Tell me about D-frames

[pneuby]

I've only flirted with them briefly over the years, and those were Dick Specials. I was not satisfied with what I felt was a 'lesser' action to the average Smith. However, I've fondled a couple of Cobras recently that were A-O/K in that regard. I suspect due to a better standard of care in that era, plus lots of dry-fire or use.

Anything to be leary of with the unshrouded ejector, and one point of lock-up at the breechface? This would see mostly back-up use, in either pocket, or on ankle. The plus is, there's that extra shot and they can use my K-frame loaders. Yes, I'm aware of the alloy frame's limitations, and that doesn't bother me much.

Thanks!

[Rangr44]

A Colt DA isn't any "lesser", nor better than a Smith's action - it's different.

A Colt is different mechanically, in both the trigger/hammer action, and even differs in direction of cylinder rotation.
A Colt doesn't lock the cylinder until the trigger's pulled, whereas, a Smith is locked when the hammer's cocked.

Some people like blondes, others prefer brunettes - and others redheads. 

I've owned/carried/shot both shrouded & unshrouded D-frames, and have no preference, except the the older guns tend to be smoother - although the post 1973 shrouded EJ rod has it's advantages.

I turned away from S&W J-framed .38's when two new M60's, I bought in the day, started skipping over a loaded chamber during very rapid DA firing - something my DS' never did for me, even when I tried: and I liked the 6th shot the Colt offered over the J-frame.
Although YMMV, a 6-shot/K-Frame always seemed too big for my taste, especially for CCW/pocket carry.

.

[spruce]

Well, I'll venture an opinion, but certainly not an expert one.

I always liked the feel of the old Colts.  While the double action pull cannot be "staged" like an S&W and does "stack" somewhat I never found that objectionable, however some do.  I don't see any problem with the single point lockup.  Personally I've never really been convinced that a second lockup point way out at the front end of a relatively long and relatively flexible ejector rod contributes as much as some say it does.

One potential disadvantage with the Colts is that it's harder to find a local 'smith to set them right if something should go wrong (as compared to finding someone to fix an S&W).  However, that wouldn't stop me from buying a good example if the price was right!

As far as the alloy frame goes, even the steel D frames weren't rated for +P loads so I'd consider that a moot point.

[pneuby]

A Colt DA isn't any "lesser", nor better than a Smith's action - it's different.


Although YMMV, a 6-shot/K-Frame always seemed too big for my taste, especially for CCW/pocket carry.

Well, you made a tactful point there, LOL. 

I've been universally IWB carry since I got my permit, with only occasional forays into the wilderness with OC.
Yes, the J-frame still rules for the pocket, but that Cobra is only a touch larger.

[Lloyd Smale]

either the lockwork on them is a bit more fragile then a j frame or there shot more because alot of the detective specials ive shot and the two ive owned were out of time. I had to send both of them to colt to get timed and both needed some parts replaced. One was an old fairly worn looking gun but the second one looked like new and im sure wasnt shot much. there cool guns but i now stick to smiths. For one thing smith will usually fix a gun for free and even send you a shipping lable and ive yet to get any free work out of colt.

[pneuby]

... smith will usually fix a gun for free and even send you a shipping lable and ive yet to get any free work out of colt.

That's true about S&W, and I'm surprised Colt still exists off of the AR/M production and 1911s.

[tony212]

I carried a Colt Cobra as a CCW for years and just recently switched to a J frame.  I never had a problem with the Colt either functioning or concealing it.  I wouldn't hesitate to carry one again, just Massachusetts has some screwy laws and they are hard to come by here.  I do have to say the I love the J frame also. But I don't see much difference between the two in concelability or reliability.  The only big differences are 6 shots for the Colt and +P rating for the Smith, and I don't feel either is that important to not choose either one.
Tony212

[Frank V]

I like the DS, it's only a little larger than the Chief Special & offers one more shot. I don't think they are fragile or worse or better, just different. They are also usually very accurate. You can also get one in the Diamondback configuration if you want a really useful .22lr or .38 Special with target sights & all the bells & whistles of the Python!!!!
Frank

[gcrank1]

Ive had more problems with S&Ws than Colts. I like the mechanism and lockup design, CW cyl. rotation, metalurgy and fit & finish better too. But, both factories have had their production/assembly issues through the years.
I dont recommend having both if you plan on defensive use. Under stress you will fall back on training and they are enough different to get you in trouble or killed if you have to think about a reload. So.....dont carry a reload? Pull the other one and keep on keepin' on.

[pneuby]

I don't feel the reverse operation of the thumbpieces is that big of a deal. I'm definitely giving this one some more thought.

[Rangr44]

[either the lockwork on them is a bit more fragile then a j frame or there shot more because alot of the detective specials ive shot and the two ive owned were out of time. I had to send both of them to colt to get timed and both needed some parts replaced. One was an old fairly worn looking gun but the second one looked like new and im sure wasnt shot much.]

No HOW much/little a Colt D-frame is shot, there's no two ways about it, they're not +P rated - which is what Is most likely at the root of those DS' woes.

Just because it LOOKS like it ought to be able to digest the +P, doesn't mean that it either CAN, or should be made to - but you can't tell some folks anything, so they just HAVE to try some.   

.