Model 1 second issue

I have a S&W model 1 second issue and was wondering if modern 22 short ammo works with the revolver? Thanks in advance.

I think you'd be better playing with these:



Modern 22 shorts may fit, but run at way too high a pressure. CB shorts are slower and lower pressure

What he said, do not shoot standard 22 shorts they reach almost the same velocity as a standard 22 LR. Use only 22 Short CB or BB, but I haven't seen any of those in as while. Be advised these little guns shoot high at least for me they do.

Does anyone know just how high the pressure is on those CB Shorts relative to the original loads? I've been hoping to try them in my Second Issue as well and wanted to know how risky they are, whether they're more in the category of something that the gun can technically handle, but you want to use it sparingly, or if they're actually comparable to the old black powder cartridges and you can shoot them relatively freely without worrying about the pressure killing your cylinder.

LDavidson said:

Does anyone know just how high the pressure is on those CB Shorts relative to the original loads? I've been hoping to try them in my Second Issue as well and wanted to know how risky they are, whether they're more in the category of something that the gun can technically handle, but you want to use it sparingly, or if they're actually comparable to the old black powder cartridges and you can shoot them relatively freely without worrying about the pressure killing your cylinder.

Click to expand...

found this:
"After I started this thread, I decided to email CCI and ask them directly about the pressure of their CB rounds. I was hoping for a specific answer. I got a useful answer, but not at all specific. Linda Olin of their techical section in Lewiston Idaho gave this response:

"The CCI CB shorts do not actually run anywhere near the SAAMI maximum of 21,000 psi. None of our CCI short products 'exceed' that number on average pressure."

Here's the link:
Shooting 22 short CB in antique handguns - The Firing Line Forums

That said, I've shot BOXES of CCi CB caps through a very delicate .22 M Frame Ladysmiths with no ill effects.
YMMV, but I'm comfortable with using them.

If you're really worried, RWS still makes BB caps which are even lighter. (but very pricey)

glowe shoots his antiques, hopefully he'll chime in.

I do believe glow did a comparison 22 short black powder to 22 short CB and found the CB ones are lower power velocity wise. I have shot half a box of the CB one through my S&W number 1 2nd issue with no ill effects. A standard 22 short published velocity is around 1000 fps a 22 CB short is around 700 fps. There is no way I will believe the two produce the same chamber pressure.

delcrossv said:

found this:
"After I started this thread, I decided to email CCI and ask them directly about the pressure of their CB rounds. I was hoping for a specific answer. I got a useful answer, but not at all specific. Linda Olin of their techical section in Lewiston Idaho gave this response:

"The CCI CB shorts do not actually run anywhere near the SAAMI maximum of 21,000 psi. None of our CCI short products 'exceed' that number on average pressure."

Here's the link:
Shooting 22 short CB in antique handguns - The Firing Line Forums

That said, I've shot BOXES of CCi CB caps through a very delicate .22 M Frame Ladysmiths with no ill effects.
YMMV, but I'm comfortable with using them.

If you're really worried, RWS still makes BB caps which are even lighter. (but very pricey)

glowe shoots his antiques, hopefully he'll chime in.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the link. I have taken a look at BB caps as another option, though oddly I can't seem to find anything in the way of ballistics data from the manufacturer on what kind of muzzle energy they have, just what Wikipedia cites. Of course it is kind of a mooted point for me regardless, I've never seen the stuff in stores and I can't get ammo shipped to me from online from most places because of local restrictions, so I wouldn't know how to find any anyways.

Honestly, from everything I've seen it's probably just fine to shoot them, the CB caps, both from your experience and other anecdotes, I'm just probably being a little too cautious given the gun's age and fear of harming it. I'd imagine that a Model 1 is going to be about as fragile as you can get for a cartridge revolver with being chambered for the .22 short over .22 long and being older, but then I might be completely off-base, maybe they made the cylinders tougher back then.

merl67 said:

I do believe glow did a comparison 22 short black powder to 22 short CB and found the CB ones are lower power velocity wise. I have shot half a box of the CB one through my S&W number 1 2nd issue with no ill effects. A standard 22 short published velocity is around 1000 fps a 22 CB short is around 700 fps. There is no way I will believe the two produce the same chamber pressure.

Click to expand...

That would definitely be reassuring to see. The only place I found someone comparing the two had the CB shorts as a lot more powerful out of a Third Issue.

In The Beginning…There Was The Smith & Wesson Model 1 In .22 Short | The Daily Caller

"It was even a bit spooky when I clocked some CCI Mini-caps. They averaged 576 fps (about what they do from a modern revolver with 6-inch barrel)..... It is possible to pack 2.9 grains of 3Fg or 4Fg black powder into a Short case but then there is no room for a bullet. The 100 percent density load is 2.3 grains of either granulation under the heel of the 29-grain bullet. Loaded with a generic sort of 4Fg prime, my loads were loping along in the 300 fps range. High energy Swiss 3Fg upped the average to 443 fps while the traditional and probably guessed-at velocity is given as “circa 500 fps.” I got pretty good at the black powder conversions but there is room to hope the original Shorts were a bit better than my “reloads.”

But that's really the only thing I've seen with comparing the two via chronograph-though it's probably the main reason I'm feeling a bit hesitant.

I just answered the a question about CCI vs original BP ammo. Safely Firing an old Model 1

The data was taken from firing all ammo through a 3 1/2" barreled 22 Ladysmith, so similar speeds will probably be found in the Model 1. Maximum pressures can only be found for 22 LR @ something under 24,000 psi. The companies either do not test their other loadings of 22 Rimfire or do not publish the numbers. Pressure differences in this caliber and in short barreled revolvers can be compared to pressures in a general fashion, with lower velocities having lower chamber pressures. The numbers still prove to be elusive.

BTW, 22 Short ammo ran around 900 fps in the Ladysmith, and would definitely not be recommended for tip-up revolvers.

glowe said:

I just answered the a question about CCI vs original BP ammo. Safely Firing an old Model 1

The data was taken from firing all ammo through a 3 1/2" barreled 22 Ladysmith, so similar speeds will probably be found in the Model 1. Maximum pressures can only be found for 22 LR @ something under 24,000 psi. The companies either do not test their other loadings of 22 Rimfire or do not publish the numbers. Pressure differences in this caliber and in short barreled revolvers can be compared to pressures in a general fashion, with lower velocities having lower chamber pressures. The numbers still prove to be elusive.

BTW, 22 Short ammo ran around 900 fps in the Ladysmith, and would definitely not be recommended for tip-up revolvers.

Click to expand...

I did manage to find one fellow who tested out CB cap versus black powder handloads in .22 short out of a Model 1 Third Issue, though he seemed to end up with much lower numbers for the old loadings, and much higher for the modern. Any idea why that might be?

"It was even a bit spooky when I clocked some CCI Mini-caps. They averaged 576 fps (about what they do from a modern revolver with 6-inch barrel).... It is possible to pack 2.9 grains of 3Fg or 4Fg black powder into a Short case but then there is no room for a bullet. The 100 percent density load is 2.3 grains of either granulation under the heel of the 29-grain bullet. Loaded with a generic sort of 4Fg prime, my loads were loping along in the 300 fps range. High energy Swiss 3Fg upped the average to 443 fps while the traditional and probably guessed-at velocity is given as “circa 500 fps.” I got pretty good at the black powder conversions but there is room to hope the original Shorts were a bit better than my “reloads.”"

In The Beginning…There Was The Smith & Wesson Model 1 In .22 Short | The Daily Caller

Guys, please. Stop this.

Subjecting a 160 year old gun to ballistic pressures—and one with paper-thin cylinder walls at that—is foolish.

I'm all for shooting older guns, but for me the Model 1 is well past the threshold of what can safely and responsibly be fired. And I say that out of concern for both the shooter and the gun.

Heaven knows there are enough Model 1's with mismatched cylinder because the original cylinder split in half. Worse yet, I've seen a few 1st Issue guns with broken articulated hammers—again, I suspect, because someone's uncle told them that it was fine to run modern ammo in them.

Nobody gets the urge to fire a Model 1 more than I do; a third of my gun collection is Model 1's. But risking a piece of history is simply not worth a moment's thrill. There are plenty of other old guns that can be shot safely; we don't need to risk the integrity of any more Model 1's.

Mike

I have been looking for years to find proof that there were lots of failures with the Model 1 revolver from firing low pressure CB ammo. Glad you have it, so please post what information you have to share.

I have only found a handful of unsubstantiated cylinder failure references where early 22 Short High Velocity ammo was used in antique revolvers and was way too hot for this early designed revolver. A cartridge that will easily achieve 900 fps and may have as much as double the chamber pressure would not be appropriate, but in the early days of smokeless powder if it fit, it got shot.

It has not been until recent decades that low pressure ammunition for the 22 became available again. Once the BP 22 ammo changed over to smokeless and solid frame revolvers became he norm, there was no proper ammo for this little revolver, but it can be guaranteed that many were still shot with any 22 Short ammo that could be found until they were retired.

There is so much more than a moment's thrill in shooting these little gems. The fact that you are experiencing something that cannot be obtained by looking at one sitting in the safe from time to time is worth the risk to me. Knowing first-hand the capabilities of this model, how it operated, and marveling at the engineering that culminated in the design and production of a wonder for its time is part of the is half the fun.

glowe said:

I have been looking for years to find proof that there were lots of failures with the Model 1 revolver from firing low pressure CB ammo. Glad you have it, so please post what information you have to share.

Click to expand...

The problem is, most people won't admit that they've damaged one. The kind of evidence you're looking for isn't going to be readily available. I wish it was.

That said, I've handled hundreds of Model 1's since I started writing my thesis on them in 2014, and the single most common part that I see missing, mismatched or damaged is the cylinder. In the case of a damaged cylinder, it doesn't take a lot of engineering expertise to wonder how the crack or rupture happened.

(In the case of damaged parts, the hinge comes in a close second place. But I suspect hinge damage has less to do with the wrong ammo and more to do with mishandling.)

glowe said:

There is so much more than a moment's thrill in shooting these little gems. The fact that you are experiencing something that cannot be obtained by looking at one sitting in the safe from time to time is worth the risk to me. Knowing first-hand the capabilities of this model, how it operated, and marveling at the engineering that culminated in the design and production of a wonder for its time is part of the is half the fun.

Click to expand...

Gary, I agree with everything you wrote. I've long been a proponent of experiential learning, and there is simply no substitute for hands-on experience.

As a historian, though, I have to weigh those benefits against the risk of damage and loss to a precious artifact. There were a quarter of a million Model 1's made, but it's anyone's guess how many survive. For decades the Model 1 fell into the "junk gun" category and wasn't taken seriously by collectors, and it's anyone's guess how many of these guns were abused and discarded. Ditto for guns that have been swept up in gun buybacks or that have fallen into the destructive hands of agencies like the NYPD (that love to chop up guns regardless of their historic significance). Etcetera, etcetera.

My point is that there probably aren't as many of these little guns surviving as we'd like to think there are. I take the custodianship of these guns seriously knowing that there's a finite number of them, and that the number of survivors will only continue to dwindle.

And in terms of extracting enjoyment from a gun that never gets shot, I'll share a quick anecdote. During the Christmas holidays of 2015 I was experiencing "thesis slump." My research had hit a dead end and I was seriously thinking about giving it up. About a month earlier I had stumbled across a Model 1, 1st Issue, 2nd Variant at a local farm auction (which I purchased for a tiny fraction of its actual worth), and in my slump I decided to put my research on hold so I could do some fun creative writing about my 1-1-2.

As clearly as I'm sitting here now, I remember sitting on my living room couch and turning that gun over in my hands. I got my magnifying glass out and looked at the fine tool marks on the gun, wondering what secrets this gun had to tell. After a glass or two of egg nog I got an idea.

Over the next few days I wrote a piece that documented the gun's "birth," with short biographies of the craftsmen that had made it, and the chaos that was Smith & Wesson's Market Street operations. I imagined the journey it would have taken from Springfield to New York City, where it had been sent to Joseph W. Storrs' warehouse. Then I imagined the rail journey that it would have taken to North Carolina, and I even talked about some of the known Smith & Wesson retailers that may have sold it.

What I wrote became the heart and soul of my thesis. I still think it's one of the best pieces of writing I've ever done, and I can say with certainty that I was writing something entirely original and novel.

I care for all of my Model 1's with the same care that I give to my 1-1-2. They're all a rare and precious glimpse into the past, and they've all got a story to tell.

I can't in good conscience sanction the shooting of a Model 1 with period or modern ammunition, because for me the risk is simply too high. I respect you as a fellow collector, Gary, and it's fine if we agree to disagree on this.

Mike