This is the real answer for my guess.People who favor revolvers are already a much smaller market than autoloaders. People who favor auto loading cartridges in revolvers are a smaller subset yet.
Don't forget the short-lived Taurus 905C - it's a real shame they dropped the short frame, only to be reintroduced several years later with the model 380, but this time in .380 ACP.
View attachment 1116237
For those who don't want to handload their ammo, 9 mm is a great choice; it has adequate power, in a compact package with affordable bulk ammo with which to practice.
I guess one possible reason is that with 9 mm, saving brass isn't so important. It's so popular it's everywhere, so why not shoot an auto, which are easier to clean and softer shooting.
BUT... for the revolver-shooting handloader, it could be loaded down to very light loads and still shoot well, since it has a much lower case capacity than its chief revolver cartridge competitor, 38 Special. Maybe even something with a flat point to cut cleaner holes in targets? And free brass everywhere.
I DO notice that 9 mm revolvers aren't in stock much these days. I don't remember how that compares to pre-COVID days. Maybe I'm wrong and they ARE popular and that's why they're not in stock?
What are you guys' thoughts on the matter?
I would dearly love to have a 3" S&W 60 in 9mm.
I have a 2" M60 in .357. I wonder what it would cost to get it converted.
But why not a revolver chambered for 38 Super ? Also since is the correct bore diameter for 38/357 is .357 while the correct bore diameter for 9MM is .355,
The fact that it has foreign origin is irrelevant here. The other part is false without a lot of qualification.9 mm is a foreign cartridge that is incompetent to compete with a rimmed cartridge.
An interesting side question:
Would you rather have a longer cylinder and frame, but with a longer jump for the bullet inside the cylinder
…or a shorter cylinder, same long frame and the barrel extending back to meet the short cylinder, thus creating an unsightly gap between the cylinder and frame?
Pick your poison.
The 'fact' is relevant here. The question is "Why aren't 9mm revolvers more popular?" Popularity is dependent on opinion. An opinion, even if indefensible is relevant.The fact that it has foreign origin is irrelevant here. The other part is false without a lot of qualification.
Read Old Hobo’s post a few down from yours.
Same here. I convert 637-2 Airweights to .357 Mag and then ream them for 9mm.
Power is adequate, 147 gr avg 952 fps and 292 ft-lbs energy. After conversion, guns weigh between 11.5 and 12.5 ounces depending on grips.
Well, I'm not sure about that. I feel like there's a Revolver Renaissance at the moment.It's because revolvers aren't that popular now. The reason there are so many .38's and .357's is they've been around a long time and during an era when revolvers were king. If 9mm revolvers were around in the 50s and 60s, it might be a different story.
Lack of desire I understand.I have a 9mm cylinder for one of my 38/357 SAA clones but I cannot remember ever even trying it out. I have lots of 38 Special and 9mm ammo available and do shoot my 9mm semiautomatics at times but simply have no desire or incentive to shoot 9mm in a revolver. I've even shot the SAA and a 9mm semiautomatic on the same day at a range. The cylinder was there in the range bag and there it stayed.
Well, I'm not sure about that. I feel like there's a Revolver Renaissance at the moment.
Lack of desire I understand.
As for incentive: Are you a handloader? Because if not, the fact that 9 mm costs half as much as 38 Special seems to be an incentive, not to mention superior ballistics out of a shorter barrel.