Talk:Colt SF-VI/DS-II

How do we differentiate between this and a Colt DSII/SF-VI? --Funkychinaman (talk) 17:56, 23 August 2013 (EDT)

Firstly, a couple of ways to tell the different from a DSII and a SF-VI is that the SF-VI has a new style cylinder release that has a stepped up and serrated portion at the back meaning there is more to get hold of, also the end of the ejector rod on an SF-VI is narrower so rather than the hole in the side of the shroud being keyhole shaped, it is just a straight slot. Secondly, the Magnum carry is a variant of the SF-VI, so the trick is how to tell those two guns apart. As far as I know the only difference is that the frame on a magnum Carry is slightly larger, with a noticeably beefier top strap and a correspondingly slightly taller front sight. For example, compare this SF-VI to this Magnum Carry]. Unfortunately this is the only difference as far as I can tell, and am not sure how well you would be able to distinguish without seeing the guns side by side. Not sure, but I think the front of the sight on the Magnum Carry is always vertical rather than slopes as well which could help with an ID. The sharp edges of the Magnum Carry were an issue though so I wouldn't be surprised if they were rounded off after-market. --commando552 (talk) 19:40, 23 August 2013 (EDT)

Have just looked through the appearances, and to my eye all of the guns listed as Magnum Carryies have the normal top strap and the smaller rounded front sight, which would make them SF-VIs by my reckoning. --commando552 (talk) 19:43, 23 August 2013 (EDT)

Yes, I agree. I guess it doesn't help we don't have a SF-VI image here. --Funkychinaman (talk) 19:46, 23 August 2013 (EDT)

Got a photo:

Colt SF-VI - .38 Special

Should it just be included on the DS page, or have a separate page like the Magnum Carry currently does? Technically, I think it doesn't have Detective Special in the name, and it is an all new stainless steel gun, however it looks pretty much identical so I'm inclined to put it on the DS page. --commando552 (talk) 20:10, 23 August 2013 (EDT)

Since all the Magnum Carrys are actually SF-VIs, we could just rename the page. Want to run it by JCordell, he's the revolver man. --Funkychinaman (talk) 23:22, 23 August 2013 (EDT)

BTW, the one SF-VI appearance already links to the DS page. --Funkychinaman (talk) 04:09, 24 August 2013 (EDT)

I realize this morning when I have less whiskey in me that I f'd up my description of the DSII and SF-VI above. I got confused between the old 3rd generation Detective Special and the Detective Special II. The DSII is exactly the same as the SF-VI, it was just a name change made after a year of production. Originally they called it the SF-VI (Small Frame, 6 round cylinder) until all the original Detective Specials were out of production to stop confusion, but when they were gone they changed it to DSII. I am inclined to put them on a new page to themselves as they are an entirely new gun on a new frame with different internals. Another question though, what would the page be called? Normally we would go by the original name which is SF-VI, but this was only used for a year as opposed to DS-II which was used from 1996 until 2000 when all the Colt revolvers apart from the Python were discontinued. --commando552 (talk) 04:36, 24 August 2013 (EDT)

I don't know why they had to denote that it had six shots, I can't recall a modern Colt revolver that DIDN'T have six shots. As for the name, we can call it "Colt SF-VI/DSII" and create a redirect for each. We can rename and modify the Magnum Carry page and delete the Magnum Carry redirect, since there aren't any appearances. --Funkychinaman (talk) 04:46, 24 August 2013 (EDT)

Ive moved the page and added some info. Not sure about why they did the 6 thing, I can only assume that it was a bit of a marketing ploy on Colt's part as in "it's a small frame but holds 6 rounds!" as opposed to the contemporary S&W small frame .38s which tend to have a 5 round cylinder. Doesn't really compare that well as the DS-II is larger and weighs more, but whatever. --commando552 (talk) 07:40, 24 August 2013 (EDT)

It was a marketing ploy. In the early eighties Ruger had an advertising campaign in which the ads talked about how much more steel their revolver frames had. The frames were thicker which was then inferred to be stronger. S&W responded with an ad campaign showing theor revolver laying next to jumbo sized burgers and milk-shakes. Smith's ads stated that while thicker was better when it came to food it wasn't necessarily better when it came to revolvers. The big three handgun companies used to always go at each other like that. It doesn't seem to be as common anymore. --Jcordell (talk) 12:51, 24 August 2013 (EDT)

Interesting stories about the competition tiffs between the wheelgun companies. This is why I love JCordell. Anyway, I'm a bit late but I have to say personally I think this page works fine. The Smiths are differentiated with a page for each model but some pages have multiple guns lumped in a one page as a series like this here so I think this works fine. I heard stories about how there was a 'Magnum' DS which was around for like 15 seconds, but wasn't sure they were true until I saw this. Of course I'm not big on Colts anyway but this is still pretty neat. StanTheMan (talk) 14:57, 24 August 2013 (EDT)

Introduced for Competition?

I have to say I find it strange that Colt would introduce the Magnum Carry (and indeed the DS-II) at all only to drop it along with almost all their other revolvers shortly after. Indeed I was under the understanding Colt was pretty much dropping their wheelgun part of the business in the 90s. But, going off of JCordells' statements about how there used to be quite a bit of competition there before, my question is, did Colt make the new guns (particularly the Magnum Carry) mainly or even solely as a counter to S&W's new magnum-capable J-frames that came out then? (In other words, made them just so they'd have something that would compete, regardless of whether they'd keep it or it if would even sell)? Just something I pondered. Wouldn't surprise me if that was the case. StanTheMan (talk) 22:17, 8 September 2013 (EDT)