gunfan
Member
wbond said:I'd really like to see nice, small frame .32 (Long or Mag) and .22 Mag revolvers with 3" barrels.
The .32 revolver with 3" barrel topic has already been covered.
So I'd like to add that a .22 Mag small frame revolver with 3" barrel would be infineately better than the 2" barrels now offered by S&W, Taurus, Charter Arms, and possibly others.
The .22 Mag revolver is ideal for very recoil sensitive people wanting a light, small gun. The problem with .22 Mag is that it is loaded with slow burning powder for rifles. It is not loaded for shorter handgun barrels. Therefore, the .22 Mag velocity suffers severely from a 2" barrel. The 3" barrel would largely correct this while providing more sight radius, not adding much weight, and still be able to fit in a coat pocket.
From a 3" barrel the .22 Mag would have enough velocity to be a serious weapon, especially with regard to penetration. From a 2" barrel the .22 Mag is very wussy for defense.
I believe that in .22 Mag a 3" barrel makes it a viable 3 shot stopper while the lightest gun that a recoil sensitive person can easily fire and conceal.
In 2" barrel, the .22 Mag is almost useless for defense. The ballistic difference and accuracy difference are extreme between the 2" and 3" barrel. I don't like the 4" barrels because who can conceal one?
The .32 H&R Magnum is the only practical way to obtain 98-120 grain SWCHP lead projectiles (w/gas check) to cruise along at approximately 1000 fps. This would virtually duplicate the performance of the 158-grain SWCHP in .38 S&W Special. (from a 4" barrel). If you load the 98-grain WC to 1100 fps with 4.1 grains of WW-231 in a Federal case, you will have a potent (and controllable) load for use in the 2"-2.5" barrel. I'd be willing to go so far as to say that that you could see a healthy 1025-1050 fps from these "snubbies".
Scott