. IMO erosion clearly shows that noted revolver just cannot take "150 rounds of full power 357 Magnum ammo every day" as claimed. Shooter was accused by vendor of shooting "dangerously overloaded ammunition". Regarding reloaded 38 Special ammo, he was also bashed in comments ""professional" reloaders destroyed a very expensive revolver".
First, I cannot imagine that anybody will load 38 Special on a such level that will destroy the gun built for 357 Magnum. Second, just doesn't make a sense to purchase such expensive revolver and shoot dangerously overloaded 38 Special or 357 "Thermonuclear". Any shooter will immediately notice if 38 Special is strong as 357 Magnum or stronger. Heck, if I want to shoot very hot 38 or 357, I will take large frame revolver made for 44 Magnum or 454.
On the end, I would like to make clear that, if money isn't the issue, I will purchase M73, but new production, under Beretta umbrella. However, most likely I will get stainless Korth 357 first
What intrigued me most was the engagement tactics when using a wheelgun vs an autoloader and the different practice routines of the wheelgun vs the autoloader to strengthen those tactics.
