Thread 64114519

Which cylinder release do you prefer?

>>64114519 (OP)
Ruger closely followed by Colt and then S&W a distant last. The button and the toggle are always reliable, I’ve had the S&W style ones gum up.

Ruger. But I do give Taurus’s big bores a special mention… no fancy clockwork connecting multiple clasps… you get 2 sepperate locks to release and it seems much cheaper to make..

>>64114519 (OP)
anything other than the pull-back design that shit sucks

S&W>Colt>>>Ruger
The button feels awkward and looks retarded so it's the worst one. Colt or S&W is a personal preference but the push forward motion is easier to do one handed.

>>64114519 (OP)
Before owning any revolvers I figured Ruger > Smith > Colt. Bought a Ruger, later Colt. Over the years I've really come around on the Colt pull back style. Its dead simple, 2 pieces, a thing on a spring. You have to get your support hand up there anyways to (depending on your reload technique) use your middle fingers to go through the frame to push out the cylinder and bop the ejector.

>>64114519 (OP)
S&W but extended

>>64114519 (OP)
Ruger or Colt. S&W release is easiet to do one-handed, but depending on the style of the latch it can irritate my thumb. Also, it has that screw keeping it in place, which I have seen come loose before.

Smith push is best release. The ruger button is acceptable. Colt pull is dumb

>>64114519 (OP)
Taurus.

release?

>>64114519 (OP)
Well I haven't had much experience with any other release than the S&W standard, which is what's on my Spohr. But it's always felt very intuitive and fast for me, so I'm choosing that.

>>64114519 (OP)
MR93.

>>64114551
Those are simply a combination of the S&W style on the frame, and the Dan Wesson style on the crane.

You forgot to post the best one. Dan Wesson.
I actually don't remember how it works.

>>64114519 (OP)
Ruger > S&W > Colt >>> Dan Wesson
Absolute piss bottom tier is pulling on the ejector rod

>>64117861
It looks like it’s actuated on the cylinder latch.

>>64117861
>>64117985
You slide it down and push the cylinder out.
It's actually pretty fast from a reloading standpoint so long as you're wearing a glove on your left hand because it can get hot after a few cylinders.
IE you push the latch down with your left thumb, push the cylinder with your left index finger through the frame, then depress the plunger with your thumb to clear the spent cases.
At the same time you use your right hand to grab a speedloader, so when it's empty you pop rounds back in, pop the cylinder shut and you're ready to go.
The goal as far as I know with putting the latch up front was to reduce cylinder end shake, which effects accuracy.

>>64114526
>>64114551
>>64117872
>i like the cylinder release that is basically impossible to activate one-handed without changing your grip

>>64114519 (OP)
Smith, mostly because it's what I'm used to but it also just kinda feels like the "right" way to do it. Had a security six for a year or two when I was younger, didn't hate the release on it but remember thinking it was a little weird, perfectly functional, just something to get used to. OTOH you do have to tighten them down every once in a while... Should probably put some thread locker on mine now that I think about it

>>64117861
Came to post this cause it's such a shame it isn't around. Most reloading techniques have you put your thumb there anyway, so you're practically combining two steps into one here and it makes for a very practical reload.

The 15 is a criminally under-rated gun. If you want what is essentially a Colt Mk IV (no, that's not a thing) then get a DW. Not sure what they're going for now but on the used market they've always been a fantastic value.

Only complaint is it's like having a K-frame cylinder on an L-frame sized revolver.

Oh and don't concern yourself over the interchangeable barrels. Just like your chassis-based semi-auto you will find that you never actually swap the barrel out anyway.

>>64118186
>I improperly handle my gun and have an unrealistic view of how revolvers should be handled

Just say you’re noguns without saying sheesh.

>>64118186
tiny hands lmao

>>64114519 (OP)
>doesn't show DW
DW.

>>64118186
>yeah, I just like mishandling my gun like a retard
>I don’t care about the ”timing” nerd

>>64114519 (OP)
>cylinder release
>dark magic
BURN THE WITCH!

>>64118756
Let him do.what he wants, Mr. Control Freak. You're not as superior as you think you are.

>>64118767
>Mr. Control Freak. You're not as superior as you think you are.

>>64117861
There's the real answer.
Let your left thumb release the latch and then let your middle and ring fingers push the cylinder out as you hit the ejector with your thumb. All the while, your right hand can be going for a speedloader which you'll have up and ready to go by the time you dump the spend cases. Then you reload, close the cylinder with your left thumb, and move back to a firing grip.
There's basically no wasted movements in this reload and it's incredibly smooth and fast if you practice at it. Only top breaks are faster.

I have both a Colt and a Smith and I literally do not care, both are exactly the same and do the same thing, the bigger question is if you prefer clockwise or counterclockwise rotation because you're stuck with one or the other depending on your cylinder release

>>64118798
>clockwise or counterclockwise rotation because you're stuck with one or the other depending on your cylinder release
When you point the gun at yourself, the rotation reverses, for you this is always an option.

>>64116808
Yeah but compare it too the rugers triple lockup…. Also pretty sure the xframe has some extra locking points actuated by connectors.

>>64118790
You know that’s exactly how Colt describes you should reload their guns in the manual, it applies to pretty much every swing out revolver with an ejector rod. Ruger, S&W, it’s no different unless you’re left handed.

>>64118804
Rude. Go fuck yourself dude

>>64118798
I still think though the same in essence, S&W is still in 3rd because of the screw, revolvers always have a way of shaking screws loose, especially in the rear sight. And one less screw is always a good thing.

>>64114519 (OP)
*unzips dick*

>>64118831
>zip on dick
Weirdo.

>>64118823
The colt has a complex dovetail in the side of the frame though which is pretty difficult to machine accurately. They can rattle around but never fall out. It's a compromise I guess.

One thing about the Colt that's nice is you will never accidentally bump it.

>>64114519 (OP)
>taking revolvers seriously in 1900+125

>>64118952
>Sights fixed to barrel, more accurate
>Can conceal much larger caliber relative to an auto of the same caliber
>Jamming basically impossible when it matters (the first cylinder)
>Cool factor
>Fun
>Reloader's dream
>You get to make fun of Taurus and Ruger poorfags while being secretly jealous that they get .454 Casull production revolvers

>>64114519 (OP)
Conceptually the S&W is the best, but I also don't think it matters at all. I only currently own Colts and the pull back doesn't bother me at all. I'll be fidgeting with it to handed anyways and also I don't use revolvers like race guns so it doesn't matter. I like my Colts

>>64118421
>>64118756
>>64118421
>>64118756
the cylinder wasnt spinning and he didnt really flip it closed that hard so its not a big deal
revolvers are made out of steel not silly putty you candy ass faggots

>>64119256
How are Ruger revolvers for poorfags?

>>64120359
Snobbery and cope.

>>64118421
>>64118756
>revolvers are peak gun, it's all you need and it will literally never let you down, and I will remind you of this at every opportunity
>but DO NOT handle it roughly or it will die!
cool.

>>64120359
They’re good as long as you get a Security 6, GP100, or SP101, the cheaper polymer framed stuff is just that, cheaper, it works but man I hate the feel of them.

>>64119256
Two of those points are BS, revolvers can definitely jam up and are definitely not easier to conceal than comparable automatics. The cylinder is an annoyance and OAL is notably more than a similar barrel length autoloader. I'm not that other fag and CCing a revolver is fine but no need to make up benefits

webleychads where we at?

>>64120498
It is called "not handling in a Faggoty fashion"

Revolver boomers are so easily trolled. The sad thing is that they forget in a day.

>>64120953
>Can definitely jam up
The point wasn't that they can't/won't jam up. The point was that the first cylinder (meaning: a clean revolver) is virtually guaranteed. Carbon buildup and screws shaking loose are the weak link that keeps a revolver from being reliable in places you aren't able to strip and clean your gun.
>Definitely not easier to coneal
Are you retarded? I can conceal a Ruger LCR in .357 that fits in my pocket. The closest neighbor to that cartridge is the 10mm, so good luck finding a 1.75" auto in that.

>>64120359
Fox & Grapes situation for the most part, but it's mostly just memes. Like how /brg/ bullies M1A owners; they're fine guns, but we all know that if money wasn't a hindrance they'd be getting a Fulton Armory or a genuine M14.
The GP100 is great but it's a compromise compared to something like a 586/686/Python, which are all compromises compared to a Korth or MR73.

>>64114519 (OP)
Wedge.

>>64114519 (OP)
This one

>>64122555
I could understand the Python since the Python "looks cooler" and has a smoother action. But, in my opinion, the 686 doesn't do anything better than the GP100.

>>64118186
Not a problem, you have to use two hands to load the cartridges anyway.

Colt looks nicer but the SW design is easier to use intuitively and the extended match releases are really nice to use.

>>64122540
>Muh magnum pocket pistol
>He doesn't know
Why are all revolver fudds noguns?

The enhanced cylinder release that S&W created for some of their Performance Center models is the best on any revolver and it's not even close.

Wish top-break frames could withstand modern day pressures. Seems like the easiest way to load a revolver. Everything moves out the way and you can do it one handed.

>>64114519 (OP)
S&W since I've never shot any other brand of revolver. It does feel very natural but I can't really imagine the Ruger being any worse. Don't know about the Colt though

>>64123773
Trigger is superior on the S&W vs. the Ruger. Rugers are durable but that's about it.

>>64125220
I'd rather have a more durable firearm than a marginally better trigger pull, but that's just me.

>>64125328
Oh yeah because you are uh using your .357 magnum large frame revolver for such serious business where durability is an actual objective criteria

stfu kid. rugers are hideous fucking bricks. graceless looking garbage that evokes no emotion whatsoever. If they were 40% cheaper than a 686 there would be some modicum of incentive to buy such a disgusting looking gun but they aren't

>>64125220
Nta, anon but it may shock you to learn that the trigger on my GP100 is better than on my 2020 Anaconda

>>64124114
Too easy to accidentally activate when thumbing the hammer.

>>64123773
It many “look” cooler but the GP100 and Python have very similar triggers in newer models, both can be made very good.

>>64125346
Your personal feefees shouldn’t effect objective fact.

>>64124005
Me with my Bruin. See? I love autoloaders too, faggot. Mwah mwah mwah c'mere little boy let me smooch you. Fucking zoomer.
>He doesn't know
Then explain it, Jeeves.

>>64125328
>More durable
Then get the MR73. Like I said, the GP100 is a compromise to better guns. Doesn't mean it's bad.

>>64125348
I'm not saying GP100s can't have good triggers, but the Python has a very smooth action and trigger OOTB.

>>64128559
Comparing the GP100 MC that’s completely stock and 10 years old vs the new 2020 Anaconda I’ve got sitting next to me, the Ruger wins, it’s not by much, mainly crispness and slight edge to pull weight in both DA and SA. It doesn’t have this slightly nasty crunch the Anaconda does on letting off the trigger after it’s been pulled. The old guns weren’t like this and had amazing glass rod snapping triggers, but they aren’t beefed up as much as the new ones are but I’ll take something to shoot more than just look at it any day.

>>64118421
>webm of me holding a gun
>UGH just say ur noguns!

more like YOU are noguns since you think lightly slapping a cylinder closed is somehow MORE damaging than pushing it closed.

>>64124114
>The enhanced cylinder release that S&W created for some of their Performance Center models is the best on any revolver and it's not even close.
>>64125348
>Too easy to accidentally activate when thumbing the hammer.

Tell ANYONE who's every handled one you're an idiot without

>>64117861
I have one. I greatly prefer the Smith style.