TheKid: I think a bullet would "align" better at the instant of ignition if it didn't have "wobble" built in to the cylinder?
I know several pistol smiths who tried to time/align the cylinder and remove any wobble - they asserted that this improved accuracy in bullseye type competition pistols - I guess I always just assumed they were correct.
I am not THAT much of a pistolero to know for certain though.
The complete absence of cylinder wobble though does impress me with todays manufacturing methods!
I do know a TON (I mean that literally 2,000+ pounds of) pistol team members who paid good money to have their revolvers timed.
Revolvers are somewhat out of style anymore for competitions but I still admire/trust them for certain applications.
Now as for weight - I firmly disagree with you on this point - if you want accuracy (especially in a double action revolver!) then weight is an asset - not just in sight alignment but in trigger control (I can shoot my 4" S&W Model 686 better than my 4" Model 19 S&W!) - wieight I am sure IS the factor here.
And the fiber optic sights are a personal preference option - to my aging eyes they are a BIG benefit for any daytime application.
I have several varieties of Smith & Wesson 22 rimfires including:
Model 17 with 8 3/8" barrel (2 of these - 1 N.I.B)
Model 48 with 8 3/8" barrel
Model 48 with 4" barrel
Model 34 with 2" barrel (2 of these)
Model 647 with 8 3/8" barrel
Model 63 with 2" barrel
Model 18 with 4" barrel (2 of these)
Model 63 with 4" barrel
Model 34 nickel plated with 4" barrel (N.I.B.)
Model 651 with 4" barrel
I have shot a lot of Smith & Wesson rimfire revolvers and have as yet to find one "lacking" in accuracy - I will grant that.
But I would NOT trade any of the above pistols of mine for the GP-100 as they are all MORE valuable to me than a GP-100 would be/is.
I hope someone gets a GP-100 soon and gives an accuracy/handling report to us.
Thanks for your insights.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy
