Race Guns, What Are They?

[Doc Shapiro]

Talk to an action shooter in a game other than Cowboy, and the answer that you get is one with electronic optics and a compensator.  Like these:
http://www.jspublications.net/images/CowboyRaceGun.JPG
http://www.stiguns.com/guns/Stinger/images/STIngerShow1.jpg

What is a "race gun" to a cowboy shooter, and do they really make any difference?

The reason I ask is that, from my experience and evidence gained from talking to some really excellent shooters, the shooter drives the gun.  The sights have to be lined up and the trigger pulled.  Then the sights have to remain on target until the hammer hits the firing pin and the bullet exits the barrel.  The only time the gun is actually is actually doing anything starts the moment that the sear trips.  Everything until that instant is done by the shooter. 

Granted, there are things that you can do to make it easier to operate the gun.  But they don't actually make the gun faster.  Unless the main spring is beefed up so that the hammer falls faster  (or the hammer is hollowed out so that it falls faster), the shooter still is the one operating the gun. 

So, tell me what you consider to be a Cowboy Race Gun and why.  Also, please let me know what the real benefit (not perceived benefit) is. 

Then, I'd be interested in where you think the line ought to be drawn for acceptable vs. unacceptable mods, and how that should be policed.  Some examples are: short strokes, custom barrels, line bored cylinders, light triggers, springs, polishing, cutting barrels down, replacing sights, removing safety's (transfer bars, etc.), custom oversized base pins, some aluminum parts (grip frames for example), grips (or stocks), internal choke tubes, forcing cone work, barrel throating, back boring, etc.

Personally, I like the rule the way it is.  It's easy to police, so mods can never go to the above examples of race guns, which is (I suspect) the actual purpose of the rule.

Doc

[Prof. Bullspit]

A race gun (Cowboy or otherwise) is one in which almost every possible (and allowable) advantage has been exploited, installed etc.

There are some individual differences in what makes a race gun. For instance I've read that you Doc like a heavy mainspring. I prefer a lighter mainspring. My race gun would have the lighter mainspring while yours would have the heavier one.

In the cowboy world a race gun (Ruger Vaquero in this case) seems to have some of these things done to it:

Springs
Timing perfected
Chamber mouths uniformed
Forcing cone recut
Transfer bar removed, hammer built up/replaced
sights adjusted to point of aim with a particular load
sight channel opened up/squared
Front sight grooved, stippled, checkered
free spin and or half cock installed
trigger pull perfected (sear engagement altered)
trigger overtravel removed
custom grips


Really trick guns have custom barrels  installed.


Having a gun set up just as perfect as you think it can be offers first a psychological advantage. You have utter confidence in the gun and you know that it WILL NOT fail. The fault for misses is all yours.

Some of these things might offer a very small time advantage.

Lighter springs let me cock the gun with less sight picture dissruption. I know that some feel that a heavier spring gives better accuracy by reducing lock time.

Sight channel squaring and enlargment aides in sight picture acquisition. This is a clear speed advantage in my mind.

Anything that improves the intrinsic accuracy of a gun probably doesn't directly impact speed, just confidence of the shooter.

How much difference does a race gun make in an actual stage time? This would be interesting to find out. Anyone want to donate a gun and some money for gunsmithing? I'm guessing that for a typical shooter the difference would be less than a second per stage.

Another thing that would be interesting to find out would be if a race gun makes more difference in raw time to a run of the mill shooter or an expert.

One last thing that would be interesting to find out would be if a run of the mill shooter would improve times more by spending the same amount of money that all of the 'race gun' modifications would cost on a coach and ammunition for practice. I'd bet that a run of the mill shooter would be better off spending the money that way than on gun modifications.

[SIR WILLIAM]

I have had problems with 44 and 45 caliber basepins easing out under recoil in my revolvers.  I installed Belt Mountain locking base pins.  No more problems.  Benefit?  Confidence, as mentioned.  I have the other items mentioned except for free spin/half cock additions to my RVs.  Springs were all replaced for my comfort.  Lightened springs allow me to shoot more and comfortably go through a match. My only big addition was a set of faux ivory grips.  These were fatter than stock and with the Ruger gripframe already being "beefy",  the fit is right for my hands.  Most "race guns" are only final fitting and polishing.  That SHOULD have been performed at the factory.

[Klondike]

Prof
Dang it you are going to cost me money , I thought I had race guns, now I gotta go and put trick barrels in them to get up race status.
Actually I would like octagon barrels on my pistols. I handled a pair of Rugers that had them, you talk about a change in balance. Really nice, but pricey.

[Prof. Bullspit]

Now don't get me wrong here but I have to say that I think an octogon barrel is actually a competitive advantage. I think this because of my experiences shooting '51 Navies. I find you don't have to worry about sight picture as that broad flat top just guides the gun onto target.

Makes me think that a true race gun might really need them. They do look pretty sweet too.

In reality I just threw the custom barrel comment in because I read that Doc Shapiro was getting a set installed to take care of some accuracy problems.

[Klondike]

I think if I wear the barrels out of my RV"s I will put stock hammers and parts back in them and trade them in on new ones. , probably cheaper than custom barrels and if the barrels are wore out, I figure the cylinders should be gone by then too.

[Doc Shapiro]

The barrels weren't wore out, there was something wrong with them.  New barrels oughta fix it.

Doc

[Klondike]

I know Doc, just jerking your chain a little . But I would consider octagon barrels, they really balance much nicer. I don't know about the price difference though.

[Doc Shapiro]

I can't even begin to think about paying for octogon barrels.

Doc

[Bear Rider]

I know Doc, just jerking your chain a little . But I would consider octagon barrels, they really balance much nicer. I don't know about the price difference though.

Just consider that you start with a round blank and have to mill (and polish) eight sides.

[Doc Shapiro]

And then have to blue them!  Ouch.

I do hope to get them back this week.

Doc

[Prof. Bullspit]

Race guns revisited:

I shot a race gun today. It was a 73 with short stroke, aluminum carrier and full race action job.

My position on this has changed. A gun like this can make a difference. I have a Marlin with an action job and I thought it was great! It was a big step up from my 92 with a light action job. I shoot my Marlin pretty well but nothing like this gun I shot today.

I'm going to have to save up 1200 dollars now.

[Sagebrush Burns]

This is (as far as I'm concerned) a very personal thing.  I've been shooting Colt SAAs for many years and never felt the need for anything more than spring kits.  Lately, however, I've got a two that feel so different (trigger pull, cocking pressure, general smoothness of operation) that I'm going to get action jobs just so they feel the same.  Just got a Hartford Model M92 that feels coarse and rough and is hard to loead.  Gonna send that one off to be smoothed up.  I guess that makes them race guns, but all I'm really concerned about is consistancy and ease of operation.