welcome to TFL
I have not personally shot one, but I have examined a couple that a collector friend of mine had for a time.
I won't say they are junk, but its not impossible they could be. For certain what they are is ...strange...
Nothing about the gun looks, or feels quite "right" to me. Admittedly, a lifetime of seeing and using "regular" revolvers probably biases me in that regard.
Besides the whole "barrel on the bottom" thing, the trigger doesn't look right (but that's just a style thing), the hammer isn't a hammer, and doesn't stay "up" when the gun is cocked. They cylinder isn't round, and the frame is not steel. The grip also doesn't "look right" to me, but didn't feel bad, though again, I have no idea what it would feel like during shooting.
It's light, the bore is low, and its in .357 Magnum, so I would expect it to slam into your hand harder than other guns in the same caliber and weight range. Muzzle rise would be less, but I think the felt recoil being more "straight back" would be heavier than expected.
I'm not a fan of even "high tensile" aluminium (or any other light weight alloy) for magnum revolver frames. Its a personal preference. I want magnums to be solid, and actually heavy. Feel free to think otherwise, its your hands...
As to cylinder gap, for generations a gap of approx. 0.006" has been considered adequate and acceptable. Guns with slightly larger or smaller gaps seem to perform well also, but going more either way can give problems. Guns with extremely small gaps are known to foul and bind too rapidly,(a really tight gap might even bind when the gun gets hot) and one with very large gaps often don't shoot as accurately. But often is not always, and there are exceptions to every general rule.
It's an interesting example of "outside the box" thinking and engineering, but its just too far from the box to appeal to me.
Just my opinion, and worth what you paid for it.
