Gun Wear - Variance by Caliber?

[Fat Boy]

OK, goofy title, I know; but I am trying to get an understanding of some things....

Does a smaller caliber handgun wear less quickly or to a lessor degree than a larger caliber, because the "explosion" generated by firing is less?

I am considering buying a Taurus .17hmr revolver (tracker, i think?) I am wondering if a gun that may be a bit less robust than, say a Ruger might last better in that I am buying it in a smaller caliber....

I believe Ruger makes the single six in .17 now, but this Taurus is fairly cheaply priced, and carries 7 rounds, so it is attractive to me. However, a non-working Taurus Tracker paperweight is much less attractive...:banghead:

I hope the question is fairly clear; I am not trying to touch off a re-start of the discussion on Taurus quality...

Thanks!

 

[FullEffect1911]

First things first, any mechanical object if used will wear. However as you seem to have noticed there are some variables that make some revolvers wear faster then others.

Quality of materials is one factor as one might expect, but for sake of argument let's assume all of the big three revolver makers use the same quality of materials.

Design has a lot to do with it. Ruger uses massive action parts on over designed frames. So their action parts will likely have a longer life then say smith or Taurus. How much longer? Depends on how much you use it and how fast you are cycling the action. Which leads me to the next part.

Cylinder mass will cause more wear if the cylinder is larger in diameter and/or heavier then one with a smaller diameter and/or lighter. This has to do with the momentum of the rotating cylinder. All else being equal, in theory an L-frame S&W should last longer then a N-frame before it needs a tune up. If you are "combat shooting" in double action, you can expect more part wear then if you were shooting a relaxed cadence. Just think about the cylinder spinning in there at a relatively fast speed and then stopping briskly.

The frames should last plenty long enough on just about any revolver assuming there isn't excessive endshake in the cylinder (forward and back slop along the axis of the bore). Excessive endshake will cause a battering ram action every time the gun is shot. Excessive endshake is not a set number and will vary somewhat when talking about different manufacturers. With excessive endshake present, this is where heavier and magnum calibers can make a big difference in wear

Now with all that out of the way I'll actually answer your question. No, differences in caliber shouldn't have much of a different effect on wear unless you consider the previous things I wrote. This assumes the design of the revolver is actually fit to fire the power level of the cartridge in question and that the revolver made and fit properly.

A properly loaded factory round of .17 hmr will not do squat to the frame of either the Taurus or Ruger.

It's quite hard to actually put a number on round count as there is just to many variables, however with that said, with a properly made revolver you will get a long long life out of them either way.

I do consider Taurus and Smith a bit less robust then a Ruger, however that wouldn't stop me from buying either a S&W or Taurus.