|
View Poll Results: Would you by a 6-shot .38 Spl J-frame?
|
Yes
|
|
198 |
55.00% |
No
|
|
132 |
36.67% |
Undecided
|
|
30 |
8.33% |
|
|
06-29-2020, 09:26 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pike County PA
Posts: 1,046
Likes: 1,758
Liked 2,027 Times in 645 Posts
|
|
|
06-29-2020, 10:00 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2006
Location: N. Ohio
Posts: 1,687
Likes: 9,441
Liked 2,731 Times in 999 Posts
|
|
I don’t think so. I have 4 five shot J-Frames. I carry Two at a time. I don’t feel a need to put them away or get rid of them to gain the sixth round. I’ve shot the new Kimber. It’s a nice gun. I still don’t feel a need to change. If something big is happening, I have a Glock 26 with a ton of mags.
__________________
Two Handguns every day
|
06-29-2020, 10:01 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Oregon
Posts: 980
Likes: 1,248
Liked 2,286 Times in 675 Posts
|
|
an offering of a six shot .32 mag J frame , with a 3" option, is the gaping hole in the current Smith revolver lineup. As mediocre a shot as I am, even a single extra round could matter.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-29-2020, 10:05 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 10,451
Likes: 3,929
Liked 50,502 Times in 6,019 Posts
|
|
Here's about the best S&W has offered in the more recent past. This is a nickeled Model 10-5, 2" barrel, that shipped in December, 1977. This one is as new in the box with all the goodies. If you absolutely have to have 6 shots of .38 special, you will have to accept a bit more bulk.
John
__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
06-29-2020, 12:27 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 604
Likes: 21
Liked 660 Times in 284 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grayfox
Nope. Absolutely no interest in a J-frame size six shot .38. As mentioned, physical size limits would require a larger frame and cylinder. So S&W would simply be making a Detective Special. I already have one of those.
|
You might need to slow down a bit on this. Some just don't seem to grasp the concept.
|
06-29-2020, 12:45 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Liked 41 Times in 25 Posts
|
|
Yes, we're basically talking about a S&W Detective Special. Colt brought back the Cobra, but it's significantly bigger than the Dick. The idea is for a minimal size six shot.
And I would think / hope that a company that has been making revolvers for over 160 years could figure out how to make something like this without screwing it up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon 1
Not sure I wonder then If the Cylinder would have to be bigger and be a little heavier in 38 special. Would it be harder for pocket carry in 38spl with bigger cylinder. A Taurus and colt D frame seem to be a some what bigger but the D frame I always felt it was between J and k. I wonder how they would hold up with timing issues IF there would be any going to the extra shot in 38 special. I no 686 7 shots I think are ok but it’s a totally different working of internals and frame. I do have 351 c that was Tuned by Teddy Jacobson it is pretty sweet but the cylinder smaller because of a 22 Magnum. I guess for a belt gun the bigger or the extra shot as they say would be pretty cool but pocket carry not sure that’s in 38 spl Like opening a can of worms I guess.
|
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
06-29-2020, 12:47 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Liked 41 Times in 25 Posts
|
|
I don't know if I consider 1977 recent. But if they brought that back in new production it would be close. I'm thinking more in the enclosed hammer design of the 442. Actually a 6-shot 442 is the exact description of what I'm talking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PALADIN85020
Here's about the best S&W has offered in the more recent past. This is a nickeled Model 10-5, 2" barrel, that shipped in December, 1977. This one is as new in the box with all the goodies. If you absolutely have to have 6 shots of .38 special, you will have to accept a bit more bulk.
John
|
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-29-2020, 01:06 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,516
Likes: 860
Liked 4,572 Times in 1,516 Posts
|
|
The Taurus 856 6-shot is pretty darn close to a 640 in size.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
06-29-2020, 04:45 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Near Austin
Posts: 24
Likes: 88
Liked 22 Times in 7 Posts
|
|
Really happy with my 8 shot 43c
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
06-29-2020, 08:11 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Bartlett, Tennessee
Posts: 7,616
Likes: 2,934
Liked 18,693 Times in 4,788 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBMW
Okay, I think the way I phrased the question caused some confusion. What I'm talking about is a 6-shot .38 snub nosed revolver in as small a form factor as possible.
I don't know exactly how Smith technically specifies it's frame size, and if the cylinder aperture is fixed for a given letter named frame class, but I was talking about stretching a j-frame to fit a 6 shot cylinder. If this fits the description of a C-frame, that's what I'm talking about. They haven't done this almost 50 years, so maybe it's time for another shot.
|
S&W has no need to design a whole new gun when they're already out there. Lots of folks make a small frame six shot .38. Colt made a whole bunch of 'em.
|
06-29-2020, 10:38 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Wilson, NC
Posts: 1,288
Likes: 464
Liked 823 Times in 375 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Execpro
Why can Taurus make a 6 shot light frame 38+p (856 UL) and S&W can’t?!
|
Agreed! *** S&W?
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
06-30-2020, 12:15 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: (outside) Charleston, SC
Posts: 31,000
Likes: 41,665
Liked 29,249 Times in 13,829 Posts
|
|
I have two....
....so that must mean SOMETHING.
__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"
|
06-30-2020, 01:30 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: metro Phoenix
Posts: 3,196
Likes: 16,412
Liked 3,964 Times in 1,605 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by steelslaver
Yup you ca stretch it more and fit another 38 round. But,only if you stretch it enough that it becomes a K frame.
Get a set of calibers and check it out.
Some manufactures make a near J frame 6 shot J frame diameter cylinder. But their chambers are farther towards the center. S&W can not move their chambers towards the center without reducing the size of the ratchet, which means moving the hand inward, which means making the trigger and hammer narrower. It also means moving the barrel down in the frame and redesigning the yoke to clearance the lowered barrel in the frame. Simple HUH?
PS it also means a heavier double action trigger pull because the ratchet is actually a gear so it takes more leverage. Just like on a bike when the rear gear is smaller it is harder to petal than when it is larger.
|
Well, it's after 10 PM and my hip is killing me, so I'll have to wait at least until tomorrow to take a photo of my Rossi 462 with a K-frame. And I already slammed down my thoroughly-vetted and heavily regulated Opioid, so if I fail to hit all points or don't make sense, we know why.
Anyway, I disagree. Even the S&W Model 73 was smaller than a K but larger than a J. Since they are nonexistent for us mere mortals, I can't measure one to see the difference. But as I mentioned, the Rossi an older one from the 1990s, is about as close to identical to a S&W in design and construction as you're likely to see. For one thing, the chambers are not "closer," because it's too big for any molded J holster, meaning the cylinder is definitely larger than a J. But it's also too small for a K holster. And I popped the side plate once to see what the fuss was with the recall, and I'm tellin' ya, it's a CLONE in there. It has all the same parts.
For sake of adding to the measuring conversation, I have a couple of Taurus Model 431s, 5-shot 44 Specials. They are nearly identical to a K-frame! Might be off a millimeter or two, but not enough to matter. They fit in all my K holsters, including my molded Israeli Front Line brand.
As far as messing with the hand-ratchet combo, I'm sorry but I don't buy it. If I remember, I'll just photograph a J, a K, and the Rossi together. Good night, y'all!
|
06-30-2020, 07:05 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,058
Likes: 108
Liked 2,125 Times in 968 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Execpro
Why can Taurus make a 6 shot light frame 38+p (856 UL) and S&W can’t?
!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telecaster
The Taurus 856 6-shot is pretty darn close to a 640 in size.
|
I will get some pictures up for comparison, if my absent-mindedness doesn't grab me.
|
06-30-2020, 07:47 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Posen, IL, USA
Posts: 669
Likes: 1,788
Liked 988 Times in 388 Posts
|
|
I always wanted Smith to make an alloy framed K-frame with 2" barrel and round butt. Fixed sights would be fine, thought a dovetailed front would be a nice touch.
.38spc would be fine.
I'd be fine with a bobbed hammer though I suspect not everyone would be.
Such a gun would be easy for Smith to produce, at least easier than adding a new frame size.
It would be a modern Model 12.
The 442/642 are great simple, no-frill defensive guns. That's how I'd see this. Just more shootable and with one additional shot.
|
06-30-2020, 07:51 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 509
Likes: 6
Liked 787 Times in 294 Posts
|
|
In real steel versions there is about a 10 ounce or so difference in weight between a 60/640 snub and a snub K 10/66. So S&W would have to put tons of money into tooling up for a new frame size between the two for basically one gun, a 6 shot DS sized revolver. A gun that a number of competitors already produce, so its not like they would be cornering an untapped market either. Split the difference between what exists and you are maybe saving 5-6 ounces over a K. Or adding 5-6 ounces over a J for one more round. Doesn't make sense for them to put that much time and money into it for such a small return.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-30-2020, 08:00 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Posen, IL, USA
Posts: 669
Likes: 1,788
Liked 988 Times in 388 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by uncleted327
In real steel versions there is about a 10 ounce or so difference in weight between a 60/640 snub and a snub K 10/66. So S&W would have to put tons of money into tooling up for a new frame size between the two for basically one gun, a 6 shot DS sized revolver. A gun that a number of competitors already produce, so its not like they would be cornering an untapped market either. Split the difference between what exists and you are maybe saving 5-6 ounces over a K. Or adding 5-6 ounces over a J for one more round. Doesn't make sense for them to put that much time and money into it for such a small return.
|
What would an alloy framed K frame weigh?
|
06-30-2020, 08:14 AM
|
|
Moderator
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 26,897
Likes: 987
Liked 19,022 Times in 9,307 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by malph
What would an alloy framed K frame weigh?
|
A 2" model 12 is listed at 18.5 ounces.
__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-30-2020, 08:32 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North Chesterfield, Va.
Posts: 6,296
Likes: 8,911
Liked 13,322 Times in 3,302 Posts
|
|
I already did. It's called a Colt Cobra.
__________________
John 3:16 .
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
06-30-2020, 08:41 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Posen, IL, USA
Posts: 669
Likes: 1,788
Liked 988 Times in 388 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CajunBass
I already did. It's called a Colt Cobra.
|
I know that Colt is a nice gun. I had one.
For actually shooting though, especially DA shooting, I strongly prefer the Smith's action.
|
06-30-2020, 09:17 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,352
Likes: 15,043
Liked 10,822 Times in 2,009 Posts
|
|
Might be easier to lobby Smith to expand their offerings in the .32 Mag.,327 Mag. J frame series including an all steel Centennial version.
No internal locks please & Thank you!
Link to Lucky Gunner article on 32 Snubs.
https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/w...caliber-is-32/
__________________
LEX ET ORDO
Last edited by lawandorder; 06-30-2020 at 09:21 AM.
|
The Following 7 Users Like Post:
|
|
06-30-2020, 09:40 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Posen, IL, USA
Posts: 669
Likes: 1,788
Liked 988 Times in 388 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawandorder
Might be easier to lobby Smith to expand their offerings in the .32 Mag.,327 Mag. J frame series including an all steel Centennial version.
No internal locks please & Thank you!
Link to Lucky Gunner article on 32 Snubs.
https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/w...caliber-is-32/
|
I am all for it.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-30-2020, 10:02 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,835
Likes: 5,161
Liked 5,242 Times in 2,483 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by malph
I always wanted Smith to make an alloy framed K-frame with 2" barrel and round butt. Fixed sights would be fine, thought a dovetailed front would be a nice touch.
.38spc would be fine. [...]
|
Back in the 90s S&W did all that in the Model 315 Night Guard. Its frame was machined for standard adjustable sights but it was supplied with a large fixed rear and dovetailed front. Sales were a dismal failure. It was not priced to compete with J frames but that does not explain why those of us who collect medium priced S&W revolvers would not buy it.
The obvious thing that has not yet been mentioned in this thread is that while automatics are selling like hot cakes new revolvers linger on the shelf. The only revolver I found in the new June/July American Rifleman is one ad for a snub. Other wise, nothing. That's a weak market to engineer a new frame for.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-30-2020, 10:16 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Posen, IL, USA
Posts: 669
Likes: 1,788
Liked 988 Times in 388 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by k22fan
Back in the 90s S&W did all that in the Model 315 Night Guard. Its frame was machined for standard adjustable sights but it was supplied with a large fixed rear and dovetailed front. Sales were a dismal failure. It was not priced to compete with J frames but that does not explain why those of us who collect medium priced S&W revolvers would not buy it.
The obvious thing that has not yet been mentioned in this thread is that while automatics are selling like hot cakes new revolvers linger on the shelf. The only revolver I found in the new June/July American Rifleman is one ad for a snub. Other wise, nothing. That's a weak market to engineer a new frame for.
|
Yep. I almost mentioned the 315. I didn't buy one either to be honest.
They were expensive if I recall correctly. Perhaps if there was a similar model built to the level of a 442/642 it would do better???
I did run into one 315 at an LGS. Dang if it didn't have the worst, most gritty, stagey trigger I'd ever felt on a K frame.
For what they wanted for it, I couldn't bring myself to do it.
If i had known I'd never see another, I probably would have bought it anyway and dealt with whatever issues the gun had.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-30-2020, 10:29 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,835
Likes: 5,161
Liked 5,242 Times in 2,483 Posts
|
|
You've seen one more 315 then I have.
There were a few variations of 7 shot aluminum L frame snub nose .357s. The ones with titanium cylinders would not weigh much more that a Model 12. Considering price and availability one might be the way to go.
I'll leave it to someone else to get the thread back up on the rails.
|
06-30-2020, 10:30 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Posen, IL, USA
Posts: 669
Likes: 1,788
Liked 988 Times in 388 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by k22fan
Back in the 90s S&W did all that in the Model 315 Night Guard. Its frame was machined for standard adjustable sights but it was supplied with a large fixed rear and dovetailed front. Sales were a dismal failure. It was not priced to compete with J frames but that does not explain why those of us who collect medium priced S&W revolvers would not buy it.
The obvious thing that has not yet been mentioned in this thread is that while automatics are selling like hot cakes new revolvers linger on the shelf. The only revolver I found in the new June/July American Rifleman is one ad for a snub. Other wise, nothing. That's a weak market to engineer a new frame for.
|
You know that really hit home during the recent Antifa/BLM induced panic buying.
The local guns store got pretty barren looking. Looked like plagues of locust came through and took off with all the guns.
But they left the revolvers....decent revolvers...586s, 686s, 64s, ... guns that would actually make sense for a first time gun buyer.
I'm sure those revolvers still sell, but it really hit me that they are just not what the masses want these days.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
06-30-2020, 10:31 AM
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 6,634
Likes: 638
Liked 6,872 Times in 2,546 Posts
|
|
Making one would put it on par with a K frame. But why have they discontinued 2” K frames? I’d like one of those. I know I can get a used Model 64 or 10, but the fact that they are no longer made makes them stupid expensive. Make a new 64 in 2” Without the lock and I’m interested. They can make j frames without the lock. They can make k frames without one too.
|
06-30-2020, 04:06 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: central ohio
Posts: 1,385
Likes: 949
Liked 826 Times in 488 Posts
|
|
Groo here
Hogue has an aftermarket rubber grip for the DASA k6s..
Got one for my K6s DASA 3in.
Covers the backstrap and allows me to shoot mags!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
06-30-2020, 04:33 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Kansas
Posts: 720
Likes: 1,919
Liked 1,143 Times in 454 Posts
|
|
Sure if it were stainless steel in 327 mag. No space age plastics or pot metal frames for me.
Last edited by double-dipper; 06-30-2020 at 04:36 PM.
|
06-30-2020, 04:36 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: South Central Texas
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 2,688
Liked 1,114 Times in 501 Posts
|
|
By the way, in reference to the above, I choose to self-mandate that I stick with .38+P for accuracy. Nobody "likes" the recoil of a .357 in a light-weight small-frame revolver. Me neither... I have a couple .357 4in 'rs for that!
Small frame and "accuracy" is the name of the game, and NOT Magnum P.I.... ;-)
Just my 2-cents...
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
06-30-2020, 04:48 PM
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 7,348
Likes: 7,536
Liked 5,590 Times in 2,562 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBMW
And, yes the frame would have to be stretched as necessary to support this.
|
And, no, if the frame were stretched as necessary to support this, it wouldn't be a J frame.
__________________
Formerly Model520Fan
|
06-30-2020, 09:49 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2018
Location: UBE, PA
Posts: 163
Likes: 59
Liked 106 Times in 65 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubiranch
I just bought an M&P 45 Shield M2.0 so if I feel the need to carry more than 5 shots I'll carry this one. .
|
Now, there's a common sense answer for ya!
I have three J's, and I love every one. I also carry two of them from time to time. Great woods guns, or when traveling in places where hazards are low.
For places where the danger is greater, I have a pair of Shield 9's. Like Stalin stated, quantity has a quality all it's own.
|
07-02-2020, 01:06 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,058
Likes: 108
Liked 2,125 Times in 968 Posts
|
|
|
07-02-2020, 10:56 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SW MT
Posts: 6,734
Likes: 10,507
Liked 6,029 Times in 2,968 Posts
|
|
Interesting question. I just bought a 7 shot Charter Arms 32 Magnum "professional". I don't know about which profession chose it but it is a decent trail gun. 3" bbl, 7 shot almost D frame cylinder. I didn't care for the green tube sight, the hump in the grip for my right thumb worked much better than it looked. It fit my hand fine and I wear a size XL glove that is too long in the fingers. Price out the door was $398.99. There was nothing gritty inside the plate.
DA pull is no K frame but acceptable. I did have to adjust to technique with it. I shot 90 gr swc, 95 gr wc, 98 and 118 gr swc's through it yesterday. With putting a target just atop the front sight I was 5 inches low at 10 yards. Finding an aiming point that worked I had my rear sight even with the bottom of the 1" target dot and the green dot covering it at 15 yards to be hitting the dot.
Best groups were with 118 gr bullets.. Cylinder throats were .314" on the pin gauges for all 7, all my bullets were sized .313 so I hope to see improvement with a new size die.
So I don't see S&W putting out a new revolver with a suggested retail or less than $600 and consider this their competition.
__________________
Front sight and squeeze
|
07-04-2020, 12:08 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 443
Likes: 196
Liked 368 Times in 194 Posts
|
|
Are you sure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chief38
Don't see how you could get 6 .38 Spl. rounds in a conventional sized J Frame. In order to do that you would have to make the cylinder a larger diameter and that in turn would hurt its concealability.
You could do it with smaller caliber rounds but that would hurt effectiveness of the revolver's stopping power.
|
Are you sure a 38+p is more effective than a 327 Magnum?
I’d have interest in a 442 or 342, 360j in 327
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
07-05-2020, 01:36 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Liked 41 Times in 25 Posts
|
|
Note, while it has a short barrel, there's nothing particularly small about that gun. It's much bigger than the original Cobra, and is pretty much the same size as a Glock 19. The original Cobra/Detective Special would be the size target for what I'm thinking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CajunBass
I already did. It's called a Colt Cobra.
|
|
07-05-2020, 04:01 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 443
Likes: 196
Liked 368 Times in 194 Posts
|
|
My J frame
The only 6 shot J frame I would buy would be 327 magnum with the same diameter cylinder a J frame has now. No bigger.
|
07-05-2020, 04:13 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Posen, IL, USA
Posts: 669
Likes: 1,788
Liked 988 Times in 388 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rich5674
The only 6 shot J frame I would buy would be 327 magnum with the same diameter cylinder a J frame has now. No bigger.
|
They've made a few .327s and .32 mags. Surely they remember how.
|
07-05-2020, 04:15 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: metro Phoenix
Posts: 3,196
Likes: 16,412
Liked 3,964 Times in 1,605 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Model520Fan
And, no, if the frame were stretched as necessary to support this, it wouldn't be a J frame.
|
Well, they still call the J frame that accommodates .357s a "J".
Same with the frame with IL, which also required substantial changes to accomodate the lock, so I think that's been answered already.
|
07-05-2020, 04:21 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Posen, IL, USA
Posts: 669
Likes: 1,788
Liked 988 Times in 388 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by malph
They've made a few .327s and .32 mags. Surely they remember how.
|
I also think this would be a lot easier/cheaper for Smith to do that than develop a new frame size.
The only thing missing, and I might be wrong here, is a real good short barrel load for the .327.
|
07-05-2020, 05:31 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,908
Likes: 414
Liked 2,249 Times in 1,032 Posts
|
|
Nope. I own several 5-shot J’s with associated gun specific gear and don’t see any practical advantage in adding an oddball gun just to gain one additional round.
|
07-05-2020, 05:35 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 957
Liked 949 Times in 419 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wadcutter1
Yes, but it would have to be a 32 to fit six shots with a j-frame, or a something closer in size to an alloy k-frame.
I'd buy either.
|
Spot on...and may I add...just bring back the old six shot S&W Model 31 in 32 S&W Long.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
07-05-2020, 05:37 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,581
Likes: 4
Liked 8,931 Times in 4,140 Posts
|
|
No, I wouldn't buy one because it would have to be larger and heavier than the five-shot. I can't see anything wrong with the five-shot models.
|
07-05-2020, 05:55 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,835
Likes: 5,161
Liked 5,242 Times in 2,483 Posts
|
|
With help from steelslaver's replies I've thought this through. BBMW, the O.P., is asking for a smaller K frame. To get there requires abandoning a few features that make K frames superior to Colt D or Dick's Special frames. The K frame would have to lose the under barrel front cylinder latch, center pin and gas ring as was done to get .44 Magnums in L frames. The gas ring extends forward under the BC gap to keep fouling out of the center of the cylinder. Lead fouling in there creates a gritty DA pull. steelslaver pointed out that the cylinder ratchet would have to become a smaller gear which would make the DA pull heavier. The K frame's DA pull is what made it the predominant 20th century revolver. It is not worth giving that up to make it a wee bit smaller. Carrying the K frame in a thinner holster can accomplish the same size reduction without losing a great DA pull. I voted NO.
|
07-05-2020, 06:15 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,988
Likes: 1,605
Liked 2,848 Times in 1,149 Posts
|
|
I have a 357 J - the 60-15. Fired five Remington 158gr 357's from it at the range. That was enough. Glad I have it, though, Very accurate shooting 38 +p's. But it's still a J. Small, light, fits my belt if concealed. I have four others, one 637 rated +p, then a 60, 36, and 38 (which I will never shoot). If five isn't enough, I'm not shooting accurately.
__________________
Heavily armed old man.
|
07-06-2020, 05:09 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Highlands, North Carolina
Posts: 1,522
Likes: 2,096
Liked 2,202 Times in 883 Posts
|
|
I voted no... "J" framed (relative sized) 6 shots are Colt "D-Framed" snubbies... That said, I love my 5 shot compact J's for their... well... compactness...
|
07-06-2020, 06:24 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wis
Posts: 439
Likes: 1,049
Liked 577 Times in 238 Posts
|
|
I'd be very wary of giving my CC number to anyone that was advertising a 6 shot 38 J frame for sale. {even if they are a Nigerian Princess with a large inheritance}
|
07-08-2020, 01:47 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Liked 41 Times in 25 Posts
|
|
This is and interesting analysis, and I haven't heard about some of this before. My immediate question is how does the J-frame handle these issues? I don't see this as cutting down the K-frame, so much as stretching the J-frame. Basically, make J-frame cylinder big enough to accommodate 6 rounds of, stretch the cylinder gap in the frame to accommodate the bigger cylinder, and may the necessary geometry adjustments to the various mechanisms in gun to accommodate the previously changes. So how the J-frame deals with the issues you talk about would be equivalent on this gun.
Quote:
Originally Posted by k22fan
With help from steelslaver's replies I've thought this through. BBMW, the O.P., is asking for a smaller K frame. To get there requires abandoning a few features that make K frames superior to Colt D or Dick's Special frames. The K frame would have to lose the under barrel front cylinder latch, center pin and gas ring as was done to get .44 Magnums in L frames. The gas ring extends forward under the BC gap to keep fouling out of the center of the cylinder. Lead fouling in there creates a gritty DA pull. steelslaver pointed out that the cylinder ratchet would have to become a smaller gear which would make the DA pull heavier. The K frame's DA pull is what made it the predominant 20th century revolver. It is not worth giving that up to make it a wee bit smaller. Carrying the K frame in a thinner holster can accomplish the same size reduction without losing a great DA pull. I voted NO.
|
|
07-08-2020, 08:51 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Central Montana
Posts: 13,713
Likes: 12,857
Liked 39,472 Times in 10,045 Posts
|
|
Tauruses and CA both run smaller cylinders than S&W. Their chambers are closer to the center. I have a 5 shot 44 specials from all three, plus good sets of calibers and know this is a fact. Alsop both Taurus and CA use a considerable smaller ratchet than any S&W. There hand is therefore closer to the center of the frame. Although they are 5 shot44 and not 6 shot 38s the same principal is at work in order to keep the outside chamber wall thick enough. It is also why CA and Taurus made 5 shot 45 acps and S&W does not. S&W can not and retain their frame and ratchet.
As stated earlier, for S&W to make a 6 shot J frame cylinder (or a 5 shot K frame big bore) they would have to make the ratchet smaller and to operate, it move the hand and its window in on the frame. This also means a skinnier trigger, /hammer as the hand is on the side of the hammer. Then moving the chambers to the center means moving the barrel down in the frame to line up with those chambers, this means a skinnier ejector rod (anyone notice the rod on a CA??) to lower tthe top of the yoke to clear the frame for the lower barrel
IT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. no way no how.
I would rather have an alloy 6 shot J frame 327 Federal anyway.
For now I will just keep packing my 325s. Bulkier, but 6 rounds of 45 acp Will get it done for me and it weighs nothing.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
07-08-2020, 10:23 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 443
Likes: 196
Liked 368 Times in 194 Posts
|
|
So what’s the size difference?
Quote:
Originally Posted by steelslaver
Tauruses and CA both run smaller cylinders than S&W. Their chambers are closer to the center. I have a 5 shot 44 specials from all three, plus good sets of calibers and know this is a fact. Alsop both Taurus and CA use a considerable smaller ratchet than any S&W. There hand is therefore closer to the center of the frame. Although they are 5 shot44 and not 6 shot 38s the same principal is at work in order to keep the outside chamber wall thick enough. It is also why CA and Taurus made 5 shot 45 acps and S&W does not. S&W can not and retain their frame and ratchet.
As stated earlier, for S&W to make a 6 shot J frame cylinder (or a 5 shot K frame big bore) they would have to make the ratchet smaller and to operate, it move the hand and its window in on the frame. This also means a skinnier trigger, /hammer as the hand is on the side of the hammer. Then moving the chambers to the center means moving the barrel down in the frame to line up with those chambers, this means a skinnier ejector rod (anyone notice the rod on a CA??) to lower tthe top of the yoke to clear the frame for the lower barrel
IT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. no way no how.
I would rather have an alloy 6 shot J frame 327 Federal anyway.
For now I will just keep packing my 325s. Bulkier, but 6 rounds of 45 acp Will get it done for me and it weighs nothing.
|
So what is the diameter of the cylinder of Taurus and CA 38spl ? I’d think a 5 shot if the cylinder was smaller than a Smith. I haven’t seen a CA in a long time. Never handled a Taurus. I’m suspicious of the quality
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|