User Panel
Posted: 1/7/2017 4:30:51 AM EDT
I'm fixing to be in the market for a new hunting revolver because my dad keeps making a big deal that I need to give his back to him (what do you expect when you let someone borrow a sixgun that shoots that good? ). I'm going to get a Model 29, and while I was dead set on one that's pinned and recessed, if I remember right they didn't start putting the endurance package on them until the -3s or -4s, and to keep my accuracy up at 50-100 yards without a scope it's going to be shot quite a bit. So I was thinking if I'm going to get a non P&R gun I might as well get a new one. I know one of the biggest complaints people have about new Smiths is they have a 2 piece barrel, but isn't that what made Dan Wessons so accurate? I would rather have a pistol without the lock and the MIM parts, but if they are more accurate I can live with the MIM parts and get rid of the lock.
|
|
Some of the new Smiths have a 2 piece barrel, but not all. I'm not sure they even make a model 29 any more, except for the classic series. If you're going to put a scope on it, you'll want to figure out when they started drilling and tapping under the rear sight.
If I were in your shoes I'd look for a model 29/629 classic with a 6 1/2 or 8 3/8 inch barrel. I might even consider a Redhawk. |
|
Quoted:
Some of the new Smiths have a 2 piece barrel, but not all. I'm not sure they even make a model 29 any more, except for the classic series. If you're going to put a scope on it, you'll want to figure out when they started drilling and tapping under the rear sight. If I were in your shoes I'd look for a model 29/629 classic with a 6 1/2 or 8 3/8 inch barrel. I might even consider a Redhawk. View Quote My vote would be for a Redhawk or even Super Redhawk. I am a big fan of the Ruger single actions myself, so for me, I would be looking at one of the Super Blackhawk Hunter models....... PS; Love your avatar OP.......very fitting for this topic! |
|
Hunting revolver lots of heavy loads, Redhawk. Casual shooting heavy loads once in a while model 29, or just to be different model 57 with the 6&1/2 inchs. Others will chime in with their opinions as well. But your not getting any younger and at some point you may want a scope on which ever bad boy you choose. Then again get both.
|
|
My new 5" M629 is very accurate. MIM is a non issue because it has been successfully used on a variety of firearms ( including the AR) for decades. The lock sucks, but only for principal reasons as it doesnt affect function. S&W N frame guns are sexy, but get the latest production for max durability. Even then, unless you are hunting buffalo, the is rarely a need to push the 44 mag to get the job done.
|
|
Quoted:
My vote would be for a Redhawk or even Super Redhawk. I am a big fan of the Ruger single actions myself, so for me, I would be looking at one of the Super Blackhawk Hunter models....... PS; Love your avatar OP.......very fitting for this topic! View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Some of the new Smiths have a 2 piece barrel, but not all. I'm not sure they even make a model 29 any more, except for the classic series. If you're going to put a scope on it, you'll want to figure out when they started drilling and tapping under the rear sight. If I were in your shoes I'd look for a model 29/629 classic with a 6 1/2 or 8 3/8 inch barrel. I might even consider a Redhawk. My vote would be for a Redhawk or even Super Redhawk. I am a big fan of the Ruger single actions myself, so for me, I would be looking at one of the Super Blackhawk Hunter models....... PS; Love your avatar OP.......very fitting for this topic! Was going to post this. SRH would be perfect. Plus you can shoot much hotter loads in it than the Smith. |
|
The new production Smith N frames are good guns but are not more accurate or stronger than the late pre lock versions wit the endurance package. To my eye the new N frames are ugly and lack the classic lines of the older ones.
I would buy a Ruger .44 over a new Smith unless you want blued steel which you can get with the Smith classic series (4 or 6" standard barrel only). The reason the Dan Wesson revolvers were so accurate was the tensioned barrel. Smith never used two piece barres on the N frame .44 . Myself I shoot and collect the pre lock/mim Smith 44's with the full endurance package. Look for a 629-3 or -4 or in blued the 29-5 or -6 (all full endurance package). Also nothing wrong with a 629-5 as it has the mim parts and frame mounted firing pin but not the lock. |
|
Get a P&R Model 29 if you really want it. Unless you shoot silhouette matches with it you'll be fine.
Here's a good long read on the 29: John Taffin on the Model 29 |
|
Totally rambling S&W fanboy:
SAAMI is there for a reason. A S&W will over it life time shoot as much max SAAMI pressure ammunition as the Ruger. If you're going to hot-rod above SAAMI when have at it, I have seen as many Rugers do a grenade impersonation as any other revolvers. 44 Magnum loaded near SAAMI maximum pressure will kill anything here in North America. There is no reason to hot-rod 44 Mag IMHO A S&W trigger after a professional trigger job is probably one of the sweeter triggers going, single action or double action. Ruger can have a nice trigger but I have yet to see a Ruger turn out as well as a S&W in the trigger department. MIM parts (assuming it's not Taurus doing it) are superb. The MIM parts are dimensionally far more consistent than the old forged parts and far more cost effective than machined from billet or forged. Modern MIM process results in parts with 90-95% the material properties of billet and this generation of engineers knows this and designs to take advantage of the dimensional consistency and designs for the well known material properties. If it's a critical part, MIM parts can be HIP'ed (Hot Isostatic Pressure) and it would hard to distinguish that the material properties of the MIM-HIP part from a forged part. Most of the guys doing action work on S&W would rather do it on the new MIM guns simply due to the consistency of the parts. I have never understood the draw to the Pinned and Recessed guns. If you saw how much torque it take to seat a barrel on a frame you would realize the pins were a complete overkill. Recessed cylinder always seemed like a jam waiting to happen. Another crevice to get some debris trapped in/under a case and then cause a cartridge to sit high and rub the recoil face. S&W still list the 4 inch and 6.5 inch Model 29 on their updated website. Personally if I was buying a 44 Mag it would be a 629 5-inch but I hate square frames and love stainless N-frames. But I am pretty sure they are still making a version of the Model 29 with the square frame. I think the only S&W with two piece barrels are the new Model 66 and Model 69 (L-frame in 357 and 44) and some of the scandium framed models. Rambling |
|
Now you're going to have to compile all the responses on the various forums you're posting this question on. I've read it on three or four already! So many opinions out there :)
|
|
All modern Smith revolvers are round butt except the blued classic series.
|
|
Then get a 629 and enjoy it. If you want lighter, a 329pd.....just keep in mind it's a 25oz 44mag. For comparison, a 4" 629 is almost 40oz.
Like others have said, the main benefit to the Ruger is that you can load hot loads for them. If you don't need hot loads (above SAMMI), then the S&W product is superior. They are also lighter when comparing steel to steel......and if you are hunting, that's a good thing. I'm seriously considering picking up a 329pd in order to keep my .44mag but not have to carry the fat-ass of a gun my 4" 629 is when I'm hiking. |
|
Quoted:
Then get a Like others have said, the main benefit to the Ruger is that you can load hot loads for them. If you don't need hot loads (above SAMMI), then the S&W product is superior. They are also lighter when comparing steel to steel......and if you are hunting, that's a good thing. I'm seriously considering picking up a 329pd in order to keep my .44mag but not have to carry the fat-ass of a gun my 4" 629 is when I'm hiking. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Then get a Like others have said, the main benefit to the Ruger is that you can load hot loads for them. If you don't need hot loads (above SAMMI), then the S&W product is superior. They are also lighter when comparing steel to steel......and if you are hunting, that's a good thing. I'm seriously considering picking up a 329pd in order to keep my .44mag but not have to carry the fat-ass of a gun my 4" 629 is when I'm hiking. FIFY, I can't stand stainless guns. While I know the Redhawk can handle a lot hotter loads than the Smith can, if I needed something hotter than a regular 44 magnum I would be getting a Blackhawk in 45 Colt. I already have my mind made up that I'm getting a Model 29, I was just curious about the whole 2 piece barrel thing and whether I should be getting one with the endurance package since I'm planning to shoot the shit out of it. Quoted:
Now you're going to have to compile all the responses on the various forums you're posting this question on. I've read it on three or four already! So many opinions out there :) I know, I'm starting to type on replies to posts on the wrong forums. |
|
Quoted:
I know one of the biggest complaints people have about new Smiths is they have a 2 piece barrel, but isn't that what made Dan Wessons so accurate?. View Quote The Dan Wesson's barrels were under tension. For hunting, I'd skip the Smith and find a nice used Dan instead. |
|
Quoted:
FIFY, I can't stand stainless guns. While I know the Redhawk can handle a lot hotter loads than the Smith can, if I needed something hotter than a regular 44 magnum I would be getting a Blackhawk in 45 Colt. I already have my mind made up that I'm getting a Model 29, I was just curious about the whole 2 piece barrel thing and whether I should be getting one with the endurance package since I'm planning to shoot the shit out of it. I know, I'm starting to type on replies to posts on the wrong forums. View Quote I'm also a huge fan of blued guns, they are very sexy. I buy stainless revolvers because I use them in the woods and I am willing to deal with a silver gun in order to not deal with rust due to condensation from temp fluctuations, dew in the morning, rain and snow. Range only gun.....blued is fine. You may not have the same considerations, however. |
|
|
Quoted:
While I know the Redhawk can handle a lot hotter loads than the Smith can, if I needed something hotter than a regular 44 magnum I would be getting a Blackhawk in 45 Colt. View Quote Probably not a bad plan. Blackhawks are out there for good prices. I'm convinced that anyone who can afford enough over-loaded .44 mag to rattle apart any S&W Model 29 can afford a sacrificial .44 Blackhawk to shoot it through. I passed on a pretty nice (albeit basic) Blackhawk in .44 mag for $400 on Gunbroker early last month. |
|
Quoted:
Super Blackhawk Bisley Hunter. Whenever I'm filthy rich, I'm going to pick up two of these, and have one redone in .357 magnum. http://picturearchive.gunauction.com/2274024235/8095536/0685c7411d2ae01d6283146920e3929a.jpg View Quote Aren't they just $1k each or so? Don't need to be filthy rich... |
|
Quoted:
Aren't they just $1k each or so? Don't need to be filthy rich... View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Super Blackhawk Bisley Hunter. Whenever I'm filthy rich, I'm going to pick up two of these, and have one redone in .357 magnum. http://picturearchive.gunauction.com/2274024235/8095536/0685c7411d2ae01d6283146920e3929a.jpg Aren't they just $1k each or so? Don't need to be filthy rich... The regular Blackhawk Bisley Hunter runs $7-800 these days. To have one completely rebuilt as a .357? Yeah, that would tickle as it would be a fair bit of custom work. That's what would break the wallet. Off the bat, likely a custom cylinder, bore out and sleeve the barrel, replacing fcg parts if .357 blackhawk parts won't fit, etc. I can't imagine the .357 pawl assembly won't fit, but I've never compared them to be honest. Plus timing it all properly, fixing endshake, etc. |
|
Quoted:
The regular Blackhawk Bisley Hunter runs $7-800 these days. To have one completely rebuilt as a .357? Yeah, that would tickle as it would be a fair bit of custom work. That's what would break the wallet. Off the bat, likely a custom cylinder, bore out and sleeve the barrel, replacing fcg parts if .357 blackhawk parts won't fit, etc. I can't imagine the .357 pawl assembly won't fit, but I've never compared them to be honest. Plus timing it all properly, fixing endshake, etc. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Super Blackhawk Bisley Hunter. Whenever I'm filthy rich, I'm going to pick up two of these, and have one redone in .357 magnum. http://picturearchive.gunauction.com/2274024235/8095536/0685c7411d2ae01d6283146920e3929a.jpg Aren't they just $1k each or so? Don't need to be filthy rich... The regular Blackhawk Bisley Hunter runs $7-800 these days. To have one completely rebuilt as a .357? Yeah, that would tickle as it would be a fair bit of custom work. That's what would break the wallet. Off the bat, likely a custom cylinder, bore out and sleeve the barrel, replacing fcg parts if .357 blackhawk parts won't fit, etc. I can't imagine the .357 pawl assembly won't fit, but I've never compared them to be honest. Plus timing it all properly, fixing endshake, etc. Got it |
|
Quoted:
The regular Blackhawk Bisley Hunter runs $7-800 these days. To have one completely rebuilt as a .357? Yeah, that would tickle as it would be a fair bit of custom work. That's what would break the wallet. Off the bat, likely a custom cylinder, bore out and sleeve the barrel, replacing fcg parts if .357 blackhawk parts won't fit, etc. I can't imagine the .357 pawl assembly won't fit, but I've never compared them to be honest. Plus timing it all properly, fixing endshake, etc. View Quote I would think it would be easier to start with a regular Blackhawk and convert it to a Bisley, because then all you would have to do would be figure out the barrel with the scope mounts on it. Unless there's something else different about the Hunter that I'm not seeing. |
|
Quoted:
I would think it would be easier to start with a regular Blackhawk and convert it to a Bisley, because then all you would have to do would be figure out the barrel with the scope mounts on it. Unless there's something else different about the Hunter that I'm not seeing. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
The regular Blackhawk Bisley Hunter runs $7-800 these days. To have one completely rebuilt as a .357? Yeah, that would tickle as it would be a fair bit of custom work. That's what would break the wallet. Off the bat, likely a custom cylinder, bore out and sleeve the barrel, replacing fcg parts if .357 blackhawk parts won't fit, etc. I can't imagine the .357 pawl assembly won't fit, but I've never compared them to be honest. Plus timing it all properly, fixing endshake, etc. I would think it would be easier to start with a regular Blackhawk and convert it to a Bisley, because then all you would have to do would be figure out the barrel with the scope mounts on it. Unless there's something else different about the Hunter that I'm not seeing. Different FCG, barrel assembly, and grip frame. I don't have enough experience taking down blackhawk models to say if you can or can't swap them, but from the angles the mainspring would have to be at, my guess is a no. Could be wrong though. |
|
Quoted:
Different FCG, barrel assembly, and grip frame. I don't have enough experience taking down blackhawk models to say if you can or can't swap them, but from the angles the mainspring would have to be at, my guess is a no. Could be wrong though. View Quote I was reading about how to convert one to a Bisley because I want a 5.5" Bisley in 45 Colt and the easiest way would be to buy a regular 5.5" Blackhawk and a Bisley and swap all the parts (hammer, trigger, grip frame, ect) over and put the regular parts on the Bisley and sell it to get some of your money back. To just buy the parts new would involve a bunch of fitting and refinishing. At least that's the way I understand it from the reading I've done. So if it's as easy as they made it sound, that would just leave you with trying to get the barrel with a scope mount, which I'm sure Hamilton Bowen or somebody would be able to whip up for cheaper than trying to convert a .44 to a .357. |
|
Quoted:
Super Blackhawk Bisley Hunter. Whenever I'm filthy rich, I'm going to pick up two of these, and have one redone in .357 magnum. http://picturearchive.gunauction.com/2274024235/8095536/0685c7411d2ae01d6283146920e3929a.jpg View Quote With all the custom work you'd have done to achieve the gun you want you'd be far better off just buying a Freedom Arms in 357. Money wise it'd be a close wash and you'd have a better revolver in the end. |
|
|
Quoted:
With all the custom work you'd have done to achieve the gun you want you'd be far better off just buying a Freedom Arms in 357. Money wise it'd be a close wash and you'd have a better revolver in the end. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Super Blackhawk Bisley Hunter. Whenever I'm filthy rich, I'm going to pick up two of these, and have one redone in .357 magnum. http://picturearchive.gunauction.com/2274024235/8095536/0685c7411d2ae01d6283146920e3929a.jpg With all the custom work you'd have done to achieve the gun you want you'd be far better off just buying a Freedom Arms in 357. Money wise it'd be a close wash and you'd have a better revolver in the end. Except they don't make anything close to the revolver I want, so it would still need to go out for custom work. |
|
|
A max load 44 ( obtained by diligent handloading within the limits of published data) is going to be fine in any S&W. keep in mind factory ammo tends to be loaded a touch lighter than an upper limit of the data handload. Still plenty powerful enough for hunting of course.
Generally most avid handgunners I know who hunt with revolvers do NOT constantly shoot hunting level loads, but rather shoot a few cylinders prior to hunting season to confirm sight settings and the vast majority of rounds fired will end up being 44 special level plinking loads. The idea the hunting revolver is going to need to stand up to thousands of full power magnums on an annual basis is not realistic, even more so if you are dependent on factory ammo |
|
Quoted:
A max load 44 ( obtained by diligent handloading within the limits of published data) is going to be fine in any S&W. keep in mind factory ammo tends to be loaded a touch lighter than an upper limit of the data handload. Still plenty powerful enough for hunting of course. Generally most avid handgunners I know who hunt with revolvers do NOT constantly shoot hunting level loads, but rather shoot a few cylinders prior to hunting season to confirm sight settings and the vast majority of rounds fired will end up being 44 special level plinking loads. The idea the hunting revolver is going to need to stand up to thousands of full power magnums on an annual basis is not realistic, even more so if you are dependent on factory ammo View Quote I have to disagree. There are loads that are still SAAMI spec that are flat out said not to be put through a Smith. The Buffalo Bore 240gr HCGC +P+ is a perfect example. That said, I'm only commenting on the max load point of your post. |
|
Quoted:
I have to disagree. There are loads that are still SAAMI spec that are flat out said not to be put through a Smith. The Buffalo Bore 240gr HCGC +P+ is a perfect example. That said, I'm only commenting on the max load point of your post. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
A max load 44 ( obtained by diligent handloading within the limits of published data) is going to be fine in any S&W. keep in mind factory ammo tends to be loaded a touch lighter than an upper limit of the data handload. Still plenty powerful enough for hunting of course. Generally most avid handgunners I know who hunt with revolvers do NOT constantly shoot hunting level loads, but rather shoot a few cylinders prior to hunting season to confirm sight settings and the vast majority of rounds fired will end up being 44 special level plinking loads. The idea the hunting revolver is going to need to stand up to thousands of full power magnums on an annual basis is not realistic, even more so if you are dependent on factory ammo I have to disagree. There are loads that are still SAAMI spec that are flat out said not to be put through a Smith. The Buffalo Bore 240gr HCGC +P+ is a perfect example. That said, I'm only commenting on the max load point of your post. But I really can't see the point in getting a +P+ .44 Magnum when a hot .45 Colt would do everything better. |
|
|
|
Quoted:
But I really can't see the point in getting a +P+ .44 Magnum when a hot .45 Colt would do everything better. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
A max load 44 ( obtained by diligent handloading within the limits of published data) is going to be fine in any S&W. keep in mind factory ammo tends to be loaded a touch lighter than an upper limit of the data handload. Still plenty powerful enough for hunting of course. Generally most avid handgunners I know who hunt with revolvers do NOT constantly shoot hunting level loads, but rather shoot a few cylinders prior to hunting season to confirm sight settings and the vast majority of rounds fired will end up being 44 special level plinking loads. The idea the hunting revolver is going to need to stand up to thousands of full power magnums on an annual basis is not realistic, even more so if you are dependent on factory ammo I have to disagree. There are loads that are still SAAMI spec that are flat out said not to be put through a Smith. The Buffalo Bore 240gr HCGC +P+ is a perfect example. That said, I'm only commenting on the max load point of your post. But I really can't see the point in getting a +P+ .44 Magnum when a hot .45 Colt would do everything better. That load is beyond anything a .45 Colt will do. It's under 200ft/lbs different from their 240gr +P .454 Casull loading. Really popular bear load up here btw. |
|
Quoted:
I have to disagree. There are loads that are still SAAMI spec that are flat out said not to be put through a Smith. The Buffalo Bore 240gr HCGC +P+ is a perfect example. That said, I'm only commenting on the max load point of your post. View Quote I think you may be mistaken. Buffalo Bore website in their technical article section explicitly states that their 45 Colt +P loads are above SAAMI for 45 Colt. The technical articles would also imply that their other cartridges with +P and +P+ designation are above SAAMI for those cartridges. The only exception I would expect would be the +P cartridges that SAAMI does have a +P specification for. The only pistol/revolver cartridges that have a +P pressure specification are 38 Special, 38 Super Automatic, 9mm Luger, and 45 ACP. SAAMI does not recognize the +P+ designation. I would bet that the Buffalo Bore's Heavy .44 Magnum +P+ 340 gr. Hard Cast, is above SAAMI spec for 44 Mag, 36,000 psi. |
|
Now I'm curious. If I can talk Monday I'll give them a call and see if I can get a hold of the tech guys. No promises since I'm losing teeth in the AM but we'll see.
Edit: after some googling it looks like +p+ is usually 120% of spec, so you are correct. Always figured it was redline max spec but within. Also the load is 340gr not 240. |
|
|
Quoted:
Some have replicated it with handloading, by their data it's 43-45k PSI. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
I would bet that the Buffalo Bore's Heavy .44 Magnum +P+ 340 gr. Hard Cast, is above SAAMI spec for 44 Mag, 36,000 psi. Some have replicated it with handloading, by their data it's 43-45k PSI. Reading over some of these figures you guys are discussing, they look like Dinosaur-killin' loads. |
|
Quoted:
Some have replicated it with handloading, by their data it's 43-45k PSI. View Quote I bet your numbers are close. I don't have the exact bullet dimensions or OAL but a quick stab at it with Quickload propellent check only shows a few powders managing to get to the reported velocity with pressures under 50K. That would be a killer load. |
|
|
Quoted:
The Buffalo Bore load is a poor man's .454 Casull. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Reading over some of these figures you guys are discussing, they look like Dinosaur-killin' loads. The Buffalo Bore load is a poor man's .454 Casull. Folks like it up here because you get to use 44spl and 44mag, but can still get 454 performance out of the round. 45 Colt ammo is a fair bit more expensive up here round for round than 44 last I checked. |
|
|
Quoted:
the S&W is pretty and smooth but.... i think the Ruger superblackhawk is easier to shoot hot 44 magnums through View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
the S&W is pretty and smooth but.... i think the Ruger superblackhawk is easier to shoot hot 44 magnums through While I would like a Super Blackhawk, I'm not getting a Model 29 because I want a .44 Magnum, I'm getting a .44 Magnum because I want a Model 29. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would bet that the Buffalo Bore's Heavy .44 Magnum +P+ 340 gr. Hard Cast, is above SAAMI spec for 44 Mag, 36,000 psi. Some have replicated it with handloading, by their data it's 43-45k PSI. Reading over some of these figures you guys are discussing, they look like Dinosaur-killin' loads. Personally, if I was going to get a Dinosaur-killin' load, I'd be sending a Bisley Blackhawk to John Linebaugh instead of getting a .44 Magnum. Quoted:Generally most avid handgunners I know who hunt with revolvers do NOT constantly shoot hunting level loads, but rather shoot a few cylinders prior to hunting season to confirm sight settings and the vast majority of rounds fired will end up being 44 special level plinking loads. The idea the hunting revolver is going to need to stand up to thousands of full power magnums on an annual basis is not realistic, even more so if you are dependent on factory ammo The only reason I' going to get started reloading is so I can afford the level of shooting I want to do. I'm really not intersted in working up more than one load. Whatever load I find that works is what I'm going to stick with. It might be barely over a special, or it might be a full house .44 Magnum, but whatever load I decide on that shoots really good is going to be the only one I load. |
|
You might enjoy reading ... John Linebaugh's Writings
The Smith & Wesson 44 Magnum is my favorite gun. Before the Model 69 came out, my favorite was the 629 Mountain Gun. Now it's a toss up. Most of my Smith 44s Attached File |
|
Nice 629 collection.
Whats the one on the bottom left. An F comp? |
|
|
Quoted:
I'm fixing to be in the market for a new hunting revolver because my dad keeps making a big deal that I need to give his back to him (what do you expect when you let someone borrow a sixgun that shoots that good? ). I'm going to get a Model 29, and while I was dead set on one that's pinned and recessed, if I remember right they didn't start putting the endurance package on them until the -3s or -4s, and to keep my accuracy up at 50-100 yards without a scope it's going to be shot quite a bit. So I was thinking if I'm going to get a non P&R gun I might as well get a new one. I know one of the biggest complaints people have about new Smiths is they have a 2 piece barrel, but isn't that what made Dan Wessons so accurate? I would rather have a pistol without the lock and the MIM parts, but if they are more accurate I can live with the MIM parts and get rid of the lock. View Quote I don't think the S&W two-piece barrel is torqued at the front AND back like the Dan Wesson. |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.