Carmoney

Bull-oney. The guy's frickin' younger than me. He just looks old.

Finally caught on to you, didn't they Hop?? Good job.

If the sight is still in the gun, it's easier to drill it from the front. It's easy if you mark the spot with a Starrett punch and keep your drill straight. I never understand why anybody markets a fiber-optic sight with a closed front.

Good--now that you have it adjusted to your liking, measure the strain screw protrusion and then grind the strain screw down to the correct length. That way you can bottom out the strain screw tightly and locktite it in place once and for all. The strain screw is not supposed to be used as an "adjustment" screw, and if used as such it will work itself out eventually and your gun will start misfiring again. I'm always astounded at how often I see revolver shooters--even those with plenty of experience--have this happen at a match. The gun starts to misfire, always at an inopportune moment (i.e. in the middle of the match) and they have to run to the safe area to tighten up the strain screw a turn. If you set it up right, that will never happen.

The C&S rod appears to have a plastic jacket around the fiber optic rod. Is the fiber optic rod easily replaceable on the C&S sight?

Yep. As expected. Anybody noticing a trend here? For most of us, the right balance seems to be right around that magic 5.5 pound mark.

Of course the hand isn't pushing the cylinder up a hill, it's merely indexing a balanced wheel on a smooth and well-lubricated axis. If the gun is set up properly, the resistance of the cylinder to being pushed 1/6" of the way around its axis should be very minimal, regardless of the cylinder's weight. As I acknowledge above, an experienced hand can feel the difference. But for all practical purposes, the whole torque issue is mostly academic.

I own S&W .45 ACP revolvers with (1) regular steel cylinders, (2) custom cut-down short steel cylinders, and (3) titanium cylinders. Although there is a difference in "feel" between them, it's pretty minimal in terms of real-world impact on the experience of shooting the gun. And there is no significant difference in measurable DA trigger pull weight. There is also the offsetting additional felt recoil caused by the difference in overall mass to contend with, although here again I don't think it's a huge deal. I believe the top 4 finishers at the 2008 USPSA Revolver Nationals all used plain 5" 625s with regular steel cylinders. Think about that for a second. If lightening the cylinder really made all that much difference, don't you think the top revolver shooters would want that advantage?

Anybody know when and how results will be available?

.....and that, my friends, is the problem with the "super-lite" action jobs. The only way to take the DA pull that light is to radically reduce the rebound spring tension to the point of being ridiculous, which creates trouble for most shooters. I firmly believe that a 5.5 to 6 pound DA trigger pull is the best compromise for most revolver shooters, myself included. Even with hand-seated Federal primers, you try to go much lighter than 5.5 pounds and you are virtually guaranteed to experience (1) occasional misfires, and/or (2) short-stroking due to sluggish trigger rebound. This is particularly true in IPSC/USPSA shooting, where there is a much more frequent need to run the gun at full speed than in the various other games. I'm not willing to deal with those problems, and if the gun is set up right, 5.5 to 6 pounds DA is plenty light.

Yes. "The Tale of the Thunderzap Bambi Killer." It's a long sordid story......

Chuck, I'm certain that many of us completely agree with your view on this, although it's not a politically correct position to take on this particular forum. Brand new shooters need to be handled carefully, on several different levels. Yes, safety must come first, but I'm not sure it always takes a DQ for a brand new shooter to learn the lesson. None of our stringent safety rules will matter much in a few years if we run all the new shooters out of the sport. Or so it seems to me.

Terry, I don't know anything about the Nationals schedule for next year, that's always a bone of contention for many of us who need to plan work stuff out way ahead of time. Anyway, I really enjoyed shooting at Milan last weekend and will be back to any major matches you guys host that I can possibly attend. Speaking of Second Chance, I know somewhere around here I have a photo taken on the line during one of the Second Chance shoot-offs with several shooters, including a guy with a "Fischer" name tag on the back of his hat.....I'll see if I can dig it out....

Looks like Ed Mahoney left side back row - I just e-mailed the picture to him.. Ding-ding-ding!! Correct. Back row: Ed Mahoney, Ken Schmidtchen, Craig Domigan, Eric Marino Front row: Mike Carmoney, Sia Afshari, Don Gianquitto Last summer on my "prodigal son" trip back to New England, we had a lobster meal at Sia's house with Sia and Craig and their wives. The years melted away as we talked about old times.....it was great!

I like Linda so much I'd let her eat half my prime rib right off my plate!!

Can you identify anybody from this bunch of Second Chance shooters, all proudly wearing their team colors from Mass. Rifle Ass'n in Woburn? (photo circa 1991)

Here's a photo from my pile of old snapshots from Second Chance.....anybody recognize this wheelgunner? Almost looks like jmax only much younger!

Yep! I'm down to one pin match per year now, every fall a bunch of us old diehard Iowa pinbusters get together for old times' sake, and I drag out the ol' Baumannized 27 and a handful of rounds from my can of .38 Specials with the 230-grain "Lincoln Logs" and go shoot. It must be like riding a bike, though, this year my throwaway run was a 4-flat!

Shawn, simply removing the spur won't change much of anything. But fully skeletonizing the hammer ("Carmonizing" takes off about half the weight of the stock hammer) will make a noticeable difference in the "feel" of the trigger by reducing the jarring when the hammer falls. If you've ever shot a 1911 with a Koenig or C&S Ultra-Lite trigger--it's kinda like that. Now--simply reducing the weight of the hammer does not--in and off itself--reduce the trigger pull weight by much. But a lighter hammer will create faster lock time and allow you to reduce the mainspring tension more than you ever could with a stock hammer and still maintain full match reliability. Besides, hammer spurs on revolvers are for midnight cowboys.

Agreed. I'm going to try to make it down there if at all possible, the Shoot for Life matches have always been great fun, and it's a good group of people to be around.

Despite recent advances in surgical procedure, some revolver shooters are still struggling with those ugly and painful hammer spurs. It's a problem that is easily remedied--just make sure your dremologist is board-certified.

Sam, looks like you're doing great--keep it up!!

OK......what possible advantage could a speedloader possibly have over moonclips?? When reloading the revo does not have to be pointed down as much and movement from reload to point is less, the bullets and brass stay rigid until loaded so you should never have to wiggle the rounds to get them to load.... I know that it is extremely easy to reload a 625 \25 very consistantly but the 38 specials and such take a little more at times. The trade off is a flater trajectory out beyond the 40 yard mark. Yea I know we don't shoot much at 40 and plus. Next, Bubber will explain the advantages of having a giant goiter.

ICORE, yes, most competitors will be shooting minor loads. USPSA, virtually everybody in revolver division is shooting major (165K+) power factor ammo.

Thanks everybody, that was a fun match! Always nice to see old friends and make new acquaintances, too.