This is going to be a long post, about nothing but guns.
Go ahead. Hit my jump.
Both of my guns are cheap. The Taurus was used (paid $150), manufactured circa 1980 in Brazil, and not the most reliable revolver (while revolvers are considered the pinnacle of reliability among firearms.) After a hundred rounds or so it begins to have jamming problems, due to the firing pin block squeezing itself out into the frame, and catching on the cartridge rims as they try to revolve from the cylinder. By running a nail file lightly over it or tapping the block back into the frame it fixes the problem, and the loaded cylinder cycles freely. However, this is less than ideal as a means of self defense. A reliable self defense handgun needs to function properly the first time, and every time. You can imagine the worst case scenario if that cylinder locks up when I need it.
The Smith and Wesson 9mm, on the other hand, has so far functioned flawlessly. I purchased it new for $300, the standard retail price. The Sigma has a bad reputation, mostly for having a heavy trigger, but there are just as many supporters as there are detractors with this gun. The price probably has a lot to do with this fact. A cheap gun is frowned upon by those who can afford something better, and lavished with sometimes excessive or undue praise by those who can't afford better. I fall into the latter category. To my personal experience so far, having put several hundred rounds of target ammo and a handfull of hot 9 +P ammo through it, it's never failed to fire, feed, or hit what I aim at. My only real complaints are the near lack of safety features and the somewhat dull aesthetic to it. Designed as a competitor to the Glock, a service pistol, the only real safety feature is the heavy trigger, which is the biggest complaint among gun enthusiasts. Requiring a heavy pull on a trigger means that you are less likely to fire without intending to, in the heat of the moment, when your heart-rate is high and your trigger finger shaky. I'm fine with this, but wish it had a manual safety locking mechanism as well, so that I could keep a round in the chamber without so much worry.
Which brings me to the reason for this article: I want to buy more guns. The Taurus is worth practically nothing, and even though it may be a piece of junk, I have some sentimental attachment to it. It was my first handgun, and I may as well hang on to it. It could be a good firearm to pass on to my children one day, after they've inherited all of my BB and pellet guns and show enough maturity to handle a firearm. 22LR aside, as far as "full-size" caliber handguns go, 38special is definitely the best place for new shooters to start with. Low recoil in a heavy steel frame and fairly inexpensive to buy target rounds.
The S&W I'd like to trade/sell and upgrade eventually, most likely to a CZ-85 9mm, which has numerous safety features and ambidextrous controls, as I like to shoot left-handed sometimes (it's also quite sexy. like a browning hi-power at half the price, and I like the two-tone colors). Since I want to hold on to the Taurus, I'm wanting to go ahead and step up the firepower a notch and get a 357 Magnum revolver. I'm definitely more of a revolver guy than a semi-auto, though I respect both as significant man-stoppers.
I've been looking at 357 Magnum revolvers in an affordable price range, and am not satisfied with the aesthetics of modern newly produced models (here, here, or here) so I've been browsing the auction sites for used models.
My criteria for an acceptable full-size 357 revolver include:
--4-6" Barrel
--Double Action
--Largish frame
--Extra safety features are a plus (transfer bar, Taurus security mumbo jumbo, deactivating key lock in the grips, etc. I don't necessarily mean a safety on/off switch like those found on semi-autos.)
--Preferably Stainless Steel or Polished Nickel finish, but a Blued model in good condition would be fine.
--Preferably adjustable sights, and a "target trigger" would be a plus.
--Sells used for around +/-$500.
Why a big honkin' 357 revolver? Why not a 45ACP or a Taurus Judge 45LC/410? The answer is Clint Eastwood. I know, Dirty Harry used a 44 Magnum, the big, big, brother of the 357. I have no desire to own a 44, or even 41 mag. 357 is a proven manstopper and with a 357 6" barrel revolver, you get all the intimidation factor of a 44Mag without quite as much recoil, noise, and blinding muzzle flash. Almost anyone sees a big old revolver and knows they are fucked, almost as much so as anyone who hears that telltale "click-clack" of a pump action shotgun being racked. Thing is, I'm not even a fan of the Dirty Harry films. I've tried watching them numerous times but just can't get into it. I'm a huge Clint Eastwood fan for the Sergio Leone films and his own directorial work, but Dirty Harry was just never my thing. But that one scene left a serious impression, as it did on countless others whether they've seen the film or not. Everyone knows that scene by heart.
Well, punk, here are the current contenders for potential purchase:
Made in the 70's-80's. Various grips are available, both wood and rubber, stock and after-market(shown with after-market pachmayr grips.) This is a no-frills revolver, and as the name implies, was mostly carried by service professionals and security guards. I do like the hammer on it that is flat and pin-less, which although the other guns I will list probably have a transfer bar or similar safety features, I know with authority that the Ruger is intentionally made to be safe to carry fully loaded without needing an empty chamber under the hammer. Usually auctions for $400-600. Probably the least attractive looking of the prospective choices, but possibly the cheapest and most rugged/reliable. Plus, since it's not as attractive as a Smith or Colt, I might be more inclined to use rubber grips which would probably increase comfort and accuracy quite a bit over the old wood grips. I've actually shot and handled an all black 4" Security Six, belonging to a friend's uncle. It was sufficiently large, heavy, and accurate. Described as medium frame, it seemed about the same size as a medium/largish L-Frame S&W, such as a 686 which I've also shot.
The Highway Patrolman, which later became known as the M28, is the successor to the original 357 Magnum, which later became known as the Smith and Wesson M27. The M27 was designed with a lot of detail and fine work, resulting in a beautiful and highly sought after collectible handgun. The M28, on the other hand, was made to be used. Built on the exact specifications of the M27, the M28 was simply a less fancy clone, made to be more affordable and aimed at service officers and the like. While less beautiful than the 27, the 28 is still a highly attractive gun. The main differences are the checkering details and quality of the finish and polish. Functionality between the two is identical. I have rented and shot what was either a 27 or a 28, it was my first time shooting a handgun and I did not know how or why to check the model number. Most likely it was a 27, because the polish was very fine and there were custom engravings around the frame. For this fact alone, that it was my first experience with a full size gun(okay, technically I first shot a Ruger MkIII Target, but I was wisely wary of shooting 357 slugs from a revolver with wood grips as my first experience), I yearn to own one of these. The 27's auction for $500-800, while the 28's go for $500-600.
Colt is a maker of higly collectible firearms, perhaps the most collectible brand in the world. There are several 357 double-action revolvers available, and most of them (the Python) sell for an arm and a leg. However, there are two models that can be had for around $500. The first is the "Colt .357" or "Combat Magnum" (or maybe that's a S&W model). This is apparently the big brother to the next entry, the Trooper. Due to its ambiguous name, it can be difficult to find details or listings for this particular model. Colt revolvers have a different kind of cylinder release switch, which may or may not be a problem considering I've only fired S&W style guns. On the other hand, they are renowned for the smoothness and comfort of their action and triggers. Aesthetically, they look superior to the S&Ws in form and finish. I've never handled a Colt of any type, but just the name implies quality and would make a fine addition to my small collection.
The Trooper is the "little brother" to the previous Colt 357, made as a more affordable version in direct competition with the S&W 28. It supposedly looks and functions almost identically to the Colt 357, with the same smooth Colt action. Again, I have no experience with Colts and have not researched specific models nearly as much as the popular S&Ws. But merely the name itself is recognized as a standard for quality, and high resale value to boot. So, in the case that I am unhappy with purchasing a Colt, chances are good I could get back all or most of my money in exchange for something else.
Those are my main options. I do not want a S&W 19, because they supposedly have weak K frames that don't hold up to repeated use with 357 loads. I do not want a Colt Python, because I am not yet obsessed enough with firearms to justify spending a grand on a weapon that I will probably be less inclined to shoot and lose resale value on. And I do not want a new gun, unless it were a Ruger GP100 with the older style rubber grips with rosewood inserts.
Kate doesn't want me to buy many (well, any) more guns, so I'm trying to round out a varied, functional, and aesthetically pleasing collection for home defense and target practice. The 357 revolver is my ideal gun for both uses. My Remington 870 12-gauge would also be a pretty practical choice for home defense. The true purpose of this post is to set in stone a few options for myself, so when the time comes to make a purchase, I don't come home with something I chose on impulse. Once the 357 has been decided I just need a .22LR handgun purely for target shooting but can't decide if I want a 9-shot revolver or a 10-shot semi-auto... next post.
No comments:
Post a Comment