1911Forum
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > Other Firearms & Tools > Revolvers


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-29-2004, 04:06 PM
bobbi bobbi is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: wyoming
Posts: 29
Purpose of Full Underlug




Could someone please explain in what way a full underlug provides added strength to a revolver? I am thinking specifically of the Smith 629 and 657. Would I be severely limited in psi without a full underlug, with a recently manufactured Smith and Wesson?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-29-2004, 04:18 PM
t-tac t-tac is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Age: 52
Posts: 1,028
The under lug provides weight to help tame the recoil. Strength isn't a issue.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-29-2004, 04:25 PM
Gunfandec154 Gunfandec154 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Western U.S.A. (for now)
Posts: 651
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbi
Could someone please explain in what way a full underlug provides added strength to a revolver? I am thinking specifically of the Smith 629 and 657. Would I be severely limited in psi without a full underlug, with a recently manufactured Smith and Wesson?
No, you wouldn't. The purpose of the full underlug barrel is to "tame" the muzzle "whip." It may lighten your hunting load (read: weight) just a bit. It should not decrease the revolver's ability to handle the pressures of either the .41 or .44 Remington Magnum cartridges. The integrity of the frame, the thickness of the barrel's forcing cone and cylinder, are what contain the pressure of the cartridge. This, along with modern heat treatment and metallurgy, are the keys to the revolver's lifespan.

I purchased a "slender" barreled S&W Model 657 and it has held up just fine!

Scott

Last edited by Gunfandec154; 12-29-2004 at 08:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-29-2004, 07:43 PM
bobbi bobbi is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: wyoming
Posts: 29
Thanks guys for the education!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-29-2004, 08:59 PM
Ceemack Ceemack is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 935
1. To look more like a Colt Python.
2. To tame recoil.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-29-2004, 09:50 PM
Joe S. Joe S. is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: beaverton,oregon
Age: 58
Posts: 565
In addition to lowering recoil some find that the extra weight out front makes the piece easier to hold steady on target. More of an advantage in a competition setting I think than in a field setting and no doubt a controversial point.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-29-2004, 10:16 PM
Majic Majic is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Virginia
Age: 58
Posts: 628
The original purpose of the full lug was to provide forward weight to stabilize aiming in target shooting.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-31-2004, 08:59 AM
Ninjato Ninjato is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majic
The original purpose of the full lug was to provide forward weight to stabilize aiming in target shooting.
Although the intent was sound, I feel my Model 19 is a better pointer. I got the 19 after the 686 and got used to the full underlug. The 19 w/out the lug is just a little quicker imo.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-31-2004, 03:40 PM
Joe S. Joe S. is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: beaverton,oregon
Age: 58
Posts: 565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ninjato
Although the intent was sound, I feel my Model 19 is a better pointer. I got the 19 after the 686 and got used to the full underlug. The 19 w/out the lug is just a little quicker imo.
A perfect example of personal preference. I would actually agree that in myhands that a Model 19 4" is about as neutral a balance and naturally pointing revolver as I've ever held. On th other hand, when I was shooting PPC I used a M10 with a heavy bull barrel and target sight rib because that extra weight out there does help steady the piece in that artificial target shooting environment. An example of how specialized equipment for one specific type of competition can conflict with what works well in the real world.
Back then I would have given about anything to have had my late model K38 with the full lug barrel, it would have been terrific for any stock gun matches.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-31-2004, 10:54 PM
Ninjato Ninjato is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe S.
a Model 19 4" is about as neutral a balance and naturally pointing revolver as I've ever held.

Neutral balance is the best word to describe my M19 w/ a 6" barrel. I agree....in the artificial target/range enviroment, the 686 is much better. In the real world for ease of carry, speed of draw, and quick to aim the 19/66 just rocks. The M66 was my wife's first revolver and I was amazed at how easy the 66 w/ a 4" pointed and shot. It hurt a little bit w/ the stock wood grips when shooting magnums. The 686 feels much better when dealing with recoil.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-01-2005, 12:11 AM
Joe S. Joe S. is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: beaverton,oregon
Age: 58
Posts: 565
It is literally the difference between the range and real world use. Back then (1979-1980), and I'm sure its the same now, going to any police PPC type match you would find everyone using customized bull barrel revolvers, the most popular being with a Bill Davis rib which had a quick adjustment feature for 7 and 15 yards, 25 yards and 50 yards. The hot ticket being to shoot center of mass at 7 and 15 and use a neck hold at 25 and 50.
Conversely, look at what police were carrying back then and you would find a strong predominance of 4" K frame revolvers. The L frame was yet to be invented but I carried a Python for a while and really thought it was a touch too heavy.
The 686 is a terrific revolver, personally I think it would be especially wonderful with a 5" standard barrel.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-01-2005, 01:01 AM
Ninjato Ninjato is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 156
I'm sorry. I am not sure what you mean by a NECK HOLD. Is this a way of gripping the gun?

I also just posted a thread on my newly acquired 629 Magna Classic 7.5"
I had shot a 629 w/ out the underlug and I could not control it very well. Made me shy of .44 magnums. I couldn't resist when I saw this one and being that it is pretty much a beefier 686 I gave it a try....awesome
http://thefiringline.com/forums/atta...id=11237&stc=1
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-01-2005, 02:41 AM
Joe S. Joe S. is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: beaverton,oregon
Age: 58
Posts: 565
Sorry, a neck hold, in this context, means that when shooting on the b27 humanoid shillouette, you use the 'neck' as your sighting marker. In essence you set the revolver to shoot about a foot low at 25 or 50 yards. The advantage is that you have a much more precise aiming point at those distances than you would holding on the center of the 'body'. At 7 or 15 yards its easier just to shoot center of mass so you switch to that hold at those ranges. Probably sounds kind of silly but thats just how it is in that particular type of competition.
I know what you mean about the recoil on the 29/629 series. I have a 4" 629 standard model, a 4" Mountain gun with the tapered barrel and one of the 629 Classics in 5" with the full underlub barrel. Pretty pronounced differences in recoil between the three.
I always thought I would love a Mountain Gun, and in fact I do, but In general I shoot a sort of glorified .44 special load most of the time in all of these revolvers and with the Mountain Gun I'd just as soon drop it a notch further in power.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-01-2005, 07:54 AM
Shootcraps Shootcraps is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Age: 54
Posts: 2,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe S.
I would actually agree that in myhands that a Model 19 4" is about as neutral a balance and naturally pointing revolver as I've ever held.

One of the prime reasons I suggest using a 4" .357Magnum to teach a beginner with. It balances almost perfectly in the hand.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-01-2005, 06:04 PM
coltsr coltsr is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 113
Bobbi, It also helps to protect the ejector rod because it encloses it.
coltsr
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-01-2005, 07:35 PM
LHB1 LHB1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,258
I agree with Joe and Majic. The primary benefit of the full underlug to me is the extra weight foward helps to steady the gun and minimize front sight wobble while aiming/firing. I like this feature so much that I bought four S&W 629 Classic revolvers. After performing action jobs on them they are the closest thing to perfection in a revolver that I have ever tried.

Good shooting and be safe.
LB
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-02-2005, 06:50 AM
Majic Majic is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Virginia
Age: 58
Posts: 628
Quote:
It also helps to protect the ejector rod because it encloses it.
A full lug is not needed to protect the ejector rod unless the revolver is a snubby. Partial lugs serve the same purpose on longer barreled revolvers.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 01:42 AM.


NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS SITE: By continuing to use this site, you certify that you have read and agree to abide by the Legal Terms of Use. All information, data, text or other materials ("Content") posted to this site by any users are the sole responsibility of those users. 1911Forum does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of such Content.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2011 1911Forum.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved