I've always been told and just kind of just accepted that

>>32892753
The only thing difficult about revolvers is remembering the order of reassembly when you put it back together.

>>32892753
>difficult to work on
What do you mean?
Do you mean take apart and clean? Pretty unnecessary

Or, fiddle fuck around with stones and files? Easy to fuck up

Rugers are easier to work on than S&W because of the side plate.

>>32892753
The gp100 and sp101 are about as easy to work on as it gets for a revolver. Which is a good thing in my eyes.

Do some polishing and some shims and drop in some wolf springs and that gp100 is a wonderful gun.

I have sp101 in 327 fed, super easy to work on. I love it, i keep it my second home as my go to gun. Fuck side plates

>>32892918
I don't really see how the side plate makes things much more complicated or difficult. Three screws and a couple whacks with a rubber mallet and it pops right off.

>>32892753
The whole "revolvers are mechanically complicated and difficult to work on" thing is not just fuddlore, in case you were wondering. Rugers are easy to improve. Smiths are harder but still doable with patience, a shop manual, and good dexterity. Colts? Don't even bother. Most gunsmiths can't even work on a Colt revolver.

>>32895327
>Most gunsmiths can't even work on a Colt revolver.

Why?

I'm getting a 642 Performance Center J Frame in .38 pretty soon.

How do I help reliability in a revolver?

>>32895359

Because fud lore that's why

>>32895366

I mean... you're getting one of the most reliable guns out there. Really there isn't much to improve. The chances of that revolver not going bang are incredibly slim

>>32895366
Keep it clean and oiled.

File: Gonne2.jpg (1MB, 2304x1728px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2304x1728px

>>32895359
Because their action is simultaneously much more complex and less robust than competing designs (it's a licensed version of the Galland revolver action from the 1800s) and also because the knowledge was allowed to be lost. Colt dropping their revolvers caused a massive decline in interest in new blood acquiring the skills/licensing to work on their revolvers, and the people who were experts on how to do so mostly did not pass said expertise on.

>>32895366
I own a PC 642 (see pic). You can "help reliability" for it by not monkeying around inside the gun, because it is perfect out of the box.

>>32895526

Damn those grips are ugly.

>Another revolver thread where some nec/k/beard pops in and masturbates about the mythical Colt snake guns of yore
The amount of hype you people put into these things is highly misleading.

>>32895565

>hype

Which thread are you reading? The only mention of Colt seems negative.

Any experienced revolveros here? I got myself a highway patrolman. Cylinder wobbles and there is a noticeable end shake too. Also, yesterday my cylinder got stuck and won't open as well. I want to take care of this myself, I totally don't trust 'gunsmiths', I had bad experiences before. Should I get a kuhnhausen's book on s&w myself and take care for of this shit myself or ship it to that one reputable gunsmith who knows his shit?

>>32895705
Seen this yet?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JII__KNLYY0

Given that you're having issues with both a stuck cylinder + endshake, I personally wouldn't try correcting the issue yourself unless you have great confidence in your gunsmithing abilities.

If you do decide to get it fixed, try and see if S&W will fix it for you. You will likely have to pay, but their prices are reasonable and their work is good.

>>32895776
I will contact s&w. Last thing I want to do is fuck everything up thanks anon

File: IMG_0485.jpg (42KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 640x480px

>>32895526
How do you like that Grip? The model I'm getting has an obnoxious clip on Grip that I'm replacing immediately.

Pic for color reference, what would you recommend? I like a classy but functional look.

File: Fauxivory.jpg (20KB, 258x194px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 258x194px

>>32895864
The grip in >>32895526 you were asking about is a good concealment grip. The rubber is pliable enough to give you a good hold even with just two fingers without being sticky, and the panels keep the sides from dragging in your pocket on the draw. The only downside, which is one common to almost all concealment grips, is that they do not have a padded backstrap. If you go more than 50 rounds with the gun per session, expect the web of your hand to be pretty sore the next day.

As for what grips to get on that 442, I would recommend something like pic related if you're interested in an aesthetic grip that still works well. They're made by the Altamont Company.

The whole point of the Security Six series (which is where the GP-100, SP-101, and Redhawk got their start) was a revolver that was designed like a semi-auto.

>>32895705
Send it back to Smith and Wesson. It'll cost a bit more due to the next day air shipping, but your gun will come back 100%.

Revolvers are a complete pain in the ass to work on when you start having to fit new parts, you can get away peening over contact points sometimes for a quick fix but when you start having to put in new parts, even on an SA it can be a pain in the ass. Fuck with one part and the rest can get dicked

And yeah, Colt revolvers are great except they can't take a beating at all like a smith or ruger

>>32896456

Send it to S&W like this poster said. I had a family member send back a Model 19 that is easily 50 years old and they totally rebuilt it. Very happy with the results

My revolver came with some instructions about stripping it down, but timing and all I really don't want to if I don't feel it is strictly necessary.

>>32894845
also this, side plates seem way easier to work on that a drop out assembly or one that needs to be placed correctly with tension in the correct positions to fit in