As a lefty I am intrigued by the break-top revolver in a way I am not by the right-handed cylinder/crane configuration everybody does. With all of this computer aided design in the industry, someone ought to be able to design a modern break-top revolver in at least .38 Special shouldn't they?
What are the engineering barriers to making a modern break top revo?
- Thread starter Boats
- Start date
- Status
dfariswheel
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 6,656
There was a Russian design shown around a few years ago, but nothing ever came of it.
The barriers are, the weakness of the hinge and locking system, and attempting to have something different enough to offer to a gun buying public that's completely satisfied with the swing-out cylinder.
Remember, any new gun design has to sell, and this requires some feature that would make it desirable to paying customers.
It's unlikely people would buy something that doesn't offer anything more than a very slightly faster ejection system, and is radically different than what they've come to trust for over 100 years.
Another problem is the bad reputation top-break revolvers have due to the many cheap "Saturday Night Specials" made in the early 1900's.
Then too, the general thrust of handgun development is toward auto's, not revolvers.
Simply put, no doubt a suitable modern top-break revolver could be developed, but it's unlikely it'd make it in the market place.
The barriers are, the weakness of the hinge and locking system, and attempting to have something different enough to offer to a gun buying public that's completely satisfied with the swing-out cylinder.
Remember, any new gun design has to sell, and this requires some feature that would make it desirable to paying customers.
It's unlikely people would buy something that doesn't offer anything more than a very slightly faster ejection system, and is radically different than what they've come to trust for over 100 years.
Another problem is the bad reputation top-break revolvers have due to the many cheap "Saturday Night Specials" made in the early 1900's.
Then too, the general thrust of handgun development is toward auto's, not revolvers.
Simply put, no doubt a suitable modern top-break revolver could be developed, but it's unlikely it'd make it in the market place.
mgjohn
Member
Many years back Detonics had a top break revolver design. I was going to be chambered for 44 Mag and 45 Colt if I remember correctly. It was a large massive looking gun, and was going to cast a bit more than the cost of a a S&W 29.
jmbg29
member
It would be easier to make left-handed cylinder/crane configuration revolvers. The milling machine doesn't care what hand the piece of metal is for.
Flip the blueprint over on a light table, and trace. Then transfer the original dimensions, and print "poof" left handed blueprints.
Wil Terry
Member
IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE BY DETONICS AS MENTIONED A POST OR TWO BACK.
Their revolver was a 45COLT 7-shot topbreak in stainless steel. It was pictured in the AMERICAN HANDGUNNER magazine and received all the fanfare from ye old buying public as frog guts at a gourmets' convention.
I said then and will say now the best place for a new revolver with a topnotch modern design is in a topbreak in the standard calibers: 38SPL, 44SPL, 45ACP etc etc...maybe 357MAG, 45COLT too...maybe...
Their revolver was a 45COLT 7-shot topbreak in stainless steel. It was pictured in the AMERICAN HANDGUNNER magazine and received all the fanfare from ye old buying public as frog guts at a gourmets' convention.
I said then and will say now the best place for a new revolver with a topnotch modern design is in a topbreak in the standard calibers: 38SPL, 44SPL, 45ACP etc etc...maybe 357MAG, 45COLT too...maybe...
Nightcrawler
Member
See, it can be done. The Russians made on in .357, and you can see it if you go to World.Guns.Ru. It's not being imported, though.
In any case, instead of all the gunmakers saying "it can't be done" I'd like to see one of them actually TRY.
A top-break in .45ACP, .40, 10mm, and 9mm, using moon clips, would be really fast to reload.
How well would it sell? I don't know, depends on how much marketing hype goes into it. I'd buy one.
In any case, instead of all the gunmakers saying "it can't be done" I'd like to see one of them actually TRY.
A top-break in .45ACP, .40, 10mm, and 9mm, using moon clips, would be really fast to reload.
How well would it sell? I don't know, depends on how much marketing hype goes into it. I'd buy one.
sixgun_symphony
member
The S&W No.3 is back in production. The .45 S&W chambering ought to mimic the .45acp.
jar
Contributing Member
Do you have a link to info on the new Model 3?
IMHO the biggest limit is not design or materials these days, but market forces. S&W made top break models well into the 40's, maybe into the 50's, but sales were such that it didn't make sense to continue. H&R was making top break guns until very recently.
But I must admit, a top break 45acp designed to work with moon clips would be a serious competitor.
IMHO the biggest limit is not design or materials these days, but market forces. S&W made top break models well into the 40's, maybe into the 50's, but sales were such that it didn't make sense to continue. H&R was making top break guns until very recently.
But I must admit, a top break 45acp designed to work with moon clips would be a serious competitor.
MrAcheson
Member
S&W does not make the Model 3 anymore. They dropped it from the Performance Center after it failed to catch on with the CAS market. Uberti still makes repros of the Model 3 Russian and Model 3 Schofield and I believe Navy Arms sells them in the US.
sixgun_symphony
member
Thats news to me because I was just looking at the S&W website the other day.
I am sure that a gunsmith could rechamber a S&W No.3 to use .45acp on the moon clips.
I am sure that a gunsmith could rechamber a S&W No.3 to use .45acp on the moon clips.
I have heard (for crying out loud don't test this on your own) that Uberti decided to test their top break Schofeld copy, just in case someone dropped a +P Ruger load into one.
They found it was unharmed at 30,000 psi. At 60,000 psi, the gun was clearly getting bent, but still held shut. That testing convinced them it would take any sane .45 Colt load, so they went ahead and made it in the standard .45 Colt, not bothering with the short .45 Schofeld case like S&W did.
Again, this info is what I heard, and I can't confirm it. The fact though, that Uberti makes their Schofeld replica in .45 Colt, makes it believable.
Apparently the top latch works fine, when made from modern steels.
If someone knows if this is true I'd love to hear the source fo the info. Again, don't shoot Ruger loads in a top break!
I myself would like to have that navy Arms replica in .44 Russian. That spur on the triggerguard just plain looks very cool
They found it was unharmed at 30,000 psi. At 60,000 psi, the gun was clearly getting bent, but still held shut. That testing convinced them it would take any sane .45 Colt load, so they went ahead and made it in the standard .45 Colt, not bothering with the short .45 Schofeld case like S&W did.
Again, this info is what I heard, and I can't confirm it. The fact though, that Uberti makes their Schofeld replica in .45 Colt, makes it believable.
Apparently the top latch works fine, when made from modern steels.
If someone knows if this is true I'd love to hear the source fo the info. Again, don't shoot Ruger loads in a top break!
I myself would like to have that navy Arms replica in .44 Russian. That spur on the triggerguard just plain looks very cool
Nightcrawler
Member
Actually, Tex, it's a pretty safe bet to not shoot Ruger/TC loads in ANY Uberti revolver, or ANY Single Action Army, for that matter. Modern loadings take .45 Colt well beyond what was available in 1873...
- Status
