I feel like you have to really enjoy the nostalgia of these designs in order to get one. For the price of one I could get a gently used S&W Model 25 in .45 ACP, new production S&W Model 22 1917, or bargain 625 that's seen some use.
Don't get me wrong, beautiful gun, I want one, but for a gun where you can only load five out of six, it's not a SD/HD gun. It's a range toy. My other concern would be can it take modern .45 LC loads. Like pushing a 250 grain LSWC to 900 fps out of a 7.5" barrel. A 250 grain LWSC traveling in excess of 750 fps is quite deadly but why not want one you can push to 900 if it's safe. If I got one I would handload it down to 650 fps but I'd like the strength of the gun to allow me some flex room.
I'm just curious. Back when these guns were made heat treating the frame was almost unheard of. Now it's routine and a good way to strengthen the frame for modern smokeless powder loads. Are these guns getting their frames heat treated or are they just being reproduced for a very niche market. I think it'd be a shame to not have these frames heat treated, personally.
A couple of things. These guns are proofed to accept SAMMI Spec ammo. So they will take anything that does not exceed 14,000 psi. How fast the bullet moves and how heavy helps define pressure, but it is not the entire story. Keep the loads down to 14,000 psi and the gun will be fine. Go more than that and you are on your own.
Regarding heat treating the frame, it is really the cylinder that is the pressure vessel in any revolver. Not the frame. I do not know whether Uberti heat treats the frames on these top breaks, I doubt it. But I suspect they do heat treat the cylinders to withstand SAAMI max loads.
I really do not know what a SD/HD gun is, perhaps somebody could enlighten me on that. But a few weeks ago we had a pretty long discussion about 'dream guns' and several posters said they would love a Top Break revolver that could take high pressure loads. I explained then and I will explain again that a Top Break is not a very good platform for high pressure loads. They have several weak points. The latch is the first one. Just about the strongest Top Break revolvers ever made were the British Webly revovlers. But the latch on the Webly was much more massive than the latch on a S&W #3, any of them. The hinge is a weak point too. Thirdly, is the two part method of construction. Excessive pounding of recoil tends to stretch the lower portion of the frame, while the upper portion tends to remain unstretched. This is what ruined so many of the old 19th Century guns. They were shot loose when fired with heavy Smokeless powder loads. The result can be a gun that does not lock up properly but is loose at the latch. I have seen plenty of old Top Breaks ruined this way. Modern steel will help prevent that from happening, but it cannot make up for the basic weakness of the design. That is why Smith stopped producing these guns and changed over to the solid frame Hand Ejectors at the turn of the Century. A solid frame is better able to put up with the pounding of recoil than a Top Break.
Are they Range Toys? Well, that shot of me shooting one is not a typical range outing. I am shooting it at a Cowboy Action match, and I am really putting that 132 year old gun through its paces. Yes, I am shooting it with Black Powder, I would not dream of shooting any of my old guns with modern Smokeless. But I can assure you I was shooting it as fast as I could cock the hammer and pull the trigger, which I do with all my antique #3 Smiths (four of them so far).
Are the modern Schofields, Russians, and New Model Number Threes niche guns? Absolutely. But I can tell you there are plenty of Cowboy shooters out there who would love to have a pair.
