?'s. Need a dedicated IDPA Revolver

[Nick_C_S]

This year, I started shooting IDPA - SSR class. I've been using my out-of-the-box-stock S&W 686, 4"bbl. I purchased the gun new in 1986 - 6/6/86 to be exact - how's that for a bunch of 6's & 86's? lol

Moving right along. . .

I feel like I need to go to the next level with this IDPA thing. With that, a trigger job and chamfered charge holes are in order.

I decided that I want to send it to Smith & Wesson to have the "master action revolver package" performed on it. But then I got to thinking that I may want to leave my 1986 vintage 686 stock. It has a good trigger on it, it's just not slick like a "worked" trigger. Another show stopper is the time frame: I can't go without my favorite gun for the 8 months - missing all those IDPA events - while they're going to have it.

So here's where I am now: I want to get a new model 67 and then have S&W work that gun instead. A 67 is actually a better choice for IDPA anyway. It's lighter and more maneuverable than a bulky 686, and the smaller frame is better suited for my small hands. Also, Miculek uses a 64 - the non-adjustable sight version of the 67. I'm thinking if it's good enough for him, it's good enough for me. So I'm set on the model; the purpose of this post is not to get an idea of gun models.

My question is (finally!!): Wouldn't it be easier if S&W just tricked out a M67 they have there, and then send it to my FFL? Rather than me hunting one down, taking delivery, then sending it right back to S&W for the work. Does anyone know if they do that? It just seems so inefficient to ship back a gun they just had in their factory not but a few weeks ago.

Or maybe some other option? I've never had any revolver work done, so I'm new to this. In the case of the new M67, I guess I don't need Smith to do the work on it. This gun will be purely a sport shooter - it will have no other purpose.

BTW, I'm not really interested in a used gun. For starters, I live in California, and 90% of the used guns are not on "the list" of approved guns by the Ca DOJ gods. It also needs to be a round butt - which only the newer 67's are (with a few odd exceptions, I know). The round butt fits my hand much much better. So yes, I'd take a used gun, but only if it's a very recent model (must be S&W SKU 162802) and in like-new conditon. Yes, I have my eye on Gunbroker.com.

Any input would be appreciated. Thank you for my indulgence.

 

[Nullcone]

Find a local smith w/ a good reputation and put a deposit down on a time slot a few months down the road.

That will give you enough time to acquire the 67 and put some test rounds through the tube. If the slot comes up and you don't have the revolver yet, ask to push it forward a bit.

Like you said, an action job and wallowing out some holes isn't rocket science and I don't see any reason why it couldn't be done locally (and at nowhere near 8 months time frame).

Luck!

 

[Sevens]

I had -no idea- that Jerry Miculek used a Model 67, or any fixed-sight revolver for that matter.

Man, I loathe California gun politics. It's easy to just say "wow, I hate Cali" but that's not the answer. It's real, and it sucks, but it seems MORE real when good people I share time with around here have to deal with it specifically.

Can't really understand your frustration, but I sympathize anyhow.

 

[Nick_C_S]

That's good advice Nullcone. I'll start asking around. And buy the gun. Stopping by my LGS on Wednesday.

Yes Sevens, it's my understanding that Miculek's famous 2.99 second shoot-reload-shoot was done with a 64. Totally tricked out, I'm sure. Obviously, he uses a lot of guns, but I've seen a number of videos where he's got a 64.

I'll stay away from the Ca politics part. I tend to get . . . spirited . . . in my writings about it. Next thing I know, I'm getting a nasty PM from a staff member - something about committing infractions . My bad. It's safe to say that we think alike in this area.

 

[MrBorland]

First, the bad news - Miculek doesn't use a 64 or a 67 - at least not regularly (I've seen a video demo-ing a 64). He's a moonclip guy, and his 2.99 11-shot record rolleyes was done with a moonclipped 625 .45acp.

The good news is that a 67 is still an excellent choice for IDPA, and is the gun of choice for the current SSR World Champ Craig Buckland (though he switched over to CDP recently). BTW, whether a k-frame is "better" for IDPA than a 686 based purely on size is debatable - despite what the specs suggest, some people simply shoot and reload a 686 better than a k-frame when things speed up (I'm one of those, and I'm not a big guy).

Anyhow, my recommendation is to forget S&W for an action job, start going to IDPA matches, and ask around to find out who does good revolver work locally. That person may not even be a formal gunsmith, but can do terrific action work nonetheless. A smooth (but not necessarily light) action, chamfered charge holes, and a fiber optic front sight is all you really need. Don't go crazy trying to get a light action - the ideal SSR gun is dead-nuts reliable, just like a SD ought to be. By competition standards, my SSR gun isn't tuned very lightly at all (about 8lbs), but it's absolutely reliable to the point where it's been my first choice for carry in cold weather. And I'm an SSR master, so my gun hasn't limited me in the least.

The closest thing S&W comes to a turn-key SSR competition gun is their 686SSR. If it were mine, I'd get the action tuned a bit more, and a hair more chamfer added, but it's a good choice for someone who wants to shoot a stock gun (the interchangeable front sight alone is a very nice feature). Again, some find they shoot an L-frame better than a k-frame (or vise versa) when things speed up, and it often doesn't have much to do with hand size (the aforementioned k-frame Mr. Buckland is a big dude, btw). Again, try going to an IDPA match and asking around. Revolver shooters are generally a friendly bunch, and I'd be surprised if at least one of them didn't offer to let you try their gun out afterward.

 

[Viper225]

I shoot both a 64, and a 686-5 in SSR/Classic Division.

My 64 was a LE trade in, and has had a trigger job, with new springs, the chambers chamfered, ball loc added and I had a 1911 Novak fiber optic front sight dovetailed on, and Rubber Hogue grips. I am now using Jet Loaders with it due to them being a little smaller in diameter than a Comp III for the K frame which helps with cylinder clearance a little.

The 686-5 again has had a trigger job with new springs, chamfered chambers, ball loc, and a pinned on Green Fiber Optic front sight added. I tryed wood, and ended up with Hogue Rubber grips on this one also. I am still using Safariland Comp III speed loaders with it.

I suspect a new 67 would work fine. The S&W web site shows a pinned on front sight, so the sight can be changed to Fiber Optic without a big problem.

Myself, if I were buying a new SSR/Classic revolver to build I would go with a 686SSR or a GP100. Both have the Quick Change Front Sight. Both also have better cylinder clearance for speed loaders than the K Frame 67.

Use Federal primers to reload with. They work better with a super Trigger Job. Also as you live in the land ran by Fruits and Nuts I would get a new firing pin on order, and get the short California drop safe one out of the gun. It will cause problems with a trigger job. Look at Power Custom and Cylinder & Slide for a firing pin. One of my local shooters retired from San Diego, and promptly escaped oppression by moving to Missouri. He has started shooting ICORE with his 686SSR. After having a trigger job he discovered it would not fire all the time. A check revealed it was a CA Drop Safe model. It now runs 100% with an Apex Firing Pin. I am sure the CA Approved 67 & 686 will both have a short firing pin.

I bought both my 64 and 686-5 used. The 64 had been worked on a little before I got it. Pretty fair trigger, and was mechanically in good shape. It did have corrosion under the grips from being wet, and the grips not being pulled regularly. The 686-5 looked to be unfired when I got it. That oversight has now been cured. When I run the same course of fire with both revolvers, my times are extremely close. Probably withing 3 points most of the time if both runs are clean. That is not much difference.

Bob

ICORE MO2908

 

[g.willikers]

ask around to find out who does good revolver work locally. That person may not even be a formal gunsmith, but can do terrific action work nonetheless.

Excellent advice.
And you just might get lucky and find such a fellow right in your own back yard.

Sorry about your State of affairs.
California was once just about perfect.
What happened there, in just a few generations, should be a warning to us all.

 

[baddarryl]

What a fantastic thread. Your guys knowledge to the average Joe is incredible. Another reason I love this forum! I shoot SSP Marksman, but have often considered running my GP100 a bit.

 

[Deaf Smith]

I use a ratty old S&W 15 4 inch .38 with the hammer spur removed.

Expert in IDPA using that gun and S&W 158gr FMJ loads. Even won a few State championships in the Expert division with it (and there WERE other shooters in my division.)

Nothing fancy. Just shoot it alot.

Deaf

 

[Jim Watson]

I thought a used gun already in California was acceptable.

I would not put a lot of faith in S&W action jobs, there was the employee who once bragged he could make them $75 in 15 minutes.

I have READ good things about Apex Tactical right there in Los Osos, CA.

 

[Nick_C_S]

Jim Watson: "I thought a used gun already in California was acceptable."

It is. If sold under consignment. (There was a bill outlawing it, but moonbeam Brown vetoed it.)

MrBorland: "First the bad news - Miculek doesn't use a 64 or a 67 - at least not regularly (I've seen a video demo-ing a 64). He's a moonclip guy, and his 2.99 11-shot record was done with a moonclipped 625 .45acp."

That makes more sense, now that I think of it. The video is so fast, you can't tell what model it is

MrBorland: "My recommendation is to forget S&W for an action job, start going to IDPA matches, and ask around to find out who does good revolver work locally."

That's good advice (given by several folks now - thank you all). I'll definitely do that. Which is another reason why I need to get another gun. I can't turn over my vintage 1986 686 to anybody other than S&W (and probably won't even do that) - it's just too valuable to me. So I need to get an "expendable" gun, so to speak. Meaning, something I won't cry myself to sleep over if something went wrong with the modifying.

Viper225: I suspect a new 67 would work fine. The S&W web site shows a pinned on front sight, so the sight can be changed to Fiber Optic without a big problem.

Myself, if I were buying a new SSR/Classic revolver to build I would go with a 686SSR or a GP100. Both have the Quick Change Front Sight. Both also have better cylinder clearance for speed loaders than the K Frame 67.

Use Federal primers to reload with. They work better with a super Trigger Job. Also as you live in the land ran by Fruits and Nuts I would get a new firing pin on order, and get the short California drop safe one out of the gun. It will cause problems with a trigger job.

I never gave the front sight much thought - I guess I'm just not there yet with my skills. I kind of like the red ramp on my current 686, I guess - but then, I don't know any different.

Never gave speedloader clearance any thought before now.

Didn't know about the short, drop-safe Ca firing pins. Good to know. Although, when I think of a trigger job, I'm more interested in smoothness than light trigger pull. Again, light trigger pull isn't something I've given much thought at this point in my skills. I've never fired a revolver with a worked trigger. I have no idea what it feels like.

baddarryl: "What a fantastic thread."

I agree. Thank you everybody.

 

[MrBorland]

I never gave the front sight much thought - I guess I'm just not there yet with my skills. I kind of like the red ramp on my current 686, I guess - but then, I don't know any different.

A front fiber optic is highly recommended.

IMHO, so long as it's dead-nuts-no-excuses reliable, an SSR revolver really only needs 3 other things, no matter one's classification: a smooth action, chamfered charge holes, and a fiber optic front sight. The factory red ramp is just (barely) adequate for general use, but it's pretty bad for any specific application.

The ideal setup, but certainly not necessary, is installation of a Weigand interchangeable front sight base, in which the front sight can be swapped in seconds. Don't like red FO today? Swap in a green. Break your fiber by whacking it into some hard cover (I've done it)? Swap in an extra from your range bag (I wished I could have ). Gonna do some target work? Swap in a Patridge. But even without the Weigand system, installation of a pinned-in FO is still a very worthwhile investment.


EDIT:

I can't turn over my vintage 1986 686 to anybody other than S&W (and probably won't even do that) - it's just too valuable to me. So I need to get an "expendable" gun, so to speak. Meaning, something I won't cry myself to sleep over if something went wrong with the modifying.

Moreso than any risk from botched 'smithing, competition itself (and the practice) is, by nature, hard on revolvers. Still, outright abuse aside, whatever you use, it ought to hold up admirably.

 

[Hal]

Miculek doesn't use a 64 or a 67 - at least not regularly (I've seen a video demo-ing a 64). He's a moonclip guy, and his 2.99 11-shot record () was done with a moonclipped 625 .45acp.

You have my curiosity piqued....
Why the rolling eyes?

 

[MrBorland]

You have my curiosity piqued....
Why the rolling eyes?

It's billed as 12 rounds, and everyone simply accepts it as such. But since a par timer gives the total time for all 12 shots from the beep, why the need for a calculator? 'Cuz they're subtracting "reaction time", i.e. the time to first shot. IOW, the 1st shot's not included, so it's really 11-shots in 2.99, not 12. It's still a remarkable feat, so I've never understood why it's so important that it be falsely presented as 12 in 2.99.

 

[Hal]

Ok - that makes sense.
Thanks!
I'll have to watch the video of it again an pay closer attention.

 

[MrBorland]

Ol' Jerry's obviously a great shooter, and a brand name, but having to make a living shooting, he's not above a little self-promotion.

He puts the very same spin on his recent .50BMG Bill Drill: Billed as "6 shots in 1 second", he clearly indicates at 2:30 he doesn't include the "reaction time" (i.e. the first shot). He then counts off the splits for the remaining 5 shots, totaling .98sec, then uses fuzzy math (2:50) to claim .98sec for 6 rounds.