Who makes new Top-Break revolvers?
- Thread starter Hugo
- Start date
- Status
Many Webleys were "converted" to .45 ACP by shaving the rear of the cylinder to allow clearance for half or full moon clips. Factory .45 ACP loads approach "proof loads" for thes pistols. The 2 lower ones are in .38 S&W. Yes Webleys are increasing in value, but they are still around.
krs
Member
Anyone for a new Beretta in .38 Spec.? The seller DID have a longer version in both .38 Spl. and .45 Colt, nickel or blued, but I guess he sold the rest of them.http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=122496138
I have a converted Webley MK VI that I love to shoot target reloads through. Although the chamber is slightly large and the bore a thou or two over what my bullets are used to the Webley does pretty good accracy. It shoots better than one of my S&W 1917's, but not the other.
completely fun experience to shoot this, wouldn't trade it for a new 1911 Colt...
I have a converted Webley MK VI that I love to shoot target reloads through. Although the chamber is slightly large and the bore a thou or two over what my bullets are used to the Webley does pretty good accracy. It shoots better than one of my S&W 1917's, but not the other.
completely fun experience to shoot this, wouldn't trade it for a new 1911 Colt...
I think the answer is that if you use a smart design, good metallurgy and don't try to make it in one of the heavy magnums then there's not a problem.
My guess is that the gun companies don't think that there's a market for a modern-design top-break.
I see that CDNN Sports has Beretta Laramie .38 Special revolvers for sale in blue (5 or 6 1/2 inch barrels) or nickel plate (6 1/2 inch only). Both are priced at $699.99. I believe the listed retail was $1,000 plus.
The Laramie is an accurate copy of Smith & Wesson's No. 3 New Model Russian, which was the last of the big-bore Smith & Wesson top-breaks. In my view the .38 Special cartridge is a good choice in a revolver of this kind. If you are a fan of Russian Model Smith & Wesson's you might give them a look while they're available at an attractive price.
The Laramie is an accurate copy of Smith & Wesson's No. 3 New Model Russian, which was the last of the big-bore Smith & Wesson top-breaks. In my view the .38 Special cartridge is a good choice in a revolver of this kind. If you are a fan of Russian Model Smith & Wesson's you might give them a look while they're available at an attractive price.
I strongly recommend against shooting standard or high velocity .45 ACP ammunition in a converted .455 Webley. I have seen a couple with chambers blown out from shooting standard GI ball.
Top strap aside, those guns are just not strong enough to handle anything of much greater pressure than the orginal rounds.
(The British Army warned against using the .455 Webley Auto in revolvers, and it is not as powerful as the .45 ACP.)
Jim
Top strap aside, those guns are just not strong enough to handle anything of much greater pressure than the orginal rounds.
(The British Army warned against using the .455 Webley Auto in revolvers, and it is not as powerful as the .45 ACP.)
Jim
Chiming in rather late but tend to disagree with a number of the comments here
A few points of order re the Webley:
most of the Webley top breaks left the factory loose as the proverbial goose. It was a military servicability requirement that leaves one in the same boat as contrasting a GI issue 1911A1 to a Series 70 or earlier Colt Gold Cup No comparison right?
and so it is with Webley top break products
At the close of the 19th century Webley once produced their Greene model. The Webley Greene was developed mainly for officers drawn from the landed gentry who provided their own side arms. Handle a Greene model and everything tends toward early Colt Python in fit, finish as well as action. Have had a couple of Greene models that some twit cut for .45acp in 1/2 moons, between the pair I am certain I ran at least several thousand rounds of military hard ball as well as snotty hand loads thru with nary a bit of looseness ever developing. It really doesnt take much to trash a Mk 1 or even a Mk IV tho as they simply were not built to anywhere close to the same standard as the Greene.
As to S&W #3's, they are somewhat weaker, mostly due to the poor quality of American steel. While they will take the stress of black powder loadings anything past that usually results in a stretched frame which affects both latch lock up and cylinder end shake. That said, used within their limitations the New Model number three was with little question the most used revolver for target use within the period easily printing ragged one hole groups in the right hands in its .44 Russian chambering.
Now on the reproductions
In my opinion they are mostly garbage and this includes the Thompson Center manufactured for S&W, Schofield clone. Why anyone would pay a grand or more for a fake when you can still purchase solid original arms in the same range has long been beyond me.
and yes, I am stating that one can still find decent #3 NM for the $1000.00 range. Usually they do require work. For example 100s of NM #3s were relined to .22. Converted pistols which are usually in great shape sell cheaply
If the work was done to a .32 or 38-44 target model often you can remove the sweated in liners and have the piece rebored to either .44 Russian or .45 S&W. Otherwise there are still new old stock barrels around in the couple hundred and up range as well as new old stock hammers and triggers.
If you are real lucky maybe you can even find a factory cut for shoulder stock model, of course the stocks tend to run more than the revolvers.
The main proviso on S&W #3s is if they are already loose there is not much you can do to greatly improve them and when you get a decent one don't play magnumitus as the gun wont cooperate, stay inside the original pressure range.
1000s were put down dead with these loading ranges and the guns themselves remain among the most accurate ever made
its bad form to judge these weapons based on burned out relics or crudely fitted reproductions in my opinion
A few points of order re the Webley:
most of the Webley top breaks left the factory loose as the proverbial goose. It was a military servicability requirement that leaves one in the same boat as contrasting a GI issue 1911A1 to a Series 70 or earlier Colt Gold Cup No comparison right?
and so it is with Webley top break products
At the close of the 19th century Webley once produced their Greene model. The Webley Greene was developed mainly for officers drawn from the landed gentry who provided their own side arms. Handle a Greene model and everything tends toward early Colt Python in fit, finish as well as action. Have had a couple of Greene models that some twit cut for .45acp in 1/2 moons, between the pair I am certain I ran at least several thousand rounds of military hard ball as well as snotty hand loads thru with nary a bit of looseness ever developing. It really doesnt take much to trash a Mk 1 or even a Mk IV tho as they simply were not built to anywhere close to the same standard as the Greene.
As to S&W #3's, they are somewhat weaker, mostly due to the poor quality of American steel. While they will take the stress of black powder loadings anything past that usually results in a stretched frame which affects both latch lock up and cylinder end shake. That said, used within their limitations the New Model number three was with little question the most used revolver for target use within the period easily printing ragged one hole groups in the right hands in its .44 Russian chambering.
Now on the reproductions
In my opinion they are mostly garbage and this includes the Thompson Center manufactured for S&W, Schofield clone. Why anyone would pay a grand or more for a fake when you can still purchase solid original arms in the same range has long been beyond me.
and yes, I am stating that one can still find decent #3 NM for the $1000.00 range. Usually they do require work. For example 100s of NM #3s were relined to .22. Converted pistols which are usually in great shape sell cheaply
If the work was done to a .32 or 38-44 target model often you can remove the sweated in liners and have the piece rebored to either .44 Russian or .45 S&W. Otherwise there are still new old stock barrels around in the couple hundred and up range as well as new old stock hammers and triggers.
If you are real lucky maybe you can even find a factory cut for shoulder stock model, of course the stocks tend to run more than the revolvers.
The main proviso on S&W #3s is if they are already loose there is not much you can do to greatly improve them and when you get a decent one don't play magnumitus as the gun wont cooperate, stay inside the original pressure range.
1000s were put down dead with these loading ranges and the guns themselves remain among the most accurate ever made
its bad form to judge these weapons based on burned out relics or crudely fitted reproductions in my opinion
As a fan of the old top-breaks, and a mechanical engineer, maybe I can help explain why there is still no .460 S&W Magnum, or any high pressure cartridge, in a top-break revolver.
Yes, you are right, it CANbe done.
A few things, though:
The gun will cost as much as an AutoMag, yet not outperform the current revolvers on the market - not to mention the T/C Contender.
It will be much more massive (bulky) than the simple and strong frames of these revolvers.
The key in mechanism design - keeping it solid and simple gives you strength and reliability. I just tried a box of Buffalo Bore +P+ loads in my .44 Ruger Super Blackhawk. AWESOME!!! THAT was fun. The solid simple design makes the Blackhawk the only one of the "big three" 44 revolvers (Ruger, S&W, Colt) to handle this load.
But, hey, I love to shoot those hammerless S&W 38's too.
Marty
Keep America safe - teach a friend to shoot.
Yes, you are right, it CANbe done.
A few things, though:
The gun will cost as much as an AutoMag, yet not outperform the current revolvers on the market - not to mention the T/C Contender.
It will be much more massive (bulky) than the simple and strong frames of these revolvers.
The key in mechanism design - keeping it solid and simple gives you strength and reliability. I just tried a box of Buffalo Bore +P+ loads in my .44 Ruger Super Blackhawk. AWESOME!!! THAT was fun. The solid simple design makes the Blackhawk the only one of the "big three" 44 revolvers (Ruger, S&W, Colt) to handle this load.
But, hey, I love to shoot those hammerless S&W 38's too.
Marty
Keep America safe - teach a friend to shoot.
I think what most people want is a modern design in top break, not in the mammoth calibers. (500 S&W, 454 Cassul, etc) The fans of top breaks were just drooling over the 412 REX because it was modern and awesome looking. It shot a popular caliber, and was unique in form and function.
I had hoped that they would license the design to Ruger to make the 412 REX available to the US, but, alas, like so may things, it was not to be. Guess the market just isn't there.
I had hoped that they would license the design to Ruger to make the 412 REX available to the US, but, alas, like so may things, it was not to be. Guess the market just isn't there.
- Status
