A Kit Gun idea (.357 + .22).

Status
Not open for further replies.
Macchina

Macchina

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
998
A Trail Gun concept (.357 + .22).

I have a thing for trail guns. I have a 4.2" SP-101 in .357 and am working on getting a .22 revolver of similar proportions. The last couple nights I've laid in bed thinking about this firearm design. I wondered if .357 and .22 could fit in the same compact cylinder and fire in a selectable manner. With a gun like this you would have a carry gun for protection or big game hunting with the option to take shots with a .22 if small game were to be of opportunity. The idea as a Kit Gun would be to set the sights to the .22 barrel and be close with the .357. I have not completely thought out the lockwork yet, however I'm headed down two separate paths for function:

Function A: Double action mode lifts a transfer bar to the .357 firing pin as a standard revolver would. Single action mode would retract the hammer a bit further to both strike the rimfire harder and also cam the transfer bar over to the rimfire firing pin. This would allow fast shooting of the .357 and precise shooting of the .22

Function B: A selector switch on the frame would bump the transfer bar left or right and allows SA/DA firing of the entire cylinder in either caliber.

Both possibilities would use the same pawl and hand for alignment. The precision in boring the barrel bores would be critical (as is very possible with today's machinery). Both barrels aligning at the same time would be mandatory so that any mechanical failure cannot allow a bullet to be fired unaligned with its barrel. The transfer bar would need to move left and right to strike the two separate firing pins. Another option here may be to have two transfer bars that travel simultaneously and the transfer bar not being use would be guided away from its firing pin. This "Switch" may also just be the hammer pivot pin with detents. By pushing the extended pin on either side of the frame the hammer would shift left or right to strike the selected transfer bar.

I drew up some rudimentary drawings tonight to see if the geometry would work and it appears it does. By increasing the cylinder diameter from 1.35" to 1.5", I am able to get five .357 rounds and five .22 rounds into the same cylinder! The rims just clear and may need a bit more room. The extractor could have a geometry that ejects all 10 rounds, however I think it would be better to only eject .357 cases. That way .22 cases could be individually removed with a pin to prevent ejecting both fired and unfired cases. If the DA mode (Function A) is going to be given to the .357 it should also be faster to reload.

Another thought was to fire the .22 cylinder from a barrel mounted on the bottom of the cylinder. The barrel could double as the Crane pivot, but I think this would cause more problems than the solution it provides. This scenario would also put the .22 barrel farther away from the sights.


Bores are in black, Rims in red, and centerlines in blue:
357-22Cylinder_zps6581039c.gif
357-22CylinderB_zps0cd36cdc.gif

Any thoughts would be appreciated. I would love to prototype one of these someday.
 
Last edited:
My only thought is that the cylinder walls for the 357 look mighty thin where they bump up against the walls of the .22. I realize that you are "thinking" this thru, but that would be a concern.

I really like the concept, tho. Put a 3" bbl on her and I'd buy it for the right price.

C
 
There were some double barreled revolvers in the 19th century, but only for purpose of increasing capacity. I don't see any with dual caliber selective fire.

The Osgood Duplex had a .22 cylinder and a single .32 barrel as axis; a miniaturization of the Lemat system.
 
Obviously this is a pretty rough draft. My SP101 gets down to .060" in the cylinder, this design has a minimum of .056", which could easily be increased...
 
I think it's a cool idea if only for the unconventionality of it. I like your imaginative thinking.
 
I vaguely recall seeing such a revolver some years back covered on another site. I forget if it was .22LR/.38 Spl or .22LR/.357 Mag, but seem to recall it was the latter. IIRC, the designer tried to sell it to the military as a survival arm for downed crews, but the sale never happened. Alas, I cannot find it on the Interwebz.

Another design that had chambers staggered like that was the 18-shot, triple barrelled Caricato.

Anyway, cool idea. Let us know how it goes.
 
I'm no engineer, but that is a pretty cool idea, and a fairly reasonable one at that. I don't think it would be insanely complex. Could be a very cool firearm, assuming the .22 and the .357 hit in the same spot- you would always have the lingering problem of proper regulation between the two cartridges/barrels.
 
The problems I see are:

1. Indexing the chambers. If I want to fire two .357 chambers in a row, the cylinder has to turn 72 degrees. But if I want to fire a .357 and then a .22, the cylinder only turns 36 degrees to bring up the .22 chamber.

2. Locking the chambers in position. You need 10 cylinder stop cuts in the cylinder, and some way to keep the cylinder from locking up midway on a 72 degree rotation.

3. Sights. It is not likely both the .22s and the .357s will shoot to the same point of impact -- especially considering they're being fired from different barrels.
 
I WOULD NOT refer to any SP101 as a " kit Gun " by any way shape or form as it is NOT. The SP101 guns are a klunk in comparison to any real S&W "Kit Gun."
Furtheremore the words " Kit gun " are an S&W trademark. Now, go make up your own names and quit stealing that which is true and honorable from that which has earned it .
And so it goes...
 
Vern Humphrey said:
The problems I see are:

1. Indexing the chambers. If I want to fire two .357 chambers in a row, the cylinder has to turn 72 degrees. But if I want to fire a .357 and then a .22, the cylinder only turns 36 degrees to bring up the .22 chamber.

2. Locking the chambers in position. You need 10 cylinder stop cuts in the cylinder, and some way to keep the cylinder from locking up midway on a 72 degree rotation.

3. Sights. It is not likely both the .22s and the .357s will shoot to the same point of impact -- especially considering they're being fired from different barrels.
Click to expand...
Unless my un-caffeinated mind betrays me your first two problems are not since he has two barrels and the bores will always line up with their correct barrel with only 5 cuts in the cylinder.
 
You have a point there -- if it's possible to lock both chambers in alignment with the barrel.

On the other hand, why not sleeve the chambers and barrel? To convert from .357 to .22, insert the chamber sleeves and the barrel sleeve -- that's all proven technology.
 
Your dual caliber revolver concept reminds me of the Aerocar. A compelling idea that, once tested, proved uninteresting to the general public. In short, it simply wasn't practical for general land or air travel. A scalpel / hatchet combination sort of thing.

It did drive and fly but performance was less than desired in both categories. When it comes to devices, specialization often wins out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerocar

Still, dreamers will dream. Who knows, in time someone may create a dual caliber revolver that will be of sufficient general interest to entice mass marketers, which is usually the bottom line for any new marketable idea.

Richard
 
My SP101 gets down to .060" in the cylinder, this design has a minimum of .056", which could easily be increased...
Click to expand...

Would you be hung up on .357? What if it was just a .38SPL beefy enough to take a steady diet of .38+p, but with thinner chamber walls, would not have to accommodate the high pressures of .357?
 
Not a bad idea at all. I have to say, of all the wacky new gun ideas I've seen, this one is actually pretty sound.

Other than barrel regulation, and sight regulation, the only other issue I see is that you'll leave an unfired round in a chamber every time you switch calibers. Not a dealbreaker of course, but just one more thing.
 
Good idea.

But now matter how careful you are selecting the materials and building it?

A 12-shot, double barrel revolver is going to be much heavier & larger then a legitimate Kit Gun would or should ever be.

rc
 
rcmodel said:
Good idea.

But now matter how careful you are selecting the materials and building it?

A 12-shot, double barrel revolver is going to be much heavier & larger then a legitimate Kit Gun would or should ever be.

rc
Click to expand...
But not heavier than 2 revolvers... The extra material in the cylinder will be hard to take out, but luckily all the holes will lighten it a bit ;-)
The double barrels will not be much heavier at all than a barrel with a full-length underlug (just canted to the side a bit). Just throwing it out there, but I'd hope the final product would come in under 30 oz. with a 4" barrel.

I am an Engineer. My bread and butter is custom automated machinery, but my degree is in Product Design Engineering and I do a decent amount of product design myself.

The prototype for this would be quite a few years out, but I intend to draw it up completely in CAD first to check function and clearances. I'd most likely start with a frame, trigger group, and misc parts from another revolver first.
 
Last edited:
I see your point.

But I still disagree with the 'Kit Gun' concept as you are calling it.

It will be much bigger and heavier then a true S&W Kit Gun, or a Ruger Bearcat, or two alloy frame S&W's in .22 & .357.

Even if S&W would let you use the Kit Gun name.
Which they won't.

Personally?

I don't see the appeal.

If I need a Kit Gun, I carry my Model 34 or Model 317 Kit Gun in .22 LR.

If I need a .357, I carry a .357 Model 19 or 66 with .357 Mag loads, .38 Spl wad-cutter light loads, and snake-shot loads.
It will shoot all three.

And it will do anything and more a double-barrel .22/.357 would do, and still weigh less.

But it seems I'm always the one peeing on the campfire.
Old & Cynical?

Yea! That's me!!

rc
 
Last edited:
Seems feasible and a pretty cool idea. I can't say that I'd want one, but it seems like a concept you could pull off if you find there is a market for it.
 
But it seems I'm always the one peeing on the campfire.
Click to expand...

We're all trying to make s'mores, and here you came along and splashed on my darned marshmallows. :fire:

:D:D:D:D

I actually do see your point, but hey, for every reason that there is to innovate, there will always be someone who comes up with a reason why what we already have is good enough. It's good to to do both. Innovation is great, but folks who say that the existing products already match the needs, keep the innovators in check, and make sure that only the best designs get through.
 
it's not a bad idea Macchina, but why not make it a 22WMR/357Mag configuration, and maybe have a second 22LR/38 Spl cyl. as well.
 
Wil Terry said:
I WOULD NOT refer to any SP101 as a " kit Gun " by any way shape or form as it is NOT. The SP101 guns are a klunk in comparison to any real S&W "Kit Gun."
Furtheremore the words " Kit gun " are an S&W trademark. Now, go make up your own names and quit stealing that which is true and honorable from that which has earned it .
And so it goes...
Click to expand...
Before your post I referred to my Ruger LCR 22lr as a takle box gun, now I think I will start calling it a kit gun. Ruger earned it by building a better kit gun then S&W
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

K
  • Locked
Dan Wesson Model 12 spring
Replies
3
Views
489
Katigroszek
K
H
  • Locked
Dan Wesson Caliber conversion
Replies
8
Views
2K
Apex29
A
S
  • Locked
transfer bars...
2
Replies
25
Views
3K
Red Cent
R
J
  • Locked
Ruger 3 screw Single Action Revolvers
Replies
14
Views
3K
tango2echo
T
D
  • Locked
Hawes western six shooter
Replies
5
Views
3K
dirty dave
D
Back
Top