Rogan

Nice job, you left more material than I did! http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=57248&hl=%2Brogan#entry871786

I gotta get some of those

I can't speak for anyone else, so I'll just interpret my scores for both guns. I tanked stage one... with both guns!!! Since it was a six shot classifier, there really isn't too much to say. You either get it right, or you mess it up. For me rounds in the gun didn't matter, so I don't think it makes a good sample to draw from. Stage 2 is a different matter. I shot it well with both guns. Perfectly exicuted, no messed up plans. The six went perfectly as a six shooter and the eight shooter i shot as an eight shooter, not as a six with extra reloads. I was 4 seconds faster with the eight shooter. The caveat is: since the stage was eight shot neutral, I was forced to do two standing reloads with the 6 shooter. Guys, I understand stage planning and I did not make any mistakes that caused me to abort my original plan and make an extra reload. There was no way to shoot it without the standing reloads. So two standing reloads at 2 seconds per reload and... wha la, i just shot the same time with both guns. So for me, stage design is still the biggest factor in the 6 vs 8 debate. A note on reloads- for me in this match, I only fumbled one reload with the 625, which was actually a failure to extract the moon. I was slower and not as consistent with the eight shooter. I strongly believe that the reload difference is a factor in this debate. The 625 loads faster and more consistently than the 627. Stage three: I shot well with the six and lost my mind with the 8. I didnt realized the popper at the start of the stage was falling so I shot it again (unnecessarily), which caused a standing reload (it was the only place where it was visible), which messed up my count for the rest of the stage and I continued to loose my mind for the rest of the stage. Since I decided to loose my mind with the 8 shooter, I can't really compare the two, because I shot the stage really well with the 6. Stage 4 was similiar to stage 3, (i didn't shoot either well) but there is one thing i can't explain. I only got 90 points, which implies that I missed a target or hit the no shoot. I know I didn't do either one, since I walked the stage while it was scored, so I can't explain the big loss of points. No matter, I didn't shoot this stage well. I mention the poor quality of the shooting because it's pointless to compare a good run with one gun to a poor run with another gun. To have a good comparison, a given shooter needs to shoot both guns with the same quality performance. If not, then incorrect conclusions will be drawn from the results. I am begining to think more like Rob, there is less difference between the guns that we think. Especially with good stage design that eliminates forced standing reloads with the 6 shooter. I, like everyone else, had a great time shooting and look forward to the next outlaw match. That killer flag will fly again!

Cliff, when I shot the WSSS, especially after a day of revo first, I had four unintentional shots fired for the match. (all of them went into the berm, so they weren't unsafe, just earlier than i planned on shooting them) The first one was on the first stage, shooting at a small uspsa target at 20-22 yards. I got to see through the rear sight notch for about 1/20 of a second, then the 1911 was in recoil, and I instantly thought oh c*#p, don't start unintentionally discharging on the first stage... then I heard the ding and realized that I hit the darn thing and I should continue with the rest of the stage. Proved to me that using those aiming things on the gun really does work! So I have to really really concentrate on keeping my finger off the trigger until I've made that decision to fire. I'm so used to taking up the trigger and prepping the revo for the shot, that with a good 1911 trigger that has minimal take-up, short press to sear break and sub 3lb weight, I often don't recognize that I've fired the gun. So the earlier advice of keeping the finger outside the trigger guard is solid advice. I use the same grip for all handguns, so I haven't had a problem with hitting mag releases or binding cylinders. I shoot with both thumbs forward, pointing to the target, so they stay out of the way on both systems. As for the reload, I do opposite things with the two guns. As soon as the moon has cleared the revo (support hand reload with strong hand maintaining the shooting grip), the revo is pointed straight down, with the cylinder at belt level, but shooting hand elbow up. I palm the moon into the cylinder, then rotate the support hand, closing the cylinder and obtaining the firing grip at the same time. With the single stack, I do the opposite. The gun stays high in my vision as I pull it in closer to the body. I try to be able to look over my fingers on the grip and see my next target when I'm not looking the mag into the gun. Take a look at Travis Tomassie's open gun reload on you tube. It's been posted for a few years now, but it contains all the efficient movements to make a good auto reload. So to answer your question, no, the mechanics of running the two guns are different in my opinion. The other basics of shooting; sights, trigger press, follow through, grip, they all remain the same, just slightly tweaked for each weapon system based on your needs.

Mike, UR ON!!!! Can u make it to Area 2 in Nov? Rich

Cliff, I agree with many of your statements. I really enjoy the stage breakdown, the decisions on which shots to take where and how to maximize reloading time. The difficultly of mastering the equipment and learning stage planning (being creative) are the fun aspects of the division. But there are a few negatives for me as well: I mentioned stage design in an earlier post. Many of the uspsa stages I shoot don't offer much in the way of creativity. Many stages take the 8shot-neutral rule to mean that the shooter can only take 8 shots from box A and then can only take 7 shots from box B then take 8 shots from box C. On those stages, there is no creativity, since the stage can only be shot one way. You eat the standing reloads and can't take advantage of creative shooting or run the stage in an alternative way. Good stage design is the single most important factor for our entire sport, regardless of division! And it may not be getting the attention it deserves. I know it's a challenge, I've designed stages and matches too. So when I see a match that has the majority of the shooters shooting the stage exactly the same way (cause there is no alternative), I get bored and loose interest. My other concern is the same problem that has been addressed by the stand alone nationals. If the shooter has a choice between shooting "major 6" revolver (cause let's face it, if major is an option, the better points from major are better and everyone competes cause they want to test their skills and be better) or shooting production (minor), most shooters are going to choose to shoot production. Production is the largest division, if it's not, it grew quicker than other division and has the easiest price tag for entry into the sport. So having the stand alone revo nationals is already a huge positive change for the division. Shooters don't have to pick between their divisions. I shoot most often at Rio Salado in AZ. A large, well funded shooting club that offers 10+ action shooting matches per month that are attended by 80+ shooter at every match. In the uspsa matches, how many revolvers are competing? Never more than three! I personally have never shot a uspsa monthly match with more than one other revo shooter. I became so discouraged that I stopped shooting uspsa. Why go shoot a match by myself? I can't discuss stage breakdown, plans of attack or compare my scores with anyone. On the other hand, if I attend the icore match, I get to shoot with 40+ revolver shooters, from D class to GM, and I can shoot any revolver I want too!!!! There is a place for me no matter what revo gear I choose to use. When I started with revo 6+ years ago, I found a revo family. Many of these shooters have become good friends and I look forward to seeing them at the monthly match. I certainly don't have the answers. But revo in uspsa is restrictive in many ways. The division can stay the same, and maybe die out, or it can try some new ideas to see if it can flourish and grow. Rich Brethour

Bill, the postal match idea is great. I've got a couple of stages already printed that would fit the postal match, set it up anywhere, criteria. Any one else want to contribute stages? Rich Brethour

So maybe the idea of a single, centrally located match where shooters get to try out both revos may be too difficult. Instead of one match, how about two or three located in different parts of the county, at different times, so more revo shooters could attend one of the outlaw, experimental matches. Az/Ca has a pretty good contingent of revo shooters who take turns traveling back and fourth between each others ranges for medium sized revo only matches. I think Rio Salado in Az could be be persuaded to hold a two day weekend match, one day for each revo style, 6-8 stages for 75-80 shooters. Considering we just had 80+ shooters run through 11 stages on friday at the WSS match (RO's and revo guys), a match of this size might be feasible as a test bed for the concept of 8 minor/6 major. Anyone in the central area or east coast able to do a similar match? Or maybe each area could run a small test match?

Robb, you hit the nail on the head. USPSA places more emphasis on the speed portion than the accuracy portion. Whats the biggest killer to speed? Having to reload. And with a 6 shot revo, just when you get warmed up with your shooting, oops/dang it, gotta reload. On a given stage the revo shooter spends as much time reloading as he does shooting. For the new guy that wants to shoot, it's not as fun to reload as it is to shoot. Is there a way to put more emphasis on the accuracy part and still keep it fun without turning into a bullseye match?

Sorry for the late reply, I just found this thread, work has been kicking my butt the past few days. First, thanks Robb, Carmoney, Larry for the kind words. Second, I've been shooting competitively for the past seven years, the vast majority of which has been only revo, with most of that being ICORE. Why? Well, that is a pretty complicated answer, with some of my answer having already been discussed by several of the past posts by all of you other shooters. I like the challenge of the revo - it does take a little more effort to break down a stage and plan out your moves and do it with a gun that require some practice and effort to use well. I also learned how to shoot using a revolver first, so for me it's what I know best, my fall back skillset if you will. From a personal standpoint, I have found the revolver community to the most friendly/sharing/involved group in all the shooting sports where I have participated. I'm not saying that the other groups or divisions are not friendly, just that revo shooters really seem to take care of each other. If your revo breaks, or your gear isn't working right, or you need a little help with stage breakdown, or advice on how to shoot better, you almost have to beat the revo shooters off with a stick cause so many of them want to help you out. It may be the small number of shooters that contributes to this, but maybe thats part of the draw, the friendship and the comraderie of taking up the challenge to "do it the hard way". In any case, I like the revo the best. So how do we increase match participation with revolvers. The stand alone Nationals is the best move. Top shooter are not going to pick the revolver to shoot in a match when it means they have to give up shooting their limited gun, or open gun or production gun. The theory holds true for most shooters. If my favorite gun to shoot is my glock 34 in production class, then thats what I'm going to shoot at Nationals, if the Nats are prod, limited and revo combined in the same match. The current idea of SS and revo back to back makes the most sense, since SS shooters are used to the idea of multiple reloads per stage. A modest amount of stage tweaking between the matches would change it from 8-shot arrays to a more neutral format and give the shooters who choose to shoot both matches a fresh look. I would like to add my belief that stage design is the single most important aspect of our shooting sports. I have shot numerous matches where 50% or more of the stages are identical in layout, just different with the actual targets engaged. Example, shoot one target array on the left, then run in a counterclockwise semi-circle engaging targets as you see them. Six stages in a row (out of 12), the only thing that changed was the type of target engaged, ie some paper had no-shoots or hard cover or the three paper targets were replaced with a plate rack or star. I would like to see stages that allow the shooter options on which targets to shoot where and in what order they choose. The top shooters may all come to the same conclusion that way "A" is the "best" or "fastest", but the options allow the different classes to shoot the stage their way and allows individual shooters to pick the way that emphasizes their strengths. After shooting the Western States Revo match, I have changed my belief about the 8-shot minor addition to revo class. I used to be all for it. Now I believe that it will fundamentally change revo division. As mentioned earlier, the 33% increase in ammo capacity is the deciding factor. It's not the same as the 20% change in ammo capacity in SS. Making the stages 6-round friendly does not counter balance the ammo capacity/need to do a standing reload cause i missed a shot on the 6 round array. Stage design can make both 6 and 8 shot revos equal, but it takes a lot of thought and planning to make that many stages that perfectly balanced. So the decision remains, what to do? I wanted to shoot my 8-shooter for the SS match so I could compare what i could do shooting both revos back to back. (I couldn't, it was the Single Stack match the rest of the weekend, I get it and I'm not angry about, I had fun shooting my single stack for the first time in a match). So who is centrally located that wants to host a back to back revo match where a bunch of shooters shoot through the entire match with one revo, then do it again with the other revo. Then we can compare apples to apples and really understand the differences between 6 major and 8 minor. Rich Brethour

For those of you who asked about pricing for the 627s, here is one option. A local store here in AZ is offering the revos at $1290.00, not including Arizona sales tax of 7.8%(only for in-state sales). If your out of state, you pay shipping from AZ. Guns etc Ron Sega 480-963-4311 Ron is asking for a $100.00 deposit and he pre-ordered a dozen guns.

The big prices are true. Here in Phoenix at the gun show primers were going for $107 a 1000. And there was a long line!

Ok, make sure you are sitting down. Here in Phoenix we just had one of our big gun shows, 200+ tables and primers were going for $107 a thousand! yes you read that right. Buy what you can or wait and hope the prices come down.

Here's the deal. Bangers Inc was the original distributor that ordered and distributed the 627-4 in 38super. At the Shot Show, Dennis Donahue, an Acount/Purchasing Agent with Bangers, agreed that a second run of 627s in 38super would be a good idea if there was enough interest. So this is where you, the consumer, comes into play. Mr. Donahue needs letters of interest from potential customers. You will note that I said "letters". Yes, snail mail. He wants written-on-paper letters to take to his chain of command to justify a customer base. The letters need to be sent to: Bangers Inc Attn: Dennis Donahue 2971 North Cannon Blvd. Kannapolis, NC 28083 Here is a sample letter. Dear Mr. Donahue, I am writting to you to express my interest in purchasing a Smith and Wesson 627-4 revolver chambered in the 38 super pistol caliber. I currently compete in several shooting matches each year and would like to use such a revolver for competition. If Bangers were to procure a limited edition of this revolver like the previously offered 627-4, I would purchase one. Because Bangers would be setting the specifications for this limited edition revolver, I would like to see one change with this new edition. I would like to see the cylinder made out of titanium instead of stainless steel. Other than this change, I believe the previous specifications of the 627-4 should remain the same. Sincerely, Richard Brethour (add your e-mail address in case Bangers wants to contact you) Now before anyone gets irritated with my sample letter, remember, it is a sample letter. I just wrote this to give people some incentive to actually write a snail mail letter. You can copy and paste, then change it as you see fit. If you don't like the specs I put in, add your own. But the simpler we keep these request letters, the easier it will be for Bangers to agree to order the guns. If everyone requests a different version, then they don't know what to order. So lets not send a confusing message. I'm suggesting the Ti cylinder for two reasons. 1) It give the collectors a reason to buy a second one (and as it has been mentioned here in the past, they buy more guns than we do) and 2) I'm finding on my personal guns that the Ti cylinder offers me a smoother action and no issues with notches peening over. I have made this a poll to see how much interest there is in this gun. Mr Donahue did not make any mention of a minimun number of requests needed, so more is better. Don't ask about price. That will be determined by Smith and Wesson and Bangers. We all know what the original 627-4s sold for when new and what current 627s are selling for. Rich

we needed to show a speedy-e-rack rig. Belt: Bianchi 1-3/4 duty Holster: SideArmor 5" with homemade drop Holder: Speedy-e-rack Bag: Mesh bag from Dillon 3-gun gear Revolver: S&W 627-5 with Ti cylinder, Hogue big butt grip, and Hogue cylinder release The speedy-e-rack has two bolts that attach it to the belt. The duty belt has a hard plastic insert so the bolts hold it rigidly in place. I also wear three belt keepers to keep the rig from moving on my inner belt (which happens to be a wilderness belt). Yes, the buckle is in the back, so I have more room to place the gear in the front. Rich

Steve, Who's got the 586 for sale? I've been looking for another L frame. Rich

Bubber, From the photos, it looks like you cut down the center post that releases the rounds? or does the jetloader have a shorter post than the compIII? I thought about shortening the center post on my compIIIs for 38special to get the rounds futher into the chambers before the loader releases the rounds, but I thought I would ruin the loader so I didn't give it a try. Rich

"It was sorta funny, (not funny, ha, ha but funny strange) that I could see everythin in slow moshen." and I had forgotten this stage for the last 4 months until receiving the new "The Cylinder's Turn". Thanks for reminding me. Bubber, in all seriousness, thank you for making me relive the stage. It reminds me to have fun and not take things too seriously. I got a little to wound up the first day and shot poorly for it. When I shoot for fun, I shoot better, and Duh, have more fun. The whole reason I shoot is because I enjoy it. When it starts becoming work, it's time to stop shooting. It wasn't funny at the time, but it sure is now. Richard

Ok, I'll jump back in with an idea. Let's make a one year test experiment in revo division. After the 2009 Nats, the rest of the year including through Nat 2010, lets have 6major and 8minor guns with the same rules as currently supplied. The only change is to offer the 8minor revo. By giving it a full year and a nationals test, we (I repeat, we the shooters) can make an objective decision 1) if there really is an advantage 2) how big or small that advantage is and 3) we might draw some more shooters to the game and to nationals. If single stack can do/try it, why can't we? The 1911 guys are some of the most diehard equipment dedicated guys I've ever met, no disrespect intented. Many of them know what they like and so they stay with their chosen format. But they were able to change their rules and include more shooters in their division. Why can't we? Rich Brethour ICORE AZ1735 A USPSA A59928 B

Naw, let's make an open revolver class. Anything that isn't a stock type 6 shot as the current rules stipulate falls into open class. I'm a limited class ICORE shooter and don't use an optic, but I would gladly shoot against the optic crowd and use my 8 shot in USPSA, if there was a place for it. Right now, I really don't have a place in USPSA unless I switch guns. That's not too bad, since a man only needs one more gun, but I prefer to shoot my 8 shot.

For ICORE, using a 627, I'm shooting a 135gr Billy Bullet(moly), with 4.7gr VV N320, PF128-130. Very clean!! If you go to 4.8 grains you'll be close to 135PF. This is in a 38special case. Yea, yea...I know, Vit is expensive. But my gun works flawlessly. so I have one less variable to worry about. I can shoot an entire match without cleaning anything.

The guys and I got to practice it again today. It's not getting any easier. We figured out the scoring, which makes the stage a little easier. Just get as many points as you can. We shot it two different ways, trying for best hits knowing we would not make all the shots in 7 seconds and trying for eight shots in each string. I'm the only revo shooter in the group. I had my best run while trying to get 8 rounds per string. But for consistency I managed closer scores with the best hit method. My runs were 45-55 points, not too good with 55 being my best run. In my defense, I am shooting 195pf factory ammo , but I know that's not really the issue I need more practice. So what are you scoring?????

I don't get to go to nats this year, but have a couple of friends who are making their debute. So I've started practicing with them now that the stages have been posted. This is the first time I've seen this standards course (I normally shoot ICORE.) With a wheel gun, it definetly takes some skill! 8 rounds in 7 seconds at 40 yards So I was wondering, what's a good score? What will the Gms have for a hit factor as well as, say a B class shooter?

The gap between the cylinder and forcing cone should be between .004 and .010, while the cylinder to breech face should be between .060 and .068. If you can't get these dimensions, then the overall distance between the forcing cone and the breach face is too small for the cylinder you have in the gun. The forcing cone would have to be moved, either by loosening the barrel as bubber did or shortening/squaring the face of the forcing cone. There maybe other solutions, but those are the two that come to mind.

Trying to go, but it depends on finances.