Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Dedicated .45 Gap Revolver


Carlos

Recommended Posts

I know that the 625's N frame is big/long enough to accomadate the .45 long colt.

and - everyone seems intrugued by lightening the 625 w/ a Ti cylinder.

So, what about a complete re-design around the .45 Gap round? The frame could be dramatically shortened w/ a cylinder to match, thus lightening the cylinder and frame. Balistics are on par w/ the ACP. Seems like it would make the whole gun smaller. Would any other frame allow a 6 shooter w/ a .45 dia bullet? Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a thread with some interesting pictures:

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...p;hl=short+colt

I wonder what happened to the range report from that gun?

Anyway, the 325PD from S&W weighs about half as much as the 625 and will already shoot both the .45 ACP and .45 GAP (with moon clips only). If you want a light 45 GAP gun the 325PD would be hard to beat.

Is there a particular problem you're trying to solve?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Carlos is talking about trying to reduce cylinder weight by shortening a standard steel cylinder instead of going Ti.

My Nowlin 25-2 has a short cylinder (although it could be shorter yet on a dedicated .45 GAP gun, as Carlos suggests). I can't say I've noticed any real difference in "torque." I believe John's reasoning for shortening the cylinder was to improve intrinsic accuracy by reducing the free travel of the bullet before hitting the forcing cone. I have seen the same thing done on dedicated PPC revolvers, with cylinders that are so short you can only load .38 wadcutters with the bullets seated completely flush. I don't think it makes much difference, in terms of either accuracy or feel. Remember when Mickey Fowler won Bianchi with a stock 686 and a clamp-on underlug?

I'm not a believer that reducing "torque" by lightening the cylinder is all that big a deal, and I think a Ti cylinder can bring certain problems of its own, but people I respect have a differing viewpoint on that topic, so I'm willing to listen. :)

I too would like to hear more about DougC's "starter pistol on steroids" and whether it shoots to his expectations with those .38 Short Colt loads. Last time I talked with him about that gun, Doug was having a minor problem unrelated to the cylinder and barrel. Hopefully he got that resolved and has had a chance to sandbag his new heater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually... to lighten frame would take some MAJOR redesign issues on the frame. that's not doable. or near profitable at this point ( the N frame is used in many many different guns.

A super short cylinder is completely possible.. as is a titanium one... they make them tha thandle 44 mag pressures. ... scandium 44 mag.. i held one the other day... phenominally light!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

If you have the dollars, Hamilton Bowen of Bowen Classic Arms can make you literally any cylinder you'd like, from scratch. Same with barrels. It might take a while though. Back in September I sent him my worn out Redhawk to be re-timed and I have no idea when it will be done.

Dave Sinko

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick and dirty post since I am time challenged before court this morning......

I did the Short Colt gun with a short cylinder to take the freebore of the cylinder out of the equation when doing accuracy testing. I got tired of hearing all the naysayers bringing that up, so it got milled off... :D

With the load I worked up it will shoot under an 1 1/2 group at 50 yds, with the bullets on top of each other at 25yds. This is with a .001 oversize bullet to the bore...(.356 in the .355). Sad thing is that the stock gun with full cylinder and stock MO. 28 bbl. with the 11 degree forcing cone does under 3 in at 50yds with the same combo....I will try .357 bullets for that gun someday.... :) I still have a dream of a Stock short colt with a 8 3/8 barrel turned back to around 7 inches....... :rolleyes:

As far as lightening up the gun and torque, I know several top competitors that bought the "3" series guns and couldnt shoot them due to inherent problems with the light frame. They however took the TI cylinders and put them in their 627 and the stainless cylinders in the "'3" guns. Another problem is when using the light frames with light bullets they jump due to the difference in mass and also have squibs when drawing during Steel Challenge matches. Had I the funds and needed them I would to it in a heartbeat, but there is nothing wrong with my equipment the way it is set up.

I am getting to the point that once you get the gun set up to shoot as well as you can with an accurate load and learn how to shoot it lighter cylinders and the other "refinements" are mental improvements, but we know if you think it will help then it usually does.

I know I personally dont shoot my 625s well enough yet to justify the expense of the TI cylinder, but for those who want it, go for it cause it is HellaCool! ;)

Now, if SW would offer stainless guns already set up with TI cylinders with the promise that they will run out of the box without having to work on them I would be all over them.... B)

Regards,

DougC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had to get my 2 cents worth in here.

I think a dedicated 6 shot revolver would be neat, but with a short, .45acp length, Ti cylinder, N frame. Take the saved weight from the cylinder and add it to the barrel (bigger O.D. or bigger underlug), so it weighs the same overall as an existing 625.

Less cyl inertia, use existing brass, less muzzle rise. Sounds good to me, but my level of incompetence may affect my priorities.

Tom

PS If I could buy the same gun in an eight shot .38 super, I'd take one of those too.

EDIT: After more thought, a PC style ball/detent on the yoke and a straight barrel (similar to a model 10 but with a classic style replaceable blade), with a nice heavy bolt-on underlug would be slick. Light or heavy, revolver legal either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are several things that bothers me about cutting the front of the cylinder back. Isn't the constriction in the front of the cylinder intended to keep hot gases from melting the sides of lead bullets, and also to keep the bullet in alignment with the bore as it jumps to the forcing cone. It seems to me by doing away with this design feature built into most revolvers that you would end up with both accuracy and leading problems and maybe a large drop in velocity. I hope some one address these questions as I have thought about this modification for some time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob,

you are right that there is some constriction in the chamber, and by cutting back the cylinder you acutally make some freebore. That is why you use the 11 degree forcing cone also known as the "Taylor throat" to make a wide sloping "chamber" for the bullet to come into to center up before it engages with the rifling.

I bought a 25-2 that had the cylinder cut back with a custom barrel turned back to the cylinder that shot like a house on fire. Carmoney still has one like that as well. They shoot just fine, and when I set up my Short Colt only gun I did this as well, and with the "correct" load that the gun likes it will shoot at 50yds as well.

The way I chose to overcome these potential problems was to use the 11 degree forcing cone cut, use an undersized custom barrel (.355) and use (.356) bullets for this kind of accuracy. I have also shot lead bullets through my gun for a practice load with no ill effects as well.

I have demonstrated that there is a severe accuracy jump doing those things in the Short Colt gun vs. a stock cylinder/barrel set up, but if you have an accurate load the stock gun will shoot them well at 25yds, and have a slightly larger group at 50yds.

I guess what I am saying is that you "dont" have to have the constriction in the front of the chambers of the Revo, but you will have to do some other things to make it shoot, instead of just buying ammo off the shelf....

Hope this helps somewhat....

Regards,

DougC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doug,

Thank you for answering my fears on cutting back the cylinder. I do most of the work on my guns, not that I am a gun smith, but I am willing to take two hours to do a twenty minute job in an effort to get things right. I currently have a 6.5" model 23 barrel on one of my 627s. I like the looks and the feel of this set up, and was thinking about maybe reaming the model 23 barrel to .460" Then cutting a custom barrel that could be inserted into the reamed model 23 barrel to take up the gap caused by cutting back the cylinder. I don't know if having an insert set in locTite would cause a heat build up problem because of an insulation effect created by the locTie boundary between the two metal surfaces, but I'm betting that it will not. Anyway thanks again, for your reply to my previous post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob, cant help you on the loctite stuff.......According to a wise man...I have to know my limitations.... ;)

A couple calls to some gunsmiths should be able to tell you what you can expect when sleeving the barrels.

Good luck on your project!

DougC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<snip> reaming the model 23 barrel to .460" Then cutting a custom barrel that could be inserted into the reamed model 23 barrel <snip>

Sounds like a neat plan, I read somewhere that the pressue may be too much for a sleeve

to stand up to. You could have the barrel re-bored by a place that was listed here on BE a

short while ago. (oops, no, that was the S&W form, I'll post info if you want later)

What caliber barrel are you looking at ?? are you trying for a 45 ??

I've been looking at having one of the 627 PC 5 inch barrels rebored for .40 caliber,

that would make a cool looking 5 inch gun :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<snip> reaming the model 23 barrel to .460" Then cutting a custom barrel that could be inserted into the reamed model 23 barrel <snip>

Dave my plan is to cut the new insert from either a .357" or .356" blank, with the O.D. turned to .461", except for the lengthened and enlarged diameter in the forcing cone area. Then heat the reamed barrel, and freeze the new barrel blank in liquid nitrogen, It should just drop in. I might not even need to use LocTite. That would give me an approximate thickness of .052" per side, that along with the support gained from the shrink fit of the new barrel blank into the model 23 barrel should handle any pressures I will run into, given that this is a straight walled pistol case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave my plan is to cut the new insert from either a .357" or .356" blank, with the O.D. turned to .461", except for the lengthened and enlarged diameter in the forcing cone area. Then heat the reamed barrel, and freeze the new barrel blank in liquid nitrogen, It should just drop in. I might not even need to use LocTite. That would give me an approximate thickness of .052" per side, that along with the support gained from the shrink fit of the new barrel blank into the model 23 barrel should handle any pressures I will run into, given that this is a straight walled pistol case.

Sounds like a cool project, but why not just use a Mod. 27/28 barrel and setback the shoulder

enough for use with a cut down cylinder ?? (if this is a starter pistol project like Doug's :P )

I'm not familier with the Model 23 barrel, does it have a special outside contour that you wish

to keep :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...