627 PC Durability

[Mattel45]

I am looking for feedback on the 627 PC eight-shot revolver. I have handled an older one with forged hammer and trigger (and key lock). I noticed that the cylinder crane locks into the barrel shroud base via a ball detent lockup. It did not lock at the tip of the ejector rod as is found in almost all S&W revolvers. This lockup would seem less durable, especially with heavy/magnum loads.

Can anyone give me their insight on this particular design? Is it as durable as the 627 Pro or an older model 27? It reminds me of a Colt which locks primarily at the rear. I had a Python that went back to the factory to be retimed because I shot a fair number of .357s in it - not all that durable.

Thanks for the assistance.

[bountyhunter]

If done correctly, the ball detent lockup is actually better than the one at the tip of the ejector rod. Not sure about durability, but your question of:

"Is it as durable as the 627 Pro or an older model 27?"

Hits a nerve with me. The quality of new SW revos (including PC guns) has been so inconsistent recently I will never buy another new one. I bought a new 627 which had serious problems and I was really ticked off. In general, I think older SW's are probably better just because they were built better, based on my limited experience.

Python timing problems is a well known weakness, but their internals are completely different than a SW. If you get a good 627, I think it would be very durable. The N frame is "overdesigned" for the .357 round so it should stand up well.

Edited May 13, 2013 by bountyhunter

[Griz]

I built a 686 Bianchi Cup open gun with no front cylinder retention at all... I fired maybe 20,000 rounds through it with no issues before I switched to an auto. No magnum ammo though.

[Carmoney]

In my opinion, "standard" aftermarket crane ball locks (like those marketed by Ron Power) do very little to lock the cylinder in place, even when properly installed. On the other hand, the factory crane ball system used on the PC guns is different, and provides much more aggressive engagement.....too much for a competition gun, sometimes.

In general, front lock-up is overrated for guns used primarily with competition-level ammunition.

[thermobollocks]

So, the purpose of it is to keep each chamber aligned with the barrel more positively during firing? I'm an M&P guy with a brand new 327PC and I'm at roughly the comfort level of "can change rebound spring." I couldn't really figure out what good the ball detent serves, especially since I've got a fairly well worn 625 that seems to be doing just fine.

[cylindrically challenged]

The older front locking system didn't do all that much because there is always some side to side tolerance in the ejector rod. If you push the cylinder out while it's locked up you will see how much play that system allows. The new frame detent ball lock up does not have to deal with the ejectors rod's side play. My biggest issue with 627 durability is with the stainless cylinder's tendancy to peen their notches. I have replaced both of my stainless 627 cylinders with the 327 titanium cylinders. The titanium seems much harder and since it has less mass--it slams with less force when it comes to a stop against the cylinder stop.

[Wagonburner]

I had the front detent removed,the real lock up is sufficient .when doing a standing reload as little resistance is better,moving reloads are a little more "forcefully " due to the nature of running and stopping your whole body..

[S&WIowegan]

The front lockup in some S&Ws is highly over-rated. Even S&W didn't use it in many of their revos. Most other revo makers don't use it. The ball détente probably isn't necessary either.

Bob

IA203