YEPPER 

YESSIREE ... BOB.  PLASTICS could be a real serious boon or is it Boom.  There is a Canadian out fit has developed a process for making Building Blocks that are sort of like Lego(tm) blocks.  Primary material is recycled plastics.  Any color, ground up fine and mix'd with a touch of concrete.  Strong as hell, cheaper than building a house with wood, and with packaging, an endless supply of raw material.  Good tip there MAKO.  May have to think an investment.

I also have a real nifty set of .45 Conversions, built on 1860esque Pietta frames.  Currently have three separate barrel sets for 'em.  Set 'em up with ACP Cylinders so I could shoot ACP cases and C45S cases interchangeably.  Works a treat and loaded with 130Gr Barnstormer bullets, recoil is on par with Suppository .38s.  Super FUN!!

I'm sure Kevin will be talking with you soon. 

  NAH 

NOT a source of revenue.  SPAMER DIRT BAG.

Russ wants see the 2 legged coyote!  On the way in brings several bird cages with a canary in each one.  Announces to everyone that if they they see any of the birds keel over, yell out and run like hell. 

I posted on another forum and got this reply,

Quote from: Roy G. Jinks;141985502

"The S&W spec. sheet date 1918 list the rifling as 6 grooves and one turn in 15 inched. I hope that helps. They list all the spec.s if you need them."  Roy

Kevin

Stawhat,
Thanks, but that is just the twist rate and the direction. The standard 1911 twist rate was  1:16 and a LEFT hand twist.  We changed it to Right Hand so the torque of the bullet traveling down the barrel would rotate towards the right as the shooter looks at it, thus pushing it INTO the hand since most shooters are right handed and you are able to control it better.  Now almost all 1911 barrels are Right Hand twist.

Which direction was the rifling twist on the S&Ws?  Actually the twist rate and the direction are not that interesting to me, the bore and groove dimensions are what everyone has been talking about on this subject.  On this thread, it has been stated the S&W 1917s had rifling for hardball which insinuates shallower grooves for jacketed bullets.  Because of that "hardball" bore some were advising soft lead bullets didn't do well.

A 1 inch difference in rotation per foot is not enough to of a difference to cause any measurable difference because of soft lead bullets, and the twist direction has no influence.  Where did the Roy Jinks quote come from? I have his "History of S&W". I don't have his "Smith and Wesson, 1857-1945 A Handbook For Collectors" or the books put out by the Smith & Wesson Collectors Association, perhaps it appeared there?

Does someone have the actual dimensions?  They will be something like this:


I've posted what I have measured on 1917s, 1950s and 1955s (M25), but I'm curious as to what the official Army Inspection print was that has been suggested as the "standard" we should be discussing.  Or even what Roy or the Collectors Association says the original S&W prints stated.

Thanks for that information, what else can you find?

~Mako