Too big revolvers?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
266
Location
Snohomish, WA
Is it just me or do folks find that some revolvers just are too big?

I find the L frame Smiths to be at the upper end of what I can shoot double action. N frame Smiths and old Colt New Service revolvers leave me unable to properly get my finger on the trigger. Just can't reach it.

I'd like to get an old WW1 era 1917 .45ACP revolver. But I don't think I would be able to shoot it.

I have average sized hands.

Is it my grip, or am I losing my grip, or are they really too big?
 
They are big, and the reach might be too much for your hands, but if you have not first I'd try some aftermarket grips. S/W's old standard "target stocks" look pretty on the gun, but are way too big for most folks and not really all that well designed to begin with.
 
If you think an L frame is big,check out the new S&W 500 X frame.It should come with a set of wheels.My model 29s look like toys next to it.
 
The late Bill Jordon was a friend of mine. He had very large hands, but prefered "K" frame revolvers for fast double-action work. Ed McGivern, the original double-action shooter of note back in the 1930's also used S&W Military & Police Target revolvers as his "weapons' of choice." If you find the mid-frames to be better for double-action shooting they're is a reason.
 
Gray Boots...

My hands are medium sized at best, I have a hard time getting a "proper" grip on the Glock 17 I must carry at work. A Government Model is just almost perfect, and I don't have problems with N frame Smiths. Yes, I shoot them double action, even in slow, deliberate fire.

I suggest you investigate good aftermarket grips. Herretts are real good, and there are many others to peruse.
 
If you find the mid-frames to be better for double-action shooting they're is a reason.

Feller by the name of Jerry Miculek might disagree with you on that ;) Though at least from pictures it appears his N frame grips are very thin...
 
Try this which I picked up today!!!

casull_s.jpg


I am fortunate perhaps . I have large hands . and the M27-2 Smith N frame i have (and love!) .. is a good fit. This .454 is large altogether but actually still very ''holdable''.

I guess in the end it is a case of ''what works for you''.
 
It's all in the stocks. I've never bought a Smith & Wesson or Colt revolver whose stocks I actually used longer than it took to find after-market stocks that fit my hand.

http;//herrettstocks.com
 
With my small hands I can still handle the N frame. Now, the new 50 is a different story and I've yet to even see one.
 
The grips on the Smith 500 are the same as the L frame. They have yet to make a DA revolver too big for me.


David
 
I finally put my hands on a new S&W .500 this past week. Glad I did before I ordered one - the grip is fine, but the revolver is too front heavy for my tastes - it is just too big. I find the S&W N frame and Ruger RH to be the upper limit as far as the weight I enjoy handling in a sixgun. Odessa
 
Well there are 1917s and there are 1917's.

The Smith has a LOT less reach than the Colt.

Many New Service shooters pick up a Tyler's t-grip. I started to get one, but I didn't like the way it looked on the big veteran. It does help fill the wide gap behind the trigger guard.
 
I agree with Only1asterisk on this one. I have a 500 S&W on order, i am 3rd on the list at my store now, i will give all a range report when i get it.

Cav Soldier.......................ALLONS
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top