Reeder Custom Guns - On the WB/Alcorn "only one handgun" discussion

that one handgun idea means, to me, it primary protection, and standing in on everything else within reason. I love my old Remington Rand 1911 with later GI hard slide, and love my 4 5/8ths 1976 Blackhawk .45 convertible.
But, what I have settled on for that all-around handgun is one I see as a modern Medium 38/44 Heavy Duty, the fixed sight L-frame 681. With 158gr JSP/JHP doing realistic 1200-1300fps from the 4", it would work against a black bear or hog as for woods, finish a roadside crippled deer, and against bad guys and cover would also work decently. Slick draw, smooth/light DA/SA, low maint. stainless. About same weight loaded as the RR or BH, but faster on follow-ups and trimmer than the BH with slicker draw. The RR a finest gunfighter, but lacking in other uses.
Anyhow, sorry for butting in, but when I read that post about one-handgun, had to register just to throw this one out which seldom is recalled, it made only from 1981-1992.

Post reply

No bragging groups, but these guns shoot. Just yesterday was at range and dredged one of those skinny little Red Bull energy drink cans from trash and put it on the 50yd berm and hit it 5 for 6 with the one miss 2" off at 10 o'clock. If you see a decent one, I advise you grab it.

Post reply

My Dad used a 586 L frame ... ran over 350,000 rounds through it. It was rebarreled once, new hammer and trigger once, had the end-shake tightened up twice. Dad has been gone since 2011 but my brother is still using the pistol.

Post reply

I am aware of your proficiency with a single-action, and in my comment as to faster follow-up shots over the BH, nearly added, "unless you are Jim Taylor". Glad you saw this, as I expected you'd get a kick out of the low fixed sights which still are quite good. These seem to be regulated for full house 158s by my experience and others I know from the highway patrol.

Post reply

I had a nice old 1917 Colt that had been converted to .45 Colt from .455 (an RCMP gun). I was using it one day and had a coyote jump out from under me in the brush and I fired 5 or 6 times at it and never hit it as it ran wringing its tail through the brush.

Later I realized I had cocked the hammer for each shot.

Habits.

:-|

Post reply

If I even touch the Blackhawk or 1911, I find myself reaching for the hammer or safety on the L-frame.
The gun is really a 44/38, the first HD and registered magnums built on the .44 frame.
The Model 19, 66 etc built on the .38 frame.
The 581/681/586/686 the first and only purpose built .357 they ever made.
Which they, of course, converted to a 5-shot .44.

Post reply

[image]

Post reply

highway patrol. There were others. New York State Police, maybe Michigan State Police, and a couple more, as well as corrections, Customs and Border Patrol. Budget maybe played into the 681 vs 686 but I never cut my elbow on a fixed sight revolver. Last hurrah for all, as Mister Glock came bearing gifts of nearly free guns and generous trade allowances to corner LEO market and bragging rights for sales.

Post reply

- No text -

Post reply

highway patrol on which was the best issue revolver, the 4" 681 or 4" 66. The 66 certainly an easier carry, but not by all that much. Both are fine shooters, the 681 just more durable.

Post reply

had such large hands I cannot imagine how he even shot it! He'd make a New Service look small. The 19/66 was to be carried a whole bunch, daily, then shot with .38 Specials for the most part. Moderate use of 158 gr. JHP .357's were the intention. I think the frame is thin at the barrel threads. Horrific pounding with 125 gr. JHP and 2400/W296 were rough on that point and the forcing cone area. Much less the lighter frame assembly.

The L-frame fixed that as did the beefy GP100. I guess the Security-six was too close to the k-frame for Ruger's comfort.

For duty carry with 158 gr. I liked idea of the 3" M65 round butt. But I never had one of my own. I'm wanting to round butt my 66 as a project for myself, just for fun. I've been studying it.

Post reply

by Smith & Wesson right at the same time in history that upper management decided to mandate training with .357 rather than .38Spl+P, which training was also rough on shooters in the lighter gun.

What S&W did at this time was briefly move the "gas ring"/cylinder bushing to the crane, which required them to cut away a lot more of the flat spot on barrel stub, where barrels immediately began cracking at low round counts. They ended up moving the gas ring back to cylinder but never stopped the cutting away of barrel, so the cracking continued.

Add to that the move from 158s with slower powder to wicked 125s with faster powder and you had a real problem.

Then at the intro of the L-frame, add to that a bunch of out-of-spec ammo supplied to assorted LE agencies with soft primers and primer sealant applied to bullets requiring over 350 lbs force just to pull a bullet on already hot 125s, with several agencies having primer flow tying up cylinders, S&W doing what seems a knee-jerk reaction to bad ammo by issuing a recall to install smaller diameter hammer noses and frame bushings in 1987, and it was a very messy time.

My no-dash/no-M-stamp(recall compliance) 681 works fine with in-spec ammo of either weight, and follow advice given since the magnum first came out, and test ammo for primer flow before carrying. I don't care for the wicked 125s as too limited to anti-personnel use, accelerated wear to throat/cone, and just plain wicked to shoot.

Post reply

On the WB/Alcorn "only one handgun" discussion

Forgot to mention accuracy.

Good Choice

Coming from you, that means a lot.

If I were carrying a double action that wouod be it.

You and me both.

Kansas Highway Patrol version, last revolver issued

The 681 was the last hurrah revolver here for

I have a 4” 686 plus. Love it, and a 66 4”.

Opinions are divided here among older local

The K-frame served it's purpose. Jordan

The problem with the K-frames was made worse