OK, here's the deal. I've owned two of the model 83s, one 6" and one 7-1/2", both in .454/.45 Colt. Great guns!
Now I'm wanting a smaller one to launch a 300 gr. LBT at just about 1,000 fps, accurately.

I'm interested in their little 4-1/4" model 97 in .45 Colt with fixed sights.
Anyone have one of these? And what do you think of them?

Only things I would worry about is if the boolit is too long for the cylinder and the Freedom has a very slow twist at 1 in 24". It is better suited to lighter, faster boolits.
The reason the Ruger shoots heavy boolits so good is the 1 in 16" twist.
Your .454 also has a 1 in 24" twist but you can step up the velocity to stabilize.
Once you pick what you want to do, match the gun to it. Pretty does not shoot by itself.
Never ignore twist rates.
The BFR has a proper twist of 1 in 20" for the .454 and would serve better with a .45 colt load although still a little slow.
I will get a rash over this but 99% of revolver shooters ignore twist and expect anything to shoot good at any velocity. The very worst bunch of gun shooters ever for sticking to mechanical fact.

Are Ruger Blackhawk twist rates pretty standard or do they differ depending on barrel length, caliber etc.? In my .44 mags and 45 Colts I tend to stick to heavier bullets. 240 to 250 in .44 and 250 to 270 in 45 Colt, with very good results.

quote:

Originally posted by bfrshooter:
Only things I would worry about is if the boolit is too long for the cylinder and the Freedom has a very slow twist at 1 in 24". It is better suited to lighter, faster boolits.
The reason the Ruger shoots heavy boolits so good is the 1 in 16" twist.
Your .454 also has a 1 in 24" twist but you can step up the velocity to stabilize.
Once you pick what you want to do, match the gun to it. Pretty does not shoot by itself.
Never ignore twist rates.
The BFR has a proper twist of 1 in 20" for the .454 and would serve better with a .45 colt load although still a little slow.
I will get a rash over this but 99% of revolver shooters ignore twist and expect anything to shoot good at any velocity. The very worst bunch of gun shooters ever for sticking to mechanical fact.

Exellent point!
And Though I am aware of this, one point I had not concidered this time. Bravo.

Hmmm, point very well taken. I may want to reconsider, and look at a Ruger, for so many reasons. Have also thought about sending my
4-5/8" Flattop Bisley, Ruger .44spl to Bowen and have him make all things right. It does provide the volocities I'm looking for; I'm just wanting perfection.

Thanks 'bfrshooter for your input; appreciated.

quote:

Posted 11 July 2010 03:57 Hide Post
Are Ruger Blackhawk twist rates pretty standard or do they differ depending on barrel length, caliber etc.? In my .44 mags and 45 Colts I tend to stick to heavier bullets. 240 to 250 in .44 and 250 to 270 in 45 Colt, with very good results.

Rates are the same for all lengths. The .44 works from 240 to 330 gr and the .45 works from 250 to 350 gr, in the Ruger's.
Now the Freedom .44 and .41 both have the right twist. Why they slow down the twist for the .45 and .475 makes no sense. It must be the short cylinders that can't take heavy boolits.
They would have the world by the tail if they stopped using the same frames and cylinders for every caliber, then they could use the correct twist rates.
But then they should change internals so all chambers can be loaded. A six shot that only is safe with Five or a five shot only safe with four is so backwards! S&W makes an eight shot.
They do not trust what they make, hammer block or transfer bar because both wear fast and can fail. They over complicated the insides.

Here we go again... I am biting my tongue!!!

No tongue biting allowed.
IM me and tell me what you think. I'm all ears.
Dennis

i think there a sweet little gun but make mine a 44 special. there strong enough for even some relitively stout loads with 300 grain bullets.

quote:

Posted 11 July 2010 20:52 Hide Post
Here we go again... I am biting my tongue!!!

As great a gun as it is, why can't you admit that they have failings. It could be better, much better for the price. Fit and finish does not correct design flaws.

quote:

Originally posted by DWright:
OK, here's the deal. I've owned two of the model 83s, one 6" and one 7-1/2", both in .454/.45 Colt. Great guns!
Now I'm wanting a smaller one to launch a 300 gr. LBT at just about 1,000 fps, accurately.

I'm interested in their little 4-1/4" model 97 in .45 Colt with fixed sights.
Anyone have one of these? And what do you think of them?

I shoot 45 Colt M97s: 21.92-grains H110; air dropped wheel weight 300-grain Saeco SWK-GC (#454); CCI 350; W-W brass. The bullet seats blandly and uneventfully - nothing special to do to maintain overall cartridge length satisfactory for 97s. Exterior ballistics from 4.25- and 5.5-inch barrels is more than you have in mind. Having these data, identifying a load for the bullet that meets your wants is a piece of cake. I have a much lower velocity load for this bullet, using TiteGroup, these loads marked on their noses with an "X." Meplat of Saeco's #454 compares favorably with a probable .400-inch from LBT.

Hope this helps.

I think the 97 is a neat little package -- at least it has a transfer bar system so the safety issue has been addressed. Granted, its short cylinder length won't allow the longest of bullets, but the way I see it, it wasn't meant for such use anyway.

A budget alternative would be a Vaquero. If you like the 97, by all means get one.

Whitworth, you are as right as rain. It is nothing personal, but our friend BFRShooter cannot for the life of himself admit that the FA was designed for shooting jacketed bullets, and the cylinder design reflects that. They are incredible pieces, and I am proud to own two of them. They are far more accurate than I am!

DWright, you have a pm...

quote:

Posted 11 July 2010 21:38 Hide Post
I think the 97 is a neat little package -- at least it has a transfer bar system so the safety issue has been addressed. Granted, its short cylinder length won't allow the longest of bullets, but the way I see it, it wasn't meant for such use anyway.

quote:

Whitworth, you are as right as rain. It is nothing personal, but our friend BFRShooter cannot for the life of himself admit that the FA was designed for shooting jacketed bullets, and the cylinder design reflects that. They are incredible pieces, and I am proud to own two of them. They are far more accurate than I am!

Why would anyone buy a jacketed bullet shooter only? I suppose if you can afford a Freedom you can also shoot factory loads!

I think if you will check on it, ALL firearms are designed to shoot factory ammunition. Most silhouette shooters, as you know probably better than I, handload, and they shoot jacketed bullets. You and I are different.

Finally, just because it was designed to shoot primarily jacketed doesn't mean you CAN'T shoot cast in it. As a case in point, something I have never mentnioned on here, but here goes...

The 654 was still in development in 1997 when a friend took some of my 411 475 SSK bullets, cast from an NEI mould, to the IHMSA match at Ft. Stockton. He showed them to the late Marty Smith, the then marketing director for FA. Subsequent to that, I was asked to cast 50 out of pure linotype and send them to FA. I was told not to tell anyone. I cast the bullets, sent them and didn't say a word...

That fall, I found myself in Idaho Falls chasing elk. I found a 5 X 5 fairly early, and had the time to travel to Freedom WY where the FA is made. I visited with Marty and Dave Baker, even toured the machine shop. I also saw the prototype 6-shot 654 Slhouette, still in development at the time. I was told I did not see the revolver...

When the 654 came out, I bought one. Turns out it has a 1 in 14" twist, and it shoots the SSK bullet lights out. Note, BFR, the SSK is a CAST bullet! If the revolver was designed to shoot jacketed, why in the HELL does it have that fast a twist? Nobody ele's does... I will tell you why. IT WAS DESIGNED TO SHOOT THAT SSK BULLET, AND BEING AS HEAVY AS THE SSK IS, IT TOOK THAT FAST A TWIST TO STABILIZE IT!!!

One footnote to this story: if you check the second Accurate Arms loading manual it lists 41 Magnum load data for the 290-grain SSK bullet. Guess who asked Accurate to do the load development. If it takes you more than one guess, you aren't trying.

And yes, I can afford to shoot factory; I CHOOSE to shoot cast that I pour myself.

I get so tired of this. Admit it: you know more than the rest of us combined, and you always will. You have done it all, and we haven't, therefore your opinion is the only one that counts.

Your turn...

quote:

Posted 11 July 2010 21:38 Hide Post
I think the 97 is a neat little package -- at least it has a transfer bar system so the safety issue has been addressed. Granted, its short cylinder length won't allow the longest of bullets, but the way I see it, it wasn't meant for such use anyway.

I think you should read the Freedom 97 manual. It states to NEVER have a loaded round under the hammer---Gee, I wonder why? John's failed and the hammer would push the firing pin in if you pushed on the hammer. The 83 and 97 do NOT say it is safe to have a round under the hammer. It is no better then a Colt after all the fancy internal parts and machining that add to the cost.

quote:

Posted 11 July 2010 21:38 Hide Post
I think the 97 is a neat little package -- at least it has a transfer bar system so the safety issue has been addressed. Granted, its short cylinder length won't allow the longest of bullets, but the way I see it, it wasn't meant for such use anyway.

A budget alternative would be a Vaquero. If you like the 97, by all means get one.

You better read the 97 manual where it is stated to NEVER have a loaded round under the hammer. John's failed and we could push the firing pin in by pushing on the hammer.
All of that fancy machining inside the gun that increases the cost means nothing and none of the Freedom instructions say it is safe to have all chambers loaded. Internals are no better then a Colt as far as safety.

OOPS double post because it did not show the first so I did it again.

Where did you go, BFR? Where is your omniscient response?

Cool down guys. It's all OK.
First off, thanks all for your comments, but I will chime in to clear up a couple things.
As I mentioned, I have had two FAs in the past. Both shot my handcast LBTs amazingly well. Jack rabbits at 200 yards were too easy. .454, and .45 Colt.

Second, I have it from a gunwriter, and good friend that did some of the first tests with the 97s that the reason FA recommends in their manual to rest the hammer on an empty chamber, is because they are smart enough to know that there will be some idiot out there that lets the hammer slip out from under his thumb while going to half cock, and back down to the frame, and could have a accidental discharge, by being clumsy, and they are simply avoiding a lawsuit.
Once it is set correctly, there is no chance for a discharge; period!
Unfortunately, I have a close friend that is very much, personally responsible for the warning label crap on all Ruger barrels.
It may happen for those that wear a helmit and rode the short bus to school.
FA is covering all the bases, just as warranties on most firearms are no longer honored if one uses handloads; any handloads. Not a bad idea for any maker that wants to remain in business.
BUT, they are in fact safe with all chambers loaded if you set the hammer on safe correctly, so this is not a worry for me, and I will carry all chambers loaded.

Personally I don't polute any of my revolvers with a jacketed bullet of any type. . . . ever.
I use my own LBT style handcast bullets exclusively. FAs shoot these just fine.

After pouring over all the info I can about the 97s, I am now leaning toward it in .44 spl. as it will do all I want to do with this revolver, and I won't be limited with bullet weight as in the .45 Colt in this revolver. (cylinder length).
I have a nice .430 LBT WFN mould that drops them right at 258 grs. that should be the berries in the spl.

Any thoughts here guys?

I think your LBT will be the answer to anything you wish to do in your .44 Spl. Let us know!

great choise. A couple of my buddys have them and they shoot real well. As to FA guns not working with cast thats just hogwash. My 454 and 475 will both shoot one hole groups at 25 yards with cast loads they like and so will the 44 specials my buddys have. Sorry brfshooter but if i rated rugers buy a few bad ones i had i wouldnt own another either and the one and only bfr i bought was a big disapointment. My FA guns are rock solid guns and great shooters and have digested many thouands of trouble free rounds. Only complaint i have with them is there a bit heavy but then a bfr is bigger yet. You can also claim that for the money they shouldnt be flawed but ive had 2000 dollar customs from the best smiths out there that broke or needed to be sent back for a small flaw to be fixed. One bad apple dont.......

The Freedom can be a better gun at a lot less price. I found the trigger and hammer are perfect but the company wants almost $100 for a trigger job. It took me 15 minutes to wind a new trigger spring to bring one to 1-1/2# and that is all the gun needs---WOW $100 worth??? Freedom giggles with the pile of replacement springs.
The safety position is no different then the Colt and if the gun is dropped and the hammer hits something hard and shears the little lug or trigger, it will fire.
Internals are so complicated, parts can wear and fail. I would prefer a Ruger transfer bar any day. The machining on the internals is expensive and not fail proof.
I don't know who makes their barrels but many I have slugged have been over size and out of round. Some have been GROSS! How about a .357 barrel at .359 one way and .3599 across another groove, with .358 throats?
You put too much into a Freedom because it looks pretty and feels tight. It costs twice what it is worth. A pig with lipstick is still a pig.
All of you know how Whitworth, Bioman and I make revolvers shoot and no matter how Withworth becomes diplomatic to keep everyone happy, I will never waste my money on a Freedom. There is not one single thing about them that makes them shoot better then any other revolver. I can make them look sick with a S&W.
I laugh at the guy that says if you let your thumb slip off the hammer, the gun can fire. Try it with the simple Ruger system. It will NOT fire unless the trigger is pulled back. There is a reason Freedom says not to have a loaded round under the firing pin and other then Colt single actions or clones, no other maker will say that.
Ask me if I want Freedom? Sure, if I get it free. I will hang it on the wall and show everyone the most beautiful single action made but priced twice what it is worth.
Now don't get me wrong, many Freedom guns are tack drivers but I just don't figure my chances of getting one are great enough to invest that much money. I could buy and sell a lot of Ruger's and be money ahead. I don't rate the Freedom accuracy chances any better then Ruger.

I'm not being diplomatic in the least. I just don't like painting with broad brush strokes. I think FAs are over-priced and have stated that all along. I think for the money they should be perfect. That said, they are a pretty fine firearm out of the box and they lend themselves well to customizing. Every single manufacturer produces a turd every now and again. When you get a Freedom that is a lemon, it is a real shame as you are paying a true premium for a gun that is supposed to be the best. Just too pricey for me.

Everytime I read bfrshooter going off on FAs, I just start thinking

quote:

Posted 13 July 2010 01:16 Hide Post
Everytime I read bfrshooter going off on FAs, I just start thinking pissers

I have wasted just too many hours on them and had too many fights with Baker to spend my money on a pig in a poke. I would need to inspect and shoot one before buying it. A good one is good, but that is the end of it.

LOL, well, not much a guy can reply with that would sound diplomatic, for someone that bent about a gun maker really.
But I will say that this. I am not by any means news to the handgun game, and have been shooting them quite extensively for the past 47 years. The one's I have owned include maybe, 20-25 S&Ws, 30 or so Rugers SAs, 10 Ruger DAs, a dozen Colt 1911s, a dozen Colt revolvers,, 4 or 5 Contenders, a couple of Kimbers, 2 Sigs, 2 Kahrs, and 2 FAs. (I'm sure there are many that I have forgotten). Many I still own.
I will say there have only been a couple of these that would hold a candle to the precision and accuracy that the 2 FAs delivered. Period!
So I know that they are expensive, as quality in anything does cost.
I have had the most Rugers SAs, and every one of them needed a LOT of work to bring them up to my expectations. Luckily I can do most all the work myself, of it would have cost me a fortune. As for an action job from FA costing $100, they charge $85. I checked, and I have had one smith in my area do an action job on one of my DA Rugers. He charged $85, and I had to redo the work myself it came out so bad.
So my experience with FA has been nothing except amazing.
We get customers in our gun shop every day that shop nothing except price points. Then they come back in and wonder why the $200 7 mag won't perform as well as they expected.
My own experience is not all that limited, and I have come to know that quality does cost, and sometimes, a LOT!
I am willing to pay a lot if I can get a little better gun.
Anyone that claims the tolerences with a FA is no better then a Ruger is smokin crack.
I have had only one Ruger that had the correct sized cylinder mouths. Most I have had to ream myself, as they varied as much as .003 from one mouth to the next. Several I have had to just sell, as the mouths were way oversized for any accuracy at all. I have replaced most all the cylinder bolts to tighten them up correctly, and without smoothing up all the internal parts, they were as rough as a rock road.
If I charged for my time in cleaning them up, I would have spent more then what a new FA is out of the box easily.
I thank you for your comments BFR, but my 47 years of shooting experience; many of which included about 30,000 rnds a year with a handgun.
I bring up this topic, only as I have never owned a .44 spl.

quote:

LOL, well, not much a guy can reply with that would sound diplomatic, for someone that bent about a gun maker really.
But I will say that this. I am not by any means news to the handgun game, and have been shooting them quite extensively for the past 47 years. The one's I have owned include maybe, 20-25 S&Ws, 30 or so Rugers SAs, 10 Ruger DAs, a dozen Colt 1911s, a dozen Colt revolvers,, 4 or 5 Contenders, a couple of Kimbers, 2 Sigs, 2 Kahrs, and 2 FAs. (I'm sure there are many that I have forgotten). Many I still own.
I will say there have only been a couple of these that would hold a candle to the precision and accuracy that the 2 FAs delivered. Period!
So I know that they are expensive, as quality in anything does cost.
I have had the most Rugers SAs, and every one of them needed a LOT of work to bring them up to my expectations. Luckily I can do most all the work myself, of it would have cost me a fortune. As for an action job from FA costing $100, they charge $85. I checked, and I have had one smith in my area do an action job on one of my DA Rugers. He charged $85, and I had to redo the work myself it came out so bad.
So my experience with FA has been nothing except amazing.
We get customers in our gun shop every day that shop nothing except price points. Then they come back in and wonder why the $200 7 mag won't perform as well as they expected.
My own experience is not all that limited, and I have come to know that quality does cost, and sometimes, a LOT!
I am willing to pay a lot if I can get a little better gun.
Anyone that claims the tolerences with a FA is no better then a Ruger is smokin crack.
I have had only one Ruger that had the correct sized cylinder mouths. Most I have had to ream myself, as they varied as much as .003 from one mouth to the next. Several I have had to just sell, as the mouths were way oversized for any accuracy at all. I have replaced most all the cylinder bolts to tighten them up correctly, and without smoothing up all the internal parts, they were as rough as a rock road.
If I charged for my time in cleaning them up, I would have spent more then what a new FA is out of the box easily.
I thank you for your comments BFR, but my 47 years of shooting experience; many of which included about 30,000 rnds a year with a handgun.
I bring up this topic, only as I have never owned a .44 spl.

HEY BFR: ARE YOU LISTENING?? ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU SOUND LIKE ONE VOICE CRYING IN THE WILDERNESS!

DWright,

I think you are on the right track. I picked up a FA97 in a 44spl here a few months back and it is without a doubt the finest revolver I have ever shot or handled. It locks up extremely tight and the fit and finish is superior to any revolver I've owned. I have shot mainly 250 gr. Keith style and accuracy is great. These are just my experiences and opinions but I believe I have found the epitome of a hunting packing revolver in my mind.


ddj

The more money you spend on a gun and the prettier is is, the more you will defend it.
Bottom line is you can buy a new Ruger and it can be a tack driver with anything you stick in it or it is a pig that you need to sell off.
Freedom is still in this spot, it can be a tack driver or one you need to sell off. I have seen more out of spec dimensions on Freedoms then I have on Rugers and not a single out of spec dimension on BFR's.
What makes Freedom owners so testy? Is it the cost? It is an over priced gun made to put piles of money in the companies hands.
ANY gun maker can produce the same finish for pennies and make a cylinder so tight it does not wiggle, but is that a good thing?
I can take a 200 year old rusty gun and polish it to perfection, blue it so it gleams but does that make it shoot better?
Sorry but I would not buy a Freedom unless I could put it through it's paces and see what it can do. I would buy a BFR sight unseen.
I am also sorry about the cost of the trigger job. I see it is ONLY $85 for a gun that costs an arm and a leg that should never come out of the factory with less then a perfect trigger. What is wrong with you guys, 15 minutes work to make a good trigger is NOT worth $85. You buy a sub standard trigger and have to pay more to get it right---you are out of your mind. I look at a Freedom catalog and see one huge money sucking machine.

BFR, when you are finally man enough to admit that somewhere back down the line you got from FA what you consider to be a bad deal (probably in your IHMSA days), you will start to regain some credibility. Until that time you are nothing but a bitter old man that spouts his drivel: nothing you can back up, just opinion that is repeatedly refuted by the majority of those who frequent this website.

When are you going to come clean and tell us what your real axe to grind is with Freedom?

I have an opinion, but I can't prove it, so it remains just an opinion. I think you decided you had a better design for the FA and when you tried to tell Bob Baker and company, they blew you off. Since then you have made it your life's mission to bombast them at every chance.

A shame... you have a lot to offer us. But your credibility shrinks to nothing when you start your anti-FA rant... I suspect even you know they are far better than you talk them to be.

quote:

Originally posted by trouthunterdj:
DWright,

I think you are on the right track. I picked up a FA97 in a 44spl here a few months back and it is without a doubt the finest revolver I have ever shot or handled. It locks up extremely tight and the fit and finish is superior to any revolver I've owned. I have shot mainly 250 gr. Keith style and accuracy is great. These are just my experiences and opinions but I believe I have found the epitome of a hunting packing revolver in my mind.


ddj

Ya, I'm thinking the same thing. I have yet to see a better built revolver, and the smaller size of the 97 seems like it would be the absolute berries. I'm with you here.

Boy guys, from what I have read so far from ol' bfr, I would have to step out a little here and say I do not believe the man has much real world experience with revolvers. I have handled but about 4 of the BFR revolvers, and I honestly
have to say that they have been the worst put together guns I have ever seen, period. They were like a Ruger that did not go through the funishing process at all. Extremely rough, and a loose piece of crap all around. Now I have heard that the quality has picked up a bit in the last few years, but it would have to be a LOT for me to even think about buying one.
And as far as a product made 'for putting money in a companies hands', THAT is what ALL companies should strive to do if they are to remain in business for any length of time.
BFR, to be honest, if you want to maintain any dignity at all, I would recommend you remain quite from here on out regarding this subject, as you are sounding more and more like an idiot.
Cheers!

Well I must say that my FA 475 Is a very well made revolver. I have never handled any revolvers that are as well made as the FA IMHO.

A friend of mine has a FA 97 in 45 Colt.

I really like the size of it, especially for a woods "carry" single action.

Sadly, I feel better "woods carrying" a DA S&W 44 Mag revolver because they are faster to reload...

I think you will be very happy with the FA 97 in 44 Special. For funning around, loads with a 240/250 Keith over 7.5 to 8.5gr of Unique will do fine.

For serious use the Keith bullet over 17 to 18gr of 2400 will penetrate through the skull of ANY animal in North America.

Here is a little Freedom Arms Trivia.

Several years ago the NRA tested the FA 22LR for one of their "Dope Bag" reports.

The NRA discovered, and stated that the "FA 22 LR was the MOST accurate 22 LR handgun they had EVER tested."

This included ALL of the USA and European TARGET handguns including the Hammerelli [sp?] single shot Free Pistol, match guns...

Think about it... A single action revolver, with a revolving cylinder, with 6 different chambers, with its long lock time, out shoots a Hammerelli Free Pistol...

quote:

I'm interested in their little 4-1/4" model 97 in .45 Colt with fixed sights.
Anyone have one of these? And what do you think of them?

Damn, I did not post because I could not answer the original question. Silly me! Life is too short to have an ugly gun, and the BFR is just that. My FA in 475Linebaugh on the other hand is just beautiful and shoots way better than I can. Understand that I am not bouncing beer cans at 200 yards (with open sights) as some on this forum say that they can do. Rugers are handsome guns too, especially in SS and they do shoot well, just not as well as my FA. Is it expensive? Yes? Is it worth it? Well, I bought it, and that should answer the question.
Peter.

quote:

Originally posted by DWright:

quote:

Originally posted by trouthunterdj:
DWright,

I think you are on the right track. I picked up a FA97 in a 44spl here a few months back and it is without a doubt the finest revolver I have ever shot or handled. It locks up extremely tight and the fit and finish is superior to any revolver I've owned. I have shot mainly 250 gr. Keith style and accuracy is great. These are just my experiences and opinions but I believe I have found the epitome of a hunting packing revolver in my mind.


ddj

Ya, I'm thinking the same thing. I have yet to see a better built revolver, and the smaller size of the 97 seems like it would be the absolute berries. I'm with you here.

Boy guys, from what I have read so far from ol' bfr, I would have to step out a little here and say I do not believe the man has much real world experience with revolvers. I have handled but about 4 of the BFR revolvers, and I honestly
have to say that they have been the worst put together guns I have ever seen, period. They were like a Ruger that did not go through the funishing process at all. Extremely rough, and a loose piece of crap all around. Now I have heard that the quality has picked up a bit in the last few years, but it would have to be a LOT for me to even think about buying one.
And as far as a product made 'for putting money in a companies hands', THAT is what ALL companies should strive to do if they are to remain in business for any length of time.
BFR, to be honest, if you want to maintain any dignity at all, I would recommend you remain quite from here on out regarding this subject, as you are sounding more and more like an idiot.
Cheers!

Okay guys, chill out. I know bfrshooter personally, and I can say with certainty that he has a boatload more experience with revolvers than any two or three guys on this site, myself included. He's a bit long in tooth and cantankerous, but he is legit. Yes, he had a couple of bad experiences with FA so he has trouble wrapping his head around a $2,000 + revolver that requires a trigger job -- I too have some issues with that. That said, I have shot quite a few that have shot well, and a couple that haven't -- what I would expect from any manufactuer. The fit and finish has no equals -- we have already established this. BFR doesn't claim to build pretty guns, but what they do sell is a revolver built like a tank, that is reliable and most importantly, accurate. That they use Badger barrels doesn't hurt. I personally think the grip frame of the FA is tops as well, bfrshooter, with his bow-knotted knuckles doesn't like Bisley-style grips. If you want a good hunting revolver, no need to look further than Magnum Research -- this is the handgun hunting forum, is it not??

I might add that this coming weekend we will be playing with an FA83 in .454 Casull -- bfrshooter can't wait!

Again, I think they are fine revolvers and have had this argument with him in person. We are all entitled to our opinions.

Personally, I can rationalize buying an FA used, but if I plan on spending in an exess of $2K, I will go custom and even though it will be based on a Ruger (how is this a bad thing?), the fit and finish will be top rate and well, I know it'll shoot as well, and that my friends is more important to me anyhow.

So, boys, why don't we all agree to disagree.

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:

quote:

I'm interested in their little 4-1/4" model 97 in .45 Colt with fixed sights.
Anyone have one of these? And what do you think of them?

Damn, I did not post because I could not answer the original question. Silly me! Life is too short to have an ugly gun, and the BFR is just that. My FA in 475Linebaugh on the other hand is just beautiful and shoots way better than I can. Understand that I am not bouncing beer cans at 200 yards (with open sights) as some on this forum say that they can do. Rugers are handsome guns too, especially in SS and they do shoot well, just not as well as my FA. Is it expensive? Yes? Is it worth it? Well, I bought it, and that should answer the question.
Peter.

Dang, Peter, they don't all look that different from one another in ugly stainless steel......noiw, if Freedom really wanted to build a beautiful revolver, they'd make one in blue.......

quote:

Originally posted by GS: PS
As for Whitworth's comment: Even Hamilton Bowen said that a "Ruger is still a Ruger."
And, that no matter what he did, it wasn't going to be the quality of an FA.

Similar comments from Linebaugh. Best of both worlds is to have a custom FA. In other words get the FA, and have it tuned by JRH, or someone that knows and will work on FA revolvers.
Fewer then you think.

And why is that a bad thing? The Rugers are proven strong and they look good, so why are they not a good -- no, great foundation for a custom? At least you won't get stuck wth stainless unless you really want it.......

I have no axe to grind with Freedom except cost.
I still think they are the most beautiful revolvers made and not a single one should leave the factory any less then perfect.
Barrels have been the most problem. Had a friends new one here in .357 and could not get it to shoot anything. We tried every bullet made, he spent a pile on all of them. The we cleaned the gun good and I slugged the bore and throats to fit cast boolits to it. Throats were good but the bore was .358" one way and .359" the other. Cast would not work.
He sent it back and the first thing I did was clean it and slug the new barrel. It was worse at .3585" one way and .3599" across the other grooves. It cost him $117 to ship it back the first time.
He called Baker again and we were accused of shooting lead, then jacketed which bent the barrel out of round. After heated arguments, Baker finally agreed to pay the shipping to return it again.
I forgot to mention, my friend wanted a longer barrel when changed and Baker charged him for it.
The third barrel is perfect at a round .357" yet it can't be made to shoot. Over 200 loads and every bullet was tried. Then every cast was tried too.
He also has a .475 and it shoots great and I would buy it from him in an instant but I want no part of the .357.
The heated phone arguments and nasty E mails turned me off to Mr Baker.
I took the best pattern shooting loads and did a series of individual chamber tests, shooting 5 through each from a rest with a scope.
This is what we got, time and time again.

I find myself agreeing with you Whitworth, to agree to disagree peacefully. OK, all said, I do believe FA to be the finest factory revolver made, but now will add a little to BFRs argument against FA.
Now, I am looking for a well made revolver in a small package, and I think FA meets my needs here.
OK, now that said, I will give BFR his due. With one of the FAs I had, I was hunting varmints in the eastern part of the state, bout 300 miles from home. While popping away at a grey diggers the revolver suddenly locked up tight. Would not cycle! Inspection proved a small pine needle had somehow lodged itself between the recoil plate and the cylinder. The worst part was that I had forgotten to bring my screwdriver kit. That left me dead in the water. I have to admit that I was madder than hell, and for a long while angry that a revolver made for use against an angry Bear or such, was put out of commission so easily. I knew that anyone of my Rugers would have not even slowed down with a hunk of brush lodged in the cylinder. I now bring tools to take all my guns apart if need be, but it took a long while to get over that.
And to further agreee, I myself had a conversation with Baker of FA, and also found him to be quite self obsorbed. But I want a revolver, not a friendship with Baker. Also, if he did not feel so strongly about his 'babies', then his guns would also be the typical gun that needed a lot more then an action job, so, that may not be a bad thing for us shooters.
I've also found that folks that do have a fair amount of experience with firearms tend to form some pretty strong opinions about them one way or the other. Myself included. I know by reading several of the posts that 'Whitworth' has a LOT of handgun experience, and respect his comments regards revolvers, as well as Mr. BFR, as coming from such.
BFR, can you give us some actual details of just what you have gone thru with the FAs?
I would also like to know if in fact the quality of the BFR revolvers has come up in the last few years. A friend of mine is considering buying one of their .475s. as I mentioned earlier, the one I handled years ago, was pretty dismal. Thanks.