Register
Log In
Home
February 15, 2009
Offline
I currently own two Palmers and had a third. The one I used to have was a stainless .44. Only issue was that the ports in the shroud were very uneven however they did replace it. On a 15-2 I bought new in 93-94 had a problem with the trigger sticking. Much use and it's perfect now and is my favorite gun. I also own a .44 Palmer that I also bought new which has zero issues. It also has a very slick action. The one flaw is that the machine marks in the cylinder should have been more smooth. The gun is accurate as a Dan Wesson should be however.
So I have not had a Palmer gun with a serious problem. I ask because I was curious if these guns have certain serious problems that were consistent during the Palmer era. I've read over and over about these issues and one being a well known gunsmith saying he stopped working on them due to so many problems. What is the truth?
Range Officer
Range Officers
Dans Club
March 27, 2009
Offline
I have several Palmer's, in 22, 357, and 44 and have never had any problems with any of them. the most of what you are talking about would be related to cleaning and lubricating. Some polishing may be needed on internal parts. Fixed barrels was the only change up that I really didn't like though there too I have a few of them and shoot fine!
May 17, 2010
Offline
I am not well versed in the Palmer era, but there is a lingering doubt about guns from Palmer for what-ever reason. The overwhelming position here is that mostly it is un-deserved. There was a decrease in quality control for a time, almost all of which was backed by DW under warrantee. I myself, would not hesitate to pick up a Palmer.
Soap Box, Ballot Box, Ammo Box
in that order.
4 Monson Model 15's
1 Palmer FB 15
1 Rossi 357 Model 92 (lever)
1 CZ 75B
January 22, 2008
Offline
Most of the issues I have read about have been more about fit and finish. The only Palmer gun I have is a 738 (Lil' Dan) and the fit of the side plate is not as good as my Monson or Norwich guns. I have also read in may places on the internet to avoid Palmer guns which I think is silly. If the gun checks out I certainly wouldn't have a problem buy it.
Supporter
Moderators
January 24, 2009
Offline
I've got three Palmer guns & have zero issues. Function & fit/finish is every bit as good as the Monson gun's I have.
A while back, Steve said that whichever Palmer guns did have problems originally, those have most likely been sent back & fixed by DW over the years, so finding one today with a lingering problem would be rare. I think he's got a good point.
Supporter
Range Officer
Range Officers
May 2, 2009
Offline
I have 3 Palmers-- my model 9 is FLAWLESS, and has a beautiful blue job.
The 715's I just purchased have a great fit...too good; they are tight, and even after a thorough stripping/cleaning needed some work to get them to function as they should. I'd rather have them too tight than loose though.
SHOOT
October 27, 2009
Offline
I only have one Palmer, it is a 357 super mag. It is a great gun. I hope the Palmer location keeps the bad rap, cheaper dw's for the rest of us.
July 25, 2009
Offline
I sold and handled a few Palmer guns, and that being my last name it was interesting for me. The only issues I saw with them were fitting issues as others mentioned, and all the danged dirt and grit and metal filings inside the actions. That was about guaranteed and I was too embarrassed to hand one to a customer like that so I took them all down and cleaned and lubed them, sometimes stoning a little if there were binding burrs on the side of the hammer or trigger. They responded well. (Karl Lewis' design is awfully good and resilient - you can work with it some.) The ones I went through were better many of the Bangor Punta years Smith & Wessons I think. Those guns REALLY went into that handbasket about 1980 or so. I remain amazed today S&W has recovered at all.
I've had to clean the goop out of a lot of other S&Ws over the years, too, and especially Taurus a few years back. You'd likely be amazed I had to pull apart and clean a brand new stainless Python once, too!
I never personally saw a Palmer gun with the legendary off-square barrel shrouds or the rough chambers.
January 22, 2008
Offline
Maybe we should put a big ad in the gun rags that states anyone with a Palmer Era Dan Wesson contact a DWF member for proper disposal because they are unsafe to shoot!
If I remember correctly IHMSA also stated that they had issues with some of the Monson guns as well but they were always good about correcting the issues.
April 25, 2008
Offline
That's right Jody. During the heydays of silhouette, many Monson guns were returned by silhouette shooters to the factory to fix problems. Cylinder faces not being square was a big one. Some guns had to go back more than once. It was a standing assumption that all Dans had to go back at least once, but when they were fixed, they were excellent. So why did Dan Wesson revolvers remain on top of the silhouette game for so many years? Accuracy.
Dan Wesson fixed every gun for free, but one of the reasons Monson closed down was because of this. It is hard to stay in business when you have to build a gun twice and sell it once.
The Savantist
December 21, 2009
Offline
IHMSA80x80 said:
That's right Jody. During the heydays of silhouette, many Monson guns were returned by silhouette shooters to the factory to fix problems. Cylinder faces not being square was a big one. Some guns had to go back more than once. It was a standing assumption that all Dans had to go back at least once, but when they were fixed, they were excellent. So why did Dan Wesson revolvers remain on top of the silhouette game for so many years? Accuracy.
Dan Wesson fixed every gun for free, but one of the reasons Monson closed down was because of this. It is hard to stay in business when you have to build a gun twice and sell it once.
Ditto, while a good dan wesson is a great gun I think internet lore over the last few years has been building up monson guns to be better than they actually were. A good part of why the majority of the older used dans(both monson & palmer) are good guns is because the real lemons tend to either be fixed or broken down into parts over time. I personally have had trouble more often with new guns of any make than with used guns which usually have had the major problems sorted out.
January 22, 2008
Offline
Dan Wesson fixed every gun for free, but one of the reasons Monson closed down was because of this. It is hard to stay in business when you have to build a gun twice and sell it once.
That's certainly not a business plan for success. To bad they were unable to get things straightened out!
Dean do you have any Norwich guns? If so I would be interested in your thoughts on those compared to Monson and Palmer.
March 25, 2008
Offline
Good to see another Oregon Dan Wesson fan, I have two Norwich DWs four Palmer's and five Monson guns can't say anyone is better than the other. Not all of them have been stripped down all the way yet, which is what one of my projects will be, My 41mag has the best trigger pull of them all so I hope to see why and correct that on all the others.
As to the question, I just hope I get my share of the Palmers before the rest of the world wakes up. LOL I've heard that early Palmers were assembled from left over parts and some new parts so that may have lead to some of the issues on fit and finish. just a thought.
May 17, 2010
Offline
I tend to kinda wonder.... silhouette shooting.... that is knocking down heavy plates at great distances tends to bring out folks that like to load up high pressure loads.. lots BOOM. That can be hard on any and every gun. I dare say even tank-tough Dans, faced critism that may have been a result of high power abuse as much as anything else. The old "one in the shop and one on the range" seems point that direction, versus poor QC.
All I do know is, 30 years and lots of light target loads hasn't so much as tempered my dan.
Soap Box, Ballot Box, Ammo Box
in that order.
4 Monson Model 15's
1 Palmer FB 15
1 Rossi 357 Model 92 (lever)
1 CZ 75B
April 25, 2008
Offline
Pinetor said:
I tend to kinda wonder.... silhouette shooting.... that is knocking down heavy plates at great distances tends to bring out folks that like to load up high pressure loads.. lots BOOM. That can be hard on any and every gun.
That was true in the original years of handgun silhouette. Back then, if you weren't shooting a full-length .308 with 200 grain bullets, you were considered a wimp. Elgin Gates saw the potential of overloading factory guns in the attempt to knock over those heavy rams, and feared the results of what would happen when someone blew up a gun and injured or killed someone. The media would have a field day.
The ram topple rule was adopted to solve that problem. That is where the foot of the ram overhangs the back of the rail so that a decent hit from a .357 Magnum would allow the ram to be knocked over. Overloads were no longer necessary to get the rams to fall. Then, IHMSA became a game of accuracy first. Few, if any, matches were won with overloaded guns...one big side effect of those cannon loads was severe recoil...tends to really wear on a shooters nerves for the 40-round match. This topple rule was in effect before Dan Wesson came on big in handgun silhouette.
Even today, less power is needed due to all the auto-reset targets available. Former rounds that were considered to weak to do the job are regularly knocking over rams with ease. That is where shooters are gravitating now...lighter bullets, less powder, less recoil, a LOT more fun.
The Savantist
April 25, 2008
Offline
Jody said:
Dean do you have any Norwich guns? If so I would be interested in your thoughts on those compared to Monson and Palmer.
I do have one Norwich gun...the SRS-1 in .41 Magnum. It may be a little better fit, due to the CNC machinery used to build them. The finish is a little nicer...polishing is better. I like the laser engraved markings. Some of the stamped frame and barrel markings on both Monson and Palmer guns are not evenly applied...some spots stamped more shallow than others, serial number stampings on both can be out of line. I've see some where it appears a child lined up the numbers, very amateurish-looking.
I can't comment on the action. Mine was the development gun for the SRS series, and thus the action HAS been worked on. It is very smooth with a light pull...not factory, I'm sure. Accurate? Oh yes, but my Palmer and Monson guns are all accurate at 200 meters also.
The Savantist
January 22, 2008
Offline
Thanks for the info! I've noticed the uneven stamping on some of my Monson guns as well.
May 17, 2010
Offline
Thanks IHMSA!
Sounds, good to me... Like I said.. I just wondered about it. I was only about 12 in 1975, so its all "long ago" to me. Of course at this point even the stories are old (to me).
Soap Box, Ballot Box, Ammo Box
in that order.
4 Monson Model 15's
1 Palmer FB 15
1 Rossi 357 Model 92 (lever)
1 CZ 75B
Supporter
DWF Supporters
December 16, 2010
Offline
Can someone post the years Dan Wesson manufacturing was at Palmer, Norwich and
Monson. Thank you,
Stovepipe
Dans Club
March 2, 2008
Offline
- 1971 – 1992 Monson, MA
- 1992 – 1995 Palmer, MA
- 1997 – 2005 Norwich, NY Under Bob Serva
- 2005 – current Norwich, NY CZ owned (these guns will say CZ on them)
I went to a bookstore and asked the saleswoman "Were is the Self Help Section?" She said if she told me, it would defeat the purpose.
George Carlin
1 Guest(s)
