wings wrote: Wed Dec 20, 2023 8:27 am If most handgun cartridges will only poke holes, but poke them sufficiently deep, then the doctrine of "more holes, more fastly" is a compromise to make up for insufficient power.

…More like “more chances for holes” to make up for insufficient operator.

Bravo, Wings, I actually learned two fascinating perspectives from your succinct post.

wings wrote:
Unless you're packing a Desert Eagle or something in 10mm, a defensive pistol typically won't knock down a feral hog or drug crazed attacker in one shot.

They won’t even knock down a raccoon, with one shot!

My buddy was sitting on his Deck and a coyote came right up the stairs while he was grilling. He shot it with his carry gun (a S&W M&P Shield w/ a 9mm JHP) point blank through the vitals, and it ran off over 300 yards away.

Typical handgun calibers are deadly (minutes or hours later) … but one shot is not a “fight stopper” that Hollywood makes it out to be. Rifles are. That’s why we hunt with them, and use them in battle. Any handgun is a portable comprimise that you must understand it’s limitations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I only have revolvers or Bond derringers in anything over .22Mag. My left hand and arm was injured in a motorcycle wreck in 1970, so I can't pull the slide on anything bigger. I've never had any problems with running out of ammo. Just sayin'.

Gnigma wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2023 6:59 pm Most ALL civilian incidents where a gun is actually fired show that only 1 or 2 shots are fired, regardless of magazine capacity or caliber. Semi-autos are not required. Hell, two from a Bond Arms derringer or a NAA .22 are as effective as almost anything else. You're not likely to get into a TV/Movie style shootout. Most police never do that. If that does happen, and you haven't had live fire training, you likely aren't going to survive. Deal with the real. https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alterna ... ping-power

Agree, round count isn’t the most important thing. I carry five rounds. Not a believer in the spray and pray philosophy. A revolver will work just fine.

cooper wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2023 9:20 am Honestly, in 50+ years I can't say that I've ever felt unsafe without a gun. I think that's another point to keep in mind. I think people overestimate the threats of real life.

Unless you're brown-skinned, especially Black. Then that picture can change quite drastically. Sure glad my Dad was armed those multiple times he was attacked.

As it happens, he defended himself with his carry revolver.

CowboyT wrote: Sun Dec 31, 2023 6:43 pm

cooper wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2023 9:20 am Honestly, in 50+ years I can't say that I've ever felt unsafe without a gun. I think that's another point to keep in mind. I think people overestimate the threats of real life.

Unless you're brown-skinned, especially Black. Then that picture can change quite drastically. Sure glad my Dad was armed those multiple times he was attacked.

As it happens, he defended himself with his carry revolver.

Being a victim can certainly reorient one’s perspective on the need for self defense. It was certainly a wake up call for me. I think my snubnose revolvers are enough for me.

Just got back from a gun show. I was behind the VCDL booth, as usual. Was open-carrying the S&W M629, as I usually do, because it's a rather handsome revolver with its rosewood grips, and it does get a lot of attention. Combined with my "San Francisco Liberal With A Gun" shirts that I also wear at these shows, the two end up starting a lot of conversations. That'a good thing and something that I intend to continue.

Some have asked me if I'd be better off carrying a semi-auto like a Glock 17 (9mm) or Glock 21 (.45 ACP) or similar. That depends on how well you shoot that gun. For me, shootability is not an issue either way, as I shoot wheelguns and semi-autos with equal facility. But others might not be able to do that for whatever reason. Proper shot placement is what matters more than which type of defensive firearm one has.

I did mention that six rounds of .44 Special hollow-points might be pretty good reason for any would-be attacker to just leave me alone. The .44 Special, while relatively low pressure, is not something one would want to get hit by. The person conceded that point.

Now, the S&W Model 629 really was meant as a hunting revolver, and it's chambered in .44 Magnum for that reason. Perhaps a 10mm Auto round might do OK against the black bears that we have on the Eastern Seaboard. But a brown bear? A grizzly? That's what they've got out West. It took five rounds of .454 Casull out of a Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan to put down a charging, and apparently desperately hungry, brown bear. The only semi-auto pistols that I'm aware of that can put out that kind of firepower are the Desert Eagle and the new Auto Mag...neither of which are at all inexpensive. So, for big bear country, I'd say the revolver remains the handgun of choice for self-defense.

For self-defense against 2-legged predators, though....

The semi-auto pistol has the capacity advantage in a big way. Comparing a six-shooter like the S&W Models 19 or 65/66 (.357 Magnum) to, say, a "Glock 40", the Glock 40 most definitely wins. In 9mm, the capacity advantage is even slightly greater. Seventeen (plus one) rounds versus six before having to reload is pretty compelling.

Someone talked about small carry guns. Some of the more recent semi-auto pocket pistols can carry 10 rounds. The slim ones can carry about 7. In either case, that's more than the 5 that a snubnose revolver can carry. However, that revolver will put out all five shots through a coat pocket if need be. There are situations in which you may have to fire from the pocket if your attacker(s) is/are close enough. The semi-auto? The slide will catch in the pocket after the first shot. One and done.

So, it really depends on what situation you believe you may end up facing. Either way, train accordingly.

Yeah, my .357 mag revolver is my PD weapon. though in my only DGU I had the 1911. I did not feel under armed. But the revolver is the original point and click interface. But it's totally silent and I needed that loud rack of the pistol to get the job done, which it did.

CDFingers

Took the doubly redundant obsolete Schmidt 357Mag 5½" SAA clone to the range a few days ago. Also took the 9mm cylinder but only five rounds of 9mm and a handful of 38S&W Special since I just wanted to make sure it still worked. Shot all five 9mm then changed cylinders and shot ten rounds of 38S&W Special.
... know when to walk away ...
I have two more old SAA clones made by JP Sauer and sold as Western Marshall by Hawes Importers back in the 70s or 80s. One is a 6" 44 Mag (but I shoot 44 Special) and the other a 5½" 45Colt. I'll get them to the range after the first of the year.

CowboyT wrote: Sun Dec 31, 2023 6:43 pm

cooper wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2023 9:20 am Honestly, in 50+ years I can't say that I've ever felt unsafe without a gun. I think that's another point to keep in mind. I think people overestimate the threats of real life.

Unless you're brown-skinned, especially Black. Then that picture can change quite drastically. Sure glad my Dad was armed those multiple times he was attacked.

As it happens, he defended himself with his carry revolver.

No argument from me CowboyT. Like I said above.

cooper wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2023 10:06 am Yes. Absolutely. Each one has their own experience and situation and needs to act accordingly.

I realize I used a lot of language about how threats are overrated etc. I should have qualified that with “in my life experience.” And remembering that my life experience is that of a healthy middle aged white straight cis-male with a modicum of affluence living in a very small town. The world was made to protect me.

Basically draw a Venn diagram of all the privileged labels you can come up with, and I live in the area intersected by all of them. I never forget that.

Such a good conversation here!
I grew up with autos and revolvers and I used to feel that revolvers were 'obsolete'. That techtosterone thing. But, I eventually came to the realization that the revolver ALWAYS worked. Even the untrained can just point and pull the trigger. Don't have to rack the slide, don't have to deal with the magazines. Just accept that you have a limited round count.
Now I have my hammer-bobbed .38 Colt Agent and my wife has her .38 LCR for carry. We also have the Mod 19 S&W .357 to go with the Rossi M92 (talk about a great!! home defense gun).
The only time we have had to use one, just my wife racking her USP sent the tresspassers off in a hurry...

RotaryMags, I'm loving your term "techtosterone!"

As a former bicycle shop service manager, I recognize that the term fits with a LOT of different industries. I had to remind people that the top-of-the-line race gear of ten years prior had eight rear cogs instead of ten or eleven, and that the eight-cog rear shifter systems still did a lot of good for a lot of cyclists. But your term "Techtosterone" applied in spades!

RotaryMags wrote: Sun Dec 31, 2023 8:41 pm Such a good conversation here!
I grew up with autos and revolvers and I used to feel that revolvers were 'obsolete'. That techtosterone thing. But, I eventually came to the realization that the revolver ALWAYS worked. Even the untrained can just point and pull the trigger. Don't have to rack the slide, don't have to deal with the magazines. Just accept that you have a limited round count.
Now I have my hammer-bobbed .38 Colt Agent and my wife has her .38 LCR for carry. We also have the Mod 19 S&W .357 to go with the Rossi M92 (talk about a great!! home defense gun).
The only time we have had to use one, just my wife racking her USP sent the tresspassers off in a hurry...

I think it's important to remember that "revolvers always work" is a potentially dangerous myth. They fail in different ways than semiautomatic pistols, but they do fail. They won't give you a double feed or FTE, and can be cycled past a bad primer without racking a slide, but they still jam, and the sights can still fall off. I've had a primer back out of factory ammunition and bind up the cylinder. I had the pawl break so that the hand wouldn't rotate the cylinder. That time, fortunately, was during function check after cleaning, but I had to send it back to the mothership. And that was a Blackhawk that has never seen anything but factory loads. Squibs are equally bad in either, but revolvers add the threat of a bullet jumping the crimp under recoil.

On the other hand, if a revolver fails during a gunfight or you run out of reloads, it will usually double as a blackjack. So there's that.

Gun forums are chock-a-block full of debates about whether you "need" a carry pistol with 10+ rounds of 9mm on deck for EDC. While that shouldn't be surprising - techtosterone! - the flip side is how many still tote wheelies instead of bottomfeeders. Not just us oldsters either.

While the usual wisdom is "carry what you shoot best and can conceal effectively" the real solution is to avoid getting into a gunfight and to get out as soon as you can if guns do come out. Confronting multiple armed assailants is a losing proposition even if you're trained to do it - it depends upon surprise and inducing panic. The most dangerous criminals won't flinch and probably have more experience under fire than we do. Out and about, you really need to be thinking about how to cover an escape.

At home, there are better options than a handgun, but you're more likely to need better options.

wings wrote:
I think it's important to remember that "revolvers always work" is a potentially dangerous myth. They fail in different ways than semiautomatic pistols, but they do fail. They won't give you a double feed or FTE, and can be cycled past a bad primer without racking a slide, but they still jam, and the sights can still fall off. I've had a primer back out of factory ammunition and bind up the cylinder. I had the pawl break so that the hand wouldn't rotate the cylinder. That time, fortunately, was during function check after cleaning, but I had to send it back to the mothership. And that was a Blackhawk that has never seen anything but factory loads. Squibs are equally bad in either, but revolvers add the threat of a bullet jumping the crimp under recoil.

I’ve had the exact same issue with a suspect primer blowing out the back of the case and locking up (ironically) a .357 Ruger Blackhawk. That’s the revolver I use for heavy, .357 max load testing.

My issue is that I was shooting heavy, .357 handloads. They caused a old Winchester SPM primer, to back out and lock up the cylinder, which I was fortunately able to get out without further damage to the revolver. These were a stack of old primers I bough from a guy at work. My lesson was to be sure if the “provenance” of any reloading components you buy.

I would not carry these types of loads for “self defense (even against grizzlies) as they have too much recoil for fast follow ups.

Revolvers are mechanical devices and any such can fail. Niche & unlikely circumstances for sure; but no complex mechanical device is perfectly reliable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, one has to accept that any mechanism can fail. Still the pros of a revolver are far greater than the possibility that a component will break. Generally maintaining and inspecting a gun regularly will keep you out of trouble. If I was really paranoid that my snubnose would fail I’d put two in my pockets and one in a shoulder holster. They are tiny and I’d much rather take my chances with a revolver than a small semiautomatic that I have to fully draw from concealment. Make your own judgements and choose your options.

OK, I understand anything machanical can fail, but the only firearms I've worked with that have NOT failed at one point or another (new ones excluded) are my revolvers, and my P7. The P7 is worth far too much to carry so it lives in it's box on the safe. I bought the Agent on a lark because it was cheap and it is now my go-to companion (after mods).

Techtosterone applies to bikes even more than guns! It's amazing what you can buy for pretty cheap just because it's not the latest and greatest.
I built my 'fast tourer' years ago from a NOS Titus carbon frame, with NOS Ultegra/Dura-Ace componants for less than $1000 (not including wheels), just beacuse 10-speed was the new thing. Sub-17lbs w/out the leather saddle.

RotaryMags wrote: Mon Jan 01, 2024 2:59 pm OK, I understand anything machanical can fail, but the only firearms I've worked with that have NOT failed at one point or another (new ones excluded) are my revolvers, and my P7. The P7 is worth far too much to carry so it lives in it's box on the safe. I bought the Agent on a lark because it was cheap and it is now my go-to companion (after mods).

Techtosterone applies to bikes even more than guns! It's amazing what you can buy for pretty cheap just because it's not the latest and greatest.
I built my 'fast tourer' years ago from a NOS Titus carbon frame, with NOS Ultegra/Dura-Ace componants for less than $1000 (not including wheels), just beacuse 10-speed was the new thing. Sub-17lbs w/out the leather saddle.

Cool bike build. I have a late 80’s likely early 90’s DeRosa road bike. Someone had put a few Shimano components in the rear and I restored it to Campagnolo Chorus components to match the original components on the bike. The frame is chromium molybdenum as far as I recall. It’s upstairs in my work hobby room. It’s old, light and fast enough depending on the rider. I need to replace the inner tubes.
As for revolvers failing my nearly 100 year old Nagant M1895 failed to fire when a small butterfly spring broke. Not really indicative about revolvers in general. Fixed it, good as new. Had a few failures to feed and limp wristing issues with a couple of semiautomatics, also not indicative of the group in general. Does highlight the need to polish technique and practice. In general if you practice and are confident with a gun I wouldn’t worry about the obscure chance it fails.

RotaryMags wrote:OK, I understand anything machanical can fail, but the only firearms I've worked with that have NOT failed at one point or another (new ones excluded) are my revolvers, and my P7. The P7 is worth far too much to carry so it lives in it's box on the safe. I bought the Agent on a lark because it was cheap and it is now my go-to companion (after mods).

Techtosterone applies to bikes even more than guns! It's amazing what you can buy for pretty cheap just because it's not the latest and greatest.
I built my 'fast tourer' years ago from a NOS Titus carbon frame, with NOS Ultegra/Dura-Ace componants for less than $1000 (not including wheels), just beacuse 10-speed was the new thing. Sub-17lbs w/out the leather saddle.

Thread drift; but as a former competitive triathlete and time trialist, I built a competitive bike for far, far less than many of
My contemporaries of the time.

I think I was $1600 all in; which is nothing comparatively. It’s my experience that the 3rd tier components like Shimano 105 & SRAM rival are just as mechanically reliable at the much, much less expense Of being a few grams heavier. There’s a minimum of quality but in my experience for the vast majority of amateur racers and recreational riders anything beyond is diminished returns for the dollar. Nothing made me happier than crushing someone with a 10k bike. It’s the “engine” and smart, not over training.

Eventually my bike became kind of a “ship of Theseus” as everything eventually wore out and needed to be replaced or improved over 7 years of training and racing. I think all that was left was the CF frame (surprisingly, uncracked despite several crashes) and the original gear shifters. Cycling is a “snake oil” industry for sure; trying to market fractions of seconds gained for 1000s of dollars.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Apologies for the drift! My favorite bike by far is my 1990 Marinoni Sprint. Bought as an NOS frame in the early 2Ks, and I built it up with a Campy Centuar 10sp CT gruppo, Mavic Open Pro rims on Campy hubs. Everything that wasn't new and modern was NOS vintage. NOS Cinelli 1A stem and Campoine Del Mondo bars, Super Record front hub and seat post (lightly used). Saddle was originally a white Brooks that my wife bought me (from a Keirin bike batch destined for Japan, no idea how she got it!), but that one is boxed up and I ride on a white Selle Anatomica. I like to think it's a great combination of vintage looks and modern ride. Eventually I'll post some pics on the "My Favorite Things" or the bicycle thread. Oh, and my Titus...

Back to the subject at hand...

sikacz wrote: Does highlight the need to polish technique and practice. In general if you practice and are confident with a gun I wouldn’t worry about the obscure chance it fails.

Discussing the finer points of things not likely to happen is fun, but sikacz has the best answer.

sikacz wrote: Mon Jan 01, 2024 3:28 pm
Cool bike build. I have a late 80’s likely early 90’s DeRosa road bike. Someone had put a few Shimano components in the rear and I restored it to Campagnolo Chorus components to match the original components on the bike. The frame is chromium molybdenum as far as I recall. It’s upstairs in my work hobby room. It’s old, light and fast enough depending on the rider. I need to replace the inner tubes.

Contributing to thread drift:
When I was a bike shop service manager, a customer was piecing together his dream nostalgia bike: a late-1980s or early 1990s DeRosa (I think) with the Columbus SLX Spiral Butted tubes and period-correct Campagnolo bits. He found a set of new-old-stock hubs and rims, and had me build them into wheels, complete with the tying/soldering that was popular at the time the bike was new.

That was one gorgeous ride! I never tried to ride it, because his frame was the right size for him, and his trousers inseam is six or eight inches longer than mine.

INVICTVS138 wrote: Mon Jan 01, 2024 3:57 pm
Thread drift; but as a former competitive triathlete and time trialist, I built a competitive bike for far, far less than many of
My contemporaries of the time.

I think I was $1600 all in; which is nothing comparatively. It’s my experience that the 3rd tier components like Shimano 105 & SRAM rival are just as mecharrwpiable at the much, much less expense Of being a few grams heavier. There’s a minimum of quality but in my experience for the vast majority of amateur racers and recreational riders anything beyond is diminished returns for the dollar. Nothing made me happier than crushing someone with a 10k bike. It’s the “engine” and smart, not over training.

I used to tell customers that I could tune a Shimano 105 rear derailleur (back when it was 9-speed stuff) so that they couldn't tell it wasn't Dura-Ace (some derisively called it "DoYaRace"). All the "feel" was in the shifter for those gruppos at that time (early 2000s).

I all but refused to build wheels with alloy spoke nipples after a wheel I built had several spoke nipples fail. The weight difference just wasn't worth the durability difference for me, especially since I was warranting my wheels to not break any spokes for five years, regardless of mileage.

Yeah, Techtosterone is a real problem in that industry. I left my last bike shop gig at the end of 2015, and I don't miss it at all. "Tri-geeks" were the worst, wanting to throw money at their bikes based on weird "tips" from sketchy online sources instead of recognizing that smart training would overcome a couple pounds of bike weight.

This thread needs a course correction. My carry pieces

Agreed. Even if I still can’t get this $*&#ing system to post pics right side up. And I LIKE bikes.

I enjoy the bike discussion, but I also approve of the course correction. Here's my contribution.

cooper wrote: Mon Jan 01, 2024 8:45 pm I enjoy the bike discussion, but I also approve of the course correction. Here's my contribution.

SuperRedhawk44mag-2.jpg

Did the lanyard ring come with the original setup?