Carmoney

Sounds like you're fixing to do something more radical than necessary, Chris. Be careful down there.

Welcome aboard........better buckle your seatbelt!!

I shot a 6.5" 25-2 with a Ti cylinder all year, Bill! Nothing wrong with that platform.

Looks fast!!

That would be quite a demotion. Board members get paid nothing. Particularly when you consider that the President of USPSA makes over $50,000 per year.

I'm not sure I've ever seen her with a revolver in her hands, but considering all the help she's been to us over the years, I'll always think of her as one of the top honorary wheelgunners out there! Happy Birthday, Linda! And thanks for everything you contribute to the game.

Yep, a 15- to 17-yard zero sure sounds about right to me!

That would be a good thing, as long as S&W doesn't get ridiculous on the pricing. I was a little less than totally enthralled when the 8-shot .38 Supers were re-introduced with a dealer price that exceeded a thousand bucks, y'know? If the factory is actually listening, I'd like to see a 6.5" plain barrel .45 wheel back in the line-up!

Get back to work, Warren.

I'm not convinced. Virtually everybody who has a 7-shot 686 or 8-shot 627 has a 6-shot revolver laying around somewhere. And for those who don't, I think most would agree that if you can afford to shoot USPSA, you can afford to acquire a 625 or 610. My initial inclination was that it wouldn't hurt anything to change the rule, but then it occurred to me that you will occasionally see a stage where it would be well worth the procedural penalty to take one extra shot. On the other hand, shooting a 7-shot or 8-shot .38/.357 is never going to be the best choice in USPSA anyway. We've pretty much talked this issue to death over the years--when we had a poll on what guns should be allowed in USPSA Revolver Division, there was an overwhelming consensus to keep it six rounds between reloads, and no comped or ported barrels.

I love hearing stuff like this! That's a very classy and generous move by Jim S.

I think Cliff is correct. We liberalized the USPSA Revolver equipment rules to accommodate exactly that sort of modification, because there is clearly no unfair competitive advantage being gained by installing a 6" barrel on a 646 and shooting it against 625s and 25-2s, etc. IPSC is not quite as enlightened on this issue. Maybe you can win a spot on the U.S. Revolver Team and have USPSA cover some of your expenses, like they do for other divisions--since they even pay for special teams for women and juniors to go to the world shoot in some other divisions, I'm sure they will be covering expenses for a Revolver team to go this time. (Yeah, right!)

It's nice that all these folks are trying to help.......but this really is a legal question. Maybe there's an attorney who shoots competitively in IN who can answer this question. Otherwise, no matter how clear it seems, the advice that is relied upon may create a real problem for the kid down the line.

Cliff got an Ion Bond job on a stainless revo a couple years ago, and a big piece of the finish peeled off. It looked pretty bad to me.

That Moss guy better be very careful he doesn't go too far in slandering my dremel work, or he's going to be up to his ass in lawsuit papers and all his nice guns and saxophones will be listed in the classifieds.

How much would it cost to plate a 1911 with Google chrome?

I like it too! This exercise pretty much proves what I have always believed--that a radically-lightened hammer snaps down with less jarring and jostling. With that video evidence, it doesn't take any great leap of faith to conclude that a lightened hammer would lead to a meaningful improvement in practical accuracy. Cool stuff!

OK guys, I'll wade in here and simply say this: I consider it a genuine honor that my revolver work is even being compared to Randy Lee's. Randy is a great gunsmith, and a very fine man. If you dig back far enough in the archives, you'll see that I have recommended his work for a number of years. That recommendation continues to this day.

Anybody who says that hasn't tried the Millett.

I hear ya on that. The Weigand is not a bad option, particularly considering the cost. They're pretty easy to install yourself, although you'll need to get the windage screw kits they sell through Brownells.

Ayoob had one he called "Fluffy, the magic gun that only speaks for its owner."

I had one of those! I actually won a certificate for a Magna-Trigger conversion at a shooting match when I lived in New Hampshire. The guy doing them, Rick Devoid, is a solid guy. He bought the rights to the design from the inventor after he died. I haven't seen Rick in 20 years.

Hey Josh, Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of the Weigand blade. It's wiggly after being installed, and made of aluminum and cannot be cold-blued once the black color wears off. On the other hand, it does provide a very nice sight picture.

Hmmm.....I wasn't aware of these until reading this thread. Thanks Dean. Here's the link: http://www.sdmfabricating.com/S&W_Rear..._Rear_Sight.htm Not sure how I feel about the fact that it's not adjustable for windage, although I suppose a little filing could be done to make that adjustment for whatever load is going to be used most in the gun. And the price......yikes!.....although it's good to have another option available. The other sight people seem to like is the LPA adjustable. I've never been a big fan, although with the Millett now discontinued it may be the best option available.

Yep, me too. I resqueeze the loaded rounds. No biggie. Although you could certainly prime the brass beforehand if you prefer. Any of the hand-priming tools will work, although the Sinclair ($$$) and the K&M (not so $$$) are high-quality tools that are designed to last for years. I like the fact that the K&M tool will accept Lee shellholders which are cheap and readily available.