S&W M&P R8

[spr1]

Any input on the subject gun? Primary purpose would be range fun with .38's. thanks

[Alpha Sierra]

Get a Performace Center Model 27. Same capacity and looks a hell of a lot better.

[sigmundsauer]

I'm inclined to recommend the M27, too.....or the 4" M327PD if you want light. The M327 M&P with its polygonally rifled barrel chronos real slow, so I have seen. Not sure why exactly, but the velocities generated don't come near justifying the 5" barrel.

Tim

[spr1]

I saw a report on the TRR version that had low chrono numbers, but that one has the standard rifling. Have you chrono'd a couple R8's?
I do like the optics rail on both of those guns.
I think if I came across a pre-lock 327, it might come home with me. I need to scratch the revolver itch - just for fun shooting.

[sigmundsauer]

I saw a report on the TRR version that had low chrono numbers, but that one has the standard rifling. Have you chrono'd a couple R8's?
I do like the optics rail on both of those guns.
I think if I came across a pre-lock 327, it might come home with me. I need to scratch the revolver itch - just for fun shooting.

I resisted buying one because it wasn't quite right for my tastes. The one or two reviews I had seen in magazines that showed low chrono numbers caused me to scratch my head. I did a casual search for info on smith-wessonforum.com and read some others acknowledging that slow chrono figures were curiously present on those revolvers with the polygonal rifling.

Most recently I paged thru the 2009 S&W catalog which had chrono results of a 5" R8 and a 6" 686+. The contrast in velocities was significant, far greater than an inch of barrel would normally justify.

Based off of what I've seen, a 5" R8 seems to generate velocities comparable to a 3-4" conventionally-rifled Smith.

I settled on a 4" 327PD, which has a conventionally-rifled 4-1/8" bbl and is exactly what I was looking for in a trail gun. I keep mine loaded with Buffalo Bore loads and recoil is stout but manageable. It is a joy to carry. I am more comfortable with the .357 Mag in the N-frame as the Scandium-framed big bores seem to be too much recoil for the ILS to work predictably.

Tim

[tmzphoto]

I was finally able to try out my R8 this weekend and I like it a lot. I put about 200 rounds through it, with a mix of .38's and .357.

The fit and finish are excellent. The black coating is matte black on the frame, but more of a satin black on the cylinder and barrel. Unlike most black finishes, it's absolutely smooth. This is the way a black finish should be applied to a firearm! Everything fits tight and moves smoothly.

When dry firing it I thought the trigger was on the heavy side, but live firing revealed that it's actually just right. The timing is precise, and the cylinder rotates like a bank vault. In fact, the cylinder operates so smoothly that there is no sensation of "dragging" the cylinder when you pull the trigger. All you feel is the trigger, with no sense of the other mechanical actions that are taking place.

The accuracy of the R8 is superb. Better ammo produced better results, but generally it's more accurate than I am. I noticed no difference in the accuracy of .38 vs. .357. The recoil with .38's is minimal, and only moderate with .357. My 1911's produce more recoil than the R8 loaded with .357 Magnum. You could literally shoot .38 Special all day.

I realize that the looks aren't for everyone, but I quite like it. To each his own. I can't speak to the chrono numbers, but it handles and shoots as well as I hoped. The only complaint I have is that the plain v-notch rear sight is slow to acquire. I'll have to do something about that, but otherwise, I won't be changing anything else.

[Alpha Sierra]

I am more comfortable with the .357 Mag in the N-frame as the Scandium-framed big bores seem to be too much recoil for the ILS to work predictably.

Tim

I disable the ILS in every S&W I have with it. I have zero concerns with that in a defensive situation.

[spr1]

I was fondling an R8 in the fun shop yesterday, I almost bought it because the action was incredible, but then I looked at where the hammer stops on the frame above the firing pin and saw a shiny mark that looked like the Aluminum was peened in, and it was awfully close to the firing pin hole. Is that normal?

[tmzphoto]

That certainly isn't normal, and mine doesn't have it. Was it a new revolver or used? Could be a manufacturer defect or damage from improper handling.

[Kyle E. Coyote]

That's a hardcore defense gun. Get a 6" M686 instead.

[Kyle E. Coyote]

I disable the ILS in every S&W I have with it. I have zero concerns with that in a defensive situation.

That's the way to go... S&W locks have been known to fail, but they can't fail if they don't work in the first place.

But if I'm spending $1,300 on a revolver, it'd better not have a lock, and it should have the firing pin on the hammer where it belongs.

[spr1]

The gun with the peening was new, but had been on the shelf for a couple months so had probably been dry fired a bunch. Looking at it worried me.
Lastest American Rifleman had a write up on these and the chrono numbers do indeed look weak. I can beat the 125 gr load from my G34 with factory ammo.