revolvers without adjustable sights

[ebb]

I went to the handgun range today and shot 3 handguns that didn't have adjustable sights. I was shooting cast bullets that I reloaded out of a modrn Taurus total titanium 2 inch barrel revolver, and 2 S&W revolvers, one is a Victory model with a 4inch barrel and one looks just like a Victory model but according to the numbers was made after the war. They shot my hand loads horribly. what am I doing wrong? Do the Victory models need a special load developed for each gun or is there a load that shoots well from them listed in pet loads somewhere II need to be following? The little Taurus was closer to point of aim than the other 2 but it was far from perfect.

[JoeJames]

Fixed sight revolvers are regulated at the factory with commercial ammo. I try to work up loads based on commercial loads that were widely available at that time. From Hatcher's Textbook of Pistols and Revolvers pub @1935 - factory 38 Special factory loads with a 158 grain lead round nose bullet were charged between 3 grains of Bullseye for 790 fps for one load, and another different factory load with the same 158 grain type lead round nose bullet but charged with 3.6 grains of Bullseye for 860 fps. I am not recommending those loads, but merely re-stating Hatcher. That is how I have worked up fairly accurate loads for my old S&W 32 Long H.E.'s.

[justindad]

Define “shot horribly” - group sizes, average POI vs POA, barrel leading, etc.
*
Have these ever shot well for you? If so, what were the conditions and how did you define “shot well”?
*
Did all three shoot the same, or differently? Might need to define “shot horribly” three times, once for each gun.

[Winger Ed.]

Adjustable sights have more to do with the point of impact than group sizes.

Group sizes are more nearly controlled by the ammo, and you doing your part.

[megasupermagnum]

Besides the fact that getting one that shoots perfectly to POA is like winning the lottery, the other problem is fixed sights, usually being a frame cutout are tiny and reflective. They are a half step better than no sights at all.

Personally I hate that they are still the norm on small revolvers. The only revolver I still own with fixed sights is an LCR. If I could get one with adjustable sights I would, even for pocket carry. Novak dovetail sights would be ideal, I don't understand why they aren't standard yet.

[stubshaft]

I had to adjust the loads for my S&W 642, 36 and Model 10. They were regulated for 158 gr. factory loads and when received the 642's barrel wasn't clocked in properly. A quick trip back to S&W fixed that. You can adjust velocity to raise or lower your POI on target.

[Green Frog]

While I have acquired over the years a trio of tiny S&Ws, a 32 S&WL I frame snub, a 38 S&W Terrier (also an I frame) and a "Baby" Chiefs Special in 38 Spl, I much prefer my adjustable sighted Models 60-4 and 631. Adjustablity is a positive, but overall, I find adjustable sight blades easier to see with my old eyes. Of course everyone has to decide what gun works for whatever they want to use it for.

Froggie

[Rick R]

Novak dovetail sights would be ideal, I don't understand why they aren't standard yet.

I own. 3” GP-100 with them. Took it to Novak’s and they put a tritium night sight up front.
You sir are 100% correct, it is “ideal”.

[TNsailorman]

I consider a pistol/revolver a short range weapon for my own personal use. inside 25 yards on a man sized target it is a pint and shoot situation. I much prefer the fixed sights on a revolver over the adjustable sights. Just my preference anyway and not down grading anyones elses likes. I shoot mostly double action and I can acquire the fixxed sights much quicker than adjustable. For me after many years of practice, the act of bringing a revolver down out of recoil while beginning the double action pull for the next shot is much quicker getting back on target. my experience anyway and not binding on anyone, james

[racepres]

Fixed sight revolvers are regulated at the factory with commercial ammo. I try to work up loads based on commercial loads that were widely available at that time. From Hatcher's Textbook of Pistols and Revolvers pub @1935 - factory 38 Special factory loads with a 158 grain lead round nose bullet were charged between 3 grains of Bullseye for 790 fps for one load, and another different factory load with the same 158 grain type lead round nose bullet but charged with 3.6 grains of Bullseye for 860 fps. I am not recommending those loads, but merely re-stating Hatcher. That is how I have worked up fairly accurate loads for my old S&W 32 Long H.E.'s.

Believe it or Not... some loading adjustments do seem to have a Marginal effect on windage as well... For Me
Maybe it is the way I hold the Revolver...
Remember, some of us learned with a Ruger Standard Model 22RF. Go From There

I consider a pistol/revolver a short range weapon for my own personal use. inside 25 yards on a man sized target it is a pint and shoot situation. I much prefer the fixed sights on a revolver over the adjustable sights. Just my preference anyway and not down grading anyones elses likes. I shoot mostly double action and I can acquire the fixxed sights much quicker than adjustable. For me after many years of practice, the act of bringing a revolver down out of recoil while beginning the double action pull for the next shot is much quicker getting back on target. my experience anyway and not binding on anyone, james

I cannot convince myself to shoot Double Action... Just Not Natural for me.. But, once regulated...I do OK
Lets say "I am Confident"

[243winxb]

Add linotype to the alloy. Hard bullets dont skid or slump.

My 5.3 grs of Unique that gives 798 fps, does not group as well or to point of aim.

Both guns like this 700X load.



No linotype? Oven heat treat some bullets to harden, as a test. Alloy needs 2% antimony & 2 weeks to fully harden.

[gc45]

The OP does not mention loads or distance he is shooting; Expectations have increased over time, so have distances many expect their revolvers to be effective. Revolvers and even the first autos say, 1911's as an example, were not intended for long range. Sure, the lucky shot stuff took place, Bill Hickok's 90 paces kill is an example, if it really happened. Some handguns shoot really well at say 50 to 75 yds, a few at 100 yds, but most are 25 yds and less. Yeah, a gun rest on a table can get us 1 inch groups, sometimes, but not all that often. Someone gets a one inch group and now he has a one inch shooter that likely can't repeat that one inch..The 38 special loads using 3 grains of bullseye and 158gr cast are pretty much right on in three model 36 Smiths I have but none shoot one inch, even at 10yds benched. But you sure would not want them pointing at you in the dark. Were I the OP here, I would try known loads in my gun first, those made for the gun and the timeframe of their history seeing if they improve. I would not load willy nilly looking for some unknown load to be accurate, and by all means use the proper bullet design for your cartridge, plenty of time to experiment later on.

[racepres]

The OP does not mention loads or distance he is shooting; Expectations have increased over time, so have distances many expect their revolvers to be effective. Revolvers and even the first autos say, 1911's as an example, were not intended for long range. Sure, the lucky shot stuff took place, Bill Hickok's 90 paces kill is an example, if it really happened. Some handguns shoot really well at say 50 to 75 yds, a few at 100 yds, but most are 25 yds and less. Yeah, a gun rest on a table can get us 1 inch groups, sometimes, but not all that often. Someone gets a one inch group and now he has a one inch shooter that likely can't repeat that one inch..The 38 special loads using 3 grains of bullseye and 158gr cast are pretty much right on in three model 36 Smiths I have but none shoot one inch, even at 10yds benched. But you sure would not want them pointing at you in the dark. Were I the OP here, I would try known loads in my gun first, those made for the gun and the timeframe of their history seeing if they improve. I would not load willy nilly looking for some unknown load to be accurate, and by all means use the proper bullet design for your cartridge, plenty of time to experiment later on.

Well Said

[JoeJames]

The OP does not mention loads or distance he is shooting; Expectations have increased over time, so have distances many expect their revolvers to be effective. Revolvers and even the first autos say, 1911's as an example, were not intended for long range. Sure, the lucky shot stuff took place, Bill Hickok's 90 paces kill is an example, if it really happened. Some handguns shoot really well at say 50 to 75 yds, a few at 100 yds, but most are 25 yds and less. Yeah, a gun rest on a table can get us 1 inch groups, sometimes, but not all that often. Someone gets a one inch group and now he has a one inch shooter that likely can't repeat that one inch..The 38 special loads using 3 grains of bullseye and 158gr cast are pretty much right on in three model 36 Smiths I have but none shoot one inch, even at 10yds benched. But you sure would not want them pointing at you in the dark. Were I the OP here, I would try known loads in my gun first, those made for the gun and the timeframe of their history seeing if they improve. I would not load willy nilly looking for some unknown load to be accurate, and by all means use the proper bullet design for your cartridge, plenty of time to experiment later on.

Exactly - my first load for a Victory Smith 380/200 was a 148 grain WC; nope - shot about 5 inches low at 15 yards. It was regulated for a 200 grain lead round nose bullet = dwell time.

[ebb]

I had not shot a handgun in years so I am sure much of my problem is me. I was shooting a shoot and see targetand had to hold on the top edge of the target to get close to the center with the Victory S&Ws. I shoot two dead center bulls eyes with the Taraus, and I will assume the lack of a group was me. The V model S&Ws, one is an old gun and it shot fairly good with jacketed ammo llast time I shoot it. The other was a gun a loaned a guy some money on and he was to get it back when he paid up, never saw him again. It came with a 6inch barrel and shoot way to the left, then I got to looking and the barrel was bent. I got 2 5 inch barrels NOS from Sarco. I made a jig to support the frame and bolted all to a piece of light channel iron and took the barrel off and put a new 5 in its place. It clocked the sight with .010 cylinder gap but never made as good groups with the new barrel. Does it need to be broke in as it probably only has 50 -60 shots through it?

[Larry Gibson]

Pray tell what ammunition you were using in each revolver?

[Speedo66]

While a fixed sight gun may not shoot to point of aim with different loads, if all factors are the same, i.e., bullet weights are equal, powder load is equal, etc, the gun should at least group well.

The rest will be determined by how well the shooter is able to duplicate the sight picture with each shot and their steadiness.

If the problem is the same with all the guns, either the loads are not equal or the problem lies with the person holding the guns.

[megasupermagnum]

While a fixed sight gun may not shoot to point of aim with different loads, if all factors are the same, i.e., bullet weights are equal, powder load is equal, etc, the gun should at least group well.

The rest will be determined by how well the shooter is able to duplicate the sight picture with each shot and their steadiness.

If the problem is the same with all the guns, either the loads are not equal or the problem lies with the person holding the guns.

It does not work that way in reality. I did such a thing with a 3" barrel Ruger SP101. With fixed sights it wasn't too bad. Windage was acceptable, not perfect. It shot about 6" low at 25 yards, and no it was not the load. This was a 327 federal, the only two options at that time were 85gr and 100gr. That could have been fixed by filing the front sight. With Federal 100gr AE from a bench I could get about 6" groups at 25 yards. It was serviceable.

I then had adjustable sights installed. A a Ruger rear sight, and a custom front sight. The very first group from that gun was at 50 yards measured 3". It won't average that, but real sights made a monumental difference. Human eyes are tricky things. I'm not here to say fixed sights are never a good choice, but I can guarantee that a person will always shoot better with large sights with no glare, and little or no angles.

[StrawHat]

…It does not work that way in reality…

I'm not here to say fixed sights are never a good choice, but I can guarantee that a person will always shoot better with large sights with no glare, and little or no angles...

Apparently your reality and mine varies a bit.

This front sight,



on this revolver



produce groups that rival my Target revolvers.

Kevin

[FergusonTO35]

Besides the fact that getting one that shoots perfectly to POA is like winning the lottery, the other problem is fixed sights, usually being a frame cutout are tiny and reflective. They are a half step better than no sights at all.

Personally I hate that they are still the norm on small revolvers. The only revolver I still own with fixed sights is an LCR. If I could get one with adjustable sights I would, even for pocket carry. Novak dovetail sights would be ideal, I don't understand why they aren't standard yet.

This 1000%!! Why why why are we stuck at about circa 1900 with snubby sights? Even the LCR, which is probably the most advanced snub ever, is saddled with default sights.