Handgun Construction Methods and Materials
- Thread starter larvatus
- Start date
- Status
Your wish is my command:Please Mike do the Korth so I can avoid the nightmare of having to admit that anything French is quality, other than their women and cooking
I'll have to test it against its French competitors:
Korth seems to offer the best option for belly gun sighting.
Try Egun.de, like so.
I have absolutely no problem spending that much money on a single gun so this is not envy talking. Is it me, or are Manurhins and Korths just not really all that attractive??? If I'm spending that much on a single gun, I HAVE to be in love with it in every way. Precision and quality of manufacture only gets you so far.
Pretty is as pretty does.
During the mid to late '70s, several newly formed Western National Force CT units became enamored of revolvers for special purposes.
USN SOF elements and some European intervention forces with maritime missions were particularly interested in salt water corrosion resistant stainless handguns. Having arguably pioneered the fielding of reliable stainless combat revolvers, Smith & Wesson’s .357 K-Frames (followed by later Rugers) became the weapons of choice (pun intended) for several such units.
Concurrent to this trend, the fielding of modern soft body armor caused these forces to see a need for deeply penetrative ammunition as a counter.
Adopting .357 revolvers provided a convenient solution for launching specially profiled AP rounds (e.g., THV) without having to deal with feeding issues. Barrier penetration became an important consideration during a time when most everyone's strike forces were deeply concerned with shooting through reinforced doors/glass/body armor while clearing buses, aircraft, trains, POL platforms, ships, etc..
Additionally, existing .32, .380, and 9mm systems suffered from a perceived lack of "stopping power" (a popular concept at the time) combined with the general lackluster performance of then available JHP loads (reliable feeding and expansion). Units with a discriminatory fire mission sought an alternate platform/caliber capable of delivering very accurate "one shot stops".
.357 revolvers had a long proven law enforcement track record in the USA. Their perceived lethality and ability to reliably fire tailored bullet designs were deemed just the ticket by resident firearms authorities in some organizations.
BLUF: .357 Magnum was (for a time) viewed as a superior cartridge for certain European organizations having special requirements. During the 1970's, US development (and use) of combat revolvers and handgun ammunition was ascendant. Law enforcement fielding of the .357 revolver was regarded as the ne plus ultra of the art. Dirty Harry genre Hollywood productions probably had just a little to do with popularizing .357 in Europe (as in the USA)
.
Eventually, and for the same reasons (lack of capacity, procurement costs, maintenance costs, and high use durability issues), use of revolvers faded from the military counter-terrorism and law enforcement scene in both North America and Europe. Meanwhile, semi-auto pistols and their modern ammunition underwent a European driven renaissance during the 1980s.
Which brings me to my experience with certain boutique, collectable, or otherwise scarce firearms...1) the CZ75 (yes, the CZ), 2) the Manhurin 73, 3) the Korth revolver, and 4) the SIG 210.
1) During the Cold War of the late 70's-early 80's, the CZ75 achieved cult status in the USA. The High Priest of the 1911, Jeff Cooper, grudgingly proclaimed the 75 the finest 9mm design on the planet. Due to Czechoslovakia's membership in (or subjugation to) the Warsaw Pact, an American couldn't simply wander down to his local gun emporium and find one. Most examples found their way into the USA through Canada or (later) from returning service members who had managed to purchase them overseas.
Scalper’s prices were the rule. $1500-$2000 for a CZ75 at a time when a new 1911, S&W 29, or Python could be purchased for around $500-$600. Had there been an Internet, someone like larvatus might have extolled the peerless virtues of this weapon to millions of admiring have-nots. Alas, the potential audience of the time comprised the relatively few gun nuts perusing shooting magazines and panting at CZ photos.
This same fine weapon (in many variants) is available today for a pittance. Thank God for ideological and economic collapse. Any shooter can now afford one.
2) The Manhurin revolvers (73, 88) I fired, handled, or inspected from the show case during repetitive assignments to Europe did not exactly blow me away. Nice guns, well fitted and finished, but for some strange reason, most of my native shooting partners lusted after premium Smiths and Colts. The M73 in particular seemed to simply demand more Deutsche Marks while offering only comparable Smith & Wesson practical accuracy (but inferior ergonomics). Quite simply, no WOW! Factor. Ho Hum. Actually butt-ugly revolvers. I've no doubt that longer barreled versions are superlative target revolvers, but the shorter ones I fired on combat ranges were merely good and merely equal to (but no better) than my Smiths or Colts. The 88s impressed me as better fitted and smoother Rugers...but not enough to buy one.
3) Korth. Another boutique weapon which (like the original pre-B CZ-75) achieved cult status due to a lack of availability in the USA. Like a White Stag, often spoken of, rarely seen. More smoke than fire. In person, a very nicely fitted and finished piece. The single time I was able to borrow a German friend's example, I was underwhelmed as to what the fuss was about. I'd rather have a Python. I do.
4) SIG 210. I will admit that this is the only one of the four I've ever lusted after (since learning of their existence in the early 70's). Accuracy wise...a semi-auto laser. Beautiful in the display case (especially with wood grips). Very accurate on the range. Sitting in a rainy hide site during the 1980's with partnered Danish Jaeger Korps Operators, it just looked like any other worn military semi-auto extracted from a holster. And, from my practical experience, a very dated design which is (except for accuracy) not especially well suited for Close Quarter Battle. On my most recent trip downrange, my Danish brothers were carrying USPs. And my UK SAS friends seemed to have traded their BHPs for SIG Double Actions. I'd love to own a 210 (at half the asking price I would), but the CZ75 is a better WEAPON and DOES everything the 210 SHOULD DO in combat.
The grass is always greener on the other side...
During the 1990s, for some inexplicable reason, Germans would sell their unborn child for a Chevrolet (GM) Camaro. Unbelievable. Any run of the mill VW GTI of the day would leave one in the dust. In a nation that produced Porsches, BMWs, etc., OPEL (a GM subsidiary) had successfully marketed a **** to otherwise discriminating buyers.
During the late '90s, the German beer drinking public somehow became convinced that imported American-made Miller Lite was a superior beer. Miller logo neon fixtures began to be seen in the windows of the local Gasthaus. This marketing miracle transpired across a nation where most local village breweries make better beer than can be imagined. :barf:
I think that a combination of factors have contributed to the perception of certain high end European handguns being worth their current surcharge. A limited market (Rolex buyers), high Euro/Franc to Dollar exchange rates, and the continued long term retention of highly skilled/paid union gun fitters have allowed certain French, German, and Swiss outfits to charge exorbitant sums for firearms. These models would languish and expire in the USA were the Gesellschaft to be located in say...Michigan. During the post-war 1950's and 1960's, these same factors applied in reverse. At that time, a Colt Python was a pricey grail for a European collector to acquire.
I remain a Timex G-Schock kind of knuckle-dragger. Manhurin? Meh...
larvatus: I'm sure your handguns are very nice. After all, such a response was the intent of your poll, nicht war? Next time, simply post the photos and reap honest compliments.
YMMV.
During the mid to late '70s, several newly formed Western National Force CT units became enamored of revolvers for special purposes.
USN SOF elements and some European intervention forces with maritime missions were particularly interested in salt water corrosion resistant stainless handguns. Having arguably pioneered the fielding of reliable stainless combat revolvers, Smith & Wesson’s .357 K-Frames (followed by later Rugers) became the weapons of choice (pun intended) for several such units.
Concurrent to this trend, the fielding of modern soft body armor caused these forces to see a need for deeply penetrative ammunition as a counter.
Adopting .357 revolvers provided a convenient solution for launching specially profiled AP rounds (e.g., THV) without having to deal with feeding issues. Barrier penetration became an important consideration during a time when most everyone's strike forces were deeply concerned with shooting through reinforced doors/glass/body armor while clearing buses, aircraft, trains, POL platforms, ships, etc..
Additionally, existing .32, .380, and 9mm systems suffered from a perceived lack of "stopping power" (a popular concept at the time) combined with the general lackluster performance of then available JHP loads (reliable feeding and expansion). Units with a discriminatory fire mission sought an alternate platform/caliber capable of delivering very accurate "one shot stops".
.357 revolvers had a long proven law enforcement track record in the USA. Their perceived lethality and ability to reliably fire tailored bullet designs were deemed just the ticket by resident firearms authorities in some organizations.
BLUF: .357 Magnum was (for a time) viewed as a superior cartridge for certain European organizations having special requirements. During the 1970's, US development (and use) of combat revolvers and handgun ammunition was ascendant. Law enforcement fielding of the .357 revolver was regarded as the ne plus ultra of the art. Dirty Harry genre Hollywood productions probably had just a little to do with popularizing .357 in Europe (as in the USA)
. Eventually, and for the same reasons (lack of capacity, procurement costs, maintenance costs, and high use durability issues), use of revolvers faded from the military counter-terrorism and law enforcement scene in both North America and Europe. Meanwhile, semi-auto pistols and their modern ammunition underwent a European driven renaissance during the 1980s.
Which brings me to my experience with certain boutique, collectable, or otherwise scarce firearms...1) the CZ75 (yes, the CZ), 2) the Manhurin 73, 3) the Korth revolver, and 4) the SIG 210.
1) During the Cold War of the late 70's-early 80's, the CZ75 achieved cult status in the USA. The High Priest of the 1911, Jeff Cooper, grudgingly proclaimed the 75 the finest 9mm design on the planet. Due to Czechoslovakia's membership in (or subjugation to) the Warsaw Pact, an American couldn't simply wander down to his local gun emporium and find one. Most examples found their way into the USA through Canada or (later) from returning service members who had managed to purchase them overseas.
Scalper’s prices were the rule. $1500-$2000 for a CZ75 at a time when a new 1911, S&W 29, or Python could be purchased for around $500-$600. Had there been an Internet, someone like larvatus might have extolled the peerless virtues of this weapon to millions of admiring have-nots. Alas, the potential audience of the time comprised the relatively few gun nuts perusing shooting magazines and panting at CZ photos.
This same fine weapon (in many variants) is available today for a pittance. Thank God for ideological and economic collapse. Any shooter can now afford one.
2) The Manhurin revolvers (73, 88) I fired, handled, or inspected from the show case during repetitive assignments to Europe did not exactly blow me away. Nice guns, well fitted and finished, but for some strange reason, most of my native shooting partners lusted after premium Smiths and Colts. The M73 in particular seemed to simply demand more Deutsche Marks while offering only comparable Smith & Wesson practical accuracy (but inferior ergonomics). Quite simply, no WOW! Factor. Ho Hum. Actually butt-ugly revolvers. I've no doubt that longer barreled versions are superlative target revolvers, but the shorter ones I fired on combat ranges were merely good and merely equal to (but no better) than my Smiths or Colts. The 88s impressed me as better fitted and smoother Rugers...but not enough to buy one.
3) Korth. Another boutique weapon which (like the original pre-B CZ-75) achieved cult status due to a lack of availability in the USA. Like a White Stag, often spoken of, rarely seen. More smoke than fire. In person, a very nicely fitted and finished piece. The single time I was able to borrow a German friend's example, I was underwhelmed as to what the fuss was about. I'd rather have a Python. I do.
4) SIG 210. I will admit that this is the only one of the four I've ever lusted after (since learning of their existence in the early 70's). Accuracy wise...a semi-auto laser. Beautiful in the display case (especially with wood grips). Very accurate on the range. Sitting in a rainy hide site during the 1980's with partnered Danish Jaeger Korps Operators, it just looked like any other worn military semi-auto extracted from a holster. And, from my practical experience, a very dated design which is (except for accuracy) not especially well suited for Close Quarter Battle. On my most recent trip downrange, my Danish brothers were carrying USPs. And my UK SAS friends seemed to have traded their BHPs for SIG Double Actions. I'd love to own a 210 (at half the asking price I would), but the CZ75 is a better WEAPON and DOES everything the 210 SHOULD DO in combat.
The grass is always greener on the other side...
During the 1990s, for some inexplicable reason, Germans would sell their unborn child for a Chevrolet (GM) Camaro. Unbelievable. Any run of the mill VW GTI of the day would leave one in the dust. In a nation that produced Porsches, BMWs, etc., OPEL (a GM subsidiary) had successfully marketed a **** to otherwise discriminating buyers.
During the late '90s, the German beer drinking public somehow became convinced that imported American-made Miller Lite was a superior beer. Miller logo neon fixtures began to be seen in the windows of the local Gasthaus. This marketing miracle transpired across a nation where most local village breweries make better beer than can be imagined. :barf:
I think that a combination of factors have contributed to the perception of certain high end European handguns being worth their current surcharge. A limited market (Rolex buyers), high Euro/Franc to Dollar exchange rates, and the continued long term retention of highly skilled/paid union gun fitters have allowed certain French, German, and Swiss outfits to charge exorbitant sums for firearms. These models would languish and expire in the USA were the Gesellschaft to be located in say...Michigan. During the post-war 1950's and 1960's, these same factors applied in reverse. At that time, a Colt Python was a pricey grail for a European collector to acquire.
I remain a Timex G-Schock kind of knuckle-dragger. Manhurin? Meh...
larvatus: I'm sure your handguns are very nice. After all, such a response was the intent of your poll, nicht war? Next time, simply post the photos and reap honest compliments.
YMMV.
Last edited:
Horses for courses. In .32 S&W Long, Manurhin beats S&W, SAKO, and Walther. In all other calibers, the factory rejects them if they cannot put 5 bullets into a 20mm circle at 25 meters. Some S&W revolvers do better than that. Most do much worse. A milspec SIG P210 will put ten where an MR73 puts five. The price I pay for mint specimens in Germany comes to slightly more than S&W Performance Center products. Admittedly, the import fees are a huge drag.
The MR73 trigger is comparable to short action S&W in single action and far superior to it in double action. More importantly, unlike Smith & Wesson, Manurhin/Chapuis are able to build a K-frame size revolver capable of digesting hundreds of thousands of full-bore Magnum rounds. As for the rest of its ergonomics, in my hand the MR73 grip frame fits better than anything short of a Colt SAA.
45_Shooter
New member
Chindo18Z, thanks for the excellent post; I agree for the most part.
And a .32 S&W Long is used for .....what these days? Maybe the purchaser of the Manurhin can engage rabid raccoons at slightly greater distances?
My personal experience with S&W revolvers has been that most full size specimens are capable of 1-2" accuracy at 25 yards. If more is desired (it rarely is) then I am reasonably confident that it can be provided in an S&W by a gunsmith for less than the final price of a Manurhin or Korth.
Something a used $200 Ruger Six-Series revolver also does just fine.
And actually, S&W fixed most of the .357 K-frame problems just a couple years before killing it; they are identified by the lack of the 'notched' forcing cone.
And a .32 S&W Long is used for .....what these days? Maybe the purchaser of the Manurhin can engage rabid raccoons at slightly greater distances?
My personal experience with S&W revolvers has been that most full size specimens are capable of 1-2" accuracy at 25 yards. If more is desired (it rarely is) then I am reasonably confident that it can be provided in an S&W by a gunsmith for less than the final price of a Manurhin or Korth.
Something a used $200 Ruger Six-Series revolver also does just fine.
And actually, S&W fixed most of the .357 K-frame problems just a couple years before killing it; they are identified by the lack of the 'notched' forcing cone.
lavartus:
Not in my experience (admittedly only with shorter barreled and heavily used service weapons). Trigger pull being only one facet of ergonomics, my sense of a weapon's practical accuracy is its ability to hit folks shooting back. I don't shoot long barreled match weapons. The M73s I shot had the ergonomics of a brick. Of course, I'm one of those who doesn't find the SAA to be particularly comfortable in the hand either.
Out of an 8 or 10 inch target sighted weapon, from a machine rest or a world class shooter, I'll accept that figure.
From a 3 or 4 inch service revolver, combat firing in human hands, firing the 158 gr. Norma .357 you have referred to...Nope. Not Even. The GIGN I observed couldn't do it. Me and my guys couldn't do it. Dutch BBE couldn't do it. SEAL Team Six couldn't do it either. I've know some AMU and Camp Perry guys who could accomplish that in revolver slow fire, but they were supernatural shooters against bulleye targets anyway.
I never said the M73 was not accurate...it is. Just not enough that I'd trade one of my Smiths for it.
One benefit of my job is that for over 30 years I've been able to observe literally thousands of very fine shooters expending aggregate rounds numbering in the millions. Some of these folks expend more rounds per day than most shooters will fire in a year. I rarely see anyone capable of sub-one inch accuracy at 25 meters. Those folks are normally well practiced competitors. For even experienced combat shooters, with full house .357 (or even 9mm), the average weapon is capable of more mechanical accuracy than the shooter.
Just out of idle curiosity...can YOU put 5 rounds of 9mm inside a 20mm circle (about 4/5 of an inch; less than the diameter of a quarter) at 25 meters with a service caliber weapon?
I can't. 99.9% of shooters can't. Not even at 25 yards (about 6 ft closer).
If you can, you are wasting valuable competiton time tapping away on this board.
I'm not trying to pick an argument. I am simply very sceptical of factory accuracy claims.
Regards - Chindo
Not in my experience (admittedly only with shorter barreled and heavily used service weapons). Trigger pull being only one facet of ergonomics, my sense of a weapon's practical accuracy is its ability to hit folks shooting back. I don't shoot long barreled match weapons. The M73s I shot had the ergonomics of a brick. Of course, I'm one of those who doesn't find the SAA to be particularly comfortable in the hand either.
Out of an 8 or 10 inch target sighted weapon, from a machine rest or a world class shooter, I'll accept that figure.
From a 3 or 4 inch service revolver, combat firing in human hands, firing the 158 gr. Norma .357 you have referred to...Nope. Not Even. The GIGN I observed couldn't do it. Me and my guys couldn't do it. Dutch BBE couldn't do it. SEAL Team Six couldn't do it either. I've know some AMU and Camp Perry guys who could accomplish that in revolver slow fire, but they were supernatural shooters against bulleye targets anyway.
I never said the M73 was not accurate...it is. Just not enough that I'd trade one of my Smiths for it.
One benefit of my job is that for over 30 years I've been able to observe literally thousands of very fine shooters expending aggregate rounds numbering in the millions. Some of these folks expend more rounds per day than most shooters will fire in a year. I rarely see anyone capable of sub-one inch accuracy at 25 meters. Those folks are normally well practiced competitors. For even experienced combat shooters, with full house .357 (or even 9mm), the average weapon is capable of more mechanical accuracy than the shooter.
Just out of idle curiosity...can YOU put 5 rounds of 9mm inside a 20mm circle (about 4/5 of an inch; less than the diameter of a quarter) at 25 meters with a service caliber weapon?
I can't. 99.9% of shooters can't. Not even at 25 yards (about 6 ft closer).
If you can, you are wasting valuable competiton time tapping away on this board.
I'm not trying to pick an argument. I am simply very sceptical of factory accuracy claims.
Regards - Chindo
Last edited:
Neither can I. On a good day, from an arm rest, I will make groups twice the size of those delivered with a SIG P210 and two to six times the size of those delivered with a Manurhin MR73, depending on its barrel length. But that is my personal limitation. Since I do worse with arms of lesser mechanical accuracy, I am thankful to have access to the best of the best.
As regards brick-like ergonomics, I have full wraparound Morini and Nill stocks that fix that as much as it can be done with any lead-slinging implement. But those devices aren't suitable for draw out of a holster, let alone field use. It remains, however, that even with my limited shooting abilities I can benefit in all practical scenarios from stronger and more accurate sidearms.
Actually, you don't seem to be challenging the claims of mechanical accuracy implicit in the test targets fired out of machine rests. Your objections, as far as I can understand them, have to do with perceived irrelevance of this standard to practical use on targets that shoot back. With all respect for your experience, my personal purposes in choosing a sidearm are better served by paying more for better precision, strength, and durability. My purpose in this thread is to get a feel for how many shooters are willing to do likewise.
Last edited:
In the matter at hand, for international centerfire bullseye shooting, where the K-frame S&W has a stellar reputation.
To repeat, my final price of an imported MR73 is on par with the initial price of a Performance Center S&W. For my money, I get valuable improvements in design in the independently tensioned dual mainsprings, a strengthened yoke and oversized lockwork, and far superior steel. I like these revolvers much better than pre-war Magnums on which the Smith & Wesson reputation rests.
The Korth is a whimsical purchase. They are very expensive even in their native land and not reputed for improved accuracy. While I couldn't justify spending $3-4K on a rich man's toy, every once in a while a lowball online auction bid will come through. For less than $2K delivered, I'll be happy to find out what all the fuss is about.
Wildalaska
Moderator
No, but at 50 feet I can put 8 rounds from a 210 into an inch circle
WildasididtodayAlaska TM
I could have bought a Rolex, but I liked this much better when I went to pick out a watch. Yes it has some dings on the steel, I wear it every day even when doing heavy yard work or running a chainsaw. 
After 3 years of this abuse it still keeps good time.
I also own a SIG, which in my view is more of a Rolex, but I much prefer to shoot my Kimber. Depending on who you ask, the Kimber is like an overpriced Timex. You wouldn't hear that from me after the experience I have with this fine weapon.
After 3 years of this abuse it still keeps good time.
I also own a SIG, which in my view is more of a Rolex, but I much prefer to shoot my Kimber. Depending on who you ask, the Kimber is like an overpriced Timex. You wouldn't hear that from me after the experience I have with this fine weapon.
I can think of several production handguns that fit that bill. None of them are target guns. However, my criteria for handgun performance are completely different from yours.
As a matter of fact, I've trusted my life to both. Literally. Working with Time On Target delivery of artillery or close air support occasionally provides that opportunity. So will breathing from twin 80's at several atmospheres underwater.
The "Rolex or Timex" analogy is apt. Timex sells a lot of watches because, first and foremost, they tell time. That's all I expect of a watch. YMMV.
As you alluded to "entrust your life" in the original post, I mistakenly assumed you meant just that. It appears that you actually just wanted to brag about your target pistols.
Yes, I'm sure that you have some very nice handguns.
No, I'm not remotely interested in owning your choices as I have no practical use for them. Nor do I believe that their high price is a definitive indicator as to performance, accuracy, or durability. However, it's your money and I'm sure you are very happy with your purchases.
As you have self-admittedly not yet realized the accuracy potential of your chosen Excaliber, good luck to you in your quest for perfection. Keep practicing.
Wildalaska
Moderator
having it tell time under adverse conditions is what I expect. The Rolex is more surviveable. Even fat old guys like me manage to break things without being an operator. YMMV
Well low price is surely an indicator isnt it?
WildimaswisscommandoAlaska TM
Well, no. I am interested in the best handguns designed and manufactured for military or constabulary service with few financial constraints and no deference to groupthink. After thirty years of study, I can identify several such handguns: the Mauser C96, the Luger P08, the Colt M1911, the Radom Vis wz. 35, the SIG P210, the Colt Python, the MAB PA15, and the Manurhin MR73. In practical terms, this leaves me with the P210 and the MR73, plus the two Colts. Since there is no shortage of people specializing in the Colts, I'll stick to the Swiss Army and the French gendarmerie issues.
My net cash outlay in my acquisitions is more or less zero. I try to buy more than I need and resell the extra to pay for keeping the rest. I agree that a high price is anything but a definitive indicator as to performance, accuracy, or durability. However, sticking to the best of the best in collecting is the only way I know to come out ahead.
I hold no brief for perfection, but harbor no aversion to practice. Strenuous pursuit of excellence in variety is the master key to lasting satisfaction. Thanks for the conversation. Have fun marking your territory.
Your model fails to account for the facts that SAAMI pressure specs for the .357 Magnum were downgraded from the original 47,000 PSI to the current 35000 PSI. Likewise the .44 Magnum pressure specs going from Speer #11 listing 43,500 CUP, to the current SAAMI listing 36,000 PSI or 40,000 CUP. Lastly, there are many reports of S&W .44 Magnums shooting loose after only a few hundred rounds of full power ammunition. As I said, we need more data.
Poseidon28
Moderator
The informal fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
S&W IS famous for originating the .357 revolver, and that's about it.
Let's see: If I wanted an inferior caliber like the .357, oh, sorry S&W in my drawer, I do own one...but, if I wanted one designed to actually shoot for the highest count my arms would take, I'd have to go Freedom Arms.
I'm sorry, Mike. It just dawned on me that you want only DA/SA revolvers.
I can't think of any American DA/SA revolvers worth owning that don't have some sort of non-forged parts, or, just plain hard to work with parts.
Colt comes to mind, but, they have certain interior parts that are 'sintered'
metal. If you get through the outside hardening, you are in trouble.
S&W is famous for not designing a gun capable of handling excessive use of heavy 357 loads.
Your only local option would be an expensive custom. Find someone capable of taking forged metal, and custom grinding each part, when the originals wear out. I know someone who can do that, but, if I tell you who it is, he won't have time for my stuff, so find him yourself.
No, better that you import guns that would otherwise not be on the market.
Onwards and upwards, and, keep up with the good work.
That said, I have only one stock poly gun. Everything else has some custom work done on it. Forged?
Let's see. M1A. Forged receiver will last about a million rounds, cast 500,000.
Costwise, it's about right, 1500 cast, 3000 forged.
The problem with the question is most guns sold here are a combination of manufacturing techniques, using stronger parts for high use areas, and, others for lower stress parts. An exception would be Kimber, who, can't seem to figure out which is which.
I guess if I wanted a totally forged gun:
Detonics, Ed Brown Special order, Wilson's, or most of them, and custom rifles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
S&W IS famous for originating the .357 revolver, and that's about it.
Let's see: If I wanted an inferior caliber like the .357, oh, sorry S&W in my drawer, I do own one...but, if I wanted one designed to actually shoot for the highest count my arms would take, I'd have to go Freedom Arms.
I'm sorry, Mike. It just dawned on me that you want only DA/SA revolvers.
I can't think of any American DA/SA revolvers worth owning that don't have some sort of non-forged parts, or, just plain hard to work with parts.
Colt comes to mind, but, they have certain interior parts that are 'sintered'
metal. If you get through the outside hardening, you are in trouble.
S&W is famous for not designing a gun capable of handling excessive use of heavy 357 loads.
Your only local option would be an expensive custom. Find someone capable of taking forged metal, and custom grinding each part, when the originals wear out. I know someone who can do that, but, if I tell you who it is, he won't have time for my stuff, so find him yourself.
No, better that you import guns that would otherwise not be on the market.
Onwards and upwards, and, keep up with the good work.
That said, I have only one stock poly gun. Everything else has some custom work done on it. Forged?
Let's see. M1A. Forged receiver will last about a million rounds, cast 500,000.
Costwise, it's about right, 1500 cast, 3000 forged.
The problem with the question is most guns sold here are a combination of manufacturing techniques, using stronger parts for high use areas, and, others for lower stress parts. An exception would be Kimber, who, can't seem to figure out which is which.
I guess if I wanted a totally forged gun:
Detonics, Ed Brown Special order, Wilson's, or most of them, and custom rifles.
Do tell. I have to go mark a tree now.Wildalaska
Moderator
Now you lost me on that one
Obviously
Add Colt 1911
WildbacktobedAlaska TM
Wildalaska
Moderator
Ergonomically unsatisfying and a combat flop unless you count popping dervishes...but then again, state of the art for 1896
And durable...I would dispute that...with the whole bolt resting on on small, poorly designed part and a two springs
Easily solved with C&S parts.
WildtherehasgottobeonecrappypartinamanhurinsomewhereAlaska ™
- Status