Has anyone converted a S&W 60 9x19 to 9x23?
- Thread starter jaktok
- Start date
- Status
RevolvingCylinder
Member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2006
- Messages
- 782
No. If you read his post, it specifically states that it is a .357. He is talking about a moonclip conversion.
S&W60 or 940?
It is packed away for a trip now, but is a stainless 9mm fed by full moon slips. I had S&W install a 3" barrel some time back and just thought of the 9x23 thing recently.
I think they made at least 2 9mm revolvers. One held the cartridges with some spring loaded arrangement. The second is for full moon clips.
I may have to dig the travel case out of the car to identify the model.
It is packed away for a trip now, but is a stainless 9mm fed by full moon slips. I had S&W install a 3" barrel some time back and just thought of the 9x23 thing recently.
I think they made at least 2 9mm revolvers. One held the cartridges with some spring loaded arrangement. The second is for full moon clips.
I may have to dig the travel case out of the car to identify the model.
sm
member
9x23 I like a lot.
The idea of 9x23, with moon clips in a revolver, especially a 3" RB K frame really is something I would to hear more about.
The idea of 9x23, with moon clips in a revolver, especially a 3" RB K frame really is something I would to hear more about.
DrLaw
Member
.380 in a 940???
Just thinking while I am thinking about it here. Would a .380 work in a 940?
Working with the full power 9mm loads is a little punishing for practice. I was thinking about downsizing some 9mm handloads but the thought just came to me while reading this thread. Any ideas?
The Doc is out now.
Just thinking while I am thinking about it here. Would a .380 work in a 940?
Working with the full power 9mm loads is a little punishing for practice. I was thinking about downsizing some 9mm handloads but the thought just came to me while reading this thread. Any ideas?
The Doc is out now.
I'm pretty sure you've got a 940 Centennial Stainless, I think its the only moonclip fed 9mm J frame Smith made on a regular basis, and the cyclinder should be long enough so go for it, and report back, cause I think I want one.
I've pitched my most recent IDPA Journal but I think there were shops that advertised various moonclip conversions there.
I wish Smith would restart production on a both J and K Frame 9mm, but I don't think its likely. The 547 was the K frame that had the spring loaded extractor that caught the rim of the case, and I want one of those in 3" also.
I've pitched my most recent IDPA Journal but I think there were shops that advertised various moonclip conversions there.
I wish Smith would restart production on a both J and K Frame 9mm, but I don't think its likely. The 547 was the K frame that had the spring loaded extractor that caught the rim of the case, and I want one of those in 3" also.
Brian Williams
Moderator Emeritus
First, your S&W is either a 2" or 3" Jframe 940 in Stainless or a 3" or 4" Kframe 547 in Blued steel
Second, The 60 never came in 9mm, unless you call a 357 mag by 9x32R
Third, S&W also made an N frame in 38 super, an 8 shot Performance center gun.
Now here is some fun stuf.
I had a S&W 940 and wanted something lighter and saw in "The Standard Catalog of S&W that S&W had made 1 942, basically a 642 with a 940 cylinder installed. I wanted one badly, so I found a 642 locally and ordered from S&W the 940 cylinder and extractor/ejector rod bits to convert it to 9mmx19. I had the cylinder fitted by Mark Hartshorn at Pinnacle High Performance. He is a competitive shooter and a great gunsmith. Links to his web site can be found at Moonclips.com.
Disclaimeran older 642 is not +p rated and a 9mm is definitely much more +p than a 38 spec is. So I have only shot this with my carry ammo to verify POA and POI, it does nicely.end Disclaimer I have loaded up some very low pressure ammo and that is what I practice with. This Combo of a lightweight gun with the short 9mm moonclipped ammo makes for a great carry package. The short ejector rod of a 2" snubby will pop the short 9x19 cases out real easily and completely.
One of the things that Mark has done is to take a 940 and ream the cylinders to either 38 Super or 9x23 and that would make for a great gun. This reaming would take out much of the 9x19 taper and straighten the charge holes chamber specs to the 38 super. This removes the problem sticky extraction that 9x19s have during ejection from a revolver.
Is this a Do it yourself Home Gunsmithing affair, Most definitely not.
I wish that S&W would take one of their Scandium frames and come up with a lightweight K or J frame that would handle 9x19 with moonclips.
For me a 312 would be sweet, 6 shots of moonclipped 9x19 on a lightweightScandium K frame 3" barrel with fixed sights regulated for 125g at about 1000fps. A 9x23/38 super would be sweeter.
Second, The 60 never came in 9mm, unless you call a 357 mag by 9x32R
Third, S&W also made an N frame in 38 super, an 8 shot Performance center gun.
Now here is some fun stuf.
I had a S&W 940 and wanted something lighter and saw in "The Standard Catalog of S&W that S&W had made 1 942, basically a 642 with a 940 cylinder installed. I wanted one badly, so I found a 642 locally and ordered from S&W the 940 cylinder and extractor/ejector rod bits to convert it to 9mmx19. I had the cylinder fitted by Mark Hartshorn at Pinnacle High Performance. He is a competitive shooter and a great gunsmith. Links to his web site can be found at Moonclips.com.
Disclaimeran older 642 is not +p rated and a 9mm is definitely much more +p than a 38 spec is. So I have only shot this with my carry ammo to verify POA and POI, it does nicely.end Disclaimer I have loaded up some very low pressure ammo and that is what I practice with. This Combo of a lightweight gun with the short 9mm moonclipped ammo makes for a great carry package. The short ejector rod of a 2" snubby will pop the short 9x19 cases out real easily and completely.
One of the things that Mark has done is to take a 940 and ream the cylinders to either 38 Super or 9x23 and that would make for a great gun. This reaming would take out much of the 9x19 taper and straighten the charge holes chamber specs to the 38 super. This removes the problem sticky extraction that 9x19s have during ejection from a revolver.
Is this a Do it yourself Home Gunsmithing affair, Most definitely not.
I wish that S&W would take one of their Scandium frames and come up with a lightweight K or J frame that would handle 9x19 with moonclips.
For me a 312 would be sweet, 6 shots of moonclipped 9x19 on a lightweightScandium K frame 3" barrel with fixed sights regulated for 125g at about 1000fps. A 9x23/38 super would be sweeter.
Brian Williams
Moderator Emeritus
O I forgot, that 940 clyinder also fits in my 60-4 and makes for a great gun. a Jframe 5 shooter with adjustable sights and 2 cylinders; one in 38 special and the other in 9x19.
ClarkEMyers
Member
S&W did revolvers in .356TSW to approach 9X23.
S&W did revolvers in .356TSW to approach 9X23.
Dane Burns did 9X23 J-frame conversions and has I think chosen not to do that any more (but his 9X23 on the 1911 are fine fine pistols) - concerns about the pressure in the revolvers as actually made if I understand that story correctly.
I have no question that S&W - as well as Ruger who also made revolvers in 9X19 from time to time - could do any of several sizes in 9X23 - especially to include anything actually made in .38 Auto +P (.38 Super).
I have occasionally regretted not buying a J-frame in .356TSW - I understand that with the demise of .356TSW the revolvers were often fitted with 9X19 cylinders by S&W. Some were ported or comped and said to be very loud indeed.
S&W did revolvers in .356TSW to approach 9X23.
Dane Burns did 9X23 J-frame conversions and has I think chosen not to do that any more (but his 9X23 on the 1911 are fine fine pistols) - concerns about the pressure in the revolvers as actually made if I understand that story correctly.
I have no question that S&W - as well as Ruger who also made revolvers in 9X19 from time to time - could do any of several sizes in 9X23 - especially to include anything actually made in .38 Auto +P (.38 Super).
I have occasionally regretted not buying a J-frame in .356TSW - I understand that with the demise of .356TSW the revolvers were often fitted with 9X19 cylinders by S&W. Some were ported or comped and said to be very loud indeed.
Brian Williams
Moderator Emeritus
the 356TSW is something like a 9x21.5 and it is almost a 9x23 in performance.
Ultima-Ratio
Member
Ping - Ka-Boom!
I can't recall which gunsmith forum Dane Burns hangs on these days but I'm positive Dane was first with the 9x23 conversion in the S&W J-frames and he sold a few.
A couple or all conversions failed because of the excessive pressure of the 9x23 , Dane bought a few new guns for folks, ya win some and ya lose some.
I can't recall which gunsmith forum Dane Burns hangs on these days but I'm positive Dane was first with the 9x23 conversion in the S&W J-frames and he sold a few.
A couple or all conversions failed because of the excessive pressure of the 9x23
, Dane bought a few new guns for folks, ya win some and ya lose some.JNewell
Member
I think what the OP is saying is: since S&W chambers the Model 60 for .357M, why can't I rechamber my 940 for 9x23?
One thing the OP should be aware of is that the .357s are, IIRC, all built on the so-called J-Magnum frame. The earlier .38s are built on the original J-frame. Check SCSW, but from memory the 940 -nothings are built on the regular J frame, whereas the 940-1 and 940-2 were built on the J-mag. That is subject to fact-checking in SCSW, though.
Of course, none of that addresses what the cylinder will take...
One thing the OP should be aware of is that the .357s are, IIRC, all built on the so-called J-Magnum frame. The earlier .38s are built on the original J-frame. Check SCSW, but from memory the 940 -nothings are built on the regular J frame, whereas the 940-1 and 940-2 were built on the J-mag. That is subject to fact-checking in SCSW, though.
Of course, none of that addresses what the cylinder will take...
Brian Williams
Moderator Emeritus
940 and 940-1 were the shorter Jframe and the 940-2 is the longer Jmagnum frame. The 940-2 will work with the cylinders reamed to 9x23, but it will be a handful.
Pinnacle Performance is doing a similar conversion.
Rechambering L frames to 9x23 so you can shoot 9mm, .38 super, and 9x23.
Rechambering J frames to 9mm. I didn't see anything about a J frame 9x23 conversion though...
Here is a link: http://www.pinnacle-guns.com/revolver.asp
Rechambering L frames to 9x23 so you can shoot 9mm, .38 super, and 9x23.
Rechambering J frames to 9mm. I didn't see anything about a J frame 9x23 conversion though...
Here is a link: http://www.pinnacle-guns.com/revolver.asp
ArchAngelCD
Member.
I think it's a good idea to buy a second cylinder for the M60 and have it converted to 9X19mm. I wouldn't convert the original because you might want to go back to .38Sp/.357 Magnum.
Ultima-Ratio
Member
Brian Williams Moderator?
Greetings Brian, do you have one of these conversions? Are the cylinders now proofed for regular use of cartridges operating in excess of 52,000psi?
9x23 is a hot little pill even in WW white box.
Greetings Brian, do you have one of these conversions? Are the cylinders now proofed for regular use of cartridges operating in excess of 52,000psi?
9x23 is a hot little pill even in WW white box.
Brian Williams
Moderator Emeritus
Sorry, I was thinking about the 9x21 and the S&W TSW(9x21.5). The 38 Super works in a 940 and the 9x23 has been done but I would not shoot one.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked