Who does good Revolver conversions from .38 Special to 9mm P-'08?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just did some looking...


The earlier models of the Colt 'Trooper', and, the Colt 'Lawman', appear to be about identical in looks to the Army Special, but for their Sights having been changed to a differsnt style, and, or being adjustable also.


So that is interesting, far as that goes, and, either would be able to oblige .38 Super without any strain, I am sure.


Both are way too new for the .38 ACP Cartridge to make any sense though, of course.


And, with either of these Models, I could change the front Sight to be like what the previous Colts had enjoyed...leaving the rear Sight alone, and, that would be only a very minor undertaking to do...as far as having a .38 Super Revolver.
 
Last edited:
If say... I had a Cylinder...from a late 'Official Police', with what we must conceed to be it's stronger Metalurgy, and, if it fit the 'Army Special...or would accept the Ejecter Rod and Star of the Army Special, which of course holds the Ratchet portion, I could live with that...with having that Cylinder modified for .38 ACP.


And all in all, that would be a pretty elegant solution...

What do you think Old Fuff?


Is ther a chance that a 'late' production 'Official Police' Cylinder with or without it's Ratchet, would fit, or could be fitted without much trouble, to an 'Army Special'?
 
Last edited:
I have a feeling that this project could end up being so costly that it required a "Obama bailout." :eek:

Anyway, keep in mind that these revolvers were not something made with drop-in parts, and in particular the hand and ratchet were individually fitted on each revolver.

In terms of appearence the Official Police didn't change from that of the Army Special, during the 1930's through mid 1950's except that Colt went to checkered walnut stocks in place of the black hard-rubber ones (although they can be interchanged) and the sights were changed from a "U" notch at the back to a square one, while the front blade was slightly thickened. However internal and material changes were incorporated over time.

I haven't ever tried to fit an Official Police cylinder in a Army Special, although in one case a barrel exchange didn't pose any problems. Without really knowing I'll say that a 1930's to 1950's Official Police cylinder could be fitted, but I would expect that the process could (would?) be expensive because of the hand labor involved. Without question, an Official Police Mk. III cylinder will not work.
 
Hi Old Fuff,




If the Ejector Rod and Star would interchange from the early era Cylinder to a later era Cylinder...then, that might be a help, if it were the Ratchet geometry which had changed.

If the location of the Cylinder indicing notch or cut were to have been re-located in it's location on the periphery of the Cylinder, of course that would be a deal breaker, but, I doubt they moved that part's location in the Frame.

Though they might have changed it's width or depth or somehting I suppose...which would then require some attentions.



But, yes...I was thinking a newer era Cylinder, going onto an older era Army Special, would have to be 'fitted' to some degree anyway, rather than being a drop-in.


But, depending on what that entails, it might not be a hardship.


I understand that usually, it is some minute aspect of the length and end geometry of the Hand, to the configuration of any particular Cylinder Ratchet, which on Colts, tends to require the Hand Fitting if replacing a Cylinder.

Hence, my curiousity, as to whether the Star and Ratchet and ejector Rod sub-assembly, could be or would interchange...thus possibly allowing a new era Cylinder to be in effect, a drop in...or, to need only some very small amount of re-fitting, if for some reason the central locating aspect of the Cylinder was to permit the Ejector Rod/Ratchet aspect to be right on, or, if it ended up possibly a few seconds or arc off or something.


If so, and, if then the only difference between the Cylinders proper, would be their Alloy or Heat Treatment, with the newer era Cylinder of course being stronger...I would be able to make that change, without feeling I have violated either the Revolver itself, or, the integrity and or Romance of the underlieing notion animating the motive for the project.


Personaly, I like the older narrow "U" channel of the rear Sight, and, the thin front Blade, half round, of the Front Sight...and that is about all I have every shot to any extent anyway.

It would detract from the mood and presence and sense of the Revolver, if these were, if the Revolver on the whole was, of a later era...even 'if' the side profile could be adjusted to come close or to represent pretty well, the look of the earlier ones.


Next Antique Arms Show ( ie: the old 'Saraha Gun Show', even if now at the Riviera ) which is coming up soon, I will see if I can find, and have some conversations with various people who are heavy into later era Colts, and, find from them recomendaitons for Gunsmiths they rely on, to whom I can appeal for possible Parts, and or obscure details of parts continuity through the variuous series or brachiations to which the Army Special, in effect, had been subject.


Orphan Cylinders occur both at Gun Shows of course, as well as on Gunbroker or other internet Auction sites, and or in the junk Boxes of Gunsmiths, and, are not usually very expensive unless minty and or for high dollar Revolver types or both.


But, since Colt did not Serial Number their Cylinders in these latter eras, or even in the earlier eras, however would one identify one, in a box of parts on a table, at a Gunshow or other, if, the Cylinder itself appears identical from the Army Special of the early 1900s,on to and through several of it's permutations up into the 1970s?

One could guess by the kind of Blue I suppose, somewhat...but...


Oye!


Thanks so much Old Fuff for your taking the time to discuss this with me, and, for your indulgence and good will that goes along with it.

It is much appreciated.
 
If the Ejector Rod and Star would interchange from the early era Cylinder to a later era Cylinder...then, that might be a help, if it were the Ratchet geometry which had changed.

Maybe... maybe not. The ratchet and star screw on the end of the extractor rod, and then the rod is staked inside the hole for the cylinder latch pin. You can see this if you swing out the cylinder on your Army Special and look. But the star started out life as a disk, and was in place when the charge holes for the chambers were drilled and then reamed. After that it was star shaped and individually fitted to the chambers in that particular cylinder. Look at the underside of the star and you may find a partial serial number matching the gun.

How do you tell the age? obviously it is difficult, but early Army Special's were chacoal blued between 1908 and 1920. Thereafter they were gas oven blued until 1941. After World War Two until 1969 they were hot salt tank blued using a system set up during the war by the DuLite Corp. I trust you will find all of this information to be totally useless unless you can identify the various blues. Hopefully someone at the gun show can help you with this by showing different Colt handguns still in mint condition - it's the way I learned before I knew everything. :rolleyes:
 
The best way to be sure, would be to buy a complete revolver - perhaps in good mechanical condition but with a worn finish. I often do this because it reduces the cost while having no affect on how well it shoots.

By now you should have noticed that I am a world class expert when it come to helping other folks spend their money... :evil: :D
 
As said earlier, by the OP at that...

"SAAMI' for .38 Special is like 17,000 PSI.

+P, around 18 to 19,000

.38 ACP, 26,000"



I looked to see that .38 Special +P proof pressure is 25000 - 27500.
That means you are proposing to operate routinely at or near proof pressure, a 30% overload from what the gun is built for, no matter what the vintage.

An anti-gun campaign of the old Senator Dodd's gun control program set out to show how dangerous handguns were. They had H.P. White Laboratories shoot one example of each tested make and model with factory loads and the occasional proof load. Most of those held up OK. The other example they pounded with a steady diet of proof loads. None of those guns lasted very long.

Y'all be careful now, you hear?
 
Hi Jim Watson,


Oh quite so...but, none the less, the 'Official Police' into which the 'Army Special' had transitioned ( in name only, far as looks and visible details go, but in Metalurgy also apparently ) was advertised in it's day as obliging the .38-44 Heavy Duty Cartridge verson of the .38 Special, which we have every reason to believe was close to if not into .357 Magnum territory, which being around 35,000 PSI.


So, far as that goes, I feel quite comfortable contemplating the use of a latter 1930s 'Official Police' Cylinder, which also ought to be identical; in every way but for some final fitting, to that of the Army Special...or, who knows, m-a-y-b-e I will just elect to acquire a latter 1930s Official Police, which still had the Half-Round front Sight, and a quite pleasant kind of Blue, and, just convert that, since probably doing so, would be about the simplest of all possible methods to arrive at what I wanted, even IF the Revolver is a decade or two later than I had originally intended.
 
Hi Old Fuff,


Ye'd mentioned -


The best way to be sure, would be to buy a complete revolver - perhaps in good mechanical condition but with a worn finish. I often do this because it reduces the cost while having no affect on how well it shoots.

By now you should have noticed that I am a world class expert when it come to helping other folks spend their money...



I am in fact considering to do just that, if in what is now a different way -


Being, to just set out for a latter 1930s 'Official Police', and, have it 'converted' to the .38 ACP Cartridge.


If these were advertised in their day as managing the .38-44 HD Cartridge version of .38 Special, a few dozen rounds-a-year or so of 'SAAMI'-friendly or even downloaded a little for plinking ( Lead Bullet too! no Jacketed, no Hardball ) .38 ACP would be a lot less of a strain than that.



Well, if all goes well with this, I do not see it needing to cost a great deal...some, yes, of course, but not a fortune.


Convert the Cylinder - I dunno, a couple two three four hundred dollars?

Lord knows, it can be hardly more than a little worse, than converting an S & W Cylinder, assuming one has the indiceing schedule for the Milling Machine or however it the Gunsmith normally does it...if, allbeit, there is some difference from the S & W in removing the Ejector Rod and Star components on a Colt, as you had regarded in an earlier post.


Moon Clips - remains to be determined, but, if anyone offers them for .38 Super converted 'Pythons', then, those would fit mine perfectly, and I am "done" then, so...just gotta find that source, ( if they exist! - and it seems like they would, no? ) and, talk with them.


If I intend to load .357 diameter Bullets into once-fired .38 ACP Cases ( of which I have thousands ), re-sized to oblige them, the Cylinder Bores probably ought to be reamed with this in mind.
 
Last edited:
Moonclips are a major speedbump in this project, and I wouldn't spend a penny on anything else until that issue is resolved. Yes, moonclips that fit a Python and hold .38 Super cartridges would be an answer, but I don't know of any such thing.

When making inquires, say .38 Super, not .38 ACP. Very few people today know what the latter is. Since you are going to make handloads (hopefully downloaded) use .38 Super components.
 
I know almost nothing about the guns we are talking about, or what their strengths and weaknesses are, but I would point out that the increased stress will also be felt by the frame, possibly leading to excessive cylinder gap or end shake. Some guns have a tendency to exhibit frame stretching. If this particular model were prone to that malady, a cylinder swap might not be enough. I do not know if this is a strong point or a weak point on these Colts. As Jim Watson reiterated, the .38 ACP operates at 53% higher pressure than the .38 Special and is equivalent to a proof load. Again, I don't know much about these old Colts, maybe the frame strength is not a concern. It doesn't seem to be the typical weak link in the chain with the thriving market for gunsmiths to do custom 5-shot conversions.

It also seems to be past the point, but for the sake of conversation while I was still in the office, I did do some quick calcs and based on some rough estimations of the cylinder wall thickness from that picture you supplied and what I am guessing the neighborhood of the .41 Colt max pressure to be, I believe the .38 Special would be roughly equal to it in terms of cylinder wall hoop stress and case head thrust.
 
Hi Old Fuff,


Indeed...untill the Moon Clip issue is resolved, I will not have anything done.


I would have thought that Pythons, converted to .38 Super, would have been a natural and sought after thing.

I am surprised it appears to be so obscure or unheard of.


It would certainly make a lot more sense to me, Pythons, Troopers et al of the .357 Colt offerings, than that other makes would be so popularly adapted to a proprietary COLT Cartridge.


I have several thousands of once or twice or thrice fired .38 ACP Brass, and, a few hundred NOS unprimed, in the Boxes unfired as well.

No need for me to have any .38 Super Cases here to offer pause for their Head Stamps...Lol...
 
Hi eldon519,


Good thoughts, good mentions.


I have brooded on the Frame Stretch matter, and, decided it is not going to worry me.


If I end up shooting half-a-box a Year of full 'SAAMI" Loadings with this, I will be surprised.

What is most probable, is that I will load to 3/4rths or so of the 'SAAMI' for fun and plinking...and, have a few Boxes of Full House ones clearly marked, just to put a few of those down Range now and then, or, to have in the Cylinder if I happen to have the Revolver with me when Travelling or Hiking or whatever.


This is not going to be shot a great deal, and, if I get into any Practical Pistol Club events or other, this will not be my Candidate for huge amounts of Shooting, so...
 
Oyeboten:

While I'm not trying to push you into anything, visit the link listed below and study the photograph in the opening post. Compare it to your Army Special (they should look about the same), and notice the color (pale blue) of Colt's gas-oven blue process. While the gun was made during World War Two, it was assembled using late 1930's/1940 parts. This, and later production is what you should be looking at for as platform, not the Army Special.



http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=562594
 
I have brooded on the Frame Stretch matter, and, decided it is not going to worry me.

If I end up shooting half-a-box a Year of full 'SAAMI" Loadings with this, I will be surprised.
That is really irrelevant. Because any reputable gunsmith won't be doing this conversion if it wouldn't be safe for a steady diet of .38Super loads. Understandably, having had four custom revolvers built, I know that gunsmiths are very protective of their livelihood. I will be very surprised if any reputable gunsmith will tackle this conversion on the Army Special.
 
Hi Old Fuff,



Oh yes, I have leaned over, or stepped on over, into the 'Official Police' realm anyway...given their presumed stronger Metalurgy, and, that aside from their Stocks ( which are interchangeable or as one pleases ), and kind of Blue, they are identical to the 'Army Special'.


This then would mean also of course ( if I can get the Cylinder 'converted' ) that the Rervolver gets to retain it's original Cylinder...alleviating the need for any tedious or expensive 'fitting' of a Cylinder from a different or newer Revolver.
 
Last edited:
Hi CraigC,


You'd mentioned -


That is really irrelevant. Because any reputable gunsmith won't be doing this conversion if it wouldn't be safe for a steady diet of .38Super loads.


Maybe.


Or it could be argued that since it would also accept the 9mm Luger Cartridge, that it should be refused.



I could send the Frame off to Mr. Turnbull or other, and, have him cut the additional Characteres to show the Calibre, to that of ".38 ACP" so at least the Barrel Nominclature would be an affirmation of it's intended Cartridge.



Understandably, having had four custom revolvers built, I know that gunsmiths are very protective of their livelihood. I will be very surprised if any reputable gunsmith will tackle this conversion on the Army Special.
.



Well, I thought I had made it fairly clear by now, that I was willing to compromise, and, to elect a later 1930s or very early 1940s 'Official Police' Revolver, instead of intending to have the 'Army Special'.



Nor do I quite see the reasoning of anyone insisting to presusme, that any Chambering of .38 ACP MUST only occur in an Arm suitable for a steady diet of .38 Super, just because the latter would also fit.

.38 Super will also fit into any early 1900s Pistol which was intended to chamber 38 ACP...as well as that .38 Super will fit into anything chambering the 9mm Largo and a few other older Cartridges.


Would a Gunsmith refuse to replace a Spring, or to do a repair of whatever sort, to a .38 ACP Pistol, or to a 9mm Largo or 9mm Browning Long or even other old Cartridge of about the same dimensions, on the grounds that someone, someday, in confusion or indifference, or impetuousity, might fire .38 Super in it?


Will he or she also refuse adamently to do anything for an 1880s Cartridge Breech Loading Shotgun, because, someone other than the Customer, MIGHT someday insert Smokeless Cartridges in to it and fire them?
 
Why, this conversion?

Some years back, USAF did some experimentation using 9mm in their existing stack of S&W M&P 10s. I forget how they managed the ejection but believe they'd worked up a successful solution. Reason for this effort, I believe, was the stocks of .38s while they were converting to M9s. The review I read of this conversion produced groups of 10 inches as opposed to 3 inches with regular .38spl. Correct me if my fading memory is inaccurate. Bore size of the M&P is .357 or maybe .358. 9mm and all it's auto cousins is .354.

While, I believe this is an interesting technical discussion. Why is this conversion to 9mm, .38ACP, .38Super, 9mmX21, or 9mmX23, or whatever a desirable conversion. Puzzled Al.

Happy Holidays to all.

AAW
 
Would a Gunsmith refuse to replace a Spring, or to do a repair of whatever sort, to a .38 ACP Pistol, or to a 9mm Largo or 9mm Browning Long or even other old Cartridge of about the same dimensions, on the grounds that someone, someday, in confusion or indifference, or impetuousity, might fire .38 Super in it?
No, but a gunsmith won't convert one to .38ACP, which can also accept .38Super, if he does not believe it to be strong enough for the Super.
 
S&W type revolvers in 9mm...another thought

Besides the USAF efforts to use up their pile of S&W M&P revolvers. My dim remembrance recalls the Israelis building and/or contracting to have built Model 10s in 9mm which did utilize half moon clips. Might be worth investigation to anyone who wants to do this kind of experiment.

It still puzzles me why anyone would want to step back though time and retrofit a wheelgun to shoot rimless or semi-rimmed ammo which is designed for an autoloader.

Frankly, while I appreciate fine revolvers, I believe the whole idea is obsolete and don't understand why we (the Americans) clung to the configuration through the 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s for police use. Glock and HK, among others, were moving forward. Just an opinion, please don't feel slighted if you are a revolver lover.

I haved owned a enjoyed shooting wheelguns, but if necessary, I'd want a high capacity semiauto anytime.

AAW

Holidays! Yeah, do it!
 
Good news, Colt's typically had somewhat smaller bores than Smiths and there should be little adverse affect on accuracy shooting .38 Auto in a .38 Special barrel.

Bad news, I agree that a reputable gunsmith is unlikely to set up a Special to shoot the higher pressure Auto round, especially considering that it would chamber the much higher pressure Super with no further change.

There have been some very stout looking .38-44 Heavy Duty Smiths beat up by rechambering to .357 Magnum.
 
Even converting older New Services to .357Mag sounds risky to me. As large as they are, they would easily be safe for the .44Mag if constructed out of modern materials but that turn of the century steel and heat treating (or lack thereof) is highly suspect.
 
When Colt introduced the .357 Magnum chambering in their New Service/Shooting Master line of revolvers some changes were made, including the elimination of the fouling cup in the front/bottom of the top strap. In addition the cylinders were made out of a special alloy steel and double-heat treated in a manner similar to that done by S&W.

It may be noted that when Charles Askins talked the Border Patrol into adopting the New Service in 1939 or '40, it was in .38 Special, not .357 Magnum.

Smith & Wesson strongly objected to the practice of rechambering .38 Heavy Duty or Outdoorsman revolvers to use the magnum round - pointing out yet again the substantial difference in the steel used in both cylinders.
 
Old Fuff - your knowledge of old revolvers is rather impressive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top