OT- Fast small bore revolver?

Andrew · Post by **Andrew** » Fri May 02, 2008 7:23 pm

I was thinking today about revolvers chambered for .22/.22mag. Then I was thinking about the SRH and the Raging Bull series of big revolvers. Then I got to thinking about the Judge with it's long cylinder for the .410. Then I got to thinking....

Why are there not any wheel guns in the fast .22 calibers?

Is it Pressure? I am under-knowledged on cartridge pressures, so I have no idea there.

Is it dimensionally difficult? I don't know if that would be the reason because you can have use a 5-shot cylinder to save space and keep the walls plenty thick.

Is there no market for flat shooting pistols? I doubt that because the .223 seems to be a pretty popular chambering for the T/C pistols.

I personally think a large frame revolver chambered in the prolific .223 rem would be pretty sweet. Plinking, varmits, punching paper- it could be awesome.

Probably not a new idea, but I thought I would get you alls opinions.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Fri May 02, 2008 7:32 pm

I think once you get to the really high pressure rounds, and especially the ones generally using jacketed slugs, the pressure when the bullet first enters the rifling would be great enough you'd have a big fireball coming out of the cylinder gap. If the gap were really tight...it wouldn't likely be for long, due to erosion.

That's my understanding of what happened with the .357 Maximum and it wasn't even close to a .223

gundownunder · Post by **gundownunder** » Fri May 02, 2008 8:23 pm

There are two revolvers available in "hot" .22 cartridges, the Taurus in 22 hornet and the Magnum Research BFR also in 22 hornet. I would think that with high intensity loads there would be conciderable erosion in the throat and the cylinder gap and also the jump from cylinder to barrel would do strange things to bullets which are designed to be fragile.

Post by **Hobie** » Fri May 02, 2008 8:51 pm

S&W made a .22 Jet but the case design was problematic. Didn't Taurus do the gun in a .218 Bee as well?

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Fri May 02, 2008 8:58 pm

BFR has one in 30WCF...that would handload nicely and it's one of the strongest revolvers made. They have some other centerfire offerings that stray from the norm......

Andrew · Post by **Andrew** » Fri May 02, 2008 9:08 pm

Hmmm, 22 hornet you say? I will investigate upon that. Not that I have any surplus cash, but, if you fail to plan...

Hobie wrote:S&W made a .22 Jet but the case design was problematic. Didn't Taurus do the gun in a .218 Bee as well?

Now that you mention it, I do remember the Taurus in .218 Bee although I am unfamiliar with the cartridge.

BlaineG wrote:BFR has one in 30WCF...

That sounds pretty cool. What's BFR?

Pete44ru · Post by **Pete44ru** » Fri May 02, 2008 9:16 pm

Big Fine Revolver, if you believe their pitch, that is.

bogus bill · Post by **bogus bill** » Fri May 02, 2008 9:32 pm

I have this old s&w model 53 .22 jet. It is the .357 necked down to .223.
It comes with inserts to shoot regular .22lr. The hammer is convertable to shoot centerfire or rimfire. If you dont keep them clean and dry in the chambers they can set back. No problem, but people didnt and smith quit makeing them. I dont remember claimed velocity but it is hot. The gun has no kick, but has the sharpest loudest muzzel blast you probley ever heard!

BAGTIC · Post by **BAGTIC** » Fri May 02, 2008 11:05 pm

It is not so much the high pressures as the low expansion ratios. If a .22 Jet and a .357 were loaded to the same pressures the pressures in the .357 would drop, compatively, much faster than the Jet because of the much higher expansion ratio. Thus the Jet would have higher muzzle pressures and would maintain the pressures at the cylinder gap longer.

Nate Kiowa Jones · Post by **Nate Kiowa Jones** » Fri May 02, 2008 11:14 pm

The main reason you don't see more revolvers in fast carts is because most are bottlenecked and when fired from a revolver the shoulders strech forward and tend to jam the cylinder. If you reload for a boltaction you know how fire forming and just neck sizing only can sometime make closing the bolt a little hard. This means zero headspace and is good for accuracy but it doesn't work in a revolver.

mikld · Post by **mikld** » Sat May 03, 2008 11:14 am

I believe Mr. Jones is correct. With a bottle necked cartridge "set back" will jam the cylinder. I think this is one reason the S&W in 22 Jet wasn't too popular.

hfcable · Post by **hfcable** » Sat May 03, 2008 1:28 pm

Hobie wrote:S&W made a .22 Jet but the case design was problematic. Didn't Taurus do the gun in a .218 Bee as well?

yes, they did make a 218 bee and maybe they still do? and sometimes you will see conversion done on a saa type gun and other double actions...
would be fun to play with wouldn't it.

shawn_c992001 · Post by **shawn_c992001** » Sat May 03, 2008 3:33 pm

I use the "Raging Hornet" to turkey hunt it's kinda heavy with it's 10" barrel. If they made it in a 6" or 7" barrel I'd swap in a heart beat. As far as shooting it will drive a nail!

Travis Morgan · Post by **Travis Morgan** » Mon May 05, 2008 3:23 am

Actually, Taurus was planning to bring out a .223 based on "Da Judge".

oldgerboy · Post by **oldgerboy** » Mon May 05, 2008 6:54 pm

I remember an old article where an S&W .22 Jet revolver was fitted with a .357 cylinder. Then a "sleeve" was made to fit the taper of the Jet cartridge and made it look and fit the cylinder like a .357. The sleeves were re-usable and the set-back didn't occur. That had to be 30 years ago.