Which beater? Old N-Frame or GP100?

[bokchoi]

I have an old police-trade Model 28-2 that I picked up for a song a little while ago, and it has been my favorite shooter, especially for higher-power .357 ammo. As of late, I've had to repair a pushoff problem on it; nothing completely debilitating, considering I shoot DA only, but it didn't help instill any confidence.

I'm considering either sending the pistol for a good teflon job after I'm sure the pushoff is repaired; the gun still does pushoff, but it takes a good 25 pounds of force to do so. As you might have noticed, I'm getting a little attached to this gun

On the other hand, I'm considering breaking away from my old S&W obsession and getting a Ruger GP100 for any really heavy work loads or just general shooting in which I don't need to worry about ruining the gun.

What are your opinions? Should I keep the Smith or trade in for a Ruger?

 

[Mike Irwin]

The 28 is as strong as the GP-100, if not more so.

If you want the ultimate in revolver strength, you need to go to the large frame Rugers.

 

[Jim March]

Hrrrmmm...Mike is right, in terms of it's ability to handle hot loads without blowing.

BUT, the GP100 has an edge when doing fast DA shooting. The hand/star surfaces are bigger and tougher on the Ruger despite the GP100 being slightly smaller.

Upshot: if it's a GOOD GP100 to start with (run the checkout, even on new guns!) then it will probably have a longer effective shooting life than a 27/28.

That said, the rare Redhawk 357 is probably the stone-axe-toughest 357 made, with the FA 383 on the '83 frame being it's only competition. Or *maybe* the Korth, though I doubt it...

 

[bokchoi]

In all reality, I probably won't be hot-rodding the revolver too much, so I don't think I need to be too worried about the gun blowing up. What I do want, though, is raw strength and durability for long term use; while I know every revolver I own can probably eat a steady diet of .357, I want one that will go for at least as long as I'm around without need of repair or tuning, or something that will give me the most confidence.\

That said, I think I'll take a serious look at the GP100 tomorrow; after this business with my M28 and its aging (and very possibly the previous owner's idea of gunsmithing), it might be time to start over to rebuild confidence in a new gun

 

[jdmb03]

Take Jim's advice and get a Ruger Redhawk. This thing will last forever. I'd buy it if I wasn't getting a GP100.

Redhawk .357

 

[Rob96]

I think the GP are as strong as S&W N frames. Nice thing with the GP's is that you get it in a smaller frame size. Corbon and Grey Area ammo don't use GP-100's as test guns for nothing.

 

[Old Fuff]

Applying 25 pounds of force on the back of the S&W hammer could have contributed to the push-off problem you have. I don’t know what you did to correct it, but if whatever it was removed much metal it also removed the case-hardened surface, and you can now expect it too wear. I would suggest replacing the hammer and trigger, or having the effected surfaces rehardened.

I note that you mentioned that you do most if not all of your shooting in the double-action mode. If this is the case I’d stick with the Highway Patrolman. It is generally acknowledged that older Smith & Wesson's have, or can be tuned to have, the best double actions available. I have shot GP-100’s, and consider it to be an excellent revolver that will stand up to both abuse and heavy loads. But I have yet too see one that will match the S&W’s double action.

 

[bokchoi]

I'll admit I'm no gunsmith; I studied the S&W Shop manual for a few months beforehand, and I also took into consideration that I paid only $200 Canadian for the revolver; to send the gun to a gunsmith would probably have cost around that amount, if not moreso

I decided to take a leap of faith and try to correct the problem myself with a fine stone, but I'm guessing that Olf Fuff is right about the case-hardening; now that it's gone, I shouldn't be surprised that it pushes off at all or if the problem reoccurs. I'm definitely not keen on fitting all the new parts myself, even if I had the know-how. (The previous owner had tried to lighten the SA trigger, and had rounded off the SA sear on the trigger)

Another more costly option is to send the gun in for a rebuild job; I'm not certain how much that will cost here in Canada, but I guess it would probaly cost as much as a new revolver altogether. On the other hand, it would be nice to keep an out-of-production S&W in the collection, and even better if I could get it fixed up.

 

[mtnbkr]

The nice thing about using a GP100 as a beater is that you can replace it anytime you want. 357mag Redhawks and S&W 28s aren't as common.

I've run a steady diet of 180gr@1250fps loads through my GP100.

Chris

 

[Old Fuff]

If you have not done so, I suggest you get a copy of Jerry Kuhnhausen's "The S&W Revolver - A Shop Manual." You may have done this already, but I'm not sure if you're mention of a "shop manual" refers to this or something else.

Anyway, if someone has worked on the hammer notch I suspect it is ruined. This is something that should never be done. You adjust the single-action pull by working on the trigger.

You can reharden the areas of the hammer and trigger that engage when the hammer's full-cocked yourself, using something called "Kasenit" if you have access to an ordinary blow torch. The rest of the hammer/trigger can be covered with a substance that will prevent the heat from spreading. The materials needed to do all of this, as well as new S&W parts, can be obtained from Brownells in Iowa (www.brownells.com). They also offer excellent (and free) technical advise.

Another possibility is to convert the action to double-action only if a safe single-action can't be obtained.

Last but not least, considering the overall handgun situation where you live I think I'd keep everything I had, but consider adding a Ruger to the collection.

In any case, a new hammer and trigger for the S&W (if both were necessary, and that's not certain) would I think, cost far less then any new revolver. As a general rule you can install these without fitting, and to the degree that fitting might be necessary the necessary information is in the Kuhnhausen book.

 

[Mike Irwin]

I tried recutting the sear seat on a Model 29 hammer and rehardening it with Casenit.

I used a regular blow torch.

I couldn't get it hot enough.

I switched to a MAPP torch. Still no joy.

I finally bought a new hammer.

 

[C.R.Sam]

I would hang on to the N and get it back in shape.

Fuff n Mike got it covered as to why and how.

Alternate source for the parts would be Numrich....Gunparts Corporation.

Sam

 

[Maddock]

A solution to working through the hardening could be having the part(s) hard chromed.
Many moons ago I saw this used on Dan Wessons to deal with the sintered metal parts.

 

[Old Fuff]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that since S&W changed over to making revolvers with the firing pin in the frame rather then on the hammer nose older parts are getting harder (and more expensive) to find. You shouldn't have a problem right now, but if you decide to referbish the model 28 I wouldn't put it off for too long.

 

[wanderinwalker]

It is generally acknowledged that older Smith & Wesson's have, or can be tuned to have, the best double actions available. I have shot GP-100’s, and consider it to be an excellent revolver that will stand up to both abuse and heavy loads. But I have yet too see one that will match the S&W’s double action.

Old Fuff,
I know that the older Smiths have (or can have) buttery smooth DA triggers. That is one of their biggest strong points. My grandfather has an old S&W M-19 (it's actually a named model, I can't remember which one it is right now) that has seen ALOT of use and is smooth and accurate. But, my dad's GP-100, which has also seen plenty of use, is pretty smooth and accurate too.

This is an interesting thread. I've too have gotten the idea I want a good .357 revolver. Sadly, I can't decide between a 686 or a GP-100. Decisions, decisions. Yet I don't think one can wrong either way.

 

[bokchoi]

I've worked out the cost of having new parts and a new finish applied to the Highway Patrolman to be about $400, plus the $200 I spent on it initially. In comparison, Ruger just pumped up the prices on the GP100 here in Canada, so they're running at about $725, up from the $550 they used to be a few months back.

That said, the revolver is already packed up and ready to be shipped to the country's service center in BC, and I'll be sure to let you guys know how it comes back... I'll take a look at the GP100 later on when I have more money to play with

 

[Old Fuff]

There are reasons that the S&W revolvers (at least the older ones) have, or can have, a superior double action. Both the Ruger and S&W have a little lever, called a “sear†(S&W) or “hammer dog†(Ruger) mounted in the hammer face. When the trigger is pulled a projection on the back of the trigger pushes against the bottom of this lever and forces the hammer to revolve backwards until the hammer rotates far enough so the lever can no longer engage it. At this point the hammer is released and falls.

However the S&W system is different and unique. The lever only rotates the hammer part of the way, and then the trigger engages a shelf on the bottom of the hammer and directly pushes the hammer backwards until the hammer is rotated far enough so that the hammer is released and falls. Consequently the hammer rotates through a slightly longer stroke then other revolvers, and the direct trigger-hammer engagement provides better leverage that translates into an easier pull at the end of the stroke.

This action is augmented with a flat (leaf) mainspring in larger models that actually decreases in pounds-pressure after the first two-thirds or so of the hammer’s travel. The Ruger uses a less-likely-to-break and less expensive coil spring, but it “stacks†in such a way that the required pressure increases to the end of the trigger pull.

Both makes of revolvers are excellent, and both have their own advantages and disadvantages. In picking one go by those features that best suit your needs. If I was picking a revolver that would be primarily used in the double action mode (as the gentleman who started this thread indicated he did) I would not hesitate to choose a Smith & Wesson. However if I didn’t expect to use this feature except on rare occasions I wouldn’t take the matter into consideration. For example, if I wanted to shoot an extensive number of the hottest loads I would opt for the Ruger, which is built like a brick outhouse. This is not to say that S&W’s are weak, but rather that Ruger’s are stronger then they necessarily have too be.

Bill Ruger’s philosophy, (I had the pleasure of knowing him,) was to build a satisfactory or even superior product then his bigger-name competitors, but would cost less then what they charged. We all know how well he succeeded.

 

[4v50 Gary]

If we're talking about beating a beater, GP100.

 

[twoblink]

GP100.. "Ruger tough"...

If you want a beater, this is it..

 

[Mastrogiacomo]

I was set on buying a S&W for my next revolver. I went to the range today to try my new Beretta....at 50 ft. Really sucked and made a fool of myself in front of kids no less... long story....

The guy at the range had a Ruger 100 in a 4" barrel in blue and let me use it. Love at first sight. It had an even better trigger pull than my 686 4" S&W. Not that I'm selling mind you but my next revolver is going to be a Ruger GP 100...