Best Extractor System for Rimless?

[Grump]

Preferably firsthand reports, please.

I'm getting interested in a 9mm snubbie revolver and am wondering how the real-world experiences are with at least two different approaches I know of. Moon clips are NOT part of this inquiry, as I very, very much prefer to retain an ability to use the intended ammo regardless of what doo-dads are or are not in my pocket.

There's the Ruger SP-101 approach*, using music wire that apparently springs inward to clear the case body and then snaps back out into the extractor groove. Okay, easy to understand but how does it work.

Then there is the Medusa-type extractor** that apparently moves outward to to INTO the extractor groove if the cartridge has one, but also doesn't jam up if the round being fired is a standard rimmed one.

Any other approaches, and how well do they really work?

*I'm pretty sure Ruger wasn't the first to try this, but I believe they are the most recent.

** Another one of those exotic and expensive revolvers that never took off. Are they even made any more???

 

[rcmodel]

S&W was the first, and used Beryllium Copper spring.
It works, but nobody bought the guns.

I believe the Ruger SP101 uses moon clips, not spring wires.

The Medusa is a non-issue because there are not enough of them in the world to form an opinion, and they are no longer made.

But you apparently miss the point of moon-clips & revolvers.

1. There is no faster way to reload a revolver
2. There is no chance of one case getting stuck under the extractor and tyeing up the gun.
3. There is no possibility of the "gadget" 9mm extractor leaving one stuck in a chamber and tyeing up the gun.
4. They are smaller & more compact then speed-loaders.
5. A reload is one smooth move, not 5 or 6 herky-jerky ones.
6. They are cheap enough you don't have to worry about losing one.

There is no better system for handling rimless calibers in a revolver.

rcmodel

 

[9mmepiphany]

the ruger speed/service-six was chambered for the 9mm and initally used the circle of music wire encirling the ejector rod. they switched to moonclips when folks complained about the spped of reloading...the rounds get progressively harder to load as the spring tensions.

the S&W 647 was also chambered for the 9mm, but used fingers in each chamber to eject the rounds. the fingers would extend to engage the extraction groove when the ejector rod was depressed. it worked well but was expensive and labour intensive to produce.

both systems were slow to load as there were no speedloaders which would allow all six rounds to be loaded together

 

[theotherwaldo]

There's another approach, also by Ruger. Slow as the dickens but very positive - it's the Blackhawk 9mm with the Colt SAA-type rod extractor.

Don't think that's what you wanted, though.

 

[spwenger]

That Would Be...

the S&W 647 was also chambered for the 9mm, but used fingers in each chamber to eject the rounds. the fingers would extend to engage the extraction groove when the ejector rod was depressed. it worked well but was expensive and labour intensive to produce.

...the S&W 547.

The S&W 547 was designed for a French police contract and, as far as I know, only "overrun" guns were sold in the US. I don't know if S&W might have continued producing the 547 if there had been a groundswell of demand for the gun. I do know that I have never seen or heard anyone of the few American owners compalin about it.

 

[Grump]

Wellll, folks, I really ain't interested in repeating the WW1 experience with those .45 ACP half-moon clip revolvers that were bored straight through and could not under any circumstances be fired reliably without the clips.

With a semiauto and no magazine, you can at least single-load.

With a pure moonclip gun and a real chamber for headspacing, you can fire a cylinder-full before looking for the pencil to poke the empties out.

I'd rather have one that had a workable extractor for no-clip ammo, AND the relief machining around the outside so half- and full-moon clips would also work.

Is that such a hard thing to ask???

 

[rcmodel]

First, only a very few early Colt 1917's were bored clear through.
All S&W 1917's, and later Colts had chamber steps and could be fired with or without the clips.

All present day .45 ACP revolvers have chamber steps, and work just fine with or without clips.

Second, the 9mm, unlike the .45 ACP, has a tapered case, so it could not fall through the holes, even if there was not a headspace step, which there is.

Hard thing to ask?
Apparently it is.

Every attempt to make & sell a 9mm revolver that doesn't use moon-clips has failed so far.

rcmodel

 

[Jim Watson]

Every attempt to sell a 9mm revolver, period, has failed. A pity, I think a modernized "I" frame S&W in 9mm would be a good hideout gun, but they are not going to tool up for one after the market failure of 547 and 940 and what they have seen of Ruger Security Six and SP 101 or foreign attempts from Manhurin and Korth.

The bored-through Colt 1917s are a bugaboo. Nearly all of them had proper cylinders put in when overhauled, and you seldom see one "in circulation." On the other hand, I have read more than one report of modern stainless steel .45s not holding chamber length tolerance close enough to shoot without clips. No problem in the 1917s which were made as gunfighting weapons, not sporting goods.