Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Nothing New Under The Sun!


Carmoney

Recommended Posts

On a recent plane flight, I had time to reflect on the equipment I use in competition, and it occurred to me that the last genuine advancement in competitive revolver equipement (in the USPSA context) occurred more than 15 years ago.

The introduction of the S&W Model 625, you ask? Nope. The 625 was merely a stainless re-make of the 25-2, and from a practical perspective not really any better. In my view, the last meaningful advancement was an extraordinarily simple little invention called the "Shoot the Moon" clip-holder. Previously, there was nothing available that would carry moonclips on the belt and permit fast reloading access.

Before that, the last real advancement was the full moon clip itself, which was pioneered by Ranch Products in the.....early '80's maybe? Somewhere in there, anyway.....

Since then, nothing new under the sun!

OK, you can buy a fancy high-tech holster these days. But is it really faster than a plain 'ol Safariland Cup Challenge or an old Ernie Hill rig? Nah. You can put a fiber-optic sight out front. Pretty cool, but will it really help you shoot any faster or more accurately? Nah. You can order grips and thumb releases and other miscellaneous doo-dads from Europe, but are any of them a bona fide improvement over the original equipment supplied on the 25-2? Nah. And despite the best creative efforts of some very fine craftsmen, in the end an action job is still an action job, a chamfer is still a chamfer, and blue or stainless steel still works perfectly fine for making cylinders.

So there is no equipment race in Revo division. Grab a 25-2 with a nice action, load up your moonclips with 230-gr. ball ammo, and it really doesn't matter whether it's 1991 or 2006--if you're the best wheelgunner there, you will win the match.

This is not true of any other division. Think how radically the other division guys' equipment has changed over that same approximate span of time! Whole new categories of firearms have arisen to fulfill a need, real or perceived.

Personally, the lack of "technological advancement" is one of the things I like most about this division. It takes the whole spending and gimmickry race out of play, and ensures the match is all about relative shooting skill. Then again, this may be one of the biggest problems of the division--because so many IPSC shooters love to win by attaining an equipment advantage over the competition, and there's nothing to play with in Revolver. Maybe those guys simply can't have as much fun rubbing their guns with a chamois and showing them off to their buddies, because--let's face it--a revolver is a revolver is a revolver.....

Any thoughts on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I think that if you take away the "upgrades" in the other classes the same shooters would win too. Most of the "trick" things are way overated.

Good sights, 100% reliable, good grip, and a good trigger and you are set, in any division, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe those guys simply can't have as much fun rubbing their guns with a chamois and showing them off to their buddies, because--let's face it--a revolver is a revolver is a revolver.....

Any thoughts on this?

+1

What more could a person want.............Revo...."The ultimate challenge in speed shooting"

DanBagger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The original attraction to revolver shooting for me was the lack of technology applied. I think Randy Lee guns (I have one and one coming soon, right Randy?), open space gun barrels, and $200-$300 holster set ups can be intimidating to someone looking in. But I know Jerry M forearms and trigger finger are what is really intimidating. Unfortunately for me, it is the shooter, not the equipment. But, the Randy gun certainly doesn't hurt.......heh, heh, heh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to also give some credit to the 7 shot Baumanized revolver in the early 1990s and to Charley Prest of RPM Guns that made up the first 8 shot revolvers in .38 Super! BladeTeck has made a Tek-Lok better than the Shoot the Moon clips that hold just 2 rnds but have room for 2 full moon clips in the same space as the Shoot the Moon clips. Radical new mounts for scopes, porting, comps, ball detents, fiber optic sights...........a few others :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to also give some credit to the 7 shot Baumanized revolver in the early 1990s and to Charley Prest of RPM Guns that made up the first 8 shot revolvers in .38 Super! BladeTeck has made a Tek-Lok better than the Shoot the Moon clips that hold just 2 rnds but have room for 2 full moon clips in the same space as the Shoot the Moon clips. Radical new mounts for scopes, porting, comps, ball detents, fiber optic sights...........a few others :-)

I agree that those innovations at that time could catapault a shooter ahead far more than the improvements made since. I think the original point of the initial statement is that this division is more shooter talent oriented than any other. I agree with that, also, Revolver, and to a lesser degree production, are the two divisions where you can be a very talented shooter with a nearly stock gun and be ultimately successful

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember Bill, I said "(in the USPSA context)"! :)

All of the advancements you mentioned (some that are certainly real and some perhaps perceived?) are not applicable to USPSA's revolver division. We can certainly give ICORE some credit for encouraging continued advancement, although most of it (porting, scopes, comps) is just carry-over from what was happening with semi-autos at the same time (porting, scopes, comps).

The Baumannize conversion was a true step forward, I'll grant you. John Baumann sent me one of the very first guns to test during my brief period of time as a gun writer in the early '90s. I used it and the "Lincoln Log" bullets very successfully at the old Midwest Pin-Blasters match that year, about the same time Jerry M. had discovered the same technology. The next year a bunch of guys had 7-shooters at Second Chance, including Brian E. (shooting for Team S&W), who promptly sold his gun to me after the match. It became my main pin gun from that point on, and won me a lot of stuff over the succeeding years. The 8-shot stuff currently produced by S&W was the logical extension of John's (and Charley's) experimentation. My Baumannizer still comes out to play at least once a year. I can think of at least two original RPM guns in Iowa gun safes, and at least one shooter who is still waiting for his.... :(

Here again, though, we're talking games other than IPSC/USPSA. In IPSC/USPSA, we've never really improved on the original set-up. Take a look at what Sweeney will be shootin' at Nationals, and you'll see that nothing has really changed. It's not like we haven't seen efforts to improve the prototype, it's just that nothing has ever really stuck.

We've talked about the possibility of another manufacturer (other than S&W, that is) someday making a real competition gun that would be a viable option to the 25-2/625 and its variants. Unfortunately, it will probably never happen.

Then again, like I said earlier, this is part of the beauty of our division--you can literally take a $500 gun you picked up at a gun show and win the USPSA Nationals with it if you shoot well enough! It's all about the shooting. That's certainly not true in L or O.

Revolver, and to a lesser degree production, are the two divisions where you can be a very talented shooter with a nearly stock gun and be ultimately successful

Absolutely--people are starting to recognize that fact, and I think it's a primary reason why Revolver and Production are currently the divisions that are growing the fastest in USPSA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, you could claim that this is because USPSA revolver is pretty much a "one-design" division the way the rules are written. ;) Tough to change a lot when the rules and available hardware favor one gun/caliber combo so much. Not that it's a bad thing, but it's there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had a local match near Christmas a couple of years ago, where all the proceeds went to buy toys for needy kids. Since it was kind of a "just have fun" match and there was no classifier, several Limited and Open shooters decided to shoot Revolver just for the heck of it. We had 9 revo shooters that day, and we were all on the same squad!

Talk about fun! We all had virtually the same equipment: S&W 625 for the gun (OK, some had 5" barrels and some had 4") and most everyone had the same moonclip holders. We had a little variety in holsters (CR Speed, Aluminator, some kydex).

It was sooo great! It got me thinking at the time about how everyone's rig was essentially equal, and the difference in our performances was truly based on skill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just a thought, i'd like to see a grip the was similar to a 1911, or 2011. think about it.

This is an interesting idea.....I can see no particular reason why the entire grip frame of the revolver couldn't be totally re-configured to match somebody's idea of what feels right. It would never sell to those of us who "grew up on" traditional wheelguns, but who knows, lots of other people might like it.

BladeTeck has made a Tek-Lok better than the Shoot the Moon clips that hold just 2 rnds but have room for 2 full moon clips in the same space as the Shoot the Moon clips.

Hmmmm.....well, a lot of us have tried them, including Sam and me.....they're OK if you get them adjusted exactly right. Personally, I like them better for carry (with my 646 in .40 caliber) than competition, and am convinced that IDPA's banning of the Blade-Tech product was a completely ignorant move, as they are street-worthy.

But for competition, I still think there's nothing faster than hanging the moons off the front of the ol' Shoot the Moon clip-holders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think there's nothing faster than hanging the moons off the front of the ol' Shoot the Moon clip-holders.

Thats what I do as well.

I have three shoot the moon holders and then three bladeteck for back up on longer stages.

al

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the Day.... I always felt that Comps weren't any more accurate, and for a good shooter they weren't any faster, but what they did for all was allow you to "Push the Edge" and get away with it. Dots changed things, especially combined with a Comp. So it became a must have equipment race. Top shooters could still win most anything without the gadgets, but it took a perfect match. Then Hi caps came in and everything changed.

There is no such thing going to happen in Revo. No matter what trick you put on it won't change the recoil, and other physical tasks, we all must control/perform.

Back to my point, before Dots/Hicaps, it was really more about the mental game/skill and practice. The other stuff would help some on their mental game, some it would help a weakness in skill or masque a problem that they couldn't/wouldn't train out of.

But, one of the lures to the game was the list of gadgets that you could Imangine would help you. It fed right into the Gadgeteers interests, and did make things fun and interesting.

Today you see Open actually slowing down and I think it's due to the weaponry reaching a plateau and everyone pretty much shoots a version of the same gun.

Limited is tops because there is still a bit of experimenting going on. See the Sight Tracker and the Expansion Chambered Cone Barrel gun (can't remember the name). It is fun, and the type who plays our game usually like to tinker with things.

Remember Revo Div has only been around since 2001, and it starts with the same problem that's slowing down Open. But, if the Randy Lee's keep going with Titanium, light Actions, Barrel enhancements, Sights, etc... then that will lure some in, cause they can play with trick guns.

The dirty little secret we don't want them to know though, is it's the skill from practice that's going to make the difference. And it seems to me that won't change unless there's a big change in the rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't somebody publicize a design for a modern top-break revolver a few years back? What if the shooting hand could clear the empties from the gun with a single motion while the off-hand is reaching for the moon. Executed correctly, that could truly speed up the reload in a measurable way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about a revo shooting from the lower chamber?

Look at http://www.a-ztech.it/rhino.htm

Surely it needs FMC and 40/45 caliber, hope to see it soon in this configuration.

Is this for real? <_< I would love to have a revolver configured like that! :wub::wub:

I always though and old webly revolver rechamber of 45ACP and machined for moonclip would make a neat IPSC revolver.

mcb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't somebody publicize a design for a modern top-break revolver a few years back? What if the shooting hand could clear the empties from the gun with a single motion while the off-hand is reaching for the moon. Executed correctly, that could truly speed up the reload in a measurable way.

What about drop-in cylinders? That would be an improvement in speed of reload. Having an extra supply of ammo to put in your pistol quickly, that would be a neat idea. Then you could hold more rounds, how about a bigger cylinder, to hold more rounds?

I guess the rules for revo just don't encourage much improvement. You improve a revo too much, you get an auto :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't there some noise around a while back that Taurus was or might be putting out a Revolver geared toward ICORE, and 8-shot?

I know that it's "wrong" to even consider anything other than a Smith but I think it would be good for the sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't there some noise around a while back that Taurus was or might be putting out a Revolver geared toward ICORE, and 8-shot?

I know that it's "wrong" to even consider anything other than a Smith but I think it would be good for the sport.

I think it would be great to have another manufacturer come up with a viable option for us....but if it's Taurus they have a ways to go before I'd be convinced their QC and metallurgy is up to the test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like revolver class because I find it more challenging in many ways. I was going to shoot single stack but it is a little too IDPAish for me.

When you only have 6 shots betweeen reloads, it makes you really think about how you break down the stage. You must also execute properly because mistakes will cost you extra standing reloads and kill your score. It can also throw you out of whack and reqires that you think on your feet quickly to recover.

It is definately cheaper to get yourself on a level playing field with the best equipment in the field.

It is hard to spend much more than $1000 on a revolver and it isn't neccessary.

A good limited 10 gun will run you $1500 +/-, a limited gun $2000+, open $2500-$3000.

Production isnt too much of an equipment race and is challenging where all hits are scored minor it puts a premium on accuracy. But I dont like shooting the wimpy guns, especially tactical teflon, LOL!

To me there is nothing more impressive than seeing a revolver guy beating the autos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is hard to spend much more than $1000 on a revolver and it isn't neccessary.

Hell, I spent less than $1,000 for both of the competition revolvers I carry in my bag--name another division where you can buy your main gun plus a nearly-identical back-up for less than a grand total!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not true of any other division. Think how radically the other division guys' equipment has changed over that same approximate span of time! Whole new categories of firearms have arisen to fulfill a need, real or perceived.

That is not really what I see in IPSC. The number 1 and 2 guns in IPSC Production are Glock 17 (which has been around since 1980) and a CZSP01 which is basically to the CZ75 (around since 1975) what a S&W625 is to a S&W25.

In Standard/Limited Robbie still wins with a Hi-Cap Springfield that is set up with a short dustcover and a really good trigger. Nothing fancy about that. He could still win with a 1990 Para Ordnance. Same goes for the holsters. Rob did a .45 draw and a 1.36 Bill Drill from a stock Safariland holster. In Beyond Fundamentals, Brian still draws from a holster that we now can only find as fossilized remains in the Arizona desert ;) Still, his .7 and .6 draws from that ancient thing aren't too shabby, even for today's standards :P:D

The only divisions that seem to change some in equipment are Open and Modified (especially modified). But still the changes are minimal. I doubt Eric Grauffel's 4% margin over Todd at the last World Shoot was all equipment. Both Eric and Todd are sponsored by gun companies that are not exactly considered "top of the line" (Tanfoglio and Para).

What remained the same in all divisions is the principle that if you practice a lot, you will do well ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spook, I agree with you on your ultimate point--that in the long run it's always about the shooting more than the equipment--but I have to point out that the entire category called "Limited" is centered around a concept that didn't exist before Para and eventually the original STI (and its various successsor companies) began to produce hi-cap 1911-based frames. That's all been comparatively recent development. Hell, I remember IPSC before Para existed, so it's all been in the last 20 years....

In Revo, we're shooting technology that has remained essentially unchanged in more than 50 years--since 1955, when Kay Miculek's dad successfully campaigned S&W to put a heavier barrel on the old Target Model of 1950. Every Production gun in common use today is a baby by comparison.

Furthermore, the first Model of 1955 that rolled off the line all those years ago would be a completely viable competition revolver in today's Revolver division in IPSC/USPSA, if you wanted to devalue it's collectability by shooting the thing! In decent hands, it would win any match, right up to the USPSA Nationals and the IPSC World Shoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No more than 6 rounds, no comp, no red dot: very difficult to improve the revo for IPSC!

I see reloading time 1, tranfer time 2 and double tap time3 what can make the differences in this order.

1 Changing the cylinder ( think of it as a magazine) is faster than FMC system, a good supply of cylinders is needed!

2 Light gun ( Alu or Scandium or titanium) would be the answer.

3 Revo shooting from the bottom allow fast shooting and less jump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...