This has probably been asked before so feel free to just point me to a thread. Tried to search but didn't have any luck.

I have always wondered why S&W puts a shorter cylinder in, for example, a Model 27 or a model 24, and extends the barrel back rather than just a longer cylinder that matches the cylinder window. I have never cared for the visual effect, looking to me like a cylinder that was mismatched to the frame size. Custom gunmakers seem to have no problem using the longer, size-matched cylinders. There is a good reason, I imagine. Could some of you that know far more about the manufacturing and such enlighten me? Thanks.

Possible gunk build-up within the cylinder's?

The ancestor of the model 24 was from the late 1900 decade, and the 27 from the mid-1930s. My guess is the cylinder length was determined by the cartridge OAL (and a desire to use the least amount of metal possible). The factory has no problem with making longer cylinders on the same frame as needed (model 29s and 57s) but to make them longer for shorter cases also probably messes with their production processes.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

I'd agree with murphydog. Case in point would be the Model 25's. The one's chambered for .45 ACP had cylinders that would accommodate any bullet weight in a .45 ACP case. However, with the advent of the 25-3, chambered in .45 Colt it was found that the cylinder was too short to accommodate some .45 Colt loads, resulting in having to crimp over the front driving band, rather than the crimp groove. When the 25-5 was introduced the cylinder had been lengthened. Smith has intentionally made guns with shorter cylinders on the theory that a shorter jump to the forcing cone enhanced accuracy. My 625-8PC and 627-4PC both have short cylinders. Whether empirical testing bears out the theory is unknown to me - I doubt that there would be a noticeable difference unless you were shooting at long range with the gun held in a Ransom rest.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

__________________
NRA Benefactor Member

I would guess that it is beneficial to get the bullet through the throat and into the barrel as soon as possible. Your options would be to either shorten the frame window or shorten the cylinder. Shortening the cylinder would be the easiest way.

My guess is that the shorter cylinder enhances accuracy somewhat and makes the cylinder a shade lighter. It looks like S&W installed shorter cylinders in the 625-8 PC and the ultra-snubby 625-10. A lighter cylinder will also smooth out the trigger pull, especially on an N Frame. On the PC gun this was probably done both to enhance accuracy and to smooth the trigger. On the snubby, it was probably done just to make the revolver lighter.

As to accuracy, Grant Cunningham has experimented with the bullet jump phenomenon a bit. While it might affect accuracy a little, Grant thinks the throat dimensions and finish have a much greater effect. Here's a link to his short article on the topic:
The bullet jump controversy: Specials in Magnum chambers. - www.GrantCunningham.com www.GrantCunningham.com

I think what the poster was asking is why S&W doesn't fit the size of the window to particular cylinders, long or short. He thinks short cylinders in big open windows looks bad (to paraphrase). I am sure it's a cost issue, but it's a good question. The open space of some guns makes them look like they are made of spare parts.

Oh. Good point; you're probably right. However, I'm not sure fitting the cylinder window to a shorter cylinder assures an aesthetically pleasing gun. Witness the Korth/Nighthawk Custom Sky Hawk. It's a very efficient package, and I'm sure it is an extremely high quality revolver, but it's as ugly as homemade sin--$1700 worth of homemade sin.

The cylinder does nothing for accuracy, the longer barrel helps with acuracy. The pugnose 327 is a good example. The barrel looks a lot shorter than it is.

The window is sized for the largest cylinder needed for the largest caliber used in that model.

The cylinder is only as long as it needs to be for the given cartridge. Making the actual barrel longer than it looks.

I know what the OP is getting at, sometimes what is practical isn't aesthetically pleasing.. I wish all .38 special j frames were made on a smaller frame than their .357 counterparts.

Thanks for all the great responses. They were very informative and brought up several things I hadn't thought about, such as trigger pull and weight of the gun. The issue of whether it's better to have a longer throat or a longer barrel is one that still intrigues me. I would imagine that the throat would have to be made very carefully and precisely if it was going to compete with the actual barrel. The absence of rifling for a distance may also have some effect.

As to the frame window point, I was really just thinking about the cylinder size. It seemed like it would be easier to just make all the cylinders the same size and simply cut different chambers and throats for each caliber.