Why aren't 9mm revolvers more popular?

Why isn't 9 mm more popular in revolvers?

  • Because not enough people like moon clips

    Votes: 24 21.1%
  • Because 9 mm is not as versatile as 38 Spl / 357 Mag

    Votes: 23 20.2%
  • Because it's easier to shoot from auto pistols

    Votes: 29 25.4%
  • Other

    Votes: 38 33.3%

  • Total voters
    114
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
" How is it incompetent to compete with a rimmed cartridge? I can't even fathom what that means".

I don't know what that means either.
I've been reloading since the 1960s, but for the last year I can't find any primers, so for the moment, I am not reloading.
 
I replied to your post... Everything you said didn't apply to the question at hand... 9mm is foreign... So what? How many US manufacturers make the round?

9mm is incompetent? What does that even mean?

44 caliber and 45 caliber also have nothing to do with 9mm revolvers.

Why am I replying to a troll? Sorry Moderators, feel free to delete...

I answered the OP's question. I don't think I am doing anything improper by answering the question and explaining my reasons.
 
No need to change those.
True, depending on what tolerance you running. SAAMI spec would certainly allow for the same barrel to be use for both cartridges. That said I know few company that hold tolerances on bore and groove diameter anywhere as loose as SAAMI allows (-.000/+.004). Most barrel makers are holding -.000/+.001 and have district barrels for 9mm and 38/357 (Nominal groove diameters of .355 and .357 respectively) that said it would be in SAAMI spec to use those interchangeable if you chose.
 
Tall, you're not. But I still don't have any idea at all what you mean when you say that 9mm is incompetent.
 
Which barrel makers?

Pretty much any of them. Some might go as loose as .000/+.002 but almost none of them go as loose as SAAMI would allow. Some of the rifle makers are holding even tighter tolerance on bore and grove diameter. A barrel that varied its bore or groove diameter by .004 inch would in most case be a pretty lousy barrel. Remember the rifling's in most modern gun barrels are only .0035-.005 inches deep.
 
I'm not thinking in terms of variations from end to end of one barrel but that A barrel can differ from spec by a good deal. I have read of more than one Beretta 9mm barrel at .358" if not .359.

Colt .38/.357 barrels were notably smaller than Smith and the old old American Rifleman article on wadcutters said they had a special order H&G mold made for their .354" Pfeiffer custom barrel.

Mike Heffron says he knows and will replicate the Colt Silver Ball process to produce a polished tapered bore in YOUR revolver. Woo, woo.

The .38 Super was a +P (or +P+, depending) version of the .38 ACP -- the two cartridges are dimensionally identical but loaded to different pressures.

Yes, but the Webley Fosbery .38 High Velocity was made in 1910, considerably predating the Super.
 
Tall, you're not. But I still don't have any idea at all what you mean when you say that 9mm is incompetent.

9MM has no rim therefore - like the 45 ACP - it is not suitable for a revolver without crutching it by using some sort of clip so the rounds can be extracted. The GI's used rim clips with the 45 ACP as a crutch to get through WWI and later some were even used in WWII (and by the Brazilians) but they were intended to be discarded, not re - used. The 45 Auto Rim was the ultimate fix.

The 9mm like the 45 ACP is designed to work in an autoloading pistol.
 
9MM has no rim therefore - like the 45 ACP - it is not suitable for a revolver without crutching it by using some sort of clip so the rounds can be extracted. The GI's used rim clips with the 45 ACP as a crutch to get through WWI and later some were even used in WWII (and by the Brazilians) but they were intended to be discarded, not re - used. The 45 Auto Rim was the ultimate fix.

The 9mm like the 45 ACP is designed to work in an autoloading pistol.

Let's see a 2-second reload using loose rounds.

Moonclips (2 rd and half moon) started out as a stop gap measure to supplement the 1911 production with revolvers while still using the same 45 ACP ammo. The moonclip has since evolved into the fastest most reliable way to reload a revolver when time is of the essences. Moonclips for rimless cartridges are thicker and more robust than moonclips for rimmed cartridges. In addition since the extractor groove is part of the SAAMI spec for rimless cartridge dimensions those groves are consistent and thus it is easy to make one size moonclip that work with nearly any and all brands of brass. The moonclip grove for rimmed cartridges is not part of the SAAMI spec and not even require so each manufacture has their own idea for whose dimensions of the groove should be and thus you end up with a much more finicky pairing of moonclips to brass. This often requires pairing specific sized moonclips to particular brands of brass.

Not everyone needs to reload a revolver fast but those that do know that moonclips are the best way to make that happen and rimless cartridge work best on moonclips.

IMG_20200720_190709.jpg
Moonclip fed revolvers rule!
 
I can tell you why I was never interested. Why buy an expensive new gun chambered for a round I’m not in love with, when there are plenty of great revolvers chambered in .38spl.

That being said, I think the tactical/SD crowd loves semi-autos and the revolver aficionados, by and large, don’t care about reloading speed or the theoretical increased terminal effects of 9mm vs their favorite revolver cartridge.
 
"Let's see a 2-second reload using loose rounds".

I'm not very fast. It takes me 3 using moonclips.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcb
"Let's see a 2-second reload using loose rounds".

I'm not very fast. It takes me 3 using moonclips.
Gerry use to do a reload just a shade over 1 second if I remember right when he set some of his world records. I can hit two seconds if I try real hard standing still. That said most of my actual reloads during matches are slower but I am usual moving when I do them so as long as I am reloaded before I get to the next shooting position I am good to go.
 
And I'm not a fan of .38 Sp, except for plinking use in my Henry lever action.
 
" How is it incompetent to compete with a rimmed cartridge? I can't even fathom what that means".

I don't know what that means either.
I think he means that a rimmed cartridge has more room for powder and bullet, so it has a higher ceiling than the 9 mm, with its small capacity. For example, in 357 Magnum pressures (even in a 38 case) a 38 would most likely walk away from 9 mm in terms of bullet weight and muzzle energy. This is not inherent to it being rimmed though, it's because 38 Spl was originally a blackpowder cartridge, so it had 4X as much capacity as we need for the same energy level now with smokeless propellants.

I've been reloading since the 1960s, but for the last year I can't find any primers, so for the moment, I am not reloading.
I had the same problem locally and finally just paid the extra and ordered some from a gunbroker seller. Really expensive, compared to what we're used to, but still not as expensive as buying loaded ammo. I think I paid $180 for a 1000 ct brick of small pistol primers, but they'll last me awhile.
 
Same answer as if the question was 327 Mag revolver.
Most people would rather have 11+ rounds (Sig 365, Hellcat) than just 6 or 5.
 
For me, if I came across a great deal on a 9mm revolver, I might buy it. But for a .355/.357, I would prefer a 357 magnum revolver. Much more flexibility from mild to wild. It's not that I have anything against 9mm, I own a couple - semi-autos.
 
"I would prefer a 357 magnum revolver. Much more flexibility from mild to wild".

Recoil from a 147gr 9mm in a 12 ounce J-frame HURTS.
I don't think I want to try .357 Mag in mine.
 
"I would prefer a 357 magnum revolver. Much more flexibility from mild to wild".

Recoil from a 147gr 9mm in a 12 ounce J-frame HURTS.
I don't think I want to try .357 Mag in mine.
Yeah, I think they're going overboard with light revolvers. They're already at a disadvantage, felt recoil-wise, compared to a similar size/weight pistol. To go and make frames from polymer aluminum just makes it worse.
Even a standard pressure 38 Spl in my 15 oz LCR is unpleasant.

I think Ruger needs to make a MCR (Medium-weight Compact revolver) It would be the same as the LCR, but with a steel frame & short cylinder, so it'd be smaller than the SP-101, which is their HCR. (Heavyweight Compact Revolver) Then, resist the urge to sell it in magnum. Strictly 9 mm. Either do the moonclip thing (I've read the latest Ruger moonclips are easy to load/unload) or license Charter Arms' clipless design.
 
I looked hard at auto caliber clip guns early days of IDPA SSR. I thought a SW .38 super was expensive, so I was hunting for a Ruger Service Six but could not find a 4". So I tinkered with .38 clip conversions which I did not see a great advantage in. Just as well, IDPA raised the power factor for clip loaders and only my sawn off M25 .45 was competitive.
 
"Yeah, I think they're going overboard with light revolvers,"

I don't. I'm 80, my brother is 83. We really appreciate the light weight J-frames and have knocked an additional couple of ounces off with titanium cylinders and center pins. His weighs 11.5 ounces, mine 12.5. The 9mm recoil is painful, but they are a delight to carry. He has had to use his to thwart a wee hours home invasion and physical attack. He fired three rounds and says he didn't notice the 9mm recoil at all.
 
I went to a gun store intending to buy a Kahr PM9 but they didn't have one and ended up buying a Scandium 5 shot 357 Smith something or other.
I bought it to carry during a cross country trip and only shot 38sp thru it before heading out.
At the end of the trip, I took that lightweight gun to the range with some 357 ammo and had replaced the boot-gun oem grip with something bigger.
I shot some 38sp and then loaded 5 rounds of 357, shot two and unloaded the rest...ouch.
I stopped a gun store and traded that revolver for a Kahr PM9 that I had to wait for.

So, yeh, feather weight revolvers, in any caliber, are not for me.
That said, I just ordered a Charter Arms, 9mm, 5 shot, 4.2"-barreled, Adj. sight, Bull Dog. :thumbup:
Charter Arms Pitbull 4.2" 9mm Revolver | 79942 | Stainless/Silver, 4.2" Barrel, 5 Rounds, Rubber Grips, 3-Dot Sights - Buds Gun Shop
and no moon clips!
.
 
I went to a gun store intending to buy a Kahr PM9 but they didn't have one and ended up buying a Scandium 5 shot 357 Smith something or other.
I bought it to carry during a cross country trip and only shot 38sp thru it before heading out.
At the end of the trip, I took that lightweight gun to the range with some 357 ammo and had replaced the boot-gun oem grip with something bigger.
I shot some 38sp and then loaded 5 rounds of 357, shot two and unloaded the rest...ouch.
I stopped a gun store and traded that revolver for a Kahr PM9 that I had to wait for.

So, yeh, feather weight revolvers, in any caliber, are not for me.
That said, I just ordered a Charter Arms, 9mm, 5 shot, 4.2"-barreled, Adj. sight, Bull Dog. :thumbup:
Charter Arms Pitbull 4.2" 9mm Revolver | 79942 | Stainless/Silver, 4.2" Barrel, 5 Rounds, Rubber Grips, 3-Dot Sights - Buds Gun Shop
and no moon clips!
.

Moonclips Rule! I would have a Charter Arms Pitbull in 40S&W if it use moonclips. Without moonclips it not nearly as interesting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top