S&W Govenor
Anybody heard about or seen this new release from S&W that is like a Judge? I see one on the Judge auction site. Thanks.
0
-
Its Smiths version of the "Judge" and it takes .45ACP too.
I'd be highly surprised if this wasn't a better version of the concept than Taurus' Judge, though I still think a .45/.410 shotgun pistol looks a lot better on paper than it performs in reality.
My suggestion is that if you want a defensive pistol, to buy one, and if you want a shotgun, to buy one of those. This gun that purports to do both ends up doing neither thing all that well.0 -
mackcrane,
I happened to be watching the Outdoor Channel last night, with the Midway's wednesday night at the range shows. They had a segment/show, where Shooting USA went to the SHOT show in Vegas. They were at the range out there, and did try one of these there. They demo-ed it with the 45 ACP, and 410 rounds. It holds six rounds, and Jerry Mickulak dumped all six rounds on the target in 1.5 seconds, at what percieved to be around 10 yards. It was flawless. I am sure it is a much better example than the Taurus.
I do also somewhat agree with Beantown, as to the effectiveness of a one gun, do all defense gun. This one, even though reliable, might not be what everyone is looking for.
Best0 -
I had one of the original Taurus Judges years ago. I don't doubt in the least the the S & W version would be more reliable and of better workmanship.
The old story of putting lipstick on a pig though still holds true, no mater if S & W or Taurus is making the pig.
The normal bore diameter for .410 full choked shotguns is in the neighborhood of .390, when your shooting a .410 shell out of a short barreled revolver with .452+? bore diameter, the pattern isn't going to be viable at anything past 5 yards. This is from my own personal experience with both factory and reloaded shells in my Taurus. The lightly rifled barrel in the Taurus also wouldn't stabilize my .45 Colt reloads unless they were very lightly loaded. I wouldn't expect the S & W to be any more effective then the Taurus accuracy wise, because of the above factors.0 -
wouldn't stabilize my .45 Colt reloads unless they were very lightly loaded. I wouldn't expect the S & W to be any more effective then the Taurus accuracy wise, because of the above factors.
I had a old 7mm mauser many years ago that the crown was worn egg shaped from steel military cleaning rods. At about 25 yards the bullet was
starting to keyhole. When you hit a deer with that slug it went down instantly, kinda like hitting them between the eyes with a sledge hammer so maybe if that 45 slug wasn't quite stabalized it would be a good thing.
I own a judge and a governor, for the life of me I fail to understand the arm-chair generals saying these two weapons are not accurate, the judge out to 20 feet with #6 shot is a good grouse gun
plus it's darn effective on 4 legged wood-rats[:)], the governor is one of the few revolvers I've owned that shot where you pointed it.
I've shot on on many military rifle and pistol teams in my day, the governor and judge were made to deliver a heavy slug quickly at close range, not tight groups on paper targets.0 -
quote:I had a old 7mm mauser many years ago that the crown was worn egg shaped from steel military cleaning rods. At about 25 yards the bullet was starting to keyhole. When you hit a deer with that slug it went down instantly, kinda like hitting them between the eyes with a sledge hammer so maybe if that 45 slug wasn't quite stabalized it would be a good thing.
Apples. . .oranges. Just because your 2400 ft-lb Mauser "could" drop a nearby deer instantly with a tumbling bullet doesn't mean that
a. Unstabilized bullets are a good choice for hunting, or
b. That you can generalize your experiences hunting a few deer with a rifle to self defense against people with what amounts to a 19th century black powder pistol round.
You don't think that same deer would have gone down with a stabilized bullet?
If tumbling/unstabilized bullets are so awesome, then how come in the 150+ year history of cartridge firearms, nobody uses them?
Answer, of course, is that any possible minor advantage in increased lethality at extremely close range is more than outweighed by lack of accuracy and rapid loss of power at intermediate and longer ranges.
quote:I own a judge and a governor, for the life of me I fail to understand the arm-chair generals saying these two weapons are not accurate,
Its because in our experience, the guns exhibit absolutely abysmal accuracy. Have you actually tried to group your gun on paper? What kind of group sizes did you get?
I can't comment on the Smith (never having seen nor conducted any accuracy testing) but everything I've seen in writing and with my own eyes shows that with normal .45LC ammo, the Taurus judge is simply not accurate by any standard typically assigned to modern handguns.
We're talking accuracy so poor the gun barely keeps its shots in the "kill zone" of a standard human silhouette target at 25 yards. (IE group sizes in some cases in excess of 7 inches). The gun groups so badly, that most of the published reviews studiously avoid giving specific group sizes!
Now arguably, you don't "need" pinpoint accuracy in a purely defensive handgun, but not needing it is a bit different than not having it! I don't "need" my car to go 95 miles per hour, but I still won't buy one that isn't capable of doing so. That's because, a. you never know what you might have to do in an emergency, and b. because the ability to go 95mph is still a valid marker of design and build quality. If the car can't go 95mph without falling apart or conking out, can I really trust it at 70mph?
Likewise, personally, I will not tolerate 7 inch group sizes from any full sized "serious" handgun. Why should I when every other full sized revolver I own will put them inside of 3 inches at that distance (and most inside of 2 inches)? Again, even if I don't "need" 2 inch group sizes in a defensive gun, I'd still like the ABILITY to pull of a precise shot at 25 yards (or more) if I want to.
Put more objectively, the Taurus Judge simply doesn't meet the bare-minimum accuracy standard requirements typically assigned to modern military and police handguns (sub 4-5" groups at 25 yards).
quote:the judge out to 20 feet with #6 shot is a good grouse gun
Sure, I suppose if a grouse landed at your feet and you shot it with this gun it would die, but I wasn't aware that grouse hunting (or any other kind) was typically performed at distances under 20 feet.
quote:I've shot on on many military rifle and pistol teams in my day, the governor and judge were made to deliver a heavy slug quickly at close range, not tight groups on paper targets.
This non-sequitur aside, you sure as heck didn't shoot on any military pistol team with a Taurus Judge!
In my opinion, the Taurus judge was designed mainly as a cynical marketing exercise capitalizing on the ignorance of a certain segment of the gun market. Non-savvy laypersons equate "shotgun" to "stopping power" and conclude that any handgun that can spray a few pellets is the best thing since sliced breat.
The fact is, that even full sized .410 shotguns lack enough "juice" to hunt anything larger than a small bird. Why on earth would you start with something too weak to hunt a duck with, gimp it by chopping down the barrel to pistol length, then rely on it to defend your life against an angry armed 200 lb male human attacker?
If you want to deliver a heavy slug quickly at close range, then any number of conventional .45LC (or .45ACP, .or 44 special, or .357) revolvers will do it better than the Judge, yielding better accuracy and in a more manageable overall package.
Put differently, apart from the poor balance, bulk, questionable Taurus build quality, and substandard accuracy, what does a "Judge" get you that you can't get from an ordinary double-action .44 or .45 revolver? Any of those can accept pistol shotshells ("snakeshot"), which are adequate to deal with snakes at a few yards range.0 -
quote:Originally posted by 1935Lee
[br
I own a judge and a governor, for the life of me I fail to understand the arm-chair generals saying these two weapons are not accurate, the judge out to 20 feet with #6 shot is a good grouse gun
From experiences with my Judge and various factory .410 shells and handloads, I don't agree with you at all. Couldn't get it to pattern at anything over 15 feet. The rifled barrel and .452 bore diameter required by the .45 LC bullet, destroys the accuracy requirements needed for the .410 shot shell.
The only way I could see making the Judge at least halfway function with .410 shells is if Taurus sold them with a screw on muzzle choke like the old Thompson Contender single shot. Because of liability reasons I don't see Taurus doing that.0 -
quote:Originally posted by rufe-snow
The only way I could see making the Judge at least halfway function with .410 shells is if Taurus sold them with a screw on muzzle choke like the old Thompson Contender single shot. Because of liability reasons I don't see Taurus doing that.
I suppose that would help pattern shot from the gun, but the question is "why bother"?
Despite casual remarks about grouse hunting nobody is buying these guns to function as a actual shotgun for hunting or "serious" clay shooting. Even assuming you could get a decent pattern at 10 yards, would that really change?
In practice, shotshells from the Judge are mostly limited to what might be terms "novelty" recreational shooting, or against snakes. While there are probably people who stuff them with buckshot for defense purposes, IMO, the shot pellets are so weak, that's really not a good idea.
Again, even with a REAL .410 shotgun, you're limited to breaking clays at very short ranges and hunting things that are both teensy and really close by. The gun just doesn't have enough of a shot payload to make a decent pattern at what might be termed "normal" hunting distances, and on top of that, pellet speed is low enough that wounding game (instead of killing it) is a real concern.
A slug from a .410 shotgun is sort of interesting, but its probably not going to outperform a true .45LC bullet from a handgun platform.
Ultimately, no matter what you did to something like a "Judge" you're constrained by the intrinsic limitations of a short barrel married to a fundamentally anemic shotshell load.
In *theory* the concept of combining a shotgun and a handgun sounds nice, but in *practice* to get enough of a shot payload to be effective at any real world application where you'd want to use a shotgun would require either a gigantically heavy handgun, wrist-breaking recoil, or both.
On top of that, Federal law significantly limits the ability of commercial manufacturers to come up with short barrelled and/or large bore handheld shotguns. Any serious variation on that theme becomes an NFA item, drastically limiting the potential market to the point where no manufacturer is likely to sell enough of them to justify the development and tooling costs.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
7 comments