Top break revolvers that are safe to shoot

Well there's the H&R 999 in .22rf, but apart from that one you're looking for antiques... in which case the things that count are condition, black or smokeless, and of course price.

Best bet would prolly be a Webley or an Enfield.

I have both a Webley and an old Iver Johnson in 38 S&W that I shoot.

Take care with the Webleys'. Many were converted to shoot 45 acp ammunition which in it's hotter loads is too much for the old guns. Mild loads are fine and I love shooting mine

Anderson Wheeler makes an extremely nice 7 shot top break in 357 magnum. Buts not cheap.

Dewey 68 said:

I will start doing more research on these, thank you.

Click to expand...

I have at least one example of most of the major types of double action top break revolvers, and overall I would say an Enfield or Webley in .38 caliber is going to be your best bet for a gun to shoot frequently. The guns are originally designed around the .38/200 or British .380 revolver cartridge, and can be fired with any commercially available ammunition that is marked .38S&W.

I believe H&R made a top break 38 SW into the 1960s. You might run across one of those.

ebeys made after WW1 are plenty strong enough to shoot anything they were originally chambered for

Howdy

Iver Johnson redesigned their Top Break revolvers around the turn of the Century (1900) with better steel to be safe to fire with Smokeless Powder.

There are three distinct ways to identify a Smokeless Powder Iver Johnson.

1. the little owl on the grip faces away from the trigger.
2. If you remove the grips, the hammer spring is a coil spring.
3. The locking slots on the cylinder have a hard edge both top and bottom, meaning the bolt locks the cylinder in position in battery.

This Iver Johnson would be perfectly safe to fire with modern 38S&W ammunition.






Iver Johnson revolvers made prior to that should only be fired with Black Powder ammunition, not modern Smokeless ammo. Note on this one,

1. the little owl is facing towards the trigger.
2. Underneath the grips, the hammer spring is a leaf spring.
3. Notice the shape of the cylinder locking slots with only one hard edge. The hand kept the cylinder from rotating backwards.

The steel on these older Iver Johnson revolvers is not up to modern Smokeless ammunition, I don't care what anybody else says.






Some Smith and Wesson Top Break pocket pistols can be fired with Modern Smokeless ammo, some should not.

Unlike Colt, with a hard line in the sand of 1900, it is tricky to determine exactly when their Top Break pocket pistols are safe to fire with modern ammunition.

The 38 Double Action Perfected model was produced from 1907 until 1920. It was the most modern of the small Top Break pistols S&W made. Easily identified because the trigger guard is integral with the frame. Also, you have to push the thumb piece forward at the same time you lift up the barrel latch in order to open the gun for loading and unloading. The ones pictured were made in, left to right, 1912, 1917, and 1913. I would not hesitate to shoot any of them with modern Smokeless ammo.






I have a bunch more S&W Top Break pocket pistols chambered for 32 S&W and 38 S&W. I would be leery to fire any of them with modern Smokeless ammo. I do know when most of them shipped, the newest shipped in 1905. I would be leery of shooting it with modern Smokeless ammo because I do not know if the 1905 steel would be up to it.

I hear you @Driftwood Johnson and yet my poor second model Iver Johnson Safety Automatic has eaten several boxes of PPU, Magtech and Remington 38 S&W without issue. The modern 38 S&W is loaded so anemic, using similar weight or lighter bullets than the original black-powder cartridges going slower than the original black-powder cartridges. I understand this is no indication that the peak pressure is lower than the black powder cartridge but for better or worst it has proven to work. YMMV.

I put J-frame target grips on an S&W Perfected Model and shot it back in the days when I could still see sights that tiny. It was quite accurate. Unfortunately. Perfected Models are usually expensive unless they are very rough or badly refinished.

I would go with a Webley Mark 6 if you can find one that isn't too expensive. The last iteration of the .455 Webleys and made in large numbers.
Or a .455 Mark IV or V.
Ammunition can be made by shortening .45 Colt cases and thinning the rims from the inside. The brass is the same thickness.
Standard 250 grain .454 bullets, either cast or JHP are correct. Or just use 225 grain cast round nose .45ACP bullets straight from the mold, without sizing. (Lyman 452374)
I'm pretty sure that the longer Mark I case will work in all marks of revolvers, even though the Mark II case was shortened for cordite.
(less pressure - more air space)

Monac said:

I put J-frame target grips on an S&W Perfected Model and shot it back in the days when I could still see sights that tiny. It was quite accurate. Unfortunately. Perfected Models are usually expensive unless they are very rough or badly refinished.

Click to expand...

This is how I got my very late production Perfected model. It has an ugly line of missing finish on the cylinder like it sat in a puddle of hoppes or something for too long, and a spattering of light rust freckling on a few different places. Mechanically it's perfect and seems like it was fired very little, but the slightly ugly finish got me a pretty good deal.

The North American Arms Ranger II is out and plenty safe to shoot with, but I take it you want something that's larger.

H&R made the 925 Defender, a .38 S&W top break, in the 70s/80s. It's not based on the obsolete design of top breaks they were making the in the first half of the 20th Century and all the ones I see on Gunbroker are usually in very good condition and under $300.

Here's one, I forgot they have nice sights too, probably the best sights on any top break ever made outside of the H&R 999.

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/832754399

I got a 6 shot .32 S&W Long H&R years ago to scratch the top break itch and I figured since I was going to be buying .32 Mag and .327 revolvers in the future, it made sense to get a .32 instead of a .38 S&W.

However, those 925 Defenders look very good and if I didn't already have my .32 H&R top break, I'd seriously consider the 925 Defender, buy a set of .38 S&W dies, suck it up and load 50 rounds at a time.

If you find an H&R 32 S&W with the right markings, it is safe to shoot with 32 S&W long, which is not all that hard to find.

I've forgotten the details, so you would have to do some research. I think I figured it out online in 20 minutes or so.

IIRC, it was easy to see on Gunbroker which ones were the correct vintage. After a bit of searching, I found one and won it for a bid of $80 or so.

However, it has some mechanical problem or other and does not ignite the rounds reliably. I haven't gotten around to fixing or replacing it.

My goal was a top-break revolver that wouldn't be too expensive and would shoot ammo that wasn't very difficult to find.

I will be retiring this Spring. After that I will probably find another one of the same vintage and use the first one as a parts gun.

TTv2 said:

The North American Arms Ranger II is out and plenty safe to shoot with, but I take it you want something that's larger.

H&R made the 925 Defender, a .38 S&W top break, in the 70s/80s. It's not based on the obsolete design of top breaks they were making the in the first half of the 20th Century and all the ones I see on Gunbroker are usually in very good condition and under $300.

Here's one, I forgot they have nice sights too, probably the best sights on any top break ever made outside of the H&R 999.

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/832754399

I got a 6 shot .32 S&W Long H&R years ago to scratch the top break itch and I figured since I was going to be buying .32 Mag and .327 revolvers in the future, it made sense to get a .32 instead of a .38 S&W.

However, those 925 Defenders look very good and if I didn't already have my .32 H&R top break, I'd seriously consider the 925 Defender, buy a set of .38 S&W dies, suck it up and load 50 rounds at a time.

Click to expand...

Here is the H&R that later became the "Defender" model. This one is from before they used model numbers or even the imprinted name.

The serial number on this one places it as likely made in 1938 or 1939.

So H&R was making those a lot longer than I thought. .38 S&W is weak by today's standards, but I imagine they could have also made a .45 S&W or, even better, a .45 Auto Rim top break and could have sold millions of those.

RevolvingGarbage said:

This is how I got my very late production Perfected model. It has an ugly line of missing finish on the cylinder like it sat in a puddle of hoppes or something for too long, and a spattering of light rust freckling on a few different places. Mechanically it's perfect and seems like it was fired very little, but the slightly ugly finish got me a pretty good deal.View attachment 863337

Click to expand...

That looks like an excellent shooter, RevolvingGarbage. I like that barrel length too. And "handsome is as handsome does."

TTv2 said:

So H&R was making those a lot longer than I thought. .38 S&W is weak by today's standards, but I imagine they could have also made a .45 S&W or, even better, a .45 Auto Rim top break and could have sold millions of those.

Click to expand...

I think that when H&R might have had the capital to tool up for that (say in the 1950's or 1960's) there was no demand because of all the surplus Webley's and US Army 1917's that were still dirt cheap. And when there might have been a demand (say the 1980's on), H&R barely had the money to retool for 32 Magnum, let alone a new 45-size gun.

I've always wondered why they did not make guns for 38 Special Wadcutter ONLY. It has the pretty much the same ballistics and pressure than 38 S&W (because that's how it was designed) and used to be far more widely available. It would have been a better self defense choice than 32 Long, IMO. There's probably some common sense reason I have overlooked. But a 5-shot 999 in 38 Wadcutter would have made sense to me.

45 Auto Rim is seems to be one of those things it would make sense for people to want, but they don't. I always thought the Charter Arms Bulldog would have made more sense in 45 ACP/Auto Rim (shorter, cheaper, and more widely available cartridge) but pretty much nobody else did. Most people hate to fool with moon clips, I guess.

Fun fact: Russia developed a modern top-break .357 that never made it to market. I guess a mix of politics with a rumor
.357 was too powerful for a reasonably sized top latch.

Called the MP-412 Rex.

I wish they could have come to market. Top breaks are cool.

I have an S&W Safety Hammerless top break chambered in 32 S&W that was my wife's uncle's revolver. I've fired it a little, less than a box, but I feel it deserves a well earned retirement.

A bit more modern revolver with mild loads would be safe and fun to shoot.

I used to think the IJ Trailman 66/Vikings were well nigh indestructable as they were made in 60s and 70s with "modern ordinance steel and aircraft alloys" and were very beefy in design- no dinky top latch like earlier ones. BUT now is the time for Tinker Pearce to show his Bomb