Small Revolvers used as Kit Guns

Status
Not open for further replies.
chicharrones said:
If it wasn't for that ejector rod housing . . .
Ruger could make a shorty Single Six , with a birdshead grip, and 10 shot capacity . . . call it the ShopOwner. ;)
Click to expand...
Email them that idea and they may just make it. Would put them a step ahead of Heritage who make a bird's head, but only with 6 shot cylinder.
 
Maia007 said:
Here is a SW 22/32 Kit Gun, Model of 1953 built on the Improved I frame with a coil mainspring. Also shown in a Model 63-0 in stainless.

View attachment 905503

I do not ascribe to the belief that the definition of a Kit Gun is arbitrary or that a Kit Gun can be simply whatever you want it to be.

A Kit Gun is a revolver, on a small frame, in a small caliber (.22, .32 SW or SWL, but probably not a .38 or larger). It features typically, but not necessarily, barrel lengths of 4" or shorter, and ADUSTABLE sights. Among the primary jobs this gun needed to do was to take SMALL game. For this task, adjustable sights are necessary, I think, so that you adjust your sights to your most accurate load, rather than relying on Kentucky windage. Kits were fairly lightweight and had good triggers.
Click to expand...

Due to my recent shooting comparison between my Bearcat Shopkeeper and Charter Arms Pocket Target, I'm with you now on the adjustable sights requirement under the S&W definition.

I've got the Bearcat real close to on the money due to me adjusting the front sight blade back when I got the gun. However, at 10 yards I still have to hold the front sight one blade width to the left of a 1" target dot to hit that 1" dot*. If that was the only gun I ever carried, it would be second nature to do that and I would be less likely to miss on the first shot.

Now with the Pocket Target, I can simply use a small screwdriver and give the rear sight screws a slight turn, and I can shoot the gun on the money without having to remember a sight picture hold.

*Both revolvers fired with my forearms rested in attempts to hit that 1" dot at 10 yards.
 
Last edited:
dickydalton said:
The original "Kit Guns" were 22 cal. Sorry
Click to expand...

And just to add to my other response yes the original "Kit Guns" were in 22 caliber. Reduced from the 32 caliber guns. But if you look at the group of guns I posted a picture of the 32s and 38 will fit in the same space and use no more room inside the kit than the 22 uses. Several here have posted other than 22 guns that all serve the purpose of being small, relatively light weight and good for small game hunting or whatever your use is for a kit gun. The overwhelming advantage to the 22 as a kit gun is the small size of the ammo and the fact that you can pack so much more of it in the same space. Thats why I stated the 38 was "questionable" as a kit gun. But what a trail gun it is. Lots more punch for bigger stuff in the same size package.
 
chicharrones said:
A few years ago I wanted a S&W 63, but the Ruger Bearcat got my money. Then a few months ago, I wanted a 63 again but a few other guns happened and one of those is that Charter Arms Pocket-Target (aka Pathfinder). I still have yet to hold a 63, probably a regretful thing on my part. :oops:
Click to expand...

If you do get your hands on one you may not like the “Combat” factory grip. I did not, but I do like the Hogue Monogrip and that grip makes all the difference in the gun. I really like it now.
 
I have two I consider "kit guns." The first is one of the original pre-lock S&W 317s. I sold my first (like an idiot) and spent years looking for another to replace it. This one isn't going anywhere. Just wish I still had the Alessi Talon holster I sold with the original.
index.php


The second, while not a .22 so doesn’t meet definitional requirements, is small, light, and very handy. Charter Arms Bulldog in .44 Spl. With moderate loads, it is not at all uncomfortable to shoot. I would certainly include it in my kit.
index.php
 
Last edited:
Another ponderance . . .

Do y'all suppose another possible reason that Kit Guns were in .22 rimfire so they'd be easier on the ears without hearing protection? Kit Guns were introduced back when wearing hearing protection was much less common than now.

I'll admit to not wearing hearing protection shooting .22s up to the late 1990s. You know, back in that other century.
 
What kit gun I now use is the Phoenix HPA 22. Extremely reliable and accurate. Nice sights, trigger etc. Small enough to carry in a backpack etc.
 
Ratshooter said:
No problem. A 32RF huh? Where do you find ammo for that? :uhoh:
Click to expand...
Nowhere anymore hardly. But way back when I was looking for an 1892 Marlin Lever I had a S&W Model 2 Army in 32 Rimfire and I picked up quite a bit at decent prices. Now it's always over $120+ for a box of 50 and sometimes they are duds.
 
Last edited:
Mine's a 3" SP101 in .327 Fed Mag.

I'm loading .327 brass, but only up to about .32 H&R load levels. So far just 120gr RN/FPs. Shoots very nicely.

I chose this particular combination because if you're rolling your own you can load down to .32 S&W short power levels all the way up to full-house .327 magnum levels depending on what is needed. My present loads are for anything between a coon and a large dog in size. For bagging bunnies or squirrels I'd reduce the powder and the bullet weight.

This is Ruger's photo as I don't have one of my own.

5719.jpg
 
dickydalton said:
Now it's always over $120+ for a box of 50 and sometimes they are duds.
Click to expand...

Wow! Thats crazy. I had a French MAS 1935A in 32 French Long. I finally found a magazine for it but could never find ammo. Finally in disgust I took it to the GS and sold it cheap just to get it out of my life. Cool gun though with pretty good ballistics. Like lower level 32 mags in power.
 
chicharrones said:
Another ponderance . . .

Do y'all suppose another possible reason that Kit Guns were in .22 rimfire so they'd be easier on the ears without hearing protection? Kit Guns were introduced back when wearing hearing protection was much less common than now.

I'll admit to not wearing hearing protection shooting .22s up to the late 1990s. You know, back in that other century.
Click to expand...
IDK, .32's are pretty quiet if they're not magnums. I haven't shot them without hearing protection tho, no real reason to.

I think it was soley based on weight, price, and size.
 
dickydalton said:
Nowhere anymore hardly. But way back when I was looking for an 1892 Marlin Lever I had a S&W Model 2 Army in 32 Rimfire and I picked up quite a bit at decent prices. Now it's always over $120+ for a box of 50 and sometimes they are duds.
Click to expand...
There is a company in Belgium that has a reloading kit for .32, .38, and .41 rimfire. It uses a rimfire blank as the primer and a special case.

http://www.hlebooks.com/32rfkit/prices.htm

As you can imagine the cases are outrageously expensive (over $3), but they aren't being mass produced, so it's not a surprise. The idea is quite innovative and it works, Mike Belivue did a video on it to shoot .38 rimfire in a Remington New Model police conversion.

Given the number of .32 RF guns that were around at the turn of the 20th Century I could see a very small market that would be well served if someone would be willing to tool up a machine to produce the cases for less money. $1/case would be more than acceptable. .38 and .41 RF I don't see much interest in those.
 
Ratshooter said:
Wow! Thats crazy. I had a French MAS 1935A in 32 French Long. I finally found a magazine for it but could never find ammo. Finally in disgust I took it to the GS and sold it cheap just to get it out of my life. Cool gun though with pretty good ballistics. Like lower level 32 mags in power.
Click to expand...
And Starline just started making brass for that last year.

It was definitely an intriguing caliber, a rimless .32 with more power than .32 ACP and if used in a doublestack mag config would hold more rounds than 9mm.

Unfortunately, the market seems to have no interest in a semi auto .32 with more power than .32 ACP. The .32 NAA has been around for a while and outside of NAA and Diamondback, nobody ever bothered to make a pistol in that chambering and it would have been an excellent pocket pistol caliber 10 years ago given it shoots the exact same .32 bullets a .32 revolver uses at similar velocities, just using a necked down .380 case.

Instead, every doofus went kookoo for the .380 cocoa puffs because "bigga bullet, more powah" even tho the .32 NAA throws a better projectile at a similar weight to most .380 JHP's.
 
TTv2 said:
There is a company in Belgium that has a reloading kit for .32, .38, and .41 rimfire. It uses a rimfire blank as the primer and a special case.

http://www.hlebooks.com/32rfkit/prices.htm

As you can imagine the cases are outrageously expensive (over $3), but they aren't being mass produced, so it's not a surprise. The idea is quite innovative and it works, Mike Belivue did a video on it to shoot .38 rimfire in a Remington New Model police conversion.

Given the number of .32 RF guns that were around at the turn of the 20th Century I could see a very small market that would be well served if someone would be willing to tool up a machine to produce the cases for less money. $1/case would be more than acceptable. .38 and .41 RF I don't see much interest in those.
Click to expand...
I bought 6 of them and they work but they're slow. I also aquired a bunch of primed 32 Short cases that I loaded a few of with black powder and heel type bullets off GB.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

wmgeorge
  • Locked
What Happened to the Small Frame 22 Revolvers?
2 3 4 5
Replies
120
Views
9K
Pat Riot
Pat Riot
weblance
  • Locked
Why Aren't There More Small Frame 6 Shot Revolvers?
2
Replies
29
Views
6K
Drail
D
K
  • Locked
I need small frame .38 recommendations.
Replies
24
Views
1K
lowercase
lowercase
J
  • Locked
Small Carry revolver
2 3
Replies
55
Views
9K
greener
G
lowercase
Charter Pathfinder .22 lr 8-shot snub?
Replies
16
Views
924
lowercase
lowercase
Back
Top