Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Korth revolvers - beautiful!

Better question...

At night? In a silo? At a raccoon? OUCH!


Travis

I'll bet the EuroGestapo does it with regularity.....and trains for it.

I'll bet they've even found a "police" use for a 10.5 inch Contender in 221 FartBall......but then it'd also be a Blaser and run nine grand.

The Z-Man is back!

I always like the mention " the best". No one is the best.And for the quality of steel no American brand can tip on the top european makers: SIG, KORTH, HAMMERLI.
Why I dare to say so: I bought them all and they are not in a safe. You can only judge a weapon after then of thousands of rounds.

Yet you can go to the SHOT show, walk over to Purdey�s booth and pick up all the $100k-plus guns you want.

While it is true that the pawl on the Colt�s revolvers is considered a wear part, it should be noted that it take a lot of shots, even with magnum ammunition to wear one out if the part has been properly installed.

The Colt�s pawl floats so as the cylinder moves back the pawl moves with it. Since the cylinder has no rifling in it, there is no significant torque either way, therefore a properly fit pawl will go a very long time before you have any issues.

Not my observation, but you may have different experiences than I.

All this technical talk is very interesting if you�re interested in such engineering minutia. The fact remains, the Colt�s revolver is anything but a �fragile� revolver. In fact, in US military testing before the turn of the century, the reason Colt�s won out over all other revolvers is because when exposed to the elements, the Colt�s was the one that kept running while all others (including the S&W) were hopelessly locked up.

In the end, one would hope that a $5,000.00 revolver would be better than something costing 60-80% less. For the difference in price, that can cover a good two to three lifetimes of having new hands fit. As for the rest of the gun, it will hold its own with the rest of the crowd.

Accuracy wise, I�ve yet to encounter a Korth that out-shoots a Python, but admittedly I�ve only shot two examples. And also admittedly, I was shooting one brand of ammo, and the rest were handloads. Still, the Colt�s consistently out-shot the Korth in my hands, and the hands of several other bullseye competitors. Still, the difference was so minute that no one would ever say that Python was truly more accurate or less accurate; just not enough of a difference.

The one thing I did like about the Korth was the feel, it felt more like a S&W to me, so therefore it tended to feel better in my hands than the Colts. And again, the engineering that allows all the adjustments on the fly is simply brilliant.

Personally, I'm glad to have him back. I�ve debated the Hi Power vs. the Sig 210 with him on another forum. All that engineering magnificence really matters to him, and there�s nothing wrong with that. Where I have problems is with the use of the word �best� or �better�. To me, that�s a highly subjective term and it all depends on what you�re trying to do.

It isn't his information...er...rather opinion...it is his presentation and arrogance that leaves such distain...

He brings hostility upon himself�

He does have a bit of an elitist tone, I�ll give you that; but he is rather well informed and I find very little to disagree with. I think where most will disagree, myself included, is the final conclusion and the general �worth� or �value proposition� that is the Korth Revolver. He finds it absolutely worth it, while the majority doesn�t.

Interesting observation, but I find the comparison of Colt�s and S&W about the same as the difference between S&W and H&R to be quite the exaggeration. I�ve been gunsmithing both for over 25 years, and have drawn my own conclusions. Let me clarify that, I have worked on and repaired both for that time, mostly S&W, but some Colts. However, I have only recently (past 5 years) done any serious work on the Colt�s, and I like them. Yes I will agree that the Colt�s has a finer degree of fit and finish, and on some models the metallurgy is superior; but I don�t find the difference in quality to be anywhere near the chasm you describe.


You know, I hear this a lot, but I don�t find either one �easier� or harder; they�re just different. Perhaps people find the Colt�s more difficult to work on because of the general unfamiliarity with the design that prevails these days.


Yes, I�ve always found it humorous the assertion that the frame mounted firing pins are less apt to break; I personally have found it quite the other way around. I�ve changed a good 6 frame mounted firing pins to every one hammer mounted pin. Far from being, as Colt�s once declared �unbreakable�.


I�m not sure what the rebound slide has to do with combat fitness or reliability, but I�ll readily admit I�ve never had the sideplate off on a Manurhin revolver. When I think of fighting revolvers, I look to the best source of information; military service. The DA revolvers with the best track record in military service would probably be the Webleys, with the 1917 Colt�s & S&W� running a very close second. The Manurhin has never been in wide spread use, so the long term effects of service abuse are just an unknown. Never be taken in by good looking workmanship, or a sound design on paper. Most arms that hit military service tended to have both; yet most arms that hit military service require extensive development. The Webley, Colt�s, and S&W have all had the extensive development that goes with wide spread military and law enforcement service. If I had to take a revolver onto a battlefield, my personal choice would be the Webley Mk VI.

Heartily agreed�there is a huge sense of �fashion� with American shooters.

Taurus is the largest handgun manufacturer in the world; but point taken.


It all depends on what you�re trying to accomplish. To make the finest target revolver is NOT what S&W is seeking; there�s very little market share for such a thing. Revolvers were supplanted in the target shooting market almost a couple of generations ago, so why compete in an irrelevant market? As to your comment about MIM parts, just like most everyone else, I think you�re being taken in by �internet experts� in your disparaging of MIM; it�s VERY sound technology. Properly made forged parts can be better provided the specifications are held with the same degree of precision. But to do so is exorbitantly costly, and prices such revolvers out of most markets. So the S&W product is a compromise, but a pretty good one considering S&W puts out orders of magnitude greater product that is suited for their intended market. Korth�s quality and engineering is truly magnificent, but a bit irrelevant here in the US, because very few are interested in such a product. US shooters who are seeking such levels of accuracy will always turn to an auto-pistol, and those auto�s will always win the matches against the revolvers.

As for forged parts�technically they can be �better� but are they truly needed? If your sole goal in the world is to shoot a revolver to extremes, then perhaps they are needed. But for the rest of the world, pure forged parts just aren�t necessary. Few have greater demands than military arms, yet the preponderance of the parts found in military arms are investment cast, or these days increasingly MIM. Trust me, nothing takes a beating or abuse like a machinegun.



Most US made revolvers were made to the best possible quality given what the market would bear. Anything beyond that just doesn�t make good business sense�notice that Manurhin and Korth have an almost un-measurable market share. And it�s not just the US who puts a lifespan on service arms, literally every nation does that. Arms that have longer lifespans will typically cost more, and those with lesser lifespans cost less. Those that cost exceptionally more or exceptionally less tend to not be too successful in the marketplace in most any industry. Since Manurhin & Korth have very small niche markets, I�d say the US makers clearly chose the right path.



Nor has anyone else�emphasis on economic incentive. But had the �market� truly demanded such a thing, you can bet S&W would have made it.



Again, here comes that �best� word again. Best for what? It�s certainly not best for someone who could never afford it. It would never be �best� for any sort of police or military service, again the price is prohibitive; the reality is, very few military or law enforcement units have the funding to provide a $5,000.00 sidearm to their officers. They are MUCH better served providing them something like a $500.00 sidearm, and spend the rest on training. �Best� as a target revolver�again, I strongly doubt it. The difference between the Korth and one of the better S&W and Colt�s is never enough to take the Korth into a whole new class. The accuracy difference is so small that it will still come down to the shooter every time. Yet the Korth has vastly fewer options for sights, grips, etc. But then again, target revolvers in actual bullseye competition are basically irrelevant. The only one�s using them anymore are those who just love to shoot revolvers. The serious competitors have switched to auto pistols.


Which was a fool�s errand. Anyone would have been able to tell you that a semi-auto of considerably less cost would be far more reliable in extreme environments, and more than accurate enough for precise shooting required in a hostage rescue situation. Notice, the GIGN were some of the only people who used revolvers�and if I recall correctly they even chose the S&W model 36 as a sidearm for a time. (possibly what lead them to the Manurhin)


So then perhaps you should stop and think about what that means? Perhaps they were never intended to, despite the musings of Mr. Cunningham. If you understand the design, you�d know that while it would be proper for a gunsmith to fit a pawl so that it passed such a test (because if you�re going to do a non-assembly line job, you ought to do the best you can), passing such a test really means just about nothing to the Colt�s revolver. With all your mechanical knowledge, you should be able to intuitively surmise that.

I think you finally got down to what it all adds up to. Still, a good man with a S&W or Colt�s still has pretty much an equal chance for a win at the local bullseye match.

Finally, I find the creation of the Korth to be really funny. They create the �finest� target revolver in a magnum caliber; kind of an oxy-moron if you ask me. Plus they create the finest target revolver in an era where the target revolver is basically irrelevant The end result is like a Rolex watch; bragging rights in an age where a watch isn�t even needed anymore since everyone carries a cell phone. Yet the Rolex wearer and the Korth shooter can go on for days as to how excellent their chosen tool really is.

You have a lot of patience, Kevin.

If this were a real campfire, Kevin and Zeleny would be the only two sitting around it.


Travis

No, I'm forced to sit on a 4 hour conference call that has nothing to do with me...I'm bored.

I wouldn't give a nickel for a Korth let alone the thousands they ask for one. I would much rather have a Colt Python or a Smith Model 27 or 28 or even a 19 for that matter.

$250 out the door,...shoots all six cylinders to point of aim with fixed sights,....particularly fond of a hardcast 160 grain LBT WFN over 6 grains of Unique in .38 spl cases.

Made in 1975.

$375,

.41,..made in 1920

Beautiful sixguns, Bristoe. I especially love the Colt. If you are ever interested in selling please let me know.

Keep your sexual exploits to yo' self, Dr Suess.

Now that..........is a revolver!

And I'd rather trust my S&W Victory Model or my 2.5" Model 66 over a Korth if my life depended on it......just as I'd trust a Timex over a Rolex if I want to know what time it really is.

Surprise!!!



Travis