A carry revolver for the future
- Thread starter pairof44sp
- Start date
- Status
Ohen Cepel
Member
I have been thinking about a .38SPC with the cylinder cut down as short as possible to be wadcutter only and then the frame made smaller to match the reduced cylinder. Yes, would limit ammo choices but don't need a new round, there are defense loads made like that now, and you get a fair amount of reduction doing that.
I like the .32's a lot but that has lots of challenges to make the ammo right but keep fools from not blowing weak guns up with it.
I like the .32's a lot but that has lots of challenges to make the ammo right but keep fools from not blowing weak guns up with it.
chicharrones
needs more ammo
Cutting edge tech for sure.
OP
OP
pairof44sp
Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2020
- Messages
- 783
Seriously? Of course I did.
I wouldn’t start a THR thread topic without first “com(ing) up with a deign for the internals and calculated the force required to pull the trigger”
You can re-check my calculations, below:
mcb
Member
Why would a shorter cylinder and frame effect trigger pull at all? The diameter would not change It would not change any of the geometry of the trigger or the mechanism that advances the cylinder. If anything it would help at least in fast double action, as the cylinder would be lighter with a lower mass moment of inertia.
BobWright
Member
does anyone use or recommend a thumb forward revolver grip? On that note, isn't there an old Russian revolver that closes the cylinder gap in the mechanicals?
Jim Watson
Member
A friend uses a left forefinger forward grip on a revolver. Comes back with a smoked finger but not shooting hot loads and his Python is actually in time, so nothing worse.
You can say that again!
How To Properly Grip a Revolver - TheFireArmGuy
He does spend a lot of time explaining what will happen if your thumb gets too close to the cylinder gap...
.
mcb
Member
None of the mechanism for the firecontrol or the cylinder advance exists in the parts of the revolver the OP wants to shorten.
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-24300789290c2139dc8ae52a948b16a3
There is nothing forward of the cylinder stop so you should be able to easily short the frame down to at least the front of the trigger guard without changing any of the lock-works. The only thing that would be impacted would be the yoke pivot but that is a simple mechanism to change and make more compact.
This thread, like any number of threads I've read over the years yearn for smaller, lighter, higher capacity self defense handguns (pistols and revolvers). Everyone wants to drop it in their pocket and forget about it.
What I seldom see discussed is how hard it is to shoot very small handguns, particularly quickly and under duress. Add a round that might provide some self-defense capability and it gets even harder. Be careful what you wish for, you might just end up with it and find you can't hit anything.
YMMV,
Dave
What I seldom see discussed is how hard it is to shoot very small handguns, particularly quickly and under duress. Add a round that might provide some self-defense capability and it gets even harder. Be careful what you wish for, you might just end up with it and find you can't hit anything.
YMMV,
Dave
chicharrones
needs more ammo
Those guns are already out there. Usually a mousegun sized autoloader. Or an NAA Mini, if we're talking single action revolvers.
However, the idea of a S&W I-frame DA revolver in a modern configuration with 6 shots in some sort of .32 sure seems interesting. Probably virtually archaic these days, though.
About five years ago, I was thinking something very similar to what the OP posted.
"Gee, I wish a quality brand would make a solid, stainless steel .357. Snubnose, with a good trigger, hammerless, good sights, and a six round cylinder."
In my case, I got lucky, apparently, a designer at Kimber was thinking the same thing.
"Gee, I wish a quality brand would make a solid, stainless steel .357. Snubnose, with a good trigger, hammerless, good sights, and a six round cylinder."
In my case, I got lucky, apparently, a designer at Kimber was thinking the same thing.
OP
OP
pairof44sp
Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2020
- Messages
- 783
If I had $5M to burn on the low-pro hi-cap concept, I’d be calling Kimber to pitch a partnership.
Imagine that it’s 2016, and you just heard a rumor about the p365 coming out.
Then some commenter named KimberTHR says, “I’ve never made a revolver in my life, but I think the world is crying out for a new 357 snub nose. What do you think?”
People would have told him he was an idiot.
Gordon
Member
I am real happy with this super tuned New Vaquero .357 I walked around with in Cave Junction the last month or so . It gets respect 
Gordon
Member
I am real happy with this super tuned New Vaquero .357 I walked around with in Cave Junction the last month or so . It gets respect
View attachment 995928
My carry gun is a Model 731 Taurus Total Titanium . It is 6 rounds of .32 H&R Magnum with a 2 inch barrel. I'm not crazy about bobbed or so called hammerless guns in DA only, so I am very pleased with this Taurus . It doesn't have the extreme blast noise of the .327 Magnum, it is light, accurate and has been totally reliable for about 15 years of shooting. I have a couple I frame S&W M1903's in .32 S&W longs I shoot, but don't hot rod them. I would love to have that 8 shot of "pairof44sp"s' shoot me a $# by PM if you want to sell.
Tallball
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,804
I shot some 327's yesterday. I hadn't shot any for a while.
My friend and I were using my 4.2" SP101.
Maybe it's because we're kind of big guys and it's a moderately stout revolver...
But the 327's were not awe-inspiring. I saw no fireballs, and they didn't kick a whole lot more than the box of 32 S&W long that we shot just before that.
I have a few revolvers in 32 H&R, and they are even less impressive as far as recoil and pyrotechnics go.
My friend and I were using my 4.2" SP101.
Maybe it's because we're kind of big guys and it's a moderately stout revolver...
But the 327's were not awe-inspiring. I saw no fireballs, and they didn't kick a whole lot more than the box of 32 S&W long that we shot just before that.
I have a few revolvers in 32 H&R, and they are even less impressive as far as recoil and pyrotechnics go.
OP
OP
pairof44sp
Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2020
- Messages
- 783
“would love to see the I-frame come back and chamber it in 5-shots of 9mm or 38 Super on moonclips. If you did 9mm you could probably shorted the frame another 1/8" to 1/4" and still have room to spare.”
This is exactly the concept I was trying to get across.
I didn’t even get into the moonclip part. That gets into to the ammo and it’s too much detail.
But the “.32 Super” would be a .3125 bullet in rimless brass, no longer OAL than necessary, on thick, polymer, 7 or 8 round moonclips.
They’d be the world’s first “carry moonclip”
more wide than deep
.32 Super would be used also, later on, in the 20-round polymer micro compact doublesinglestack SIG p365.32 that we’re gonna invent after the revolver is through
halfmoonclip
Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2011
- Messages
- 2,760
A little confused about the 'more wide than deep' notion with the moonclips.
What I've found are autopistol rounds in moonclips work better than revolver ones, simply because the shorter auto rounds stay in place. They could be carried.
What gets weird with autopistol rounds in revos is recoil. The Smith 325 can be an unpleasant handful with hardball, and even a 940 J-gun isn't much fun with certain loads.
Now if you really want to think outside the box, talk to the folks at Chiappa. Don't know if there is a way to shrink their Rhinos down to pocket size.
Moon
What I've found are autopistol rounds in moonclips work better than revolver ones, simply because the shorter auto rounds stay in place. They could be carried.
What gets weird with autopistol rounds in revos is recoil. The Smith 325 can be an unpleasant handful with hardball, and even a 940 J-gun isn't much fun with certain loads.
Now if you really want to think outside the box, talk to the folks at Chiappa. Don't know if there is a way to shrink their Rhinos down to pocket size.
Moon
OP
OP
pairof44sp
Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2020
- Messages
- 783
More wide than deep
The idea is a moonclip that can be carried.
Instead of say 6x45 Colt flopping around more deep than wide,
a short rimless round x 8 rounds on a thick polymer moonclip gives you a broad/shallow design where the rounds don’t flop around or hang up in their way into the cylinder.
the worlds first carry moonclip
- Status
