IDPA Revolver Carry Optics 9-2-17

 

This was the first IDPA match I've shot with the Smith & Wesson Model 66 Optic. Not too long ago, I posted a review of a revolver that I feel would be ideal for a wheel gun in a Carry Optics division. If you haven't already read my previous posts regarding a Revolver in Carry Optics or the S&W 66 Carry Optics, please take a minute to read them. 

The Match Director only chose to use four of the five bays at the club. Stages three and four used the same set up but were designed to be run in reverse. The same can be said for stages five and six. There was more strong/weak hand only in this match compared to usual club matches. I can say that the dot really helps with this type of shooting.

Stage One

  

 

The first stage of the match was the standards stage. There was an option to advance from the 15 yard position or retreat from the 5 yard position. Most of the squad chose to advance. If I recall, the stage was limited, so I shot two at each position: free style, strong hand, and weak hand. I was down 10 due to hits just outside the target center. I thought it was pretty poor shooting until I heard down 20s and 30s. 

Stage Two  

  

This stage required shooting on the retreat. Rather than the typical best two on paper, the match director wanted us to shoot two to the body and one to the head. This is commonly referred to as the Failure Drill. As the capacity of the 66 is only six rounds with only three reloads on my belt, there would be no time for make up shots. I stopped moving each time I reloaded while taking short steps on the retreat. A three on the second array, another down three, and a blown head-shot on the third array ruined the stage. Overall, pretty poor shooting with 11 points down. 

Stage Three

  

Stage three started with activating a swinger and engaging strong hand only: one to the body and one to the head. Thankfully, none of this was on the move. I took an extra head shot on both targets, taking care to avoid the swinger, and reloaded on the way to the cover position. The next array needed to be engaged as targets appeared and required a standing reload. One shot on each steel, two shots on each head, and three on both far targets. A final reload then three on both targets while advancing. I was only two points down on this stage.

Stage Four

  

As a lefty, I prefer to move right to left across a stage. It is much easier to shoot around the strong side of a cover position. Stage four was the reverse of the previous stage with a few tweaks. The stage started on the retreat engaging weak hand only. I followed the same pattern of one shot on each steel, two shots on each head, and three on both far targets as I did before. The swinger was removed at the final position so no one accidentally hit the stand while advancing on the targets. I dropped an additional point but my overall time was twelve seconds faster than stage three.

Stage Five

  

Stage five started with a retreat while shooting from retention. I fired three rounds on both papers, performed a reload, and rounded the corner. It was at that point that I earned a three second procedural for stopping on my first shot rather than shooting while advancing. I remembered that I needed move while shooting and continued down the "hallway" to finish the stage. I was only down one point on the stage.

Stage Six

  

Stage six added four steel poppers that needed to be engaged before reaching the safety line or the first cover position. I took a makeup shot on a piece of steel so my whole reloading plan kind of fell to pieces. It really threw off my groove. My final reload used my third speed loader, something I try to avoid if possible, with only one target left to engage. I managed to finish the stage with only one point down.

Conclusions  

Here is the UberScoreMaster summary of my match. My final time was 254.96 seconds: 11th out of 21 shooters. As a point of interest, the overall winner's time was 165.05 seconds. Of course since I was shooting NFC/SPD, my rank doesn't really matter. I was hoping someone else would be shooting a pistol with a slide mounted optic. Maybe IDPA will add a Carry Optics Division to the rules down the road. Hopefully it includes wheel guns. 

I really enjoyed shooting the Smith & Wesson 66 equipped with the CMore RTS2. At the end of October, I shot this revolver in USPSA Open against the race guns, but forgot to take stage photos. You can imagine how well that went, but it sure was a great day on the range! I am shooting another USPSA match with the S&W 66 Optic this weekend so I'll try to take some pictures of the stages for a post next month.

As always, if you have any suggestions for future posts or would like to share your experience on the current topic please post below!

Moon Clips: .38 Special vs. .45 ACP

What are moon clips?

I've now had a chance to enjoy two different six shot revolvers that load via moon clips: the Chiappa Rhino and the Smith & Wesson 325 Thunder Ranch. For anyone unfamiliar, moon clips are thin pieces of spring steel that hold ammunition in the pattern of a revolver's cylinder via the groove under the rim. While speed loaders remain the primary method of loading rimmed cartridges in revolvers, moon clips are also available for this type of ammunition. 

As the majority of cartridges for auto-loading handguns are semi-rimless or rimless, the addition of these clips allows manufacturers to chamber revolvers in auto calibers. These clips prevent rimless cartridges from sliding into the charge holes, as the clip rests on the extractor star. All it took was a bit of machine work to the face of the cylinder and extractor so the moon sets deep enough to prevent binding of the cylinder. 

I'd like to compare two six shot moon clips in two popular calibers: .38 Special and .45 ACP. There are two features of each round that need to be examined when comparing the two moon clip systems: cartridge dimensions and cartridge weight. Hopefully this helps you determine if moon clips are something you might be interested in using in your wheel guns! 

Why use moon clips with rimless cartridges?

 

Well...you kinda have to for the revolver to function correctly. I guess that isn't technically true all the time (sometimes rounds will head-space correctly) but it sure is hard to get those cases out because the extractor has nothing to catch when you push the ejector rod. Moons make loading and unloading a breeze, especially with comparatively shorter cartridges designed for use in auto-loading handguns. Auto-loaders usually require shorter length cartridges to promote more reliable functioning. A shorter and heavier cartridge goes in and comes out much faster than a longer one. 

Why use moon clips with rimmed cartridges?

 

Is there any advantage to using moon clips over speed loaders with rimmed cartridges? Well, I guess what depends on the intended use of the revolver. From a durability perspective, moons are fragile due to the thin metal construction. If they are bent, then there is a chance the cylinder might bind preventing operation. A quality speed loader is usually well constructed and holds rounds in place until released by the user. 

Comparison

 

.45 ACP on the left and .38 Special on the right.

Before addressing both moon clip configurations, I wanted to show the size difference between a moon clip that is designed for six .38 Special cartridges and six .45 ACP cartridges. The Chiapp Rhino cylinder is roughly the same size as a Smith & Wesson K frame (medium frame). The S&W 325 TR is a Smith & Wesson N frame (large frame). The diameter of the .45 moon is significantly wider than the .38 moon. Which system will be better? Let's find out! 

.45 ACP

Advantage: Cartridge Dimension

The .45 ACP is a relatively short and wide round which makes it perfect for speedy reloads in cylinders with equally short and wide chambers. The 11.5mm profile of the .45 bullet assists in feeding the full moon into the cylinder should the shooter fail to perfectly align all six rounds. Compared with the 9.07mm diameter of a .38 bullet, the margin for error is a bit lower due to the increased width. With six rounds locked into the clip, the .45 moons basically drop right in provided that the shooter is relatively close in case alignment. The cartridge almost feels like it was meant to be loaded into a revolver like this.

Disadvantage: Cartridge Weight

Unfortunately, that wider bullet profile means a heavier  overall weight. This may help load the rounds a bit faster but that comes with a price: increased weight on the belt and in the cylinder. In  many competitive leagues, stages will require several reloads. If the rounds are approximately 100 grains more per bullet, you can imagine how much more total weight you will carry when moving through a stage. Over the course of a match this will start to add up whether you realize it at the time or not. It may still be worth it considering those fast reloads.

.38 Special 

Advantage: Cartridge Weight

The weight of a factory .45 ACP projectile often hovers near 230 grains while the weight of a .38 special bullet is between 115 an 158 grains. The heavier weight of the bullet might help the .45s feed a bit quicker, but a full .45 moon feels like a brick in hand compared to a .38 moon. In my testing, the 130 grain .38s were a full 100 grains lighter than the .45 ACP bullet. While this may not seem like much, when you are carrying 6-8 moon clips each stage, it adds up quickly. So the same number of .38 rounds can be carried for a lot less weight than the .45s.  

Disadvantage: Cartridge Dimension

Another aspect of reloading with moon clips involves the length of the case. The overall length and bullet diameter both play significant roles in the speed of reloads. In my experience, the .38s don't seem to go in to the cylinder as easily as the .45s. The case is just a bit longer so it takes more time to feed and eject. I think the size of the bullet might play a bigger role. The 9.07mm diameter of the .38 is nearly 2.5mm less than the 11.5mm diameter of the .45. It might not seem like much, but a smaller hole is a smaller target. This lower speed may also be related to the fit of this Remington .38 special brass to Chiappa's moon clip thickness. I think a slightly thicker moon, maybe from a company like TK Custom, would hold the rounds more securely with less wobble.

Conclusions

 

So which caliber is better for a six shot moon clip? It depends on how the revolver is being used. For range and competition, moon clips are the clear choice. They load much faster than speed loaders and keep all your brass together for easy clean up. For concealed carry or defensive use, a combination of moon and speed loader might be best for self protection. A loaded moon clip can be carried in the revolver to ensure complete extraction of spent rounds and a speed loader securely holds the rounds in place, should a reload be necessary. 

After practicing with both types of moon clips, I prefer moon clips with shorter cartridges because they load and unload faster. I'd be interested to see how a six shot 9mm moon clip compares to the six shot .45 ACP. Both are short so I imagine both would be equally quick to load. I mentioned the brass to moon fit earlier with regard to the .38s. The slight wobble of the rounds due to a looser fit made reloads a bit more challenging. To reduce this problem, the brass should be fit to a properly sized moon to ensure that rounds are held tightly enough to quickly load into the cylinder.

Unfortunately, not every revolver is cut for moon clips from the factory. There are companies that can machine  parts and produce correctly sized moon clips should you decide that your current wheel gun needs an upgrade. It is relatively inexpensive, normally between $100 and $150, and offers an additional way to load your revolver aside from traditional moon clips. I have considered sending the cylinder assembly of my S&W Model 66 but just haven't committed to the modification. I might go for it soon!

As always, if you have any suggestions for future posts or would like to share your experience on the current topic please post below!

Smith & Wesson 325 Thunder Ranch

Specifications

 

The Smith & Wesson 325 Thunder Ranch is a collaboration between a firearm company and a firearm instructor, Clint Smith. Clint possesses decades of experience and teaches at his own facility Thunder Ranch in Oregon. The result is a wheel gun assembled by the Performance Center to fill the role of a modern defensive revolver. The large N frame uses a Scandium alloy to reduce the overall weight to less than 31 ounces unloaded. This makes for a big bore handgun that can be carried all day with less effort than other auto-loaders chambered in .45 ACP. The cylinder and barrel are both stainless steel. The barrel is a two piece design and the factory can set the barrel to cylinder gap to improve performance. 

The moon clips load and extract incredibly fast.

The barrel shroud is where this design really gets interesting. Clint believes a self defense weapons requires a detachable white light, so a removable picatinny rail was included. A ball detent system replaces the traditional locking bolt. This allows the ejector rod to be a bit shorter to clear the weapon light. The front sight is a gold bead on an interchangeable blade system should you desire to switch sights. The hammer and trigger are also forged rather than current production metal injection molding for enhanced longevity. The Performance Center completes an action job with a great trigger out of the box. All these features combine to create a quality revolver for those that still prefer a wheel gun over auto-loading options. 

Kydex

 

Master-Tac holster and single moon clip carrier.
North Mountain moon clip holder (long posts).

A quality revolver requires a quality holster and carrier for spare ammunition. For range and competition use, I prefer outside the waistband holsters made of kydex. Master-Tac Holsters produces great gear for competition or carry. Bill is always polite and I typically have the products at my door in less than seven business days. The moon clip carrier with short posts fits the .45 ACP round perfectly. I will order a couple more over the double stack design. The North Mountain long post (made for .38/.357 rounds) worked in a pickle, but I think the short post would be easier to manipulate. 

Recoil

 

Shooting the S&W 325 is a bit challenging due to the lighter weight of the gun. Other than an Colt Single Action Army, I have very little trigger time with .4xx caliber revolvers. I have a bit more experience with auto-loaders in this caliber and recognize the difference in full power ammunition and lighter loads for competition. I was curious to see if this translated in the wheel gun, so I tested a few different rounds at different power factors. Below is a table outlining the different ammunition that was tested in the revolver. 

I am still looking for two lighter factory loading; a 158 PF for IDPA and a 168 PF for USPSA.

Although the 230 grain Federal is reported to be loaded to a higher velocity, the Freedom 230 grain actually produced the most felt recoil. The Freedom 200 grain was definitely the softest shooting round I tried. I largely shoot minor power rounds (.38 Specials, .380 ACPs, and 9mms), so the recoil of a major power factor rounds is a bit stiffer than expected. Nothing produced painful recoil, but you can definitely tell you are shooting major. Short but dedicated range sessions with regular dry fire practice are my recommendation.

Shooting Impressions

Testing accuracy with a handgun is largely based on the shooter's ability. I've only been shooting revolvers with regularity for about two years now but I consider myself, an average shooter. I regularly shoot the Hardwired Tactical Shooting Revolver Super Test twice each session with all full size guns. A passing score is a 162/180. The drill is straightforward as follows:

• 6 rounds in 12 seconds from 15 yards.
• 6 rounds in 8 seconds from 10 yards.
• 6 rounds in 4 seconds from 5 yards. 

My first attempt after three quick warm-up groups. 

   

Before running the drill, I shot one moon clip of each of the three rounds to see which round shot closest point of aim to point of impact. The Freedom 174 PF was pretty much dead on, so I grabbed three moons. I failed with a 150/180. I was trying to push to ensure I made the time limit but tracking the front sight was a difficult. I even had a miss. 

  

Better.

   

After working target transitions and shooting a few groups at 25 yards, I attempted the Super Test again. I was closer to passing the second time but only shot a 161/180. Overall, the grouping is a bit tighter even though I threw a significant portion of the shots outside the black. I was rushing at the five yard line trying to make it under the four second limit.

So what is it for?

 

 

I should mention that this is not my revolver. It is on loan from a family member who also enjoys revolvers. This is his favorite handgun, and it serves the role of nightstand gun. His theory? The gun is manageable one handed, sports a weapon light, and fires a proven round operating at a low pressure. It is a great home defense weapon if you don't want something with a stock. The 325 has also served as a woods gun on day hikes when he visits the property. I think a day with a steel revolver would make me appreciate the Scandium frame a bit more. 

Conclusions

   

The Smith & Wesson 325 Thunder Ranch is loaded with features designed to create the ideal defensive revolver. After a day on the range, I'm not sure that the light weight is a benefit for a gun chambered in .45ACP unless serving as a primary carry. For my purposes, a S&W 625, the steel cousin of this revolver, is a better option. The added weight soaks up a bit of recoil on the range or in competition but the reloads should be faster than a speed loader.

I mentioned before that this is the first revolver chambered in .45 ACP that I have tested. If I were to carry this out and about, I would definitely consider a leather holster. Carrying inside the waistband might be a bit challenging with the four inch barrel and large cylinder, but it could be done. The 325 is a winner if you want a lightweight carry revolver that shoots a the same round as a 1911.

As always, if you have any suggestions for future posts or would like to share your experience on the current topic please post below!

Stocks or Grips for the Double Action Revolver

Revolvers and auto-loading pistols are different in more than a few respects. Many would argue that pistols are easier to customize. When it comes to aftermarket controls, sights, and magazine base-plates, this is absolutely true. 

The revolver does have one particular advantage over it's mag-fed kin, the ability to accept a myriad of differently sized and shaped stocks. Need a small slim profiled stock for concealed carry? Boot grips. Need a large comfortable grip for shooting a match all day? Target grips. Need a recessed and contoured grip for fighting? Combat grips. These options exist and come in all shapes and sizes.

In this post, I am comparing stocks on a few Smith & Wesson revolvers. S&Ws have two different frame shapes: the older square butt and the newer round butt. As long as the stocks are cut for that shape and are sized for the correct small, medium, or large frame, they are interchangeable. While materials vary, they are mostly to be wood, rubber, or G10. Ivory is nice but way out of my price range.

Wood vs. Rubber

 

Wood was the predominant material for revolver stocks until rubber grips were introduced. In my opinion, wood stocks have a classic look, especially on a blued handgun. The K-22 is a square butt with stocks designed for single action shooting rather than double action. Unfortunately, I don't find them to be particularly comfortable when shooting. Since the butt is square, many stocks have sharp corners which make concealing those with this frame type challenging. 

The Ahrends stocks on the Model 66 (far left) are a bit more comfortable because they are designed for double action shooting. The round frame rests naturally against the palm. This shape fills the hand a bit more and doesn't move as much under recoil. The round frame also conceals better because of the rounded edges.

Rubber became an option for revolvers just as the revolver began loosing ground to the auto-loading pistol. Rubber is cheaper to produce and many manufactures offer these over the more expensive wood stocks. In addition to the lower cost, rubber is often more comfortable because of the "squishy" nature. This material also absorbs some of the recoil and cushions the impact on the hand.

I honestly prefer rubber grips due to the comfort in shooting for extended range trips or all day competition. The rubber is tacky enough that it kind of sticks to your hand which is assists in maintaining a solid grip. On the other hand, this sticky characteristic can be a curse if you are trying to conceal the revolver under clothing. The fabric clings to the grips and can make it obvious you are carrying.

  

Wood vs. G10

Wood stocks have some advantages and disadvantages. In my opinion, wood stocks really bring out the best in revolvers. The smooth sides don't hang up on clothing and they are comfortable to shoot on shorter trips to the range. However, they are susceptible to changes weather and can crack if dropped. So is there an option that is less affected by weather, feels similar to wood, and is visually appealing? Perhaps.

G10 is a glass based epoxy resin laminate. To over simplify, this material is basically multiple layers of resin compressed into a tough, lightweight package. The best part is that G10 is nearly impervious to moisture and temperature. Unlike wood. It can also be manipulated easier, often with hand tools, but does not require refinishing like wood.

In hand, G10 feels very similar to wood. Companies such as VZ Grips make grips for both square and round butt Smith & Wesson's in both a smooth or a rough texture. I prefer the smooth over the rough texture but a little sanding can take some of the bite out. I wish VZ made a finger-less grip for round butt Smith's, but that feature is not offered at this time. If this was an option, I might prefer G10 grips to Wood stocks on my round butt S&W revolvers.

 G10 vs. Rubber

The final comparison I'd like to make is G10 vs. Rubber. If you will be running your revolver regularly, I believe that these are the best options on the market. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate wood stocks on wheel guns. This material is both functional and aesthetically pleasing; however, modern materials are more durable for regular or hard use. Wood may best serve on presentation or collection pieces. 

G10 is nearly impervious to adverse conditions. Moisture from rain or sweat should not affect the grips at all. If the revolver is dropped the stocks have less of a chance to shatter or chip and are easily replaced at a reasonable price. Also don't forget that clothing catches less on these grips for carry. These stocks may be a great option for concealed carry.

Rubber if also a great choice. My favorite aspect of rubber stocks is the comfort provided in prolonged shooting heavier rounds. It has some resistance to heat and moisture. Prolonged exposure to the elements might eventually wear on rubber grips, but the material is comparatively inexpensive and can be replaced for significantly less than wood or G10. For a revolver you plan to open carry or for duty use, rubber is a great choice.

Conclusions

    

At this point, I've done a lot of shooting with each stock which has formed my own opinions. Here is what I determined; I like all three materials as long as they are finger-less. I hate finger grooves because they just don't fit my hand correctly.

Each material has strengths and weaknesses but all make for quality stocks/grip on revolvers. Once I understood this factor, I began to decide what role each material would best serve. Presentation? Wood. Carry? Rubber or G10. Competition? Rubber, G10, or Wood. These are just my preferences. At the end of the day it is totally up to you. 

As always, if you have any suggestions for future posts or would like to share your experience on the current topic please post below!

Smith & Wesson Model 66: Carry Optics Ready

In the past, I've mentioned Chris Baker's series Wheel Gun Wednesday as featured on Lucky Gunner. On his quest for the perfect revolver, I learned of the Smith & Wesson Model 66. About a year after Chris posted the entry The Best Revolver in the World, I stumbled across a 66-6 on Gun Broker and didn't hesitate to purchase it. I totally agree with Chris about this being the best revolver in the world, but the addition of a red dot sight makes it even better.

Specifications

The Smith & Wesson Model 66-6 was produced between 2002 and 2005. S&W discontinued the model for about a decade before demand revived to the point that an updated model was released in 2015. This 66-6 is relatively desirable due to the factory three inch barrel, but the internal lock kept the price reasonable by the time I located it. 

The three inch barreled version of the Model 66 weighs in about 32 ounces which helps to mitigate recoil. The barrel also allows for a full length ejector to ensure positive extraction of spent brass. Internet chatter reveals that people really like the three inch barrel and after shooting it myself, I understand. After adding a set of rubber Hogue fingerless grips, the revolver fits perfectly in my hands. I also changed the front and rear sight blade, but I'll discuss that in another post.

Upgrades

Unloaded and pointed down range. Just wanted to show the hammer.

In a previous post, I listed several parts for a proposed Carry Optics division. As this is a review of the Model 66 Carry Optics, I'd like to go into a bit more detail regarding these specific upgrades. 

This was the first handgun in my collection to host an electronic sight. I enjoyed shooting a Glock with a slide mounted optic but was hooked by an Open Division 2011. This was mostly because the frame mounted dot remained stationary while the slide reciprocated. As sights increase in reliability and decrease in size, they are more accessible even to the budget conscious shooter. I believe mini red dot sights will become standard options on pistols of all shapes and sizes within a few years. 

The optic I selected is a CMore RTS2 with a 6 Minute of Angle (MOA) dot. Rather than the battery mounted between the optic and the firearm, a small removable shelf holds the battery in place. This allows the battery to be changed without removal of the sight and should keep the optic zeroed. Battery life is not as long as some competitors, but is still quite respectable at medium brightness with a clearly defined dot. To top it all off, the adjustments and controls are easy to manipulate.

After I selected an optic, I needed to locate a suitable mount. Not many companies manufacture optic mounts for Smith & Wesson revolvers, and I didn't really want use a giant picatinny rail. Although I located a couple different options, the best mount I found was made by Allchin. The Allchin is very low profile and places the dot much closer to the bore, especially when compared to a dot placed on a picatinny rail with a bulky mount. This allows for less height over bore issues and easier zeroing.

A good compromise of size and function is the release made by California Competition Works. As a left handed shooter, a cylinder release with a flat and wide face opens the revolver faster. At this point in my testing, it has not resulted in any hang ups while using Safariland Comp III speed loaders or caused any extraction issues. I also picked up a similarly profiled Cylinder & Slide release that I may try down the road.

The last part I installed was the APEX Tactical Evolution IV Hammer. Honestly, I needed to convert the revolver to double action only from the start. I have only fired in single action a handful of times, but my zero is based on my double action pull. I was aware of the the APEX part and a local gun shop actually stocked both the K/L and N Frame model hammers. I purchased them when the store placed them on clearance, so I basically got a 2 for 1 deal! Our local revolver guru, Steve, fit the hammer and did some great trigger work. He smoothed everything out and re-profiled the trigger face. After all that work, the pull weight is right under eight pounds with positive ignition on most primers.

Kydex

  

Master-Tac Holster and Ready Tactical Speedloader Carrier

As soon as I found my Smith & Wesson 66, I ordered a Milt Sparks PMK holster. The wait time on custom leather holsters varies, but I ended up receiving that right at twelve weeks. An old open top Don Hume rig filled the holster role while I familiarized myself with the revolver. The opening was just long enough to permit a frame mounted red dot...so a revolver wearing a red dot soon rested in the holster. 

This set up functioned for a while, but I wanted a kydex holster with adjustable retention for competition. I contacted Bill at Master-Tac Holsters and a custom race ready piece of kit was at my door in less than a week. Bill makes the majority of my kydex equipment and always does great work. The double layer holster both fit and supported my optic equipped revolver perfectly. Please visit the Master-Tac Holsters Facebook page and check out some of Bill's work.
  

Shooting Impressions

  

Shooting the Model 66 Carry Optic is incredibly fun. Standard pressure .38 Special loads recoil very lightly and .38 Special +P loading are manageable. I've fired a handful of .357 Magnum rounds, but the recoil is stout. I'm happy as can be shooting standard pressure .38 Specials all day at the range. The addition of a mini red dot sight further improves the overall shooting experience. 

I can hit a plate at distance without too much effort, but I'll admit that I have definitely misaligned the sights and missed shots before. That is where an optic really shines: distance. The dot aids in making hits on targets beyond the 25 yard line. So far, the farthest distance I've attempted is 35 yards, and I reliably make hits with good trigger control. Keep in mind, the dot is not magic. You can't expect good results if you don't manipulate the trigger well.

Testing accuracy with a handgun is largely based on the shooter's ability. I've only been shooting revolvers regularly for about two years now, but I consider myself an average shooter. During each range session, I shoot the Hardwired Tactical Shooting Revolver Super Test with all full size guns. The drill is straightforward as follows:

• 6 rounds in 12 seconds from 15 yards.
• 6 rounds in 8 seconds from 10 yards.
• 6 rounds in 4 seconds from 5 yards.

Nearly all in the black.

  

Scoring the NRA B8 target is easy; total up your points excluding misses and shots after the timer. A passing score is a 162/180. This was the first run of the day. I focused on speed a bit too much. I only threw two shots, and the first one was the on slight low-left. I passed, if only barely, with 166/180 points.
  

That little guy? Don't worry about that little guy.

The second attempt at the drill showed much better results. I slowed my pace and concentrated on a smoother trigger press. The results show improvement. The first shot was low and left again, so I need to work on presentation. The red dot significantly improves shooting at the 15 yard mark when compared to iron sights.

Conclusions

  

Despite the prevalence of plastic fantastics and steel framed auto-loaders, the demand for revolvers with barrel length of two and three inches has not subsided. In fact, another model featuring a 2.75 inch barrel is now available from Smith & Wesson. I might have to add one of those to the stable in the future, but we'll see.

Overall, the Smith & Wesson Model 66 is about as good as a compact revolver can be. The shorter barrel length and relatively light weight results in great ergonomics and balance. Adding an optic further improves this wheel gun by improving a shooter's ability to successfully make hits both up close and at distance. If you happen across a three inch K frame like this you should absolutely pick it up. Thanks again for posting about this revolver Chris!

As always, if you have any suggestions for future posts or would like to share your experience on the current topic please post below!