What do you prefer: Smith & Wesson, Ruger, or Colt Revolver style cylinder release?

[Old Dog]

there is a reason S&W dominates those sports and the cylinder release is very much part of that domination.

Nope, the sole reason is that for the past many years, S&W was the only manufacturer of revolvers making the only quality revolvers capable of functioning well in revolver competition. Ruger's un-ergonomic offerings didn't lend themselves well to revolver competition, and who else was there for the past twenty years? Taurus? Rossi?

 

[Zaydok Allen]

In order:

Smith
Ruger
Colt

That's based purely on experience though with Smiths. I've never owned a Colt. I do prefer the very solid blast shield of the Smith though. Don't know why...……..

 

[mcb]

In order:

Smith
Ruger
Colt

That's based purely on experience though with Smiths. I've never owned a Colt. I do prefer the very solid blast shield of the Smith though. Don't know why...……..

Accidentally putting 9.0 gr of Titegroup (double charge, Quickloads predicts 85,000 psi+) under a 180 gr 40 cal bullet makes you appreciate that solid recoil shield. I double charge a 40S&W back when I was first learning to use a progress press, still haven't really figure out how a double charge is possible on a Dillon SDB but I managed it.

The gun went bang and other than the cylinder being locked up I never new the case had just cut itself into nearly three pieces in the cylinder. Had to pound the cylinder open and drive the rest of the moonclip full of rounds out of it. I could not see any evident damage other that a couple of nasty scratches in the recoil shield from the heavily deformed moonclip. Called S&W up and told them what happened including the fact that I double charged it and that I would like to send it in for a safety check ($35 at the time) and repair if needed.

They did the check, fit a new cylinder stop since it was worn out of spec (unrelated to the double charge) and sent my revolver back with a clean bill of health (8-day door to door) and did not charge me a dime. I was out only the cost of shipping it to them. I have since put many thousands of round of 40S&W through that 610 and a few hundreds 10mm Auto. I suspect the solid recoil shield kept me from catching any case fragments. I was uninjured in anyway other than my pride.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Accidentally putting 9.0 gr of Titegroup (double charge, Quickloads predicts 85,000 psi+) under a 180 gr 40 cal bullet makes you appreciate that solid recoil shield. I double charge a 40S&W back when I was first learning to use a progress press, still haven't really figure out how a double charge is possible on a Dillon SDB but I managed it.

The gun went bang and other than the cylinder being locked up I never new the case had just cut itself into nearly three pieces in the cylinder. Had to pound the cylinder open and drive the rest of the moonclip full of rounds out of it. I could not see any evident damage other that a couple of nasty scratches in the recoil shield from the heavily deformed moonclip. Called S&W up and told them what happened including the fact that I double charged it and that I would like to send it in for a safety check ($35 at the time) and repair if needed.

They did the check, fit a new cylinder stop since it was worn out of spec (unrelated to the double charge) and sent my revolver back with a clean bill of health (8-day door to door) and did not charge me a dime. I was out only the cost of shipping it to them. I have since put many thousands of round of 40S&W through that 610 and a few hundreds 10mm Auto. I suspect the solid recoil shield kept me from catching any case fragments. I was uninjured in anyway other than my pride.

That's a good lesson right there. Maybe my subconscious is telling me something.

 

[Huntolive]

I prefer Dan Wesson release once you get used to it as it inherently as strength and support to the front of the cylinder.
You just cannot be a Dan Wesson 15-2 or 715 for the money
Sure I hated the release on the first one I owned for the first few hours but now I see the beauty of it

My second would be colts because they're just classy and unique

 

[peacemaker45]

Shooting as a right-hander, I had a strong preference for the S&W Style. Now, shooting as a lefty, I find there's not much difference between S&W and Ruger.

I break my shooting grip and retract the pistol to about belly button height, left thumb pushes in and forward, while the right thumb pushes a cylinder through the frame,) and the same motion will do for either latch style. The Colt on the other hand requires I hook the latch with my trigger finger which is not something I've practiced, therefore it's awkward.

 

[Pat Riot]

I didn’t read everyone’s responses but I prefer the S&W release. I have shot Rugers and Colts as well. Fine revolvers, but I prefer the S&W cylinder release.

 

[tbob38]

Over the past nearly 15 years of competitive shooting I have had or seen a fair number of S&W revolvers crash and burn (stop working) and I have to say I have never seen one fail due to a cylinder release failing in the open position. I have seen it fall off but never fail in such a way as to leaving the revolver unlocked. Maybe it can happen but I have not seen it.

My reason really has nothing to do with a potential mechanical failure and more to do with ergonomics and reloading quickly. That rearward motion of a Colt cylinder release is simply not as ergonomic and efficient of a motion if your trying to reload a revolver quickly, such as is common in USPSA, IDPA, and the fiction Self-Defense scenarios rolling around in my well deluded head. These fantasies prompted the somewhat satirical comment that a Colt will get you killed on the streets.

As I alluded to in the second half of my earlier post there is a reason S&W dominates those sports and the cylinder release is very much part of that domination. The push forward motion of a S&W revolver is simply faster and more efficient whether you're a strong hand or weak-hand re-loader, especially if you're feeding your revolver moonclips. Since I started shooting USPSA in 2005 I have seen lot of S&W revolver in competition, a few Rugers, a Webley Mark VI and even a Dan Wesson but I have never seen Colt. If the Colt was faster the competitive shooters would be using it (despite the crazy Colt prices) and they are not.

-rambling

I agree. That is why Colt is my least favorite method of cylinder release.

 

[Logwood]

I prefer the S&W release, but they're all good!!

 

[MI2600]

Being a lefty...they are all on the WRONG side!

 

[WheelGunMan]

I like them all.

I like em all. Why? Cause they are the REAL guns which are wheelguns!!

Ditto

 

[Sistema1927]

S&W, Ruger, and Kimber are all OK for me.

Colt? Not so much.

 

[entropy]

I would actually prefer the latch relaease that the Enfield revolvers have, but since I have never actually owned one, (I have shot several) I'd order them Colt, Ruger, Smith. In reality, I've had all three, plus a Smith with top-latch, side swinging, clockwise rotating cylinder.

 

[CraigC]

I'm more accustomed to the S&W but have no problem with the Ruger or Colt design. The Dan Wesson is aggravating.

Nope, the sole reason is that for the past many years, S&W was the only manufacturer of revolvers making the only quality revolvers capable of functioning well in revolver competition. Ruger's un-ergonomic offerings didn't lend themselves well to revolver competition, and who else was there for the past twenty years? Taurus? Rossi?

Huh? The sole reason for S&W's dominance is their fast trigger return. Folks like Miculek can outrun the trigger return on a Ruger, Colt, Dan Wesson, virtually anything.