I'm presenting this post, not to state an alternative (unfortunately) for the Indian firearms market, but to show what ought to be possible. The subject of this post is the Armscor 38 Special revolver that is available in the USA, marketed by Rock Island Arsenal. This revolver, like other Armscor firearms, is made in the Philippines -- hardly a nation known for a robust industrial base. The underlying point to my post is that surely India could do just as well, if not better, than the Philippines in this area of manufacture and marketing.
Armscor makes revolvers in 38 Special, 357 Magnum, 9mm, and 22. They also have a line of semi-auto pistols, including a 1911 model, and long guns, as well. For this post, I want to comment on their 38/357 line of revolvers, because I would like to have one myself. Please note the list price of these firearms. The 38 Special 4" barrel revolver I'd like has a list price of $249 (₹18502 at today's exchange rate) and they are listed at the local gun store for $229.99 -- just ₹17090 -- today.
Here is the manufacturer's website link to the revolver: https://www.armscor.com/firearms-list/m200-38spl-6rd
These guns are not perfectly finished at this price point, but by all reviews, they are quite serviceable as purchased over the counter. Here is a review from the "American Rifleman" magazine of the snub nose version of this revolver. There are other reviews of these guns online, but in this dismal world of fanboy advertising cloaked as a magazine review, this one contained the best analysis that I could find:
(As always, click on the pictures for a larger view!)
from: https://www.americanrifleman.org/conten ... -revolver/Review: Rock Island Armory M206 Revolver
I’m a fan of hard-working .38-cal. revolvers for personal protection. They're reliable, simple to operate and pack a solid level of stopping power when loaded properly. But not everyone who wants a defensive revolver can shell out the kind of cash needed for some models.
Hoping to find a solution to this problem, I’ve spent the last few years looking around various trade shows in search of a useful and affordable new .38 Special or .357 Magnum. I wanted something that could be put to work as a truck gun, a kit gun or fill the important roles of home defense or concealed carry for those who are financially strapped.
For the most part, the fruits of this quest have been disappointing. When looking at new revolvers with prices under $400, some of what you'll find is downright spooky. Poor craftsmanship, mysterious and unidentifiable alloys, and triggers that feel like dragging a chunk of concrete across a sheet of sand paper abound.
The original M200 revolver in the RIA lineup features a 4" barrel and polymer grips.
I had nearly given up on finding an inexpensive revolver worth testing when I stopped by the Armscor USA and Rock Island Armory booth at SHOT Show a few years back. It had slipped my mind that Rock Island's catalog of firearms made in the Philippines contains a couple of revolver models including the 4" barrel M200 and the 2" barrel M206.
I noticed the six-shot .38s this time around because the company had two on display front and center. The representative explained that in addition to the standard Parkerized double-action M206 model, the company was adding spurless double-action-only versions that year in both a Parkerized and satin nickel finish.
Let me be clear with revolver fans who have an eye for aesthetics: the M206 is not going to win any beauty contests. It is a simple, all-steel revolver that sacrifices outward refinements for costs savings. The Parkerized and nickel finishes were properly applied if not necessarily attractive. Opening the cylinder revealed casting and grinder marks that one would not see on more expensive .38s.
The configuration of the M206 shows a mix of influences. The frame, six-shot cylinder, pull-back cylinder release and old-fashioned checkered wood grip are all reminiscent of the Colt Detective Special. The single-piece 2.15" barrel, which is pinned to the frame, has a fixed front sight and squared off ejector shroud seemingly borrowed from Charter Arms.
The low-mounted, spade-shaped hammer spur of the double-action model is unlike any other modern hammer that I’ve worked with so far. The deeply curved, smooth-faced trigger is housed in a rounded trigger guard. A transfer-bar safety prevents the revolver from firing if bumped or dropped.
I'll freely admit here that my previous experiences with budget-friendly wheelguns have left me feeling a bit jaded. The looks of the M206 revolvers lying there on the table did not exactly cause my heart to race. But my impression of the revolvers changed once I started handling them.
The problems found in some inexpensive imports were absent in the M206. There was no grit in the cylinder release. The cylinder dropped open smoothly with no binding in the yoke or ejector star. The cylinder spun freely when in the open position. The ejector moved back and forth easily but snapped back into place when released. Only a modest amount of pressure was required to push the cylinder in and out of the frame.
So far, so good. In fact, the M206 was much better than I expected. Now came the moment of truth. Would the trigger cycle cleanly or would it require a one-eyed, spinach eating sailor to cycle? It was good to discover that the triggers of both revolvers were smooth throughout their arch of travel.
The spurred hammer of the double-action model was free of any roughness, swinging back into the cocked position with a distinctive click using a comfortable level of effort. In short, the M206 looked like a plain Jane revolver while behaving like a much more pricey model.
When a factory-fresh M206 revolver headed my way later, I put it through the same bench checks used at the trade show. It demonstrated the same smooth operation throughout the action and in the trigger. The trigger required 10 lbs. 10 ozs. of trigger pull to cycle in double-action mode and 6 lbs. 2 ozs. of pressure when fired single-action.
Included in the shipment was a good supply of Armscor USA .38 Spl. to break in the gun along with one of the full-size hard black polymer grips usually installed on the 4" barrel M200. I was glad to have the grip, because I found that the long hammer could pinch the web of the shooting hand thumb when the hammer was cocked for single-action fire with the compact wood grip. Installing the polymer grip resolved the problem.
One of the first questions to pop up with modern .38 Spl. revolvers is whether or not they can safely fire +P ammunition. If a .38 Spl. cartridge loaded to SAMMI standard +P levels, it's going to generate somewhere around 9 percent more pressure than a standard load.
This may not sound like much of an increase but the boost in power causes revolvers to wear out more quickly and, in some cases with weaker or older guns, using +P loads could possibly cause a catastrophic failure.
When I asked the Rock Island representative at the trade show if the M206 is rated for +P ammunition, he said I could go ahead and shoot it. Readers have reported that when they contact Rock Island they get the same answer.
However, if you look at the M206 barrel markings, the owner's manual, and the company website, the gun is referred to as being a “.38 Spl.” with no mention of +P ammunition. On page 5 of the owner's manual it reads, "The M200 REVOLVER is chambered for Cal. .38 Special cartridges manufactured in accordance with standard industry practice." It could be argued that this statement includes SAMMI specification +P loads, but it's not very specific.
Other revolver manufacturer's who rate their revolvers as +P, including Ruger, Smith & Wesson and Charter Arms, come right out and say it by writing “.38 Spl. +P” in their product descriptions and barrel markings. So when it came time to test the M206, I opted to work with standard pressure loads.
At the shooting range, the M206 six-shot was an enjoyable reminder of why mid-sized .38 Spl. revolvers were popular with law-enforcement personnel before the mass migration to semi-automatics. The 25-oz. weight of this snub gun is a bit heavy for concealed carry, but it tames the recoil of standard velocity .38 Spl. ammunition nicely.
All of the test ammunition loaded, fired and ejected reliably. Spent cases often fell free from the cylinder without any help from the ejector. Shooting free hand at 15 yards, it was not much of a challenge to maintain regular center-of-mass shot placement. Formal accuracy testing was conducted from a bench rest using the revolver in single-action mode firing into targets set at 7 yards.
The results were on par with other 2" revolvers I've tested. HPR HyperClean 158-gr. jacketed hollow points produced the best single group of 1.85" with the best five-group average of 2.04". Remington 110-gr. HTP semi-jacketed hollow points yielded an average of 2.17", followed by the Armscor 158-gr. full-metal jacket load at 2.19".
The M206 .38 Spl. is something of a shooting market contradiction. With the Parkerized models marked at a suggested retail price of $283, and real-world prices under $250, it seems like these six-shot steel revolvers would have mediocre triggers and actions. But much of the finishing work is done the old fashioned way: by hand.
The result in a smooth action and trigger that is better than the revolver’s price would imply. If you are looking for a .38 Spl. that is affordable, enjoyable to shoot and shipped with a Limited Lifetime Warranty, this Rock Island revolver deserves a closer look.
Rock Island Armory M206 Specifications
Manufacturer: Rock Island Armory
Model: M206 Action: Double-Action Revolver
Caliber: .38 Spl.
Finish: Matte Black Parkerized
Grips: Compact Checkered Hardwood
Sights: Fixed Cylinder
Width: 1.40"
Barrel Length: 2.15"
Overall Length: 7.75"
Weight: 25 ozs. unloaded
Capacity: 6 rounds
Twist: 1:18” RH
Rifle Grooves: Six
Accessories: Hard Case, Owner's Manual
MSRP: Parkerized $283, Nickel: $492
So, how does a Philippine company make a revolver so cheaply, when revolvers are famous (notorious?) for the amount of hand-fitting required? The article only brushes this subject, but I wanted to delve into the matter further. One of the most available sources of information on how guns work is the gunpartscorp.com site, which is the Gun Parts Corporation, successor to the old Numrich company that has been in business for well over 100 years. They often provide a parts diagram for individual guns. (Hint: save this link, because you can use it for many other guns, as well!)
My comments will be based on this diagram:
which is available from the full page here: https://www.gunpartscorp.com/gun-manufa ... esbing-200
the American Rifleman article noted that the revolver was similar to a Colt, but had the features of other makes. Unfortunately, the author didn't compare the revolver directly in size, because that would have told us what holster might be used: e.g., can one use a Colt Detective Special holster, or an Official Police holster, or a holster meant for some other gun?
But Armscor choosing a Colt design over a Smith & Wesson makes the gun cheaper to produce, and a better gun, as well. You can first tell that the gun is Colt-based because the sideplate is on the left side, rather than the right, and because the cylinder rotates clockwise, rather than counter-clockwise, like most other double action revolvers.
The clockwise rotation is important, because the hand, the part that turns the cylinder, pushes the cylinder into the frame, rather than out of the frame, like counter-clockwise cylinder rotation does. This eliminates the need to anchor the cylinder at both front and back of the cylinder. You will notice that Smith & Wesson revolvers have a lock on the front of the barrel, which requires additional machining and fitting. Turning the cylinder the right way in the first place eliminates needless manufacturing expense and complexity. Another advantage is that, on snub nosed revolvers, the ejector rod can be made longer when a cylinder lock isn't on the end of the barrel. This longer ejector rod ensures that fired cases are more reliably ejected in the reloading cycle.
Another advantage to the Colt design that is seen in the pictures is moving the cylinder bolt slot to the side of the chambers on the cylinder. This means that, unlike Smith & Wesson, the slots are not cut in the thinnest, weakest part of the cylinder, but rather to the side, in the thicker web portions.
The barrel is pinned to the frame, like a Smith & Wesson. You can see this above the barrel, where it threads into the frame. Colts don't have this pin, and I suspect the use of it allows Armscor to seat the barrels in a cheaper process, saving some more money.
A big savings is involved in the choice of lockwork, visible in the parts diagram. I would describe this lock as the Ruger double action design, adopted to the Colt clockwise rotation with a sideplate on the left. (Rugers don't use a sideplate.)
Colt, since 1905, and Smith & Wesson, after World War 2, each used a lock design that included a positive method of preventing an accidental discharge. This can happen if a revolver is dropped that doesn't have such a feature, such as an IOF revolver. This safety feature allows a "6-shooter" to be a true six shot gun, rather than having to leave an empty chamber under the hammer, as with an IOF, and eliminates the need for a so-called" safety (that doesn't make anything safe!) as seen on the IOF revolver.
The Ruger design eliminates the rebound lever of the Colt and the sliding bar of the Smith & Wesson and uses a transfer bar instead. You can see this transfer bar, #45, in the parts picture. This bar raises when the trigger is pulled. The hammer then strikes it and in turn, the transfer bar strikes the firing pin. Thus, unless the trigger is pulled all the way back, the hammer cannot hit the firing pin and discharge the gun.
This design eliminates a lot of parts that require close fitting in the Colt or Smith & Wesson designs, so a lot of money is saved in manufacturing costs here, as well.
The magazine article contains a picture of the hammer: look closely and you will see that it is most likely an injection moulded sintered steel part. Most likely, the internal parts of the revolver are made by the same process. This allows parts to be made with minimal machining and finishing, because they are moulded to size or nearly to size, rather than needing to be machined from a block of steel to fit and work.
What I see here is a gun that is intelligently designed, borrowing from what has worked in the past and marrying different systems together to provide a reliable weapon. Thus, it's not just a cheap piece of junk or a slavish copy of an older design. The thought that went into these revolvers gives the best of both worlds: an inexpensive gun that is also strong and reliable, and can be fully loaded to its full six shot capacity. I think that a lot of people who are on a budget, yet want or need to carry, would appreciate such a gun.
Consider the price: 0.2 lakh rather than 1.2 lakh. The reasons for this, I will let you, the reader, fill in for yourselves. I think it is a real shame that such a weapon is not made in India. It wouldn't even need to bear the cost of shipping it across the ocean to import it into another country! Unfortunately, it is unobtainable.
Anyway, I wanted to provide this as food for thought.
