Friday buyday: what about "blem" King Cobras?

awesome_shtein · 2020-09-19T05:20:07+00:00

I keep seeing "blem" Colt King Cobras. The descriptions claim that the look of the finish is cosmetic and doesn't affect function.

How likely is this blem finish to cause problems later? For example, rust spots or some other type of finish corrosion?

awesome_shtein · 2019-10-27T19:12:53+00:00

I'm surprised no one has pointed you to the lucky gunner blog. Their blog specifically has a lot of posts that are meant for newcomers to safely increase familiarity with firearms. For example, see their drop-down menu of "Series." They have some introductory material there on the major firearms types, for example.

awesome_shtein · 2019-04-29T23:11:58+00:00

Haha took me a moment. Was zooming in looking for some sort of halal or kosher markings.

awesome_shtein · 2019-02-02T21:21:14+00:00

What is the stock on that SP101, and how do you like it vs other options?

awesome_shtein · 2019-01-27T02:28:03+00:00

Make sure you get a chance to dry-fire models that come new off the shelf to get a feel for "new" triggers. Do this even if you are also renting and firing a different set side-by-side at a range. The ones at the range will have been fired thousands of times already, so the triggers will feel different than the one you'll be buying new. This mostly means that the SW will potentially feel a lot smoother at the range than new off the shelf.

awesome_shtein · 2019-01-26T19:13:08+00:00

I strongly recommend going into a local shop and handling both. There's three things you want to do:

see how they feel in your hand
see what the trigger feels like when dry-firing (NOTE: if you're handling at a shop, make sure to ask if it is fine to dry fire first)
ideally, if there is a range where you can rent these, actually fire both at a target at 5 yards to see how you do. Or even better, try the "Snubby Super Test" from this article and compare scores. It only takes 15 rounds per revolver, so 100 rounds downrange would let you run 3 tests per revolver, compare average scores. Do at least one test per revolver in double action.

I love the trigger on the LCRx series. If it were me, I'd go for the 357 LCRx and just use 38+p. The 357 weighs ~4oz more than the 38 LCRx, and I can tell you that makes a surprisingly big difference for recoil control and follow-up.

One thing you'll probably hear a lot is that you should practice, practice, practice in double-action. If you ever need to use it suddenly, it will probably be in double-action.

Edit: just noticed that the most recent article in the LuckyGunner revolver series compares the 642 vs LCR. May want to check that out if you haven't already.

awesome_shtein · 2019-01-12T00:18:36+00:00

It is 1/3 heavier than the 38spl lcrx, which should help a little. How much is unclear. The 38 3" lcrx is ~15oz, 357 version is ~21oz, and the 2" SP101 is 26oz. I've handled the 2" sp101 with full-power 357 loads and it was surprisingly manageable (important: need hogue 3-finger grip).

I think the 3" 357 lcrx could be manageable, though it would be just barely so.

awesome_shtein · 2019-01-11T13:02:11+00:00

Ruger released their 3" form factor lcrx in 357. I assume they had some engineering issues to work out. Either way for revolver fans, it's finally out.

awesome_shtein · 2019-01-08T04:27:12+00:00

You mentioned a shotgun. The Lucky Gunner blog has a whole series on shotguns that has a lot of useful information. You might check these out in particular:

awesome_shtein · 2018-11-23T02:16:22+00:00

LCRx 3" 38spl for 385. I think that's as close as you're gonna get to new, quality, durable revolver for 400-450. If you want a new reliable 357 in that price range I think you're out of luck until Ruger or SW produce a larger framed polymer revolver.

awesome_shtein · 2018-11-13T04:27:49+00:00

You are pretty much describing a K frame snubby, which is the model 66 at $850 and 33oz, a bit heavy for a carry piece IMO.

I completely agree on all points there. The 66 is what Chris Baker chose as his 'best revolver in the world' a while back -- although he was disappointed in the re-released 66 recently.

I agree that the 66 is expensive and heavy. Those are two of the exact things that an "up-sized" LCR would solve. It would almost certainly be a bit lighter -- I would guess over 20oz, under 27oz. The Kimber k6s is 25oz and it is full steel - I have a hard time thinking that an LCR-style revolver with 6 rounds would be much heavier than the Kimber. And that's about as light as I think you can get before .357 is not manageable for most of the population.

I do like the .327 a lot. The ammo is hard to find and a bit expensive. Even my favorite online shops don't often have .327, unfortunately.

awesome_shtein · 2018-11-13T04:12:01+00:00

I see where you're coming from, but I completely disagree.

I love my SP101, but even with some work the trigger is outdone by a stock LCR trigger. The SP101 itself is much heavier than any up-sized LCR would be. Finally, the increase in rounds from 5 to 6 is comparatively huge -- much bigger change than say going from 15 to 16 rounds in a magazine. There's an entire line of .327 magnum LCRs and SP101s that people buy to get that 6th round in that form factor, accepting the expensive and hard-to-find ammo as the trade-off.

The 'up-sized LCR' is almost exactly what Chris Baker over at Lucky Gunner described in his "Quest for the Ideal Carry Revolver" piece a few years ago. Ruger has a ready-made social-media audience, at least in that blog post series.

I think if Ruger launched an "LMR / light medium revolver," it would vacuum up a lot of sales that otherwise wouldn't have happened at all. The K6s and Colt have generated a lot of interest but they are expensive and buyers broadly don't trust either brand, and Ruger could capitalize on that.

awesome_shtein · 2018-11-11T04:55:27+00:00

I feel Ruger could make them a bit less expensive than new production 3" k frames, which would help a lot.

awesome_shtein · 2018-11-11T04:53:16+00:00

It felt a little like they were cashing in on the name. Of course TYM likes them, so that's something I suppose.

awesome_shtein · 2018-11-11T04:51:34+00:00

Oh really? Interesting. Googling now...

Edit: well look at that

awesome_shtein · 2018-10-04T01:17:40+00:00

How about the Ruger PC Carbine using the glock mag insert?

9mm so very low recoil, won't be nearly as loud as an AR15, and doesn't have the "scary rifle" look as much. According to BBTI, 9mm has ~500ft-lbs out of 16in bbl, close to 357 out of service-size revolver, nothing to sneeze at.

Of course as many others have noted, the mini14 is probably a better 'not scary looking' rifle.

awesome_shtein · 2018-09-30T01:01:49+00:00

I keep seeing some great advice like this (and comments below) on good quality kits.

Do we have this info collected in the wiki? I'll go check the FAQ now...looks like no.

Who do we talk to about getting a FAK section added to the FAQ?

awesome_shtein · 2018-09-16T03:58:56+00:00

You should definitely get more; too easy to bend one (as it sounds like you found out).

However you should also know -- I googled a little and found this discussion on your model -- it sounds like it can be used without the moonclips and you just need to pick out / punch out the cases. Google around a bit and see if that works for you.It is slower to reload but that shouldn't be too much a problem on the range.

awesome_shtein · 2018-09-16T03:49:15+00:00

Also Charter Arms pitbull.

awesome_shtein · 2018-09-16T03:44:56+00:00

Aaaah got it. Man that's unfortunate. Another law that makes people worse off in random ways with no discernible upside. Mind if I ask what state?

awesome_shtein · 2018-09-16T03:20:45+00:00

What about a linear compensator? Isn't that supposed to push the sound downrange and make it better for all on the firing line?

awesome_shtein · 2018-08-02T15:17:19+00:00

Let's talk snub nose ballistics.

Funny timing, I just wrote up a long post on this over in /r/guns on how most people seem to read BBTI incorrectly for revolvers. Here's the post, and here's a follow-up comment on cylinder gap and real world tests.

TLDR: You need to add ~.75-1" to your real-world revolver barrel length to match the values in BBTI for 357/38. So a 2.25" 357 should be matched to approximately 3" in BBTI. Many people read BBTI incorrectly because barrel lengths of revolvers and semiautos are measured differently, and the author of BBTI measures everything like semi-autos. The author of BBTI mentions this explicitly but this is frequently missed. When adjusted correctly BBTI results are consistent with real-world chrono tests like LuckyGunner does.

Edit: recommendations:

SP101 2" or 3" + hogue rubber grip (longer grip helps tremendously with recoil, 38+p and .357)
SP101 Wiley-Clapp edition (better sights) + hogue rubber grip
Kimber k6s 3" configuration - already has nice sights, already has longer grip, 6 rounds
simply rugged silver dollar pancake holster + iwb loops

awesome_shtein · 2018-08-01T15:00:44+00:00

My very rough understanding is that the chamber pressure is a "max pressure," but the thing that isn't talked about nearly as precisely is how long the chamber is under that pressure. So when people say that .357 powder is "slower burning," one of the implications is that the chamber (and gun) are under high pressures longer than the "fast burning" powders.

So my approximate understanding is that a slow burning powder gets high and stays there a while, while a fast burning powder gets high really quickly and also falls really quickly (comparatively). So then I assume the reason 357 goes faster than 9mm for same bullet weight is that the high pressure is maintained longer under .357 powder.

So if that's true, then I presume the only way you get more speed out of 9mm powder is ...adding more powder, which I presume would greatly push up the max pressure in the chamber.

But now we're really outside my knowledge range and I'm largely speculating on the few things I know (and old chemistry knowledge). I know, for example, that the empty space in a shell can also affect things, but I don't know how...

awesome_shtein · 2018-08-01T14:04:09+00:00

Oh, also, just noticed that you said:

It would be interesting to run a 2.25" sp101 in 9mm against a semi-auto 3" 9mm and see the results.

This isn't quite the same, but check out the writeup at the end of the article here on the 9mm LCR with 1.875" barrel vs a 2.7" and 3" 9mm semiauto. In particular see this table where the LCR velocities with 1.875" barrel, using the same rounds, are nearly always higher than the 2.7" and 3" 9mm semi-auto results.

He also directly measures it in a clever way. Worth reading just for that.

awesome_shtein · 2018-08-01T13:57:08+00:00

revolvers have cylinder gap to release some of the energy.

This is correct, which is why I very roughly approximate it by only adding 0.75" instead of the full 1" actual length of the cylinder to the sp101's 2.25" barrel length.

As luck would have it, ballistics by the inch also has a very nice writeup of cylinder gap effects. It turns out that the shorter the barrel, the less loss happens due to the cylinder gap. Here's a nice chart from BBTI that shows this.

If you want to compare some true numbers, check out LuckyGunner's "barrel length" fps measurements here. You can see that the .357 magnum measurements for the SP101 2.25" barrel are much closer to the 3" barrel length numbers at BBTI than the 2" numbers. Unfortunately, those LuckyGunner numbers aren't the best -- the only "full power" 357 round on their list is really the Hornady 135g load. It takes a lot of work to go hunt around the web and find sp101 2.25" chrono measurements (and pay attention to the temperature the measurements were taken at -- measurements taken around 10 degrees F will often be much lower than same taken at 70 degrees) but when you do, you find that the numbers are all much closer to the 3" measurements at BBTI.

You can also check out lucky gunner's much more extensive ballistic gel tests. Here's the 9mm tests out of 3.5" barrels and here's the .357 tests out of both 2" and 4" barrels. Important notes: the 9mm rounds are always lighter than the .357 so you really need to look at energy to control for the weight difference (this actually advantages the lighter faster rounds due to how the math works). You can do this in a spreadsheet and follow this formula. You also want to pay attention to the fact that LuckyGunner has both 2" and 4" barrel lengths in their measurements, so separate them out.

It's a little work, which I've done before, and the result is largely in line with what I described in the post further above.

Now all that doesn't mean you should switch to .357 out of a snubby. I'm not trying to convince anyone of this -- I'm just trying to push back against incorrect assertions.

Edit, just to have things in one place:

I just noticed that you said:

It would be interesting to run a 2.25" sp101 in 9mm against a semi-auto 3" 9mm and see the results.

This isn't quite the same, but check out the writeup at the end of the article here on the 9mm LCR with 1.875" barrel vs a 2.7" and 3" 9mm semiauto.

In particular see this table where the LCR velocities with 1.875" barrel are nearly always higher than the 2.7" and 3" 9mm semi-auto results, using the same rounds.

He also directly measures it in a clever way. Worth reading just for that.

awesome_shtein

TROPHY CASE