Colt451985
Member.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2013
- Messages
- 13
I think if you're looking to customize you'd need to explore polymer frames like the LCR. A modular revolver like the old Dan Wesson's, but with the entire cylinder/barrel assembly as a modular upper to the lower with the trigger group, hammer and grip.
Tough to do right, maybe too tough. But if it could be done it would be pretty sweet.
Ruger was certainly inspired by the AR-15 and other similar firearm designs, which incorporate an upper and lower receiver. I too was thinking of something similar to the Ruger LCR and your suggestion. I'm gravitating towards this direction for my own design.
I disagree, however, that a polymer frame is necessary. Reducing the weight for a pocket revolver like the LCR makes sense, but revolvers are frequently chambered in hard recoiling cartridges such as the .357 Magnum, .44 Magnum, .454 Casull, and so on. Polymer frames are popular for semiautomatic pistols, but the recoil characteristics for the 9mm Luger, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP allow for lighter weight without being unpleasant or painful to shoot. The 10mm Auto is about the most powerful semiautomatic pistol cartridge available (that's practical in a recoil operated semiautomatic) and you'll notice that many people prefer to fire it in all-steel 1911s to reduce recoil. Furthermore, it appears that Smith & Wesson has not been very successful selling aluminum or scandium framed revolvers larger than the J-Frame. This could be for several reasons, but I suspect there aren't a lot of people who enjoy shooting a .44 Magnum or similar hard recoiling cartridge from a revolver that weighs less than 30 ounces.
A couple ideas that come to mind:
The lower receiver is the serialized "firearm" as far as the ATF is concerned. That gives the owner of the revolver the option of purchasing multiple monolithic upper receivers with different barrel lengths, handling characteristics, and sights. The sights stay with the barrel, so the owner does not need to sight-in or zero the revolver each time the barrel is changed. The word "monolithic" refers to the absence of a joint between the barrel and frame, or in this case, the upper receiver.
To install the barrel liner into the monolithic upper receiver can be done several ways. One way would be to incorporate a barrel nut similar to the Dan Wesson design. This would allow the owner of the revolver to adjust the barrel to cylinder gap to his or her preference by removing the barrel nut and tightening or loosening the barrel liner, which would move the forcing cone closer or further away from the cylinder. This would also allow the owner to replace the barrel liner.
Any barrel blank from well known barrel makers, such as Shilen, can be easily turned on a lathe into a barrel liner of the design I have in mind. Basically, the barrel liner is the same outside diameter as the inside diameter of the monolithic upper receiver. The monolithic upper receiver is tapped at the muzzle and the barrel liner is likewise threaded at the muzzle. The muzzle of the monolithic upper receiver is recessed and the barrel liner extends past the recess. A barrel nut is then threaded to the muzzle of the barrel liner and tightened to lock the barrel liner to the monolithic upper receiver. In other words, a gunsmith would buy any pistol barrel blank, turn the muzzle of the barrel liner to the outside diameter of the threads, thread the muzzle, turn the rest of the barrel liner to the inside diameter of the monolithic upper receiver, crown the muzzle of the barrel liner, and chamfer the forcing cone of the barrel liner.
While the barrel nut is tightened or loosened with a spanner wrench, the barrel liner is tightened or loosened into the monolithic upper receiver with a tool that engages the rifling. Both the spanner wrench for the barrel nut and the tool that engages the rifling would be supplied to the owner of the revolver.
Last edited: