The hosting program always makes the pictures blurry >:D The Pearce finger-grooves take away from the luster too but function trumps total eye appeal.
Anyway... extremely happy with the fit and finish on these panels. Nice little Mom and Pop shop out of Virginia and at 1/2:1/3 the cost of other places I have seen them advertised. The nice lady even phoned me up before shipping and we talked for a while. If you are looking for these, Burl or another exotic they can do them!
(http://sphotos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/243_552151198156250_697766753_n.jpg)
(http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/1011876_552151131489590_1713681040_n.jpg)
(http://sphotos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/1001633_552151628156207_626690353_n.jpg)
Try these
(http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff100/Intercooler2/20130621_162442_zpse8741208.jpg) (http://s236.photobucket.com/user/Intercooler2/media/20130621_162442_zpse8741208.jpg.html)
(http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff100/Intercooler2/20130621_162230_LLS_zps70383182.jpg) (http://s236.photobucket.com/user/Intercooler2/media/20130621_162230_LLS_zps70383182.jpg.html)
(http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff100/Intercooler2/20130621_161954_LLS_zps687813df.jpg) (http://s236.photobucket.com/user/Intercooler2/media/20130621_161954_LLS_zps687813df.jpg.html)
They look nice congrats, I wish I could have kept my DW Razorback they are very well made 1911's.
I wanted some exotic wood based off a picture I saw long ago but couldn't find it. I think these are them though!
That's a very nice DW RazorBack! 8)
Still on the fence whether to put a full-length guide rod or flat bottom firing pin block.
Very nice lookin wood . The finger grooves not so much. :D
Sean
Very nice
Lovin' those Slabs
Love the wood, but do agree the finger grooves throw off what could be a much better look. One of my favorite attributes held by the RZ-10 is the normally extra-clean overall look. The finger grooves definitely detract from that look. But, like you said, function trumps eye appeal. Then again, in this specific case I'm not so sure. Guess it all boils down to the individual weighing out the pros and cons to their own liking. :-\
The Razorback doesn't have any checkering on the front side of the grip. The finger grooves make it like a glove but they are an ugly black color. It's a 9 instead of 10 with them on :D
I would imagine the rubber is pretty grippy but not so pretty. I can see the purpose they serve though and like you mentioned there isn't any checkering on the frontstrap. You would think DW would have checkered the frontstrap on the 10's being they do have more recoil than a 9 or 45.
You know I had plans for the Pearce piece before even buying the DW so smooth was perfect. If I weren't using it I think I would have sent mine for checkering. Maybe the full-length guide rod would make it a little more front heavy where you could get a better feel shooting the hot stuff.
Quote from: Intercooler on June 22 2013 07:34:25 AM MDT
You know I had plans for the Pearce piece before even buying the DW so smooth was perfect. If I weren't using it I think I would have sent mine for checkering. Maybe the full-length guide rod would make it a little more front heavy where you could get a better feel shooting the hot stuff.
Both of my 1911's just have a GI setup but I've noticed Wilson and Fusion and several other manufactures of 10's have the full length guide rods on their 10's.
I really have no experience with them other than a Colt DE I used to have that had one. I really didn't care for the take down method myself but they maybe do have some advantage.
I'm not sure though other than adding weight.
http://pattoncustomshop.com/?page_id=82
Hate to say it, but the more I look back at the black finger groove addition to that RZ-10, the more I think my G20 has pretty good aesthetics. :o
Aesthetics is a branch of philosophy dealing with the nature of art, beauty, and taste, with the creation and appreciation of beauty.
and Glock in the same paragraph :)) :P
Maybe part of what you meant to post is missing?
Quote from: REDLINE on June 23 2013 07:51:21 PM MDT
Maybe part of what you meant to post is missing?
:)) You know what they say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. ;D
That's the truth.
I'm going to give it another whirl without the grip on and see.
(http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff100/Intercooler2/20130625_170112_zps8b5ce203.jpg) (http://s236.photobucket.com/user/Intercooler2/media/20130625_170112_zps8b5ce203.jpg.html)
(http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff100/Intercooler2/20130625_170120_zps36ce8482.jpg) (http://s236.photobucket.com/user/Intercooler2/media/20130625_170120_zps36ce8482.jpg.html)
All I can say is WOW! That is one good looking piece w/o the grip. 8)
Ah...Beautiful grips are the one lament I have with a double stack 1911. Grip options are expensive and limited.
IMHO it now looks much better w/o the finger grooves, I like the salted maple looks, but went with horn instead. I think the word salted brought back memories of Browning rifles with salt cured wood and rusted rifles. :o
BTRZ001
(http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x245/oldnavy6393/DSC_0083.jpg) (http://s185.photobucket.com/user/oldnavy6393/media/DSC_0083.jpg.html)
Very nice!
Those horn grips really do look nice. 8)
Sarge's Grips does great work. As for salted maple I think they would really pop on a blued gun, but there isn't enough contrast or something with the SS & light color grips IMHO. But then it's back to the old saying "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and if owner is happy then that is all that counts in my book.
Speaking of beautiful DW's;
(http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x245/oldnavy6393/44-05.jpg) (http://s185.photobucket.com/user/oldnavy6393/media/44-05.jpg.html)
Love the clean look of DWs across their lineup. Those 2 are certainly no exception!
And the internals are very simple and clean, unlike S&W and few others.
Here is side by side size comparison with that BTRZ10mm of mine. The revolvers are built like tanks and can handle loads that would self destruct a S&W N frame and due to size and weight it's like shooting a 38 special in a N frame S&W revolver.
(http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x245/oldnavy6393/44-08.jpg) (http://s185.photobucket.com/user/oldnavy6393/media/44-08.jpg.html)
I didn't realize the DW revolvers were that overbuilt. Kind of like the conversions Linebaugh does to Ruger revolvers.
What DW calls a small frame is heavier built then S&N N frame, large frame guns like the 44 mag were like X frame guns . Here is a DW M-22 22lr & M-15 357 mag side by side.
Most of the internal parts are interchangeable, and only real difference is inner barrel size and size of holes bored in cylinder.
(http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x245/oldnavy6393/SANY0041.jpg) (http://s185.photobucket.com/user/oldnavy6393/media/SANY0041.jpg.html)
To make sure I'm clear, you're saying;
DW 44 MAG guns (also chambered for 445 Super Mag) are closer to the size of S&W X-frame (460 and 500 S&W) platforms than S&W N-frame (44 Mag...) platforms.
Is that right?
Yes, but I've never measured an X Frame I'm just going by what owners of both say. It would have been my guess that Large frame DW would be in between the two, but closer to X frame. I had a S&W 500 owner tell me the cylinder walls looked thicker on my DW, but he thought the top strap on his 500 was thicker. What is amazing is these guns were designed in the early '70's and it's taken S&W 30 years to catch up.
That's impressive. It makes me wonder how the cylinders of a few different makes compare.
I would like to see side by side pictures of the guns and cylinders from:
Freedom Arms 454 Casull (good for an average of 65,000 PSI),
Dan Wesson 445 Super Mag (good for an average of ~60,000 PSI, maybe more),
Linebaugh Ruger Bisley Super Blackhawk conversion 475 Linebaugh (good for an average of 50,000 PSI),
and S&W X-frame 460 S&W Mag (good for an average of 65,000 PSI).
Several years ago the guys on the DW Forum compared the S&W N frame (before X frame), the big Ruger and large frame of DW revolver. Those guys involved were owners of DW's, the S&W's and Ruger's. They all had the tools to do the measuring and most were surprised at the difference, the DW was winner hands down in several key area's. N frame was not even close runner up, the cylinder walls were the big difference area for N frame. The distance between cylinder holes was almost half of DW and IIRC about 50% thinner from those cylinder holes to outside walls. It was also considerably thicker walled then the Ruger, the Ruger was about mid-way between the two best I remember of this bout between members in all measurements taken.
The only place the S&W won a measurement so to speak was the top strap, it was either wider or thicker then the DW, but don't remember about Ruger. The cylinder and rear of frame where all the energy hits hardest is far more important then top strap, but that's not to say top strap not important. Best I remember there were a few guys that got rid of their N frame guns, but this was 5 to 8 years ago and I'm lucky to remember what I had for lunch when wife gets home about 6:00pm and ask me what I had for lunch.
Interesting. Do S&W n-Frames use a six shot cylinder and DW revolvers a five shot cylinder? If so, that alone makes a huge difference. I know both Freedom Arms revolvers and Linebaugh conversions both use five shot cylinders.
All DW's ever made were 6 shot, in the comparison the S&W's were 6 shot as were Ruger's. Look again at the DW 5" 1911 Razorback of mine and the DW 744 beside it, that's not any trick of photography, the gun is huge even with 2.5" barrel installed. You can tell from photo if you look close that the internals drop out from the bottom on the large frame guns which makes frames stronger and I think was also done on the Ruger revolvers. I need to look up the 300 gr loads I shoot in the 744 and that I carry with 4" barrel installed if going into feral hog area on foot. The recoil on that load is about like a 357 in an N frame Smith.
Stupid question. Is there a 10mm revolver option for DW? I don't see any offerings now for revolvers from CZ.
No such thing as stupid question if you ask it honestly because don't know the answer.
No 10mm/40 or 38 Super option. I've bugged Keith about it for several years now, but he says for their market share it would not be worth time and money to redesign and build as they would never sell enough of them to break even. Also the 10mm due to OAL would probably not work in small frame gun because cylinder might not be long enough and at present time no large frame revolver in the works and as for 38 Super it's about numbers to sell.
Also they are not S&W size where they can build several model and types at same time, they have to rotate their building of guns. Keith told me when the next run of revolvers were, but I don't remember if it was late this year or some time next year because I'm not real interested in a new revolver as yet. My next DW will be a light weight Commander style in 38 Super to replace a Colt LWC 38 Super I currently carry.