Guns of the IRC?

[pskys2]

JM even misses on occassion!

I can see it now:

JM and Dr. Dremel staring down their plate sets. They raise their hands to surrender, like the slow motion raring of a cobra's head.

BEEP!

JM strikes his first plate then freezes, eyes wide he suddenly jerks looking at the ground trembling with anxiety at the sudden buzzing sound. Before he realizes what has happened Dr. Dremel drops his Pocket Dremel having replaced his FO FS and hoses down his plates. JM hurridly rushes a reload to the gasps of the crowd, he drops a moonclip.

Dr. Dremel wins by a twitch.

[Pin Shooter]

Mike does make a good point.....pressure normally makes a mess of things, and that's when capacity is a plus.....I just want you all to shoot 6 shots at the IRC, hell even a 5 shot SP101, or whatever they call them.

This year JM had dot problems, and picked up a load of misses. Had his opponent not been a true sporstman, and allowed him time to repair his gun, JM would have left the line in 2nd place.

[Carmoney]

I guess the other issue is that .45 ACP is probably not the best cartridge for the Near and Far Standards. My solution this year was to shoot the 185-gr. HBRN Berry's bullet for everything but the standards, sighted in normally at 15 yards, then switch to a 185-gr. cast SWC for 25 and 50 yards that was loaded to hit to point of aim at 50 without changing the sights mid-stage. This worked sorta OK, but when Randy chronographed my 50-yard ammo, we found it easily made major. Obviously, I was fighting more recoil than necessary in order to have ammo with a reasonable 50-yard trajectory.

Plus I've now done the 6-shooter thing at the IRC. I think from here on, I'll be using my 8-shot guns. Hell, that's what ICORE is all about, right??

[Carmoney]

......like the slow motion raring of a cobra's head.....he suddenly jerks.......and hoses......Dr. Dremel wins by a twitch......

Sounds like my other shooting sport.

Edited November 8, 2007 by Carmoney

[rwmagnus]

I guess the other issue is that .45 ACP is probably not the best cartridge for the Near and Far Standards. My solution this year was to shoot the 185-gr. HBRN Berry's bullet for everything but the standards, sighted in normally at 15 yards, then switch to a 185-gr. cast SWC for 25 and 50 yards that was loaded to hit to point of aim at 50 without changing the sights mid-stage. This worked sorta OK, but when Randy chronographed my 50-yard ammo, we found it easily made major. Obviously, I was fighting more recoil than necessary in order to have ammo with a reasonable 50-yard trajectory.

Plus I've now done the 6-shooter thing at the IRC. I think from here on, I'll be using my 8-shot guns. Hell, that's what ICORE is all about, right??

I dunno. I'm not convienced an 8 shooter is a big advantage at the IRC. Aside from having extra rounds on the steel stages there was maybe one other stage where it helped to have higher capacity this past June. On the steel stages it's rare you need more than an extra shot for a make up. The 45ACP with 200gr bullets and 130pf is perfectly fine at 50 yards. Bump it up in PF a little if you feel more comfortable. I also like the bigger holes the 45ACP leaves behind. I always seem to see a scoring line benefit when shooting 45ACP.

I do hear ya about the 8 shooter. I need to get a bunch of Dave's moonclips for the Starline brass I'm using and I think that will solve the reloading problems I was having. I fully agree about the 8 shooter in the shoot offs. Hell I'm gonna try to sneak my STI 2011 9mm with big stick into that puppy next year!

[Carmoney]

I need to get a bunch of Dave's moonclips for the Starline brass I'm using and I think that will solve the reloading problems I was having.

Yes--absolutely. I finally obtained 30 Hearthco moonclips sized for Starline (in my case, .38 Short Colt) brass, and it makes all the difference in the world. Reloading a .45 wheel is still slightly faster, but the Hearthco moons and stubby .38 Short Colt brass take away most of the difference.

I would not shoot an 8-shot revolver in any serious match without Hearthco moonclips ever again. Seriously.

[pskys2]

Icore PF is much like Bianchi Cup, you need optimum accuracy and consistency with your loads.

It's better to load a .38 up to make it than load a .45 down.

I know 2 guys in my area that have the .38 Super 627's and neither shoot them for sport, 1 guy even has it all tricked out with c-more and all. I found one of the pc627 Mags at Cabela's and didn't get it.

But after seeing Carmoneys pix of his latest, they all seem pretty pedestrian. A S&W Revo should be Blue, SS just seems...less.

So, which 627, or rather cartridge, is most accurate: the .38 Super or .38 Colt?

Edited November 8, 2007 by pskys2

[Carmoney]

So, which 627, or rather cartridge, is most accurate: the .38 Super or .38 Colt?

I will be interested to hear people's thoughts on this question. I know the .38 Super is an inherently accurate cartridge--in a good 1911 it can shoot tiny little groups at 50 yards. But--my impression is that many people have had a little trouble getting that kind of accuracy out of the 627-4, maybe because the barrel might be oversized?? On the other hand, I've never seen so many 627-4s at one place as I did at the Hogue Range at this year's IRC, so obviously this challenge can be overcome.

I have found my .38 Short Colt loads to be quite accurate in several 627s (although I haven't had time to test my new blue 27-7 for accuracy). You may recall that DougC had a special short-cylindered 627 built just for .38 Short Colts, we called it the "starter pistol on steroids." However, I'm really not sure all that effort and expense was necessary, given the accuracy I've managed to obtain at 50 yards with Short Colts out of my plain, stock 627s. The "jump to the rifling" just doesn't seem to be the problem that people envisioned.

[Bubber]

I had always thought that the 38 special was a more accurate round than the 38 super or short in the standard length cylinder. Apparently not so. It takes a bullet/powder combination to get the most (anything) round. My Model 28, 8 shot had a 1 in 10 inch twist which was great for the 160 grain bullet but did very poorly on the lighter bullets. I am now shooting the 38 super in 357 and have good luck with the accuarcy at 50 yards. And I know of a few people that had just as good accuracy with the 38 short Colt that I could not get. It is probably the Indian "and" the Arrow instead of the Indian and not the Arrow.

[rwmagnus]

Those shooting short colt do you have a preference towards jacketed or hard lact lead bullets? And yes blued revolvers just look right but sometines there are limited choices.

[pskys2]

I've found more consistent accuracy from my moonclipped M29 than my 625. But at 50 yards on any given day I make more difference than either. Need a ransom rest to test it out.

I've wondered if it's due to the "Rim" of the .44's vs. the moonclip of the .45's controlling the headspace, hence the ignition?

I also wonder if the action could be lighter with a rim vs rimless cartridge? But it's apples/oranges due to the differences of the hammers.

An Article Idea, take a 625's action down to 90% reliability with acp's then try auto rims to see if it makes a difference. Set up both in a Ransom Rest and see if there's any accuracy difference.

[10mmdave]

I had always thought that the 38 special was a more accurate round than the 38 super or short in the standard length cylinder. Apparently not so. It takes a bullet/powder combination to get the most (anything) round. My Model 28, 8 shot had a 1 in 10 inch twist which was great for the 160 grain bullet but did very poorly on the lighter bullets. I am now shooting the 38 super in 357 and have good luck with the accuarcy at 50 yards. And I know of a few people that had just as good accuracy with the 38 short Colt that I could not get. It is probably the Indian "and" the Arrow instead of the Indian and not the Arrow.

What kind of accuracy are you seeing Bubber ?

and what bullet/powder combo are you working with

What accuracy are other folks seeing at 25 and 50 yards with short colts and Supers ??

(group size that is, not just "great" or "better than XX" )

what do the masses feel is okay ??

(2"?, 3"? 4" ?? from a dot scoped ICORE revo ??

I ask because I did a ton of testing with 2 627's in 38/357 and didn't get a whole

bunch of good targets, but then again maybe I was being too critical.

38 spcls always shot better than 38 shorts at the same PF (3" vs 4-5"s)

I have a stk 627 super and an open 627 super and neither have grouped

very well with the small testing I've done with them (3 to 4 inches IIRC).

and maybe this should be a new topic in the ICORE forum ??

[Carmoney]

My Ransom Rest is over at DougC's right now, so I haven't had a chance to do any serious accuracy testing with any of my 627s. I'm not a real big believer in "benching" guns, at least in my particular case, as there is still quite a bit of variability introduced by the shooter. And in my experience, the gun sighted in over the bench will typically shoot to a different point of aim than the same gun being fired from a standing position.

I would consider consistent 3 to 4 inch groups at 50 yards to be very good accuracy from any revolver, and plenty adequate for any challenge that an ICORE match will offer. The very best centerfire bullseye guns can cut those group sizes in half, but we're not talking bullseye guns here, we're talking action revolvers.

[Carmoney]

Those shooting short colt do you have a preference towards jacketed or hard cast lead bullets?

I'm having good luck with the Bushwacker 145-gr. RNL sized .357" in my Short Colts.

[Bubber]

I had always thought that the 38 special was a more accurate round than the 38 super or short in the standard length cylinder. Apparently not so. It takes a bullet/powder combination to get the most (anything) round. My Model 28, 8 shot had a 1 in 10 inch twist which was great for the 160 grain bullet but did very poorly on the lighter bullets. I am now shooting the 38 super in 357 and have good luck with the accuarcy at 50 yards. And I know of a few people that had just as good accuracy with the 38 short Colt that I could not get. It is probably the Indian "and" the Arrow instead of the Indian and not the Arrow.

What kind of accuracy are you seeing Bubber ?

and what bullet/powder combo are you working with

What accuracy are other folks seeing at 25 and 50 yards with short colts and Supers ??

(group size that is, not just "great" or "better than XX" )

what do the masses feel is okay ??

(2"?, 3"? 4" ?? from a dot scoped ICORE revo ??

I ask because I did a ton of testing with 2 627's in 38/357 and didn't get a whole

bunch of good targets, but then again maybe I was being too critical.

38 spcls always shot better than 38 shorts at the same PF (3" vs 4-5"s)

I have a stk 627 super and an open 627 super and neither have grouped

very well with the small testing I've done with them (3 to 4 inches IIRC).

and maybe this should be a new topic in the ICORE forum ??

Dave the best I can tell you on accuracy was that at 50 yards on practice for the standards I shot 4 X's and 2 A's and that the total score was a 9. But that was practice in 2006 and the best I shot. I had shot a few 11's and 13 for score in practice.. I used a 160 grain bullet loaded with Clays for a 130 PF, about 815 fps. I think it was 2.8 grains. I think that 815 fps is the key. I really don't like using a Ransom Rest to check accuracy for about the same reasons that Carmony mentioned

[DougCarden]

The best accuracy I have gotten is with an oversized bullet to the bore in the short colt.

I load Zero jacketed 150gr RN sized .356 for my short colt loads. In my .355 bore starter pistol with short cylinder it shoots around 1.5-2in at 50yds benched. In my 6 1/2 8 shot .357 cylinder Stock gun it opens up to 3-4in, but in a circular pattern, and it is repeatable, which is important for what we are doing. I am sure that a .357 sized bullet in the short colt in the full cylinder gun would shoot well at 50yds, but I really dont need it to right now, so I havent tried it....

The biggest thing is that you will have to load up a bunch of different loads and go to the range and just shoot groups....finding out what works well for your particular gun

*edited to add that I had the Short Colt gun built because everyone said that it wouldnt work......

Good luck,

DougC

Edited November 9, 2007 by DougCarden

[10mmdave]

*edited to add that I had the Short Colt gun built because everyone said that it wouldnt work......

Good luck,

DougC

You rebel you !!

[Carmoney]

Well, if I ever get out of Michigan to shoot the IRC, I'll use this that I just got back from Randy Lee. I have to sand off some wood behind the trigger guard and do some experimenting with bullets, but so far it likes Berry's plated 230's pretty well. After shooting a 625 4 inch for a long time this is like a rifle. Or at least a carbine. The action is just about equal to my 625.

http://[/img]

Hey Festus, check this out: http://smith-wessonforum.com/eve/forums/a/...04/m/4741013362

Turns out S&W actually made three original specimens of the 25-2 with 8-3/8" tube (assuming the information from the little old ladies on the S&W forum is correct).

[mwx40x40]

Well, if I ever get out of Michigan to shoot the IRC, I'll use this that I just got back from Randy Lee. I have to sand off some wood behind the trigger guard and do some experimenting with bullets, but so far it likes Berry's plated 230's pretty well. After shooting a 625 4 inch for a long time this is like a rifle. Or at least a carbine. The action is just about equal to my 625.

http://[/img]

Is that a Ti cylinder? If it is , are the throats tighter than the original? If so, did accuracy increase?

mws

[vrmn1]

Well, if I ever get out of Michigan to shoot the IRC, I'll use this that I just got back from Randy Lee. I have to sand off some wood behind the trigger guard and do some experimenting with bullets, but so far it likes Berry's plated 230's pretty well. After shooting a 625 4 inch for a long time this is like a rifle. Or at least a carbine. The action is just about equal to my 625.

http://[/img]

Is that a Ti cylinder? If it is , are the throats tighter than the original? If so, did accuracy increase?

mws

It does look like a Ti cylinder.

If I had known this could be done I may still have my 25-2.

I am sure the accuracy had to improve.