Aluminum cylinders make no sense to me. I've owned a few j-frames with alloy frame and stainless or carbon steel cylinders. My favorite airweight is the 637. As far as recoil with +p ammo, I decided a 640 all steel 357 was plenty light for carry but tamed +p and 357mag ammo more effectively (obviously the 637 won't take 357mag, but hot +p was on the edge of to much recoil for fast follow-up shots). As far as carry weight goes, I don't see the need for a lighter firearm than an airweight or airlite j-frame. My wife weights a little over 100lbs, and when she carried the 637 she often forgot she had it in her pocket. I'm pushing 275lbs, so an n-frame in my pocket is quite comfortable, let alone a j-frame. When I carried the 637, it was totally forgotten. I would frequently have to check my pocket to see if it was still in there (not advisable since it is a great way to get made as either a concealed weapon carrier, or a pervert).
In light of the airweight and airlite both pushing the limits of "to light", why add an aluminum cylinder when there doesn't seem to be any need to reduce weight especially at the expense of ammo selection and durability. These trends toward the two extremes (huge heavy hyper-magnums and featherweight firearms you can carry in your breast pocket) are starting to produce fireamrs that are absurd in my narrowminded medieval opinion.
I would think a j-frame airweight 22lr revolver with a nice durable steel cylinder capable of handling any 22lr ammo you wanted to feed it would be a nice little bug gun that would see lots of use on soda cans and pinecones. If you add the aluminum cylinder that might wear if you shoot to much, and which prevents you from using the hotter ammo, I feel you have suddenly created a finicky, near useless firearm. What's the point? Why not just make disposable plastic cylinders that are pre-charged with caseless ammo that are inserted into a top-break revolver that ejects the cylinder, not the cases. I say this to be absurd, not as an actual suggestion.
