Modifying a S&W 460xvr: Revolver carbine


PDA






CHighfield
September 7, 2012, 11:53 AM
Hey, guys! I'm a long time lurker, first time poster. I was wondering, though, since I like revolver carbines so much for some reason, if anybody had thought to put a longer (18"-20") barrel on an xvr and add a stock? The only way to add a stock I could think of (not knowing much about xvr's :rolleyes: ) is to have a stock/grip in one piece... I know that modifying in this way would probably require a tax stamp... Just some thoughts. Appreciate any feedback!

God bless,

CH

If you enjoyed reading about "Modifying a S&W 460xvr: Revolver carbine" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Sam1911
September 7, 2012, 12:00 PM
You mean like this?

http://www.rossiusa.com/images/imagesMain/SCJ4510SS_012.jpg
http://www.rossiusa.com/product-details.cfm?id=211&category=15&toggle=&breadcrumbseries=

That's not a .460, but it is a .410/.45 Colt.

As long as you aren't installing a barrel that's less than 16" long, and the total length is greater than 26" a conversion like you're talking about wouldn't require a tax stamp.

You sure would want a blast shield up at the cylinder/barrel gap. The .460 operates at such high pressure you could be very seriously hurt if you got your arm too close.

CHighfield
September 7, 2012, 12:09 PM
Exactly what I had in mind. I knew about the Rossi's, and even those do have a blast shield. The tax stamp part would come in from modifying a 460 to have the stock, since I don't think you could just get a receiver to make the rifle with. I think that Rossi looks awesome, but a S&W would be one heck of a rifle. Any expectations as far as accuracy? longer barrel, but still a cylinder gap... I don't know how those would play together. Recoil would probably be more manageable, especially with the extra weight and shoulder pad.

CHighfield
September 7, 2012, 12:13 PM
Also, I know that you can use .454 and .45LC in your .460, and in some .45/.410 you can use .454 or .45 ACP depending on model... Would it be possible to make the .460 fire all of the above (.460, .454. .45LC, .410, .45 ACP)? I haven't checked dimensions, but I'm sure someone else already has the data... :D

Sam1911
September 7, 2012, 12:26 PM
The tax stamp part would come in from modifying a 460 to have the stock, since I don't think you could just get a receiver to make the rifle with.
Once you have the 16" barrel on it, you can add your stock. No paperwork.

Would it be possible to make the .460 fire all of the above (.460, .454. .45LC, .410, .45 ACP).460, .454, .45 Colt? Yes. .410? Too long. .45ACP? Going to need to get the cylinder cut for moon clips.

CraigC
September 7, 2012, 12:32 PM
I'm sorry but there is a reason why revolving carbines never caught on. It's a bad idea. I sure as HELL do not want a 65,000psi cartridge going off with the barrel/cylinder gap right in my face. Even with the blast shield.

460Kodiak
September 7, 2012, 12:42 PM
I'm sorry but there is a reason why revolving carbines never caught on. It's a bad idea. I sure as HELL do not want a 65,000psi cartridge going off with the barrel/cylinder gap right in my face. Even with the blast shield.

That's kind of my feelings as well. I love the concept and the look, but I don't want it near my face or my arm out past the cylinder gap, blast shieled or not.

Now I would buy a lever action rifle if anyone made one. The pressure is still an issue though. Even Bighorn Armory who makes a 500 mag lever action hasn't produced a .460 yet.

A 460 mare's leg would be great too.

Sam1911
September 7, 2012, 12:49 PM
Hmmm...so how 'bout a slightly improved and embiggened Nagant revolver? That would seal the gap...! :)

CraigC
September 7, 2012, 01:02 PM
There's really not much reason to build a .460 rifle. It would have to be easily as large and heavy as a .45-70 and its kin. We already have the .45-70 and it covers everything the .460 could and more at less pressure. Actually, the Marlin 1895 is a wonderful rifle for the .45-70 but is not strong enough for the .460. Unless you just REALLY wanna use pistol bullets and vaporizing speeds. ;)


Hmmm...so how 'bout a slightly improved and embiggened Nagant revolver?
Would it still have a gritty 90lb trigger??? :p

rcmodel
September 7, 2012, 01:17 PM
I sure as HELL do not want a 65,000psi cartridge going off with the barrel/cylinder gap right in my face+1

The .460 S&W runs 65,000 PSI, and burns a powder charge equal to many centerfire rifles such as the 30-06.

The blast out of the cylinder gap would be almost like a plasma cutter used to cut metal!

See this about that! (Caution = Graphic Images)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2313371/posts

rc

Sam1911
September 7, 2012, 01:54 PM
Would it still have a gritty 90lb trigger??? Oh, that would have to be "UPsized" too! :D

CHighfield
September 7, 2012, 02:29 PM
Thanks, all! I didn't realize that the chamber pressures were that high! But from what sam1911 says, then if you cut for clips and had a lengthened cylinder/frame then you would have one heck of a monster revolver that could fire everything under the sun, right? :D :p
But yeah, I knew that revolver carbines have never caught on... But I do really like that look. I didn't think a lever gun handled pressure that well either though? a lever gun in .500?? :eek:
mares leg of either would be cool though :cool:
Also I've never tried the 45-70. For some reason I just have a fear of that particular cartridge.

CraigC
September 7, 2012, 02:39 PM
I knew that revolver carbines have never caught on... But I do really like that look.
They're cool as they can be, in theory. Colt's Paterson revolving rifles were some of the neatest looking rifles ever produced and really an ingenious design. They're just not very practical for all the reasons mentioned.

barnbwt
September 7, 2012, 09:45 PM
Feel free to draw inspiration from this ugly duckling:
http://matebafan.com/mtr/photo20large.jpg
Or this uglier duckling:
http://matebafan.com/unica/photo12large.jpg
Both images courtesy of the awesome Matebafan.com website: MTR-8 Carbine and semi-auto Unica 6-based Grifone, respectively (apparently Ghisoni had a thing for revolver carbines). I have no idea how (or if) the Grifone automatically advances to the next chamber like the pistol; can you really do a recoil action with a barrel that long?

TCB

Fotno
September 8, 2012, 04:00 PM
Hmmm...so how 'bout a slightly improved and embiggened Nagant revolver? That would seal the gap...! :)

Embiggened... I have learnt a new word.

Sam1911
September 8, 2012, 05:29 PM
Thank Homer Simpson for that one.

NG VI
September 8, 2012, 05:49 PM
Thought that was Abe Simpson?

"A noble heart embiggens the smallest man" is how I remember the original.

Dnaltrop
September 9, 2012, 02:24 AM
Close.

"A Noble spirit embiggens the smallest man."

Those are the words of the Vicious pirate Hans Sprungfeld, after he changed his name to "Jebediah Springfield" and founded the city we all love.

http://simpsons.wikia.com/wiki/Jebediah_Springfield

That aside on a .460 i'd be constantly wondering which shot would breach the shield and slice my arm off.

CraigC
September 9, 2012, 10:26 AM
That aside on a .460 i'd be constantly wondering which shot would breach the shield and slice my arm off.
Me too! ;)

CHighfield
September 9, 2012, 04:09 PM
"That aside on a .460 i'd be constantly wondering which shot would breach the shield and slice my arm off."

Is it really that dangerous? I still cant believe that the gasses would come that far from the cylinder... Flame cutting is self-limiting, right? That would mean that the gasses fon't go very far. I think the rossi shield is about perfect, and if you made it even slightly thicker then there would be no chance (in my mind) of being cut by gas. (I have seen the guy's thumb blown off by gasses from the .500 btw... not something I'd enjoy seeing in person... :barf: )
Putting a shield on the regular .460 and .500 might be a good idea, too-- not just on a carbine, but the revolver version straight from the factory.

DWM460tx
September 10, 2012, 01:40 PM
I purchased the S&W 460XVR 14” (Hunter) model two weeks ago and was at my range the next day. Within the first five shots, the combined pressure/heat generated from the muzzle blast “permanently” scorched the cylinder face and semi-circled discoloration on the outside at each cylinder chamber.
The gun is “everything I had hoped for” and should allow me to achieve my goal of taking a black bear with a handgun in the near future. However, this caliber demands absolute respect and attention!
P.S. Double hearing protection is a really good idea!

http://www.dmatney.com/images/01_-_S_W_460XVR.JPG

788Ham
September 10, 2012, 02:03 PM
A little overkill no? Black bears aren't that hard to kill, my grandpa killed several with a .250 Savage '99 ! Unless you wrap the bullets in freezer paper, then your meat will be wrapped when you get to the bear. LOL

DWM460tx
September 10, 2012, 04:42 PM
You definitely have a valid point 788HAM. However, my message (was related to “gun safety with the .460” as apposed to “bear hunting” – specifically). The beauty of the 460XVR is that you have the option to shoot 45, 454 Casull, or 460 through the same weapon – allowing a wide variety of shooting options. S&W 460 is typically what I will shoot for long range silhouette. Bears; likely a 454 or 45 load...

captain awesome
September 10, 2012, 09:11 PM
Also, I know that you can use .454 and .45LC in your .460, and in some .45/.410 you can use .454 or .45 ACP depending on model... Would it be possible to make the .460 fire all of the above (.460, .454. .45LC, .410, .45 ACP)? I haven't checked dimensions, but I'm sure someone else already has the data...

The magnum research BFR could, at least all but 45 acp. perhaps with some kind of modification? Don't think moon clips are viable in a single action. It has the long frame in the 460 version, so 410 would fit.

gandog56
September 10, 2012, 10:19 PM
I'm not real sure, but when they tried to sell the "revolver" rifles in the Civil war was not one of the complaints that the users would get powder burns on their arms from the cylinder/barrel gap flash? How does the new one fix that problem?

Sam1911
September 11, 2012, 07:30 AM
How does the new one fix that problem?

That's the "blast shield" I mentioned in post 2. All the new revolving carbines have a cover that protects your arm. You can see it really well in Post 14.

BCRider
September 11, 2012, 03:08 PM
Well, the "proper" way to shoot those old originals was to put both hands back at the grip area.

Also the original revolver carbines of this sort were cap n' ball. And with that came the risk of a chain fire. Having your hand in front of the cylinder during a chain fire was not something that most folks would aspire to experiencing. So you don't see such firearms with fore stocks for this reason..... although there was a Colt I seem to recall seeing that was percussion fired with such a stock....

EDIT- I thought so. There was a Colt 1855 revolving carbine in .54cal cap n' ball with a bit of wood furniture up front. But again most thinking folks that liked their fingers would not have seen that wood as anywhere friendly to hold the gun when shooting.

CHighfield
September 17, 2012, 12:16 PM
@dwm460tx

Nice! That thing is a monster. Any flame cutting that you've noticed? Know you haven't had it long, but don't know if you got it new or used. Side question--two optics? what ranges are they for?

@Gandog56

Yep, blast shields solve it... maybe. .460 would need some serious metal i think.

CraigC
September 17, 2012, 12:31 PM
There was a Colt 1855 revolving carbine in .54cal cap n' ball...
The Paterson rifles had no wood furniture up front. I was thinking there was an early revolving rifle that had a blast shield but it was not the Paterson's. Interestingly enough, the first firearm Colt manufactured was the No. 1 Ring Lever Rifle, that had a concealed hammer and the action was cocked/cylinder rotated by operating a ring lever in front of the triggerguard. But that's probably a discussion for another thread.

460Kodiak
September 18, 2012, 12:24 PM
Is it really that dangerous? I still cant believe that the gasses would come that far from the cylinder...

It wouldn't slice your arm off or anything, but you sure as hell would have a bad burn. I mean hospital trip bad, and possibly permanent damage. The pressure, concussion, and force generated by the 460 is quite impressive. I regularly shoot a 5" bbl 460 and I am never not impressed by the basketball sized fireball that shoots out of the end of that short bbl. I have stood at 90 degrees of a shooter, and wished for double hearing protection. Behind the bbl, ear plugs work fine. The 460 is a beasty of a cartridge.

DWM460tx, did you use an entire bottle of Locktight to get those optics to stay on? LOL! Nice gun man!

Sam1911
September 18, 2012, 12:42 PM
It wouldn't slice your arm off or anything, but you sure as hell would have a bad burn.
The burn isn't even the problem...

As rcmodel posted before:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2313371/posts

Might want to finish your lunch before you click on it, though.

Jim K
September 18, 2012, 12:47 PM
Could it be done? Sure.

Would anyone buy it? Hmmmm.

Jim

460Kodiak
September 18, 2012, 02:47 PM
The burn isn't even the problem...


Point taken. Gas cutting as well. It would suck big time and I wouldn't want my arm near by if the blast shield failed.

roger460xvr
September 18, 2012, 08:35 PM
Ruger makes a single-shot in 460cal. Called the no.1 rilfe...

JShirley
September 19, 2012, 11:51 AM
You know, I was thinking this morning, as I do occasionally, of how neat a little bolt-action .454 Casull with a 17" barrel would be. M4 style sliding stock, bolt on the left hand for speed.

Just a dream...for now.

John

If you enjoyed reading about "Modifying a S&W 460xvr: Revolver carbine" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!