| beleg2 |
| (.375 member) |
| 03/10/08 12:31 AM |
|
Colt vs Smith & Wesson
|
I had an argument with another shooter about Colt vs S&W revolvers.
He told me something I never hear about the old Colt revolvers having poor design because the extractor rod usually bent.
My question is:
How often have you see Colt revolvers with the extractor rod bent after a fall?
I have asked the same question to some gunsmith here and they have never have one bent for falling. A couple of extractor rods was bent by the owner trying to fix another problems.
Thank you very much
Martin
| tinker |
| (.416 member) |
| 03/10/08 04:57 AM |
|
Re: Colt vs Smith & Wesson
|
Martin-
I don't know about bent ejector rods due to dropped guns, but I'll say this -- I just prefer the feel of the S&W action.
With a good example of either, I doubt you'll have problems with either brand.
--Tinker
| bigmaxx |
| (.375 member) |
| 03/10/08 11:59 AM |
|
Re: Colt vs Smith & Wesson
|
It would depend on series, production run, and sometimes caliber. What are the apples or oranges you are comparing?
| 9.3x57 |
| (.450 member) |
| 03/10/08 11:40 PM |
|
|
Re: Colt vs Smith & Wesson
|
Quote:
My question is:
How often have you see Colt revolvers with the extractor rod bent after a fall?
I'm a little surprised your gunsmiths have never seen a bent ejector rod. I've seen them bent on Smith revolvers. Offhand I do not remember if I've seen any on Colts, but then, I have seen 100 Smiths for every Colt I've seen.
I think the point is that on older Colts {Army Special, Official Police, New Service} there is no shroud protecting the rod and they lack the front ejector rod lock that itself provides a bit of protection. The Colt rods are hardened to about a spring temper, and do give a bit if the cylinder is in battery and crane {yoke} is locked and pressure is applied to the rod from the side or pushing up toward the barrel.
All of them can bend if the gun is dropped while the cylinder is open. But in that case at least some crane damage is frequently a result, also.
| beleg2 |
| (.375 member) |
| 04/10/08 12:40 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Colt vs Smith & Wesson
|
Thank you for your answers!
Thr point was that that Colt revolvers were inferior to S&W because of the ejector rod bending.
He have a picture of a rod bent very much but for what I find on Internet S&W have this problem more often than Colt.
Just want to know if Im right.
Thank you very much
Martin
BTW: I love my old Python.LOL
| Checkman |
| (.333 member) |
| 04/10/08 10:27 AM |
|
|
Re: Colt vs Smith & Wesson
|
Well back in ancient times police officers would use their revolvers to thump the heads of miscreants. This was pre-Taser and pre-Pepper Spray days mind you. The Smith and Wesson design was preferred because the ejector rod was protected by the shroud. Other than that I don't really think the Colt design was better or worse than the S&W design. However the debate between Colt and Smith & Wesson fans continue to this day.
| 9.3x57 |
| (.450 member) |
| 04/10/08 11:10 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Colt vs Smith & Wesson
|
Quote:
Well back in ancient times police officers would use their revolvers to thump the heads of miscreants.
I believe you are mistaken.
I have heard of quite a number of unfortunate situations involving suspects who have bumped their heads against officer's service revolvers, but never have I even heard of an officer who used his revolver to put a dent in a suspect's head.
| 88MauSporter |
| (.375 member) |
| 04/10/08 01:36 PM |
|
Re: Colt vs Smith & Wesson
|
My first Colt revolver was a Colt Mod. 357. This was the the pre-Python model. A very nice double action with medium frame and 6 inch barrel. Fixed Sights. It was great with full house 158 gr .357 mag loads. I was young and could not yet handle the sharp kick and the muzzle blast. It was a companion for a few years in Alaska. I wish I had it now. The issue above with bent ejector rods could be, as stated previously by others, the exposed rod under the barrel. No underbarrel shroud. The early Smith & Wessons had the forward detent plunger that took the supprted the rod end under the barrel, even before the shrouds were put in place. The Colt did not have this. My Colt Agent (carried on my ankle or a belly band for a number of years when in that line of service) has the unsupport ejector rod. If I had a perp or target bump his knoggin very hard against it while I was swinging it down from an overhead possition, It would have likely bent. Never did. Still works well, a number of years in service.
I do have a Buenos Aires Argentina Special police issue Spanish copy of a S&W M&P that has a slightly bent ejector rod. In spite of the rod end support. Guess that is opposite of the previous assertion.
| bigmaxx |
| (.375 member) |
| 05/10/08 11:10 AM |
|
Re: Colt vs Smith & Wesson
|
I have had plenty of both, Smiths and Colts and have never had a bent ejector rod. I have used them for about as severe a service as possible. Never a bent rod. Maybe I'm just lucky? I have mostly Rugers now and never any problems with them either.
| beleg2 |
| (.375 member) |
| 05/10/08 03:53 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Colt vs Smith & Wesson
|
Thank you all!!!
Martin
CptCurl
|
| (.450 member) |
| 10/10/08 01:43 PM |
|
|
Re: Colt vs Smith & Wesson
|
In regard to double action revolvers I think the S&W is heads above the Colt.
S&W just had the extra expertise as to the DA design. The Colts are nice, but the Smiths just define the market. I really like them. The actions are so easy to tune, and the results are so gratifying.
Curl