Does anyone still make theses Revolver Carbines anymore? Can’t seem to find any.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Apr 2, 2019
Messages
157
Location
Akron ohio
140C7930-64B9-4278-82E7-17C487685627.jpeg I e been looking high and low for one of these. Uberti still makes them, but with no pistol grip, just a straight stock.

I’d love to have one for my collection. 45LC to be exact.

I have the Heritage Rough Rider in 22lr/mag. It’s fun. But I’d like the real thing.
 
Guess you'd have to get a .45 LC revolver with the longest barrel available and add a stock to it. Maybe can even get a longer barrel fabricated?
 
Barrel has to be greater than 16” to add a buttstock. Not sure anyone is offering a 16” buntline these days.

Oh yeah, another government regulation. Well then a custom barrel is in order, so this .45 is going to be an expensive gun but might be worth it.
 
Barrel has to be greater than 16” to add a buttstock. Not sure anyone is offering a 16” buntline these days.
Uberti has (or at least had) a SAA clone with an 18 inch barrel. It has the capability to mount a stock. I never got around to it for mine but it could certainly be done.
 
There are some made, mostly reproductions of another age, but some are for specific purposes. The biggest reason revolver rifles were not commercially successful in the main was the cylinder gap would singe your shirt sleeve or forearm if not careful. And lever gun design quickly became affordable and reliable.
 
Uberti has (or at least had) a SAA clone with an 18 inch barrel. It has the capability to mount a stock. I never got around to it for mine but it could certainly be done.
Ultimately I may end up with one of them. But they don’t have the pistol grip I’m hoping for. I know it’s picky, but I love the look.


They are both made Uberti. You are right. But both also have the straight stock. I’m really hoping for something with the pistol grip. It’s picky, but I love the look.

There are some made, mostly reproductions of another age, but some are for specific purposes. The biggest reason revolver rifles were not commercially successful in the main was the cylinder gap would singe your shirt sleeve or forearm if not careful. And lever gun design quickly became affordable and reliable.

yup. They have a few quirks. That’s for sure. But are still fun to shoot.
 
Never understood why some people are so fascinated by the concept. The very first guns Colt produced at the Paterson factory were shotguns and rifles but there are very good reasons why they never caught on.
If you saw the rest of my collect you might understand. I don’t collect normal guns. Antiquated does not mean boring. Many are actualy quite fun to shoot.

I have a large collection of Floberts as well as some single shot shot guns. For me shooting is about having fun while doing it. Not Necessarily the most practical guns but just fun 42D7B657-55FB-44F7-ACDB-2D83D81ADB7B.jpeg BFC0B701-48C0-4B0F-9511-9B00E60A45B4.jpeg 9C1BA1F4-4942-4E83-8219-94F909151C17.jpeg

A few for fun
 
Love the 1911 carbine! I’ve always wanted an SBR version.:)
And, of course, the Pocket Hammerless goes great with a deLisle carbine!:D

Your collection is more interesting than mine for certain.:thumbup:
 
Never understood why some people are so fascinated by the concept. The very first guns Colt produced at the Paterson factory were shotguns and rifles but there are very good reasons why they never caught on.

Because everyone is different, we like what we like. I know people that can't understand why I like single action revolvers....there is no case at all for them. Double action they "can" see, from the simplicity aspect, but a single action there is no reason to have one past you enjoy it.
 
Because everyone is different, we like what we like. I know people that can't understand why I like single action revolvers....there is no case at all for them. Double action they "can" see, from the simplicity aspect, but a single action there is no reason to have one past you enjoy it.
Big difference between liking something that's different and liking something that doesn't work.
 
Big difference between liking something that's different and liking something that doesn't work.

So you are saying the things made today don't work?

Yes I understand in days gone by and the dangers of a chain fire, but that was then and this is now, and do you really think that a large company would put out a product that does not work or would be a law suit waiting to happen?
 
So you are saying the things made today don't work?

Yes I understand in days gone by and the dangers of a chain fire, but that was then and this is now, and do you really think that a large company would put out a product that does not work or would be a law suit waiting to happen?
Have you ever fired a revolving long gun? Obviously not.
 
Must say... this reminds me of the small problem that shooters of riot guns with folding metal stocks encountered.. If your face was in close proximity to that metal stock in the extended position- you were likely to need a bandaid or two after firing it... I was very lucky all those years ago and got to see a few living examples - before I ever thought of trying out that folding stock Remington 870... I suspect that the revolver carbine probably looks a lot better than it actually shoots...
 
Never understood why some people are so fascinated by the concept.

I gotta admit, @CraigC , I saw a Carbine-ized Redhawk a couple of years ago, and it made me lust HARD for a Super Redhawk version with a GP44 nose job and a Bayside style float tube to support the handguard, thinking of a 357/44 B&D or a 44/454 wildcat. I’ve had two revolving carbines in the past, and stocked and rebarreled a Super Blackhawk once for the novelty of it, but I agree, it’s largely a gimmick. But I might be ok with owning a gimmick 44/454 Super Redhawk Carbine as a deer and hog hammer!
 
I gotta admit, @CraigC , I saw a Carbine-ized Redhawk a couple of years ago, and it made me lust HARD for a Super Redhawk version with a GP44 nose job and a Bayside style float tube to support the handguard, thinking of a 357/44 B&D or a 44/454 wildcat. I’ve had two revolving carbines in the past, and stocked and rebarreled a Super Blackhawk once for the novelty of it, but I agree, it’s largely a gimmick. But I might be ok with owning a gimmick 44/454 Super Redhawk Carbine as a deer and hog hammer!
It would probably be fine if it had some sort of blast shield to keep from burning your forearm. You would certainly have a performance advantage with a 16-18" SRH over the current crop of leverguns. I'm going to have JRH tune one of the new Taylor's 1-20" twist 1892's to basically accomplish the same thing, 50,000psi and looooong bullets.

Or I guess you could wear an archer's arm guard. :neener:
 
It would probably be fine if it had some sort of blast shield to keep from burning your forearm.

That’s one advantage of using the Bayside shroud design - a guy can mount a blast shield fitting backwards from the shroud under the BC gap to redirect blast. I have seen spoon shape shields wrapped around the side of the cylinder, and I just don’t like that look, but something keeping the blast up and away from the forearm would be nice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top