Handguns and Ammunition Forum banner

french and german revolvers for sport and social work

25K views 38 replies 12 participants last post by  Guy Clericy 
#1 · (Edited)
I own and shoot a good number of Korth revolvers that I imported from Germany. I have a similar number of Manurhins, which I am able to compare to a passel of Colt Pythons, Bankers and Police Positive Target Specials and Single Action Armies, as well as a good selection of Smith & Wesson's best, ranging from prewar Kit Guns to Registered Magnums and a Triple Lock Target. As a preliminary evaluation of these revolvers, here are some talking points.
  1. Based on my experience, the quality ratio of Colt to S&W is proportional to that of S&W to H&R. The Colts are much better made and more precisely fitted, of finer and stronger materials, than Smith & Wessons. I base this statement on the personally observed differences in working internal parts with a diamond file, and wear and peening in contact surfaces with comparable round counts. The Smith & Wesson single stage lockup is not nearly as precise as, but much more durable than, the Colt double stage lockup. The Smith & Wesson bolt is softer but less stressed than the Colt bolt. The S&W action is much easier to work on than the Colt action.
  2. The Colt V-spring action as used in the Python with its "Bank Vault Lockup", is a licensed derivative of the Schmidt Galand patents. As the trigger of these revolvers is pulled, the double hand forces the cylinder against the locking bolt. The harder the trigger is pulled the tighter the cylinder is locked. Consequently, as the cylinder recoils, it compresses the hand, eventually peening it out of spec. This is all the more applicable to Magnum chamberings never contemplated by the original European inventors. The ensuing requirement for periodic maintenance is the price you have to pay for shooting a Python.
  3. Every Colt double action revolver that I own, including unfired and factory overhauled guns, fails to carry up when thumb-braked in the course of cocking the hammer, though it carries up when the cylinder is free to rotate in the course of cocking the hammer, no matter how slowly I cock it. So either this tuneup represents a factory error, or the factory considers this condition normal. The basic features of Colt double action revolvers are well summarized by Grant Cunningham:
    Colt revolvers have actions which are very refined. Their operating surfaces are very small, and are precisely adjusted to make the guns work properly. Setting them up properly is not a job for someone who isn't intimately familiar with their workings, and the gunsmith who works on them had better be accustomed to working at narrow tolerances, on small parts, under magnification.
    On the other hand, by referring to a copy of Kuhnhausen's shop manual, I was able to fit a new bolt to one of my Bankers Specials using NSk calipers, S&W screwdrivers, the diamond-coated file of a Leatherman Charge TTi, and a wooden shaft. So I agree that Colt actions are highly refined. I also agree that they require working at narrow tolerances, on small parts, under magnification. But much of that is within the reach of a hobbyist equipped with a $30 manual and $200 worth of hand tools.
  4. Regarding Colt V-spring revolvers, the Schmidt-Galand design uses its distinctive "double-headed hand" as a kind of sacrificial element. The hand is stressed past its yield point at the moment of firing and bears the brunt of recoil, because as the combustion gases cause the cartridge case to expand, it briefly locks to the walls of the cylinder chamber and transfers most of the recoil momentum to the cylinder, which in its turn bears upon the hand by way of its interface with the extractor star, which at that moment is tensioned by the trigger being squeezed by the shooter's finger. In a nutshell, Colt's factory authorized maintenance procedure allows for one-time stretching of the hand by peening. The second time around, the hand must be replaced with a new factory part. The service interval for this work depends on a variety of factors such as the chambering of the revolver and the use of high velocity ammunition that generates a higher recoil impulse. Unlike S&W N-frame revolvers, Colt's post-WWII V-spring revolvers do not suffer from excessive wear in rapid double action shooting or fast hand-cocking, because their cylinders aren't oversized with respect to their chamberings, and consequently do not generate an excessive angular momentum, the brunt of which must be borne by the bolt, the counterpart of the S&W cylinder stop, as it slips into the locking notch of the cylinder, bringing it to an abrupt stop at the moment of lockup. But take it easy while cycling your pre-WWII .38 Special and .357 Magnum Colt Shooting Masters and New Service revolvers.
  5. The Manurhin MR73 is the best fighting revolver ever made, designed as a significantly improved S&W, crucially strengthened at the yoke, ingeniously refined at tensioning the hammer and the rebound slide, and manufactured to the quality standards of 1950s Colts. I have tried the current S&W revolvers. There is no comparison. In a nutshell, an early Python is a better revolver than a Registered Magnum, in the same sense whereby a Ferrari 330 P3/4 is a better car than a Ford GT40. But the MR73 is the only revolver I would take in harm's way, in the way I would choose the Citroën ZX over the Ferrari and the Ford for entry in the Paris-Dakar rally.
  6. The market proves that S&W is king of revolvers in the same way, and to the same extent, that it proves that the Big Mac is the king of burgers. The problem with S&W is not design, but quality. Their basic action layout is capable of uncompromising performance, as witness this Manurhin chambered in .32 S&W Long, beating match guns by S&W, SAKO, and Walther. But in order to get a current production S&W to perform like that, you would have to rebarrel it and replace its MIM lockwork with increasingly unobtainable forged parts. And even then, it will not approach the quality of Manurhin's hammer-forged frame, barrel, and cylinder.
  7. The Korth is by far the best made modern revolver, comparable in quality only to the best of the pre-WWI classics, from the French M1873, the Swiss M1878 and 1882, and the Mauser M1878. It is equal in precision to a Target Triple Lock, and far superior to it and the Registered Magnum alike in ruggedness and durability. Among post-WWII revolvers, only the first generation Colt Pythons compare to it in fit and finish. It is arguably the best sporting revolver ever made, as distinct from a social work tool such as the MR73. Its lockwork is hand ground out of steel forgings and deep hardened. It is nowise stressed at ignition, resulting in unexcelled durability and enabling Willi Korth to guarantee the same accuracy even after firing 50,000 Magnum rounds. Its design incorporates some Colt traits such as clockwise cylinder rotation, within an original layout that bears some resemblance to S&W two-point lockup and transport. Its ingenious hand detachable yoke is a great boon to regular maintenance, and its spring tensioned ejector built into the optional 9mm Para cylinder is the best such system that I ever used with rimless ammo in a revolver.
  8. Aside from an early run of 20,000 2" and 4" 5-shot revolvers chambered in .38 Special and numbered in the 20xxx range, meant for, but not purchased by, the Hamburg harbor police, no Korth revolver has been made for constabulary service. Certain features of its design make it less well suited for such use than its Manurhin and S&W counterparts. To cite just one factor, the stroke of its ejector rod is comparable to that of a snubnose 2½" MR73, and shorter than that of a full-length ejector rod fitted to MR73 revolvers with 3" or longer barrels. Consequently, rapid ejection may leave one or two expended shells hanging at the chamber mouths of the cylinder. I do not consider this trait appropriate for a service revolver.
  9. Aside from that, there remains an issue of economies. Arguably the costliest sidearm ever drafted into constabulary service outside of the petrodollar economy, the Manurhin MR73 was designed and built for an administrative market that formally required extreme precision and durability orders of magnitude greater than that expected from and built into contemporaneous U.S. police sidearms. The aesthetic sensibility of most American shooters derives from an appreciation of fancy sporting goods and service sidearms meant by their makers to be surplused after firing several thousand rounds. Although that is no longer the case owing to the worldwide decline of revolvers in constabulary use, throughout its history Smith & Wesson and Colt never had an economic incentive to forge their gun parts out of tool steel. It was far more cost effective to sinter and machine softer materials, replacing the products under warranty in the rare instances of their being put to hard use. That was not an option for Manurhin in delivering the MR73 to GIGN and SIG, the P210 to KTA. Hence the unexcelled durability and precision of their military and constabulary service handguns, combined with a more or less utilitarian finish in most of their variants. Whereas Korth takes this philosophy to the point that most casual shooters would disparage with a tinge of fascination, as wretched excess. For many European shooters, this is not the case, in so far as their licensing requirements deny them the option of accumulating numerous handguns. By dint of being limited to a few specimens, they acquire a compelling incentive to invest in more durable goods.
  10. On the other hand, in my experience, every part on a Korth is significantly more robust than its S&W counterpart. For example, here is an independent testimonial pitting a Korth revolver against a vintage, all-forged S&W M28:
    I mentioned the strength of the metal in the Korth as well as the care of the hand fitting. I began some tests of the Korth vs. the M28. At the beginng of the tests the barrel to cylinder gap of the Korth was just over .0025 while that of the M28 was .003. With just under 200 rounds of heavy hunting loads through both guns the barrel to cylinder gap of the Korth was where it had begun for all cylinders. The M28 however had opended up and varied from .003 to .004. The S&W showed wear and some additional gas cutting on the frame above the barrel from some hot .125 grain loads. The Korth showed no significant wear.
    Please note that the frame size of the Korth falls between those of the K and L frames in the S&W lineup. A 4" Korth Combat revolver weighs 1016g, whereas a 6" Sport model weighs 1175g, as against the 4" and 6" S&W 686 weighing in at 1191g and 1298g, respectively. The Korth cylinder is sized comparably to the cylinder of the late S&W M19, originally known as the Combat Magnum, and takes the same speedloaders. And yet it appears that the Korth withstands the pressures of heavy .357 Magnum loads much better than the S&W N frame. Additionally, the S&W lacks comprehensive single and double action trigger weight and stacking adjustments built into every .357 Magnum Korth revolver. To many European shooters, these factors alone warrant its premium price.
  11. Concerning Python accuracy, Colt used to advertise its Python Elite as accurized to shoot a 2" group at 15 yards. By contrast, Manurhin tested the MR73 to shoot within 25mm (<1") at 25 meters (>25 yards). I am not sure whether or not this disparity in factory requirements makes Pythons less than a third as accurate as their Old World competitors. To the contrary, thus spake Massad Ayoob:
    How accurate? From a Ransom rest with Match ammo, the Python will generally deliver about 1 3/8" groups at fifty yards. This is about what you get out of a custom made PPC revolver with one-inch diameter Douglas barrel. My 8" matte stainless Python with Bausch & Lomb scope in J.D. Jones' T'SOB mount has given me 2 1/4" groups at 100 yards with Federal's generic American Eagle 158 grain softpoint .357 ammo. The same gun, with Federal Match 148 grain .38 wadcutters, once put three bullets into a hole that measured .450" in diameter when calipered. That's three .38 slugs in a hole a couple of thousandths of an inch smaller in diameter than a single .45 auto bullet.
    I am not sure what to make of this testimonial. Please stay tuned while I gear up for my own round of Ransom rest testing.
  12. Regarding the Korth, here is the official factory statement:
    In order to give a statistically covered statement of the shooting performance of our weapon, numerous test series need to be performed. Single shooting results are therefore subjective. For this reason, we abstain from including an original target.
    As an aside, this worry didn't prevent SIG from including an original target with its early P210 pistols, putting ten shots well within a 50mm circle at 50 meters. On the other hand, as I previously mentioned, Willi Korth used to guarantee his revolvers to maintain "the same accuracy even after 50,000 shots fired". I cannot fathom how this guarantee comports with the more recent disclaimer by his successors, of "a statistically covered statement of the shooting performance of our weapon". Be it as it may, in an otherwise inaccurate review, Gun Tests reported five-shot groups fired from a bench rest, measuring at the most between 1.6" and 2.2", depending on the ammunition used. While I cannot duplicate these results with a Korth by aiming each shot individually with iron sights, I can easily do so with a 6" MR73 topped with a Docter sight.
  13. As for the relative strength, in my experience Colt Python, Manurhin MR73, and Korth frames are immune to stretching commonly observed in S&W frames. I am sorry to report having personally experienced a forcing cone fracture in my prized 1957 Python. Regardless of round counts, I've yet to see such breakage in a Korth or an MR73, despite their dimensional similarity to the notoriously fragile S&W M19. In GIGN service, none of the S&W revolvers could handle the daily practice regimen of 150 rounds of Norma 158 grain .357 S&W Magnum ammo. The MR73 was originally tested with this ammunition. Its torture test was abandoned without observing appreciable wear after firing 170,000 full power Norma .357 rounds. Numerous published tests witness this capacity. According to an article in Cible No. 342 on the MR73, its rectangle of shot dispersion remained the same after firing 20,000 Magnum rounds. The writer concluded that it would take at least 300,000 Magnum rounds for the bore to begin to wear. Several French police armorers confirmed this estimate from their experience with high round counts in service revolvers. Make of their claims what you will.
  14. I cannot answer the question of subjective value. In Germany, used Korth revolvers of the latest design cost between 1,200 and 3,500 Euros, depending on the condition, configuration, and luck of the draw. By contrast, you would have to spend between 700 and 1,800 Euros for a used Manurhin MR73, and between 400 and 1,000 Euros for a used Colt Python. To put this in perspective, my nicest blue steel Korth cost me around $2,200 to acquire and import in a large combined lot. I wouldn't part with it for three times that price.
After nearly 40 years of amateur photography, I am teaching myself the essentials of studio lighting. Next week I should be getting a Broncolor Mobil A2L travel kit to complement the Leica S2 that I use in my performance art. Please stay tuned while I work on my first gun photo shoot and update my blog threads.
 
See less See more
1
#2 ·
Thank you for the report. Not many folks here have even seen, much less had extensive experience with, Korth or Manhurin revolvers.

One minor quibble: the last few years of Colts revolver production saw a marked decline in quality, even worse than S&W has gone down. It seemed like the management at Colt was trying to kill off demand so they could shut down production of them.


Regards,

Pat
 
#3 ·
One minor quibble: the last few years of Colts revolver production saw a marked decline in quality, even worse than S&W has gone down. It seemed like the management at Colt was trying to kill off demand so they could shut down production of them.
Colt always combined excellent design with lackadaisical execution. The test targets on early Pythons showed five-shot groups sized around two inches, noted as shot at 15 yards out of an arm rest with a six o'clock hold. It fell upon custom gunsmiths to realize their potential. Whereas a sloppily shooting Korth or Manurhin MR73 would be an anomaly. Most importantly, these revolvers are still made. After some initial missteps, Chapuis does a fine job with a limited range of the MR73, whereas Willi Korth has both direct successors and inventive imitators. Despite, or perhaps because of, their restrictive gun laws, the French and the Germans continue to surpass American gun designers.
 
#4 ·
Hello Zeleny,

Thank you for this very interesting and documented report.

I have a .pdf copy of "Les cahiers du pistolier et du carabinier", an old french mag that made a special number on the MR 73 (about 70 pages with b/w pics). If you are interested, give me an email adresse so I can send it to you.

Thanks very much for the effort.

L.
 
#6 ·
I recall seeing Korth revolvers as a boy in the old Federal Republic of Germany for sale in the local rod and bottle. They were more than twice as expensive as the US made models but they were a thing of beauty. Unless I am mistaken, I think they were made in the vicinity of Heidelberg. My late Guv admired them greatly but he did not buy one.

I also remember distinctly seeing Manhurin autos (and I later had a PP made by them) but I don't recall seeing the revolvers until later. I found them to have the features of both S&W and Colts in some ways but I always wondered why they were replaced with Rugers.

The Korth and Manhurin revolvers were sort of the ultimate and elegant development in the field but they were sort of a local phenomenon. I imagine for every one of each made, there were thousands of Colts and hundreds of thousands of S&Ws made. Joe Stalin once remarked that quantity has a quality all its own!

Many of my young shooting friends are just not interested in learning to shoot a revolver. I think they may accurately reflect popular sentiment. Too bad. One is not badly armed with a revolver but there is no support system at all any more for Colts revolvers. Sometimes, I wonder if there is one for S&W.
 
#7 ·
Sorry zeleny, I knew that I sent to someone but my mail-box has been emptied since the changes to the site.

Thank you anyway for the knowledgeable post.

I've seen Korth twice here in Switzerland: in a gun show and in a shop. Taking them was not in the programm - maybe with white gloves.

I've had several Manurhins: a MR73 5 1/4" Sport model (that is now on sale), a Special Police 3" (the Ruger Speed Six clone, recently sold) and a MR73 3" Defense. The later was my dream wheelgun for very long and I finally located one last year and bought. I wrote several posts about these Manurhins.

L.
 
#9 ·
I fired Korth revolvers in Germany... they were very nicely made, and technologically reminded me of my BMW... over engineered. The down side to the Korth was (IMHO at least) too tight and could have problems with dirty ammo for example. The two I shot also had very tight charge holes and sometimes had problems clambering all types of ammo. The ones I shot (not new guns by any means) were reported to suffer from timing issues after a lot of shooting.

My experience with Manurhins is not extensive, but I have shot P38 clones they made as well as something that looked like a knock off of a Ruger... they worked, but I didn't find much to shout about in them... They were however somewhat better made than the Egyptian Maadi Beretta knock-off pistols (actually I think the Maadi is really built under a Beretta license.)

On to the Colt v S&W Battle... I would not argue Colt's made some very nice looking revolvers...but I would say the Colt's were/are not as reliable as a S&W... Are Colt's somewhat tighter than a S&W? Often so... BUT they have other problems... A few years ago I had a 4" Python whose charge holes were so tight it would not chamber hand loaded ammo that dropped into every other brand of gun without a hitch. Colt's DA revolvers of course are of course well known as the "gunsmith's friend" because they had to be taken back frequently to have the timing fixed... and try to find a good Colt's revolver smith these days...:barf: From an engineering point of view, Colt's revolvers would be better designs if they had a front locking lug for the ejector rod.

I suppose the ultimate answer is the market place decided which was/is the best revolver.... ;)

V/r

Chuck
 
#10 ·
Manurhin made cast revolvers, beginning with licensed Ruger hybrids, to address the market segment deterred from purchasing the MR73 by reasons of cost. All of these guns share the fine hammer-forged barrels and cylinders of their predecessor, and some of them, such as the short-lived MR93 and MR96 "space guns", are very innovative from an engineering standpoint. However, they shouldn't be taken as representative of the quality of the flagship model.

Not chambering handloaded ammo that drops into every other brand of gun without a hitch is more likely to reflect on the quality of ammo than on that of the gun. Tight chambers are a prerequisite for accuracy, and so is dimensional consistency of ammo. Admittedly, Korth and Manurhin have short chambers, but they accommodate every factory brand of ammo that I fired to date. The length of the chamber in my MR73 is 39.6mm, whereas the .357 Magnum case is 32.77mm long. As long as the length of the protruding part of the bullet does not exceed the difference, you are good to go.

I don't eat at McDonald's because I don't buy the notion that the market place decides the ultimate answers. Make mine In-N-Out Burger, if not the Office Burger.
 
#11 ·
To Zeleny and all the participants of this thread, the staff here is so impressed with the quality and authoritativeness of your comments that we have made it a permanent part of the Revolver Forum by posting it as a Sticky.

This is most impressive dialogue and we thank you all for posting it here. Please continue your discussion.

JayPee
 
#12 ·
Hello Zeleny,

Thank you for the excellent thread and there is much to be learned about the revolvers produced by Korth and Manhurin. I am also intrigued by the discussion of the "Colt vs. S&W" dialogue.

Sadly, my own experience bears out that I have many more "veteran" Colt revolvers worked on than S&W's.... A priori, I've owned two Pythons, a Trooper MK III and a couple of DS models over the past twenty or so years and they all required a serious "gunsmith" to keep them in time. Because they were wonderful works of revolvers, I wish it wasn't so.....

The straw that broke the "camel's back" was when I had to send a brand new ITB King Cobra back to Colt because it wouldn't lock up.... And that was meant to be my Tuesday Night "bowling pin" revolver....

Again, thank you for the wonderful thread!

Best,

Chris
 
#13 · (Edited)
This is an early Gendarmerie Manurhin MR73 revolver, characterized by a ramp front sight and slightly rounded corners of the rear sight blade.






I recently won this revolver on eGun.de and expect to receive it in my next shipment around four months from now. The serial number is K19XX, where the K prefix indicates revolvers with adjustable sights, originally fitted with a 4" barrel. According to Manurhin, adjusting the rear sight by a click (⅛ of a full turn) on the MR73 is equivalent to the following correction of the point of aim at 25 meters, according to the model and barrel length:

Sport model in .357 Magnum / .38 Special
  • 4" barrel, correction 7.7 mm
  • 5¼" barrel, correction 6.3 mm
  • 6" barrel, correction 5.7 mm
  • 8" barrel, correction 4.4 mm
Match model in .22 l.r. / .32 S&W Long / .38 Special:
  • 6" and 5¾" barrel, correction 5.2 mm
If I weren't told the serial number range that places it in the mid-Seventies, this revolver's vintage could be inferred from the top sideplate screw, deleted on subsequent variants. Later on, the rear sight tang would be widened from 8mm to 10mm. Much later, the ejector ratchet would be changed from this "insular" configuration corresponding to a pointy-nosed hand, to the current "star" pattern corresponding to a blade-nosed hand, and the solid front sight retainer pin would be replaced by a rolled pin.

One variation that cannot be distinguished without removing the sideplate is the changeover from the "safety pin" music wire spring tensioning the hand in an early model of the MR73, to a flat spring that performs that function in the later models.

American-style handgun shooting reached Europe in the Sixties with Raymond Sasia, a judo instructor employed as a bodyguard by Charles de Gaulle, who was sent to study the shooting techniques of the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia. He returned to France with an FBI certification and founded CNT, a shooting school in Paris that taught range officers, French nationals at first, then foreigners. The latter, upon returning home, taught new range officers. Thus the method "Sasia" promulgated FBI's revolver shooting techniques throughout the Western world.

One of the drills was the 7 meter fast response. It goes as follows: the gun is loaded with five .357 Magnum rounds and carried in a belt holster; in the pocket the shooter has 5 more loose .357 Magnum rounds. At the sound of a whistle, the range officers are given 25 seconds to fire the ten cartridges at the target located 7 meters away; the instructors have only 20 seconds. It turns out that in order to have the time to reload and fire the other five rounds in the allotted time, the first 5 rounds must be fired in less than 5 seconds to satisfy the requirements; no more than 3 to 4 seconds can be allowed for top placements.

At this rate of fire, in the original MR73 design that tensioned the hand with a "safety pin" spring, the hand did not have enough time to return to the ratchet and rotate the cylinder, and consequently it slipped over the ratchet, causing the firing pin to strike the primer of the last expended shell. Owing to the inertia of the hand thrown backward by Magnum recoil forces, the music wire spring was not strong enough to return it forward in time to engage the teeth of the ratchet of the ejector and ensure the rotation of the cylinder. Manurhin's engineers were slow to understand why this happened to some police shooters, because the factory testers never managed to replicate the malfunction. Shooters training with S&W M10, M13, or M19 under similar conditions never experienced this malfunction. My 3" MR73 Defense & Police revolver numbered B1254 has the music wire spring. I never managed to replicate the malfunction, either.



Subsequently, the MR 73 design was modified with the new, stronger flat spring that required a milled relief inside the sideplate, and was not suitable for retrofitting without this difficult and costly modification.
 
#14 · (Edited)
That is an interesting post Zeleny... lots of stuff I didn't know... thanks for sharing.

For many of us here in the U.S. at least, being able to chamber re-loaded ammo in a requisite for any gun... ammo is rather expensive and to be able to shoot much many of us have to reload... something I have done for nearly 50 years without problems... except as noted with Korth and a Python from Colt's. Most Colt's shoot my reloaded ammo just fine, but those that don't are the only U.S. made revolvers that have ever presented a problem.

To follow up on Chris's comments re timing, I have had the same experience with Colts... something not often encountered on S&W revolvers... and if you have a timing problem on S&Ws it is easily fixed by an armorer or anyone with a good knowledge of the innards of S&Ws... So easy I can still do it... ;) Basically in my experience S&W revolvers are simply more rugged than the competition. Back around 1972 or so (when I was still young enough to have hair on top of my head) a good friend and I each decided we needed a 357 revolver for social purposes. Being somewhat less affluent than my friend I bought a 3.5" S&W Model 27 (price was $125 plus sales tax) whilst he bought a 4" Python that cost him a bit over $200 IIRC. Time passed and we went on our separate ways until we met up again when I moved back to Florida... over lunch we caught up on old times and finally the subject moved to guns... We recalled buying our 357s way back when... I asked if he still shot his... he sort of sighed and explained he didn't shoot it any more, in fact he said it needed to go back to the factory for repairs... it was he said spitting lead... BAD... AGAIN... for about the fourth time... over a period of nearly 40 years to be sure... For my part I replied to his inquiry I did still have my M27 and in fact was wearing it at the time... still worked fine.

That is sort of a "Readers Digest" version of why I prefer S&W revolvers.

FWIW

Chuck
 
#15 ·
There is only one legitimate reason to make handloads that cannot be chambered in a Korth or a Manurhin revolver, and that is to use heavier bullets that cannot be seated deeply enough for the loaded round to fit inside the chamber. You would then be limited to models with longer cylinders. Otherwise, if you resize and trim the fired brass to the SAAMI spec, it's all good.

Using dirty ammo is another matter. Tight chambers yield better accuracy. Given that revolvers are no longer used for combat, there is no reason to build them with clearances for reliable operation in the dirt, which would degrade their accuracy. I never had any problems in chambering, cycling, or ejecting good quality ammo in the Korth or Manurhin revolvers. I have used Meyer minus gages to measure their chambers. On a 4" MR73 Police and Defense number C37705, the .382" gage enters only at the mouth, whereas the .381" gage goes all the way in. On a 6" Korth Sport number 32126, the first gage to enter the throat is sized .382", whereas the first gage to go all the way in is sized .379". By contrast, on a 6" S&W Registered Magnum numbered 50138, registration 1829, the first gage to enter the throat is sized .383", whereas the first gage to go all the way in is sized .380". Lastly, in a Colt Python numbered 2894, the first gage to enter the throat is sized .382", whereas the first gage to go all the way in is sized .379", though the one sized .380" makes it almost all the way in. I think the previous owner was more fond of firing .38 Special than .357 Magnum.

Lastly, the ruggedness of S&W revolvers should be qualified by noting the wear of N-frame actions under rapid double action firing or fast thumb-cocking, as discussed here, and their frame stretching measured here.
 
#16 ·
I think most of that falls into the "Old wives tales" category... though I think older guns are more likely to suffer from preening than guns with more modern metals used in the cyl.

That said I have quite a few N frames going back as far as a 1908 1st Model Hand Ejector .44 which as been shot a LOT and shows no problems with excessive wear... In addition to .44s in various models, 1st. model, 2nd model and 3rd model and 1950 model, .45 in .45acp, .45 LC and .455 all of which work just fine as well... no signs of wear. Also in addition to .357s I also have some 38/44s which also have no problems.

In .357 I have three Pre WWII Magnums ("Registered") and one non registered pre war. All work just fine, though only one has been shot a lot... I also have quite a number of post war 357 Mags in various barrel lengths, 3.5", 5" and 6.5" all of which show no signs of much wear...

I suppose it is possible some one has has such difficulties... but I certainly have not experienced it.

As to the question of reloaded ammo chambering, I do not believe the ammo I make is defective. I use Dillon case gauges (which are toward the tight side of tolerances) and the ammo I load chambers quite satisfactorily... which leads me to conclusion that guns that won't chamber correctly ammo must be the problem.

I do know that in the case of the Colt's guns, they have had some "little" problem over the years with quality control that are consistent with the problems with Colt's mentioned.

As to Korth, I did not shoot them enough to be anything like an expert... but whilst very well finished indeed I also think them considerably over engineered.

It has been interesting to note, that the French police who was/is probably the only major police user of revolvers in Europe other than the UK has preferred S&W and Ruger revolvers over the domestic product in quite a few contracts... curious.

Finally, I would note that the S&W Customer support is generally seen as the best in the business... they have fixed free of charge for me lots of old guns they certainly did not have to warranty... not many makers will fix their guns for life at no cost as well (not a warranty, for legal reasons.)

So all in all, my experience has been the S&W is and has been the best revolver for me...and Colt's are ok, but less reliable, if very well finished most of the time.

V/r

Chuck
 
#17 · (Edited)
Customer service is great, but better yet is making the gun right the first time around. Current S&W revolvers won't even time with an empty cylinder for want of indexing pins. And the cylinder notches keep peening. Use a magnifying glass if you can't see the plastic deformation with your naked eye. The issue is not problems with excessive wear, but any degree of wear appearing in pards and places that could be endowed with a practically unlimited service life by better design and construction techniques.

The most telling aspect of S&W underengineering is the failure of K-frame revolvers to cope with prolonged firing of .357 Magnum ammo. This failure has been acknowledged by the factory in the termination of that chambering in the K-frame range. By contrast, Korth and Manurhin MR73 last through hundreds of thousands of full power .357 Magnum rounds. Admittedly, this durability comes at a multiple of the cost of S&W revolvers. But it would be impossible to replicate the experience of shooting a lighter, stronger, and smoother revolver with a crisp trigger action fully adjustable from the outside, with any number of its bargain-rate S&W counterparts.

S&W peaked before WWI. As the chamber pressures mounted, the quality deteriorated. The Triple Lock was as good as S&W got in fit and finish. Korth revolvers duplicate this quality, while Chapuis comes closer to it than anyone else with the MR73.
 
#18 ·
Hello Zeleny,

Thank you for the photo's of your "soon to come home" Manhurin. I am indeed impressed and Larry posted a earlier thread of the two he owns...

Some years ago, J&G Sales of Prescott, AZ had some French Police turn in Manhurins for sale. It must have been a small lot and they were not listed again for some time.

Again, thank you for sharing your reports and interests in European Handguns. They are indeed wonderful and interesting.

Best,

Chris
 
#19 ·
http://www.handgunsandammunition.com/member.php?u=2835Zeleny,

There is no question some of the current S&W product is less attractive than older guns... but I think we will have to disagree about the peak of S&W quality... I think that point was when they produced the original 357 Mag and the subsequent post WWII production well up into the 1960s... it was IMHO the pinnacle of S&W quality and the 357/M27 was simply sublime.

The current guns are quite strong... probably stronger than they have ever been... but I don't like the way they look and I am not buying any for that reason... but they are very strong and very reliable...

The subject of the M19 has been kicked back and forth for many years... I have a number of M19s including one made in the first year of production and one from the second year of production... both shoot just fine and have not even had to have a timing job... The same is true of the other M19s I have... The issue I assume you are referring to is the cracking of the forcing cone in some examples.

The reasons for the cracking problem are pretty well established... the few examples that exhibit the problem have been shot with a lot of high velocity 125gr JHP bullets. Now when the M19 was introduced, the 357 cartridge was loaded with a 158gr soft lead bullet and it worked just fine in the M19 as the lead was much softer than the metal of the forcing cone thus causing more stress... the newer ammo was a problem... standard ammo was not a problem.

S&W DID address the problem, for those who considered there was a problem with the M19... it is called the 586/686 series.

Like many others I don't think the M19 is flawed... it did what it was designed to do very well... that being shot with 38 spl most of the time and carried with .357. One of the "fathers" of the M19 was Bill Jordan. Jordan commented on this very issue by saying the M19 should be mostly used with 38 Spl and carried with 357... Understand we are talking about the mid 1950s, and that was exactly how police would train... shoot 38 wad cutters at the range and carry .357 mag for duty. The gun did what it was designed to do very well... and when newer ammo became available they produced a new design to accommodate the light bullet/high velocity ammo.

It is difficult to compare current S&W guns (or Colt's for that matter) with Korth or Manhurin because Manhurin is no longer producing pistols and I believe Korth produces so few revolvers they are out of the revolver business for practical purposes. Their attempts at a semi auto look like a SIG copy.

There is very little demand for a revolver that costs as much as an automobile... and is no more accurate than revolvers costing a fraction of the price... ;) I expect if I could sell revolvers for the price of a Korth I could make a really nice gun too... I could easily produce a triple lock at Korth prices... :tup:

In the final analysis, I would have to say the market place decided who made the better revolver... Colt's is gone, Manhurin is gone and essentially Korth is gone... S&W is still making quite a lot of revolvers... AND is still in business to service and support the ones they made...

FWIW

Chuck
 
#20 ·
As I said above, Chapuis does a fine job with a limited range of the MR73, whereas Willi Korth has both direct successors and inventive imitators. Neither revolver ever competed with S&W's offerings, any more than Peter Luger competes with Ronald McDonald. And neither one had to be "mostly used with 38 Spl and carried with 357".

I also disagree that the production of Registered Magnums and their early M27 successors comprised "the pinnacle of S&W quality". The Triple Lock is fitted and finished much better than any of its N-frame successors. Also, even the Sixities' S&W production evidenced cost-cutting measures, such as the deletion of the the forward screw in the trigger guard that retained the spring and lug that locks the cylinder in place; omission of relief cuts on the cylinder stop, meant to minimize the peening of the cylinder notches; and so on.
 
#21 ·
I guess we will have to just say we don't agree and leave it at that.

Chuck

As I said above, Chapuis does a fine job with a limited range of the MR73, whereas Willi Korth has both direct successors and inventive imitators. Neither revolver ever competed with S&W's offerings, any more than Peter Luger competes with Ronald McDonald. And neither one had to be "mostly used with 38 Spl and carried with 357".

I also disagree that the production of Registered Magnums and their early M27 successors comprised "the pinnacle of S&W quality". The Triple Lock is fitted and finished much better than any of its N-frame successors. Also, even the Sixities' S&W production evidenced cost-cutting measures, such as the deletion of the the forward screw in the trigger guard that retained the spring and lug that locks the cylinder in place; omission of relief cuts on the cylinder stop, meant to minimize the peening of the cylinder notches; and so on.
 
#22 ·
I can't help but wonder how the Korth or the Manurhin would hold up in widespread use by troops under combat conditions. Smiths and Colts were tested under the harshest of such conditions and were apparently deemed "adequate" or "as good as they needed to be" for the time and weaponry available. Of course, they didn't function too well with mud and grit in their mechanisms, but I suspect the Euro masterpieces wouldn't either despite how many full house .357 loads they could fire without appreciable wear. Maybe then the significant question is not how well made, accurate, or reliable they are but whether they are as durable, functional, etc. as they need to be in any given role.

Although the points made in support of the superiority of the Korth and Manurhin are very persuasive and likely valid, they still might not be "adequate" in combat use; whereas the Smith & Wessons or Colts might not be "as good as they needed to be" at an indoor range at some palatial estate in the Hamptons. I guess it's all in what you want to use the weapons for. Hands down the bragging rights go to the Korths and Manurhins.

Another issue involves the more subjective aspects of value and functionality such as aesthetics and ergonomics. They are handsome pieces for sure -- to me -- but maybe not to everybody. But do those French and German revolvers just fit everybody's hand? Do they point perfectly for every person? Do they, by virtue of their superior materials, design, and manufacture, when hefted just feel like an extension of the arm of every man, woman, and child? How many shooters out of, say, one hundred would report that the Korth or Manurhin just "feels better" than a Colt or Smith & Wesson. How many would say they shoot a Korth better than a Colt? It seems that an assumption is being made about user friendliness as if "quality" insures universal acceptance and even preference for each and every shooter. Any data about all this? And, by the way, are we certain that 'cost' was the only issue with the replacement of the MR73 by Rugers and Smith & Wessons?

Finally, dolt that I am, I don't really understand the point about the chamber measurements. If I got it right, then: MR73=.382/.381; S&W Registered Magnum=.383/.380; Python=.382/.379 (& almost .380); Korth=.382/.379. So which one wins? And does the winning weapon win by 1 to 3 thousandths of an inch?!? I would really like to understand the significance of these numbers.

--Ray

P.S. I enjoyed your website Zeleny.
 
#23 · (Edited)
Symmetrical wraparound Nill grips on the recently produced Korth revolvers are ambidextrous and nicely hand-filling. I am getting the last two made by Nill for post-1986 Korth revolvers, and have their likes installed on my five favorite Manurhin MR73 revolvers. Original Korth stocks have an open backstrap and a shallow thumb rest just big enough to block a speedloader. They offer a nice rolling fit for the right hand; not so good for the left. Korth revolvers have two kinds of gripframes: the square butt frame on the Sport and Match revolvers, and the rounded butt gripframe on the Combat models. Since every revolver is benchmade individually, factory stocks are hand-fitted to each gun, and cannot be expected to interchange between them, much like the original Magna stocks on S&W Registered Magnums.

The Manurhin MR73 has a uniformly dimensioned, compact grip frame in a true round butt configuration. There are two kinds of factory stocks for the MR73. Most of the early revolvers regardless of the model, and most of the Police and Defense models regardless of vintage, are fitted with abbreviated walnut stocks that follow the contours of the grip frame, except for filling the gap behind the trigger guard in the manner of the pre-WWII S&W grip adapter. They are very comfortable to hold, but require a very firm grip for controlling the roll under recoil, and provide little feedback for a consistent handhold. The factory walnut, symmetrical finger grip Sport stocks fitted to later production Sport and Gendarmerie models wrap around the front strap and extend past the butt in a squared configuration, exposing the typically grooved backstrap. They are more hand-filling and offer better indexing, albeit not to the degree afforded by Nill grips. Full wraparound Trausch rubber grips, which can be had with or without a shelf at the bottom, offer all advantages and drawbacks of their kind.

No revolver designed and manufactured in the U.S. after 1911, was intended or suited for combat, as that destination was interpreted by the makers of Webleys and Nagants. Owing to America's late entry into WWI, none of them were widely and successfully used in trench warfare, in the manner of the LP08 Artillery Luger. Like the S&W M19, its delicate precursor, the MR73 was designed and built for fighting by the constabulary personnel, not for combat by the military. Its typical application took place on the day after Christmas of 1994, when Captain Thierry P. of GIGN entered the hijacked Air France Flight 8969 plane, grounded at the Marseille airport. He served as the point shooter, armed with a 5¼" .357 Magnum Manurhin MR73 and backed by his partner Eric carrying a 9mm HK05 submachine gun. Thierry killed two Islamist terrorists and wounded a third with his revolver, before taking seven bullets from an AK47 fired by the fourth hijacker. In spite of then absorbing a full complement of grenade shrapnel in his lower body, Thierry P. survived the assault, as also did 171 hostages. Not so the four terrorists, who had been planning to deploy the plane as an incendiary missile against the Eiffel Tower. Thierry could have armed himself with any firearm. He chose an MR73. His fellow GIGN intervention troopers still choose to carry their vintage Manurhin MR73 revolvers alongside a modern automatic pistol such as a Glock G17 or G19, or a SIG P228 or P2022. Such anecdotes add up to all the data at my disposal, attesting to the relevant user preferences. N.B.: The plural of "anecdote" is "data".

Along the same lines, I am collecting critical measurements for an ongoing study, meant to correlate them with shooting performance. Tighter chambers should yield better mechanical accuracy, up to a point. Whether or not that can be demonstrated in practice, remains to be seen.
 
#24 ·
Well, thanks for letting us know that Korths and Manurhins have designer grips too. We still don't know how even those classy and pricey handles would work in the hands of those hundred shooters I'm interested in surveying. I'm simply talking about a side-by-side cornflakes taste test with brands W,X,Y, and Z to check out those very subjective dimensions that constitute 'shootability' and that result in any given handgun being loved, tolerated, or abhorred. If I read you correctly, you don't have such information and probably largely because there aren't enough of these furrin (i.e., foreign) revolvers out here in the colonies.

If we resort to 'anecdotal' information then you could bury all the Euro wunderkinder in existence under tons of heartfelt testimonials to the adequacy and efficacy of Smith & Wesson revolvers alone. You've had a taste of that in some of the other posts which represent only the tip of that iceberg. Although the story of the use of the MR73 is interesting and entertaining such information is obscure and irrelevant to the issues I am raising. We have only yours and Monsieur Tierry P.'s experiences to go with to talk about 'shootability' or the subjective experience of actually using these firearms; some of the other respondents to this thread were not particularly impressed by one or both of these when they had the opportunity to shoot and/or examine them. Second, we have very limited contextual "data" (i.e., military After Action Reports, for example or other indications from use over time). Apparently French police replaced their MR73's with 9mm or .357 Smith & Wesson and Ruger revolvers. Right? Of course, everybody uses autoloaders now, but if the MR73's are so hot, surely the police still have them in their inventories for specialized use. Does GIGN still use them? Your story was dated 1994. Do any police organizations use the Korth? Or are these guns just expensive toys that bestow pride of ownership to those that can afford them?

My essential assertion is that the measurement of the worth or value of any firearm involves its being 'good enough' for the job it is intended to do. When you refer to Smith & Wessons designed after 1911 as not having been intended for military use, I am a bit confused because the essential design dates back to about 1899 IIRC. Smith & Wessons and Colts were indeed designed for military use and any other kind of use, and that is probably their greatest strength -- flexibility -- military, police, hunting, target work, etc. They were used extensively in both World Wars and a host of other conflagrations all over the world. Thousands of large frame Smith & Wesson hand ejectors in .455 supplemented the stocks of Webley revolvers in the same caliber in both the British and Canadian armies during WWI. "Anecdotal" reports that I have read in years past revealed a strong preference among the officers for the Smith & Wesson over the Webley. The U.S. military forces in both world wars utilized the Colt and S&W models of 1917 to supplement the 1911. About every weapon known to man during the era of the first war found its way into the trenches of France, and some were clearly found wanting. But not the Colt or Smith & Wesson revolvers which continued to be in military inventory until the 1980's at least in .38 special caliber. Smith & Wesson Victory Models in .380 inch or .38 special continued to arm both U.S. and Commonwealth forces from WWII well into the 1960's. How many Korths and Manurhins have served? If the Colt and S&W revolvers had been demonstrated not to perform in an adequate manner they would have gone the way of the Johnson rifle and the Reising submachinegun.

It's been fun sparring with you over this topic Zeleny.

--Ray
 
#25 ·
I don't know of any agencies replacing their Manurhin MR73 revolvers with Smith & Wessons or Rugers. GIGN gendarmes still use the MR73 as their principal sidearm, backed up by a SIG or Glock autopistol. French police and security guards with smaller budgets and fewer mission-critical requirements tend to use the latter alone.

I didn't refer to revolvers designed and manufactured in the U.S. after 1911 as not having been intended and suited for military use, which encompasses many duties outside of combat. The point I am making is captured in the following contrast. The Imperial German Army had more success in clearing trenches with their Lange Pistole 08, than His Majesty's Armed Forces, with their S&W Hand Ejector 1st Model. The U.S. Army issued its 2nd Model successor only as a substitute standard, anticipating a short supply of the M1911 autopistol. The fact that Colt and Smith & Wesson revolvers remained in military inventory until the Eighties, is due to the inertia of government procurement, and nowise attests to their performance under adverse conditions as being comparable to that of the M1911.
 
#26 ·
There's very little to disagree with in this previous post. I'm not certain that revolvers hung around so long due to the slowness of procurement processes or just that as weapons or weapon systems go handguns, in general, are such a low priority. Clearly no revolver can compete with a reliable autoloader especially for defensive or offensive purposes. And now we may have a caliber (.357 Sig) that rounds the edge the .357 revolver might have had in terms of power, range, and accuracy.

This is a very, very interesting thread, and I look forward to hearing more from you in the future Zeleny.
 
#27 · (Edited)
Clearly no revolver can compete with a reliable autoloader especially for defensive or offensive purposes.
This point can be amplified: the British army failed at putting the S&W Triple Lock to offensive use in trench warfare, whereas the German army succeeded with the LP08 and the Trommelmagazin developed for that purpose, notwithstanding the Luger's commonly acknowledged aversion to dirt and mud. Given the availability of Browning-pattern autopistols, whose patented slides afford far better protection from dirt, the revolver has become obsolete as a combat arm. On the other hand, its continued fitness for specialized fighting tasks is borne out by the external and terminal ballistics of the appropriate .357 Magnum loads, ensured by the superior strength of the static breech featured in the Hand Ejector-pattern revolvers, and the greater range of bullet configurations they accept. In other words, GIGN gendarmes don't have to worry about fighting in the trenches. Their main concern is maximizing the probability of a one-shot stop.

Thank you for your kind encouragement.
 
#28 ·
One overarching consideration that bears frequent emphasis is the choice to ignore Davy Crockett's advice to leave well enough alone, or, in more vulgar and more recent parlance, to fix what ain't broke. It has been convincingly argued that the Colt M1911A1 and the S&W Hand Ejector represent the unbroken standard of adequate performance, beyond which no reasonable shooter should aspire. To the contrary, I refer my readers to the trophy wife as the paradigm of not leaving well enough alone, and fixing what ain't broke. As the SIG P210 is among autopistols, so the Manurhin MR73 and the Korth are the trophy wives among revolvers. As with fleshly receptacles, so with steel utensils.
 
#29 ·
I've shot both Korth and Manurhin revolvers and they are indeed fine weapons. Are they better than the comparitive Smith and Wesson, Ruger, Colt, etc. ? Ultimately yes, I believe they are. However, as with anything we reach a point of diminishing returns. Are they better enough to justify the increased cost? On that point I would say no. A three thousand dollar stereo system will sound better than a one thousand dollar system, but will it be two thousand additional dollars worth of better? This is all very subjective but the ultimate answer is no, it won't be. Any field of study and manufacture eventually moves past the point of sheer practicality and into far more subjective areas of quality.

Quality reaches a point where it goes beyond items of neccessity and apeals to those who appreciate finer details of manufacture and style. (although I find both Korth and Manurhin revolvers to be somewhat lacking in the latter) At that point you're not paying for reliability and performance, but more for the joy and pride of ownership. (which is fine in itself)

In my opinion these revolvers have moved into that stratum of quality. I've had years of experience with Colt and Smith and Wesson revolvers and have always found them perfectly adequate for the task at hand. That experience has involved heavy and repeated use in the field of law enforcement. Any superiority I've observed in the Manurhin and Korth is more of an academic exercise in engineering than in real world performance. They are fine weapons to be sure, but I don't find their increased cost to be justified in any practical sense, at least not enough for me to ever purchase one.

Still, Zelenys insight into these fine weapons is very informative and interesting as they aren't commonly seen here. Zeleny, I appreciate your efforts.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top