Page 8 of 9

Re: Fugly or not ?

Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2018 10:06 pm
by safetyfirst
Ah, rimless! Ok such a n00b.

Re: Fugly or not ?

Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2018 10:41 pm
by DavidRees
I imagine most shooters would put fairly low power handloads through these, most of the time. A .357 case does not have to any more powerful than a light .38SPL load, after all, and for most purposes, far more useful for target purposes.

BTW, .45ACP CIP limit is 19,000psi -- not so much more than .38SPL. One reason why I'd like one. Big holes, not much recoil or battering to gun/hand. Great for NRA LBR target comps.

Sadly, I know a .45 is unlikely to happen with the Chiappa. I did try the Taurus .45ACP a few years back, but their choice of thin moonclips totally ruined the gun for me (bent far too easily, and spares unobtainable -- and .45AR would not fit.) So I'll keep waiting for a LBR for true one-handed use...

Re: Fugly or not ?

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2018 11:13 am
by GlockworkOrange
As others have said, there must be a reason Chiappa hasn't released a .44 mag version so far, and I'm fairly sure it's because the alloy frame wouldn't handle a steady diet of full-house ammo. Why most of the UK retailers are stating there will be a .44 version available soon I'm not sure, I haven't seen anything from Chiappa about it.

Re: Fugly or not ?

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2018 11:20 pm
by Daryll
Why not make it just in .44 Spl then..?? that will satify the majority of Uk LBR owners who just want a bigger hole in the target...??

Re: Fugly or not ?

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2018 1:22 pm
by GlockworkOrange
I think .44 spl. would still require a new frame size though, unless it only had a 5 shot cylinder. Maybe they should be selling the .40 S&W version for those who want something a bit bigger than 9mm? I'm not a big fan of the cartridge but it'd make an interesting alternative to the usual revolver calibers.

Re: Fugly or not ?

Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2019 11:04 am
by Gh0st
Even S&W have different frames for .38 and .357/.38 to handle the extra power

Re: Fugly or not ?

Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2019 2:22 pm
by FredB
No they don't. The model 19 "Combat Magnum" in 357 is on the same (K) frame as the model 14 target revolver in 38 special.
Fred

Re: Fugly or not ?

Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2019 2:25 pm
by Gh0st
I was going by K&L frames in the calibres mentioned.

Re: Fugly or not ?

Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2019 4:02 pm
by MistAgain
FredB wrote:No they don't. The model 19 "Combat Magnum" in 357 is on the same (K) frame as the model 14 target revolver in 38 special.
Fred
I dont think S & W has made a K frame 357 for many years .

At least until the Classic and Performance Centre versions came out .

Re: Fugly or not ?

Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2019 8:22 pm
by FredB
You have to remember that I am an antique and I shot pistol in the good old days for more than 30 years. In the UK, the 38 / 357 revolver owned by most club members was a model 19 in 357. I have a friend who still has his model 19---he moved it to the Ilse of Man---and he has put many thousands of rounds through it. I use my N frame model 27 once in a long range pistol shoot at ranges up to 300 yds and came second---I was beaten by a guy using a 4" barrel model 19.
I owned two 686 L frame revolvers in 357. In my opinion the L frame Smiths are the best designed and made revolver ever, with one exception: the Webley WG Target.
I also owned a Colt Python: expensive junk compared to the 686. My favourite Colt was a New Service Shooting Master in 357: built to a quality standard umkown in todays guns.

Fred