re: Best revolver

quote:

---

Now, all you metallurgists describe the process of each, and tell which is stronger. 

---

Forged vs cast can both be equally as strong. The heat treat and metallurgy is what's important. Ruger RedHawks were designed to handle heavy loads better than S&W N-frames, but it has nothing to do with casting vs forged. It is in the design itself. RedHawks are a single piece frame. N-frames have a removable side plate making it less rigid. RedHawks also use a stronger cylinder locking design. Bill Ruger had always overbuilt his firearms because he was scared of lawsuits. The differences between the 2 designs is negligible and you will never shoot one out before the other. Get which ever one you like best.

The overall construction of the ruger is more robust than smith across the board for the same "size" gun. It isnt debatable, ask anyone who shoots lots of heavy loads. Hell even read the box on some of buffalo bore's nasty stuff. I can all be used in all ruger guns with no restrictions. The same cannot be said for Smith's. The lockup is different, the frame structure is different, and the trigger is different. The material the gun is made from is close to irrelevant. The overall integrity of the ruger is better.

quote:

---

S&W 642. No hammer. Easy conceal.38 special.

---

Massive recoil even with standard .38, small sight picture, inaccurate, only 5 shots.
Having said that, this is the gun that I take on car trips everywhere. Greatly concealable and plenty of power. Get a Uncle Mike's size 3 holster for front pocket carry. Any gun enthusiast should eventually own a 642....and a 1911.

A pre 1990 Smith will handle anything you put in it.

I shoot a 1979 New Model Blackhawk, and it's a "cool" pistola, but no where near the gun that my '83 Smith is in fit, finish, and accuracy.

Ok, you know everything about firearms.

I concede.

Good. Me and the people who run a successful ammunition company agree.