horsemen61
Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2011
- Messages
- 6,759
New books I’ll need to get thank you for the pics @Driftwood Johnson!
Smith & Wesson Revolvers, Rear View
- Thread starter The Glockodile
- Start date
- Status
westernrover
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2018
- Messages
- 1,613
Some Colt DA revolvers don't need the foldback in the recoil shield because the recoil shield is part of the cylinder release that works in the opposite direction from a S&W -- it is pulled away from the cylinder to release the cylinder rather than pushed toward it. The disadvantage to this is the awkwardness of gripping the gun and pulling the cylinder release back with the strong hand. Many people adept at reloading Colts will change their hand position on the stocks during reloading and even point the gun muzzle-up to open the cylinder. The method common to S&W and Ruger allows the cylinder to be opened with the strong hand thumb without changing the hand's grip on the stocks.
The Dan Wesson design is also different because the cylinder release is forward of the cylinder. Because of this, it has no pin protruding from the ratchet. Instead, the rear of the cylinder is locked by a ball detent in the frame. There is only a hole in the ratchet so there is no need to relieve the recoil shield for a protruding pin. I see no disadvantage to the Dan Wesson design except that it probably makes one-handed reloads harder.
The Dan Wesson design is also different because the cylinder release is forward of the cylinder. Because of this, it has no pin protruding from the ratchet. Instead, the rear of the cylinder is locked by a ball detent in the frame. There is only a hole in the ratchet so there is no need to relieve the recoil shield for a protruding pin. I see no disadvantage to the Dan Wesson design except that it probably makes one-handed reloads harder.
Yes, it gives serial number ranges for each model and approximate dates of shipment.
- Status
