The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Revolver Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old October 26, 2013, 07:05 PM   #1
trigger643
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2011
Posts: 322
60 years doesn't improve perfection much

Designed to be one thing -- a reliable, easily concealable, rapidly retrievable defensive weapon capable of delivering accurate lethal force within the confines of the average defensive shooting distance...

1952 Centennial, SER# 38xx (first year of production)
2012 340PD circa 2012

trigger643 is offline  
Old October 27, 2013, 10:13 AM   #2
Crazy88Fingers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2010
Location: WesTex
Posts: 958
Re: 60 years doesn't improve perfection much

Do I spy a grip safety on that Centennial?
Crazy88Fingers is offline  
Old October 27, 2013, 11:18 AM   #3
bbqbob51
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 6, 2005
Posts: 775
Laser sight on grip. Maybe Crimson Trace?
bbqbob51 is offline  
Old October 27, 2013, 11:32 AM   #4
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Yes. The grip safety originated on the top-break Safety Hammerless.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old October 27, 2013, 01:53 PM   #5
chewie146
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 25, 2010
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 853
Now, I know the grip safety isn't exactly necessary on a DA revolver, but does anyone know why they discontinued it? Is it simply to simplify production or was there a reliability issue?
chewie146 is offline  
Old October 27, 2013, 02:53 PM   #6
BigG
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 1999
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,334
The grip safety while neat is a unnecessary complication on a DAO revo with a heavy trigger pull.
__________________
o "The Earth is degenerating today. Bribery and corruption abound. Children no longer obey their parents, every man wants to write a book, and it is evident that the end of the world is fast approaching." Assyrian tablet, c. 2800 BC

o "In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." Mark Twain

o "They have gun control in Cuba. They have universal health care in Cuba. So why do they want to come here?" Paul Harvey

o TODAY WE CARVE OUT OUR OWN OMENS! Leonidas, Thermopylae, 480 BC
BigG is offline  
Old October 27, 2013, 03:25 PM   #7
Waspinator
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2013
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 517
And I would still take the 60 year old one over the 1 year old one.
Waspinator is offline  
Old October 27, 2013, 05:10 PM   #8
dahermit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
What the heck could have been the rationale for a grip safety on a double-action revolver?
dahermit is offline  
Old October 27, 2013, 07:47 PM   #9
Obambulate
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 22, 2011
Posts: 582
I believe it was originally marketed as the ultimate in handgun safety, that even if something caught on the trigger the gun would not fire without also having steady pressure on the backstrap. You have to admit, it is quite safe.
Obambulate is offline  
Old October 27, 2013, 09:40 PM   #10
trigger643
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2011
Posts: 322
The Centennial has a small pin stored under the grip provided by S&W to pin the safety into the off position.

The 340pd is just plan and simple a puta to shoot. I don't care who you are, there is no fun with this little 11 ounce .357 magnum (weight/energy ratio is the highest for a production handgun, or at least it was when it was introduced).

I've been carrying j frames for nearly 30 years, starting with a model 40, then 49, then my first 340pd for about the last 10 years, before acquiring this one.

The 340pd goes to the range once a year and gets 5 rounds fired. Regular practice is done with an all steel gun, either a model 40, 49 or occasionally my night stand gun, a 638, also equipped with CT grips.

These guns do what they were designed to do. If I ask more of them, I'm wasting my time and ammunition.
trigger643 is offline  
Old October 28, 2013, 09:07 AM   #11
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 8,563
Quote:
60 years doesn't improve perfection much
60?
I was born in 1952 - which makes it 61, not 60.....


Oh wait - you're talking bout that little j frame....never mind
Hal is offline  
Old October 28, 2013, 09:12 AM   #12
Colt46
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: Campbell Ca
Posts: 1,090
There is nothing new under the sun

You could make a case for the Ruger LCR to be surpassing the 60 year old design, but they are hideous(despite their high esteem).
The firearms community can be really conservative in what they want.
Caseless ammo comes to mind.
Colt46 is offline  
Old October 28, 2013, 11:15 AM   #13
dahermit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
Quote:
I believe it was originally marketed as the ultimate in handgun safety, that even if something caught on the trigger the gun would not fire without also having steady pressure on the backstrap. You have to admit, it is quite safe.
I have never heard of a problem with j-frame snubbies firing because of catching the trigger on something. It strikes me that to put a grip safety on a snubbie because it could happen, is like carrying a lightning rod around with one because lightning could strike a person. In short, if that is what they were thinking, it is the proverbial, ingenious solution to a non-existent problem.
Safe yes, but a safety as there are on autos would make it safer still, but who would want one on their revolver?
That said, I would buy one of the Centennials just for the heck of it...kind of like the looks of it.
dahermit is offline  
Old October 29, 2013, 10:52 PM   #14
jhvaughan2
Member
 
Join Date: March 12, 2010
Posts: 87
Quote:
I have never heard of a problem with j-frame snubbies firing because of catching the trigger on something. It strikes me that to put a grip safety on a snubbie because it could happen,
Easy to say now with 20/20 hind site but we must remember that when the centennial came out S&W had not had a true "pocket" revolver in ~40 years. Hammerless revolvers were truly meant for the pocket, while the Chief's Special was meant for a holster. I suppose it was just assumed that a true pocket revolver would need some extra protection from other stuff in the pocket, like they thought 60 years before.

Obviously it proved to be un-true. The grip safety did not last long.

BTW I've never understood safeties on DA autos. But you'll find them there too.
jhvaughan2 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.06428 seconds with 10 queries