Revolvers with more than 6 shots ... ?

[Boiler_G]

In another thread concerning .22 revolvers, a member made the argument that he preferred a 6-shot .22 (617) for training since its indexing would be similar to the 19/66 .357 6-shot that he used. This was opposed to the 10-shot version of the 617 (or Taurus 94 9-shot).

Based on training, this seemed like a valid point, but purely on reliablity and utility of the weapon, should revolvers with more than 6-shots be considered less reliable or harder to use? Does the fitting, machining, timing have to be that much more accurate, thus limiting the tollerances?

The performance center 327 8-shot and 686 plus 7-shot seem pretty appealing to me, having the extra rounds for not that big of a sacrafice in weight.

What are your thoughts and experiences with these guns compared to the 'normal' 6-shot 19/66/686?

 

[Mike Irwin]

"should revolvers with more than 6-shots be considered less reliable or harder to use?"

No.

"Does the fitting, machining, timing have to be that much more accurate, thus limiting the tollerances?"

No more or less so than for a 5 or a 6 shot revolver.

 

[MJRW]

Except that its fundamentally wrong to have a full sized revolver spitting centerfire with more than 6 shots.

 

[Mike Irwin]

"Except that its fundamentally wrong to have a full sized revolver spitting centerfire with more than 6 shots."

huh?

Spitting?

You mean lead out the sides?

You're losing me.

 

[ChristopherG]

Mike, I think you're just being stymied by the hard face of traditionalism, which loudly insists that it is a logic unto itself and needs no other

I think an 8-shot 627 sounds like a fantastic gun; I've had a 7-shot, and I know that was a fantastic gun. I just lament that none of the competitive venues in my area would let me either use (IDPA) or take advantage (IPSC) of its enhanced capacity. If I could find an excuse to buy one, I would in a red-hot minute. Must think more creatively!!

CG

 

[MJRW]

Spitting, using, firing, loaded with. Uses centerfire rounds. There is something fundamentally wrong with a 7 or more shot .357.

 

[bountyhunter]

I drool for one of those N-frame eight shot .357 guns. They are way cool, and Clint Eastwood carried one in his last movie.

 

[Mike Irwin]

Ah. OK, you're talking about wrapping your noodle around the concept, not the spitting of lead out the cylinder gap due to poor alignment.

Can't say that I disagree with you.

 

[444]

Somewhere in the back, dark recesses of my safe, back where it nevers sees the light of day, sits one of those 627PC 8 shot .357s.

 

[Poohgyrr]

CG,
I understand the ICORE folks have grabbed onto the 7 & 8 shot wheelguns for their competitions. I kinda like the idea of more .357's in my favorite revolvers. Of course, I also like the idea of 7 & 8 shot .45 1911's.

 

[Standing Wolf]

I have a pre-agreement ten-shooter Smith & Wesson model 617, the first six-shooter-plus I'd ever bought. I'm not convinced there's an advantage to having four extra rounds in the gun, but have discovered cleaning the cylinder is nearly twice as much work.

 

[caz223]

My buddy has a 686+ 7 shooter, about 5".
It looks to me like the cylinder had more than 7 holes, like 9 or so, but counting them, I'd count to seven every time. (Like I'm gonna sneak up to it, and it's gonna have 9 holes!!)
When they start making 7 and 8 shot SA rugers, maybe I'll accept it, but in the meantime...

 

[ToxicSteel]

I have a 686+, 6", (7 shot) and think it's great. It makes a good hunting revolver, can be used for steel, pin, and ICORE matches... and is just a lot of fun regardless of if I'm shooting mouse fart loads or full power loads.

I love my wheelguns and think that while 6 might be "traditional"... there's nothing wrong with 7.

Steve

 

[Penforhire]

I asked that very question, far and wide, before I bought my 4" 686+. The answers were universal in saying no difference in intrinsic reliability. The only downside, to me, is limited choice of speedloader. But I'm okay with the cheap HKS's.

If I was raised on wheelguns I'd probably have some qualms about more than 6. But I was weaned on semi-autos. Once I got over seeing more than seven rounds in a clip, tradition went-- eh.

 

[Guy B. Meredith]

There is no objective downside to 7 or 8 round .38/.357 revolvers.

I do think the 8 shot has a feel in the lockup and hammer drop sequence closer to the 6 shot than does the 686+ with its 7 shots.

But then my 686+ shoots about twice as well as the M66 (or maybe it's just me) and the 8 shot does even better.

Actually, I use the M66 more these days as I am not able to afford time or money to competition. The M66 is more difficult for me to use so gets more range time now as I try to iron out my personal kinks. The 627 8-shot is just like a battle cruiser and steady as a rock--no challenge in target shooting. The 7 shot 686+ gets some range time as it is the home defense handgun (don't want the expensive 627 sitting in an evidence locker if used for SD).