I've now had a chance to go to the range twice with my Smith & Weson Model 1917 revolver. I've fired about 150 rounds through it, and these are my impressions so far.
First, it's a very accurate pistol. When firing single-action out to 15 yards, it was just as accurate as my M1911 and CZ-75 autoloaders. This is pretty impressive given the rudimentary sights. Firing double-action naturally reduced my accuracy, but it was still more than sufficient for self-defense. The double-action trigger pull is quite smooth, just very heavy. If it's possible for a gunsmith to lighten it, the pistol should be just as accurate when fired double-action as it is when fired single-action.
The M1917 uses rimless .45 ACP cartridges. In order to give the ejector something to push against, a piece of metal called a "moon clip" is used to hold the six cartridges together at the base. This makes for very fast reloading, since all you have to do is drop a full moon clip into the cylinder and close it. The process of loading and unloading the moon clips is a bit tedious, though. I bought a tool for unloading them, but so far I've been loading them by hand, and it takes considerable force to push each cartridge into a slot in the clip. I've read about tools that can load them more easily (and without the "loader's thumb"), and I definitely want to buy one before my next trip to the range.
The pistol's reliability was somewhat disappointing. I found that if I didn't pause after emptying the cylinder to let it cool down, the pistol would jam. Apparently the cylinder expands enough from the heat of firing that it can catch against the back of the barrel. When that happens it's impossible for the cylinder to turn, which means the pistol can't be fired until the cylinder is opened and given time to cool down. Fortunately there is advance warning when this happens--right before the cylinder locks up, the double-action trigger pull gets much heavier.
I don't think there's anything that can be done about this. A revolver's cylinder has essentially six chambers all heating up instead of the one chamber of an autoloader, so it's not surprising that the heat produced by firing quickly would have this effect. Probably the degree to which this is a problem would vary depending on the pistol and the ammunition, but for the M1917 it's best to let it cool down after firing the first 12 rounds.
There's more recoil than the M1911--hardly surprising, since there's no slide moving back to absorb some of the recoil energy. I found that it was necessary to hold the pistol as high up on the grip as possible, because if I didn't my hand would end up there anyway after the recoil of the first shot pushed the grip down in my hand. Compared to the modern .45 ACP pistols which use lightweight aluminum frames, the M1917 has much less recoil overall, but its recoil is sharper.
The M1917 is too big to be useful for concealed carry. Even if the barrel were shortened, the cylinder is still too wide--it makes the pistol almost exactly twice as wide as the M1911. If it were carried in a belt holster under a bulky jacket it could probably be concealed, but that's not nearly as convenient as the M1911, which can be concealed under an untucked t-shirt.
It's pretty easy to see why the military used the M1917 only when M1911s couldn't be made fast enough. Although it's a fine pistol for civilian use, and very accurate, it's way too unreliable for military use. No doubt other revolvers would have similar reliability problems.
11:05:52 AM 
|
