Talk:Sudden Impact: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 01:03, 18 April 2010

the Auto Mag was the ORIGINAL automag the AMP NOT the AMT. Same name, completely different weapon. 69.23.137.224 07:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Smith & Wesson 3000 Info

A little history of the Smith & Wesson Model 3000 (later Mossberg Model 3000) 12-gauge Pump-action Shotgun. I hope that this will help add a little to the online history of the Smith & Wesson Model 3000 Shotgun, which seems lacking.

Smith and Wesson long held a strong police presence in the firearm market with their line of revolvers, their "Military & Police" model, aka Model 10 was long a standard sidearm for many officers. Smith & Wesson offered a broad market of Police-oriented gear as well as ammunition, adding Shotguns in the mid-to-late 1970s. The Model 3000 was a companion piece to the semi-automatic Model 1000, a gas-operated design, in their product line.

In the April 1983 issue of EAGLE Magazine, a bi-monthly Publication of Command Publications, then Sergeant Gary Paul Johnston reviewed a sample of the then new shotgun. For comparison, it was to be shot next to the Remington Model 870 Pump-action, considered the standard by which new shotguns were being judged.

Where were these differences in the two? Using a fairly new Remington, both shotguns were equipped with 20" rifled sights. This would help reduce friction on critical parts. Where Remington used flat springs, the S&W used coil springs. Parts were simplified, the ejector being mentioned. The S&W's barrel was hammer forged for both strength and precision, with a "taper bore" vs a conventional choke method as found in the 870's barrel.

The one, well-known problem with the Model 870 was being stoppage-prone, when a cartridge would fall onto the carrier and create a frustrating jam. According to the Sales Manager Johnston spoke too, this was specifically engineered out of the 3000's design.

Johnston replicated (with some difficulty he noted) these stoppages with both shotguns, to see how they compared to one another. On the Remington, he had to use both hands on the pump and have the buttstock on the ground to get it cycle. The S&W, he reported cycled and chambered the "jammed" round with relative ease.

So, he went to the next part of the test, comparing S&W's "taper bore" with a Remington Improved Cylinder choked barrel. Given poor weather (gusting wind) at 50yds, he felt they were at a draw using the Federal rifled slugs. Later testing indoors netted 3" groups at 100ft. Moving on to buckshot, was to be of more interest to him as he felt that slugs had limited use in the majority of Police usage. Tight patterns, given that each pellet becomes accountable, was paramount. Again using Federal-brand buckshot, firing four rounds at 50yds, using the standard B-21 large silhouette the Remington put 16 of 36 pellets onto the silhouette body. Repeating with the Smith & Wesson, it put 11 of 36 on the body. Things changed when distance was moved in to 25yds. Both Federal and Remington "00" buckshot was used and performed well, as the full 36 pellets stayed on the paper, but the patterns the S&W printed were tighter overall.

Having used a Remington Model 870 both personally and professionally as a Police Officer, the question would be asked, which is the better gun. He felt it was hard to answer, but winning factor was the "Jam-free" engineering.

At the time, the gun was offered with Blued and Parkerized finishes, could come with a regular stock, or the optional Choate-manufactured (for Smith & Wesson) Pistol-gripped stock or a folding-stock.

That, as I mentioned was in 1983. The movie tie-in of Sudden Impact was obvious, the Smith & Wesson revolver carried by Clint Eastwood was a stand-out co-star, and had been from the beginning. Albert Popwell, the man who played "Horace King" in Sudden Impact, of course had been in all of the previous "Dirty Harry" movies. He finally got to be "The Partner" and was well-rewarded with a Smith & Wesson firearm of speciality, their new Shotgun. Many look at the AutoMag used by Eastwood, and it did stir press back then, but the shotgun was looked over by most.

How is it I believe it was a S&W Model 3000 and not a Mossberg Model 500? Several reasons. I have a Mossberg Circular from an old gun magazine in my files, it has the Model 3000 series in it. This circular was the "New for '86" guns. Mossberg, I believe, acquired the rights from Smith & Wesson, but it didn't stay in their line very long.

A brief summary of the Model 3000 can be found in Leroy Thompson's guide on "Combat Shotguns," (Greenhill Military Manuals, 2002)

Now, for the nitty gritty. If you have the DVD, you can slow-frame through Horace's approach to Harry from the car. The shotgun is "profiled" and you can look at the bolt through the ejection port. It looks more like an 870 rounded bolt than the Model 500 Mossberg, with it's flatter design.

Also, you get an opportunity to look at the feeding port. If you look closely, you'll see the shell elevator is shiny and at the bottom of the port, not recessed into the flat of the bolt like the Mossberg design.

Added by BC2009.

I originally thought it was an 870 but the magazine tube cap is off and the ejection port isn't quite right. If you can find a good picture of this gun, that would be great, since I'll be revamping this page soon. - Gunmaster45

- Great insight. You should repost all this on the 3000 page itself. StanTheMan 00:39, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

.44 special Colt DS?

a ".44 special Colt Detective Special"???? Such gun NEVER existed.

-You're right. The Colt DS was only made in .38 special. I've modified the page.--Rafa

Actually, the DS was made in .44 Special. Look at the pictured DS on this page. Its clearly says ".44 Special" on the barrel. -Gunman69 17:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

-Funny, I was pretty sure that the DS was never made in that caliber (I've read all of the John Taffin books, and being one of the greatest admirers of the .44 special caliber, I think that he would have mentioned such a gun). I'm not able to find any other reference to a .44 special DS in any of my books/magazines (and I've been collecting them since 1981). I've magnified the pic, and, indeed, it seems to say ".44 special", although the quality of the pic is not high. May it really says ".38" and a horizontal scratch makes it to look like ".44"? May be it was a prototype that never was commercially released? I think that the frame of this revolver is too small to chamber it in .44 special (S&W used the "L" and "N" frames, that are larger than Colt's "D" frame for their .44 special wheelguns). I've posted the question in www.coltforum.com. --Rafa

Even so, look at the screenshots on the page. The muzzle diameter is WAY to big to be a .38 special. -Gunman69 23:55, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

-I'm not sure about that. Muzzle diameters can look larger than real in movies/pics, specially in stainless or nickel handguns, and particularly if the muzzle hole is slightly out of focus, as it happens with the screenshot (I took some pics of my .22 l.r. S&W 617, and the muzzle looked like a .38). In the scene where Sondra Locke loads her revolver, the cartridges look like .38 specials (they look too "stylized" to be .44 specials, although I admit that it's hard to be really sure). BTW: if I remember well, when Callahan prints the ballistics report in the police precinct, it can be read ".38 special" (I'll have to see that scene again).--Rafa

-FWIW: here are some answers from Coltforum.com: --Not possible. The barrel does say .44 Special, but that's probably just a good Photoshop job. What's telling is that the cylinder has six chambers, and there isn't enough room in a DS cylinder to get six .44's in there.

Uh, no, that is NOT a photoshop job. In fact, if you knew anything about me, I am super against Franken guns, which are guns which are altered in Photoshop. Just because you never encountered one doesn't mean it does not exist. I saw, handled and photographed this gun IN PERSON. .44 Special does exist. Don't know the history of the gun, but it was a .44 Special revolver. And like some anonymous guy on the COLT FORUM would trump a physical example of a .44 Special CDS. Really. "I trust everything on the Internet too! ;) "MoviePropMaster2008 00:24, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

--Movies are a wonderful make believe world filled with props and/or PhotoShop can do wonders. In a word, no. JMO

--Nice photoshop job

Well, personally I think you should ask MPM2008 about it. He's the one who took that picture, so I think he would have the best information about the Colt DS. I very highly doubt that he just photoshopped ".44 Spl" onto a picture just for him to prove a point, so I think you need to ask him about it. -Gunman69 23:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, just take a look here: http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Talk:Colt_Detective_Special -Gunman69 23:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Gunman69 for the backup. :) MoviePropMaster2008 00:26, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

--Interesting, indeed. Would it be possible to know if the gun pictured was a gun modified in a custom shop? (and if so, who made the job?). ).--Rafa

- Interesting how the ones retorting 'Photoshop' don't ID themselves. In any case, regardless of the gun MPM provided (which I myself think is genuine - A photoshop could be done better than that :P) I do believe that the gun in the film itself is .44, or at least, it's certainly bigger than a .38 anyway. There are numerous shots in the film and even on the page where you can plainly see the barrel is too big for .38 caliber. If it is focus error, then it's a focus error that happens throughout most of the film.

Looking at it in side-by-side shots of the other DS examples, one can tell it has a larger cylinder and is generally a bit bigger overall. Which only makes sense if it is a .44.

Anyway, that's my say. And while I myself might do a photoshop in a case like this, MPM just doesn't strike me as that kind of fellow.

A funny thing though is that one of the comments is correct, the gun is referred in the film as a .38. Now if they had just used a Model 10 Snub or even re-used Pat Hingle's Model 36, we wouldn't be in this mess. StanTheMan 00:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Great forum here

I love forum vey professional and clean. i live in the us well philly to be exact just wanted to drop and see how everyone is and what not.

@@ Line 71: / Line 71: @@
 Anyway, that's my say. And while I myself might do a photoshop in a case like this, MPM just doesn't strike me as that kind of fellow.
-A funny thing though is that one of the comments is correct, the gun is referred in the film as .38. Now if they had just used a Model 10 Snub or even re-used Pat Hingle's Model 36, we wouldn't be in this mess. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 00:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
+A funny thing though is that one of the comments is correct, the gun is referred in the film as a .38. Now if they had just used a Model 10 Snub or even re-used Pat Hingle's Model 36, we wouldn't be in this mess. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 00:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 == Great forum here ==
 I love forum vey professional and clean. i live in the us well philly to be exact just wanted to drop and see how everyone is and what not.

Talk:Sudden Impact: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 01:03, 18 April 2010

Smith & Wesson 3000 Info

.44 special Colt DS?

Great forum here

Navigation menu

Search