I'm gonna order this beauty
- Thread starter A10mmguy
- Start date
rock_jock...
"I hate to belabor the point, but how is a moonclip faster than a speedloader?"
Simple. The moonclip is inserted in to the cylinder and remains there with the cartridges. You do not have to withdraw it as you do the speed loader, eliminating one or two extra motions.
And when you eject it (and the spent cartridges) they all come out as a unit, tending to eliminate or reduce the possibility of a sheel or two hanging up in the cylinder.
Think of a moonclip as a magazine for a revolver. Easy in, easy out.
"I hate to belabor the point, but how is a moonclip faster than a speedloader?"
Simple. The moonclip is inserted in to the cylinder and remains there with the cartridges. You do not have to withdraw it as you do the speed loader, eliminating one or two extra motions.
And when you eject it (and the spent cartridges) they all come out as a unit, tending to eliminate or reduce the possibility of a sheel or two hanging up in the cylinder.
Think of a moonclip as a magazine for a revolver. Easy in, easy out.
New technology....NO
Different technology for the application...Yes.
Frame mounted firing pins been used by Smith n Wesson for many many years.....on their .22 rimfires.
MIM....AKA Powder Metalurgy has been used in firearms parts, including barrels, for over 30 years that I know of. One of the reasons for using it was lowered material and final machining costs. Almost no waste of original stock and less machining required. Priduct adequate.
My problem with Smiths of late is spotty value for the price and this.. http://www.nraila.org/FactSheets.asp?FormMode=Detail&ID=31&1=View
Sam
Different technology for the application...Yes.
Frame mounted firing pins been used by Smith n Wesson for many many years.....on their .22 rimfires.
MIM....AKA Powder Metalurgy has been used in firearms parts, including barrels, for over 30 years that I know of. One of the reasons for using it was lowered material and final machining costs. Almost no waste of original stock and less machining required. Priduct adequate.
My problem with Smiths of late is spotty value for the price and this.. http://www.nraila.org/FactSheets.asp?FormMode=Detail&ID=31&1=View
Sam
With some people, it always comes down to the friggin' "Agreement".
Stubborn lot, they are. They are definitely entitled to their opinions, but they are missing out on some great guns because of it.
The current ownership of Smith and Wesson is not responsible for anything the previous idiotic owners did.
It seems to be just about as polarizing as the abortion issue.
Besides, if you want to buy a factory "stock" 7 shot L frame .357 Magnum revolver with a 3 inch ported barrel, nice action and grips, who else makes one that can compare?
If anyone says Taurus, I'll need a barf bag.
Stubborn lot, they are. They are definitely entitled to their opinions, but they are missing out on some great guns because of it.
The current ownership of Smith and Wesson is not responsible for anything the previous idiotic owners did.
It seems to be just about as polarizing as the abortion issue.
Besides, if you want to buy a factory "stock" 7 shot L frame .357 Magnum revolver with a 3 inch ported barrel, nice action and grips, who else makes one that can compare?
If anyone says Taurus, I'll need a barf bag.
Well, of course you are right. It's every one to their own opinion about trading with Smith but the current ownership is responsible for the agreement. The Company is responsible. They represent the same company, engaged in the same business, in the same location, with the same products. No cheap lawyer trick can alter those facts.
Now if you said that Taurus or Colt or etc. etc didn't have anything to do with it then you would have a better point.......Old news, but I'll never forget what they did.
PigPen
My 1982 681 is a great gun, and the Performance Center variant ought to be even better. I'd go for one myself if I had the bucks. 
BTW, I've been a 681 (and 581) fan for years, but am used to the "traditional" ones with a 4-inch barrel and service stocks. Shucks, until reading this thread, I didn't know there was any other kind, and thought the 681 was long out of production!
BTW, I've been a 681 (and 581) fan for years, but am used to the "traditional" ones with a 4-inch barrel and service stocks. Shucks, until reading this thread, I didn't know there was any other kind, and thought the 681 was long out of production!
?
...
Guest
Taurus of course
hehehe:barf:
hehehe:barf:
Fprice,
I was just noticing your signature line. An interesting point is, that in the early 50s (I cannot remember exactly when it happened), I was just a school boy. I resented them asking me to interject the words "under God" into the pledge. Not because I was opposed to God but just because it was a change!!
Now I oppose them taking it out! Bottom rail on top now.
PigPen
I was just noticing your signature line. An interesting point is, that in the early 50s (I cannot remember exactly when it happened), I was just a school boy. I resented them asking me to interject the words "under God" into the pledge. Not because I was opposed to God but just because it was a change!!
Now I oppose them taking it out! Bottom rail on top now.
PigPen
Patrick Murphy
New member
It's funny that this post showed up just as I was debating purchasing one. You guys put me over the top. I ordered a new PC 681 from Sporting Arms last night. Also, I believe Smith dropped it from their website just yesterday.
Gila Jorge
New member
That certainly is one fine looking piece. Wish
it was in 44 Spcl....forget moon clips...
it was in 44 Spcl....forget moon clips...