Shooting a revolver without a barrel

[cmj8591]

Stuff like this just galvanizes the anti-gun crowd and bolsters their agenda, aside from the abject stupidity of the action.

I'd really like to know how this galvanizes the anti gun crowd. You mean they weren't galvanized until they saw this You Tube video?

It's a little amazing to me how some people in this hobby, particularly the ones who post on the internet, seem to look down their noses at this kind of stuff. I'm not about to run out and start unscrewing the barrels on my guns because I looked at this video. But I do find it interesting to see firearms pushed outside of their design envelopes. If you watch some of these videos, there is a lot that can be learned from them. No one is telling you to go out and do it so when you start labeling things as stupid or let us know how you would never, ever think of doing anything like this it just seems like so much virtue signaling.

As far as running afoul of the law. The questions I would ask is: Is no bore the same as smooth bore? Perhaps once the barrel is removed, it would fall into the same category as a nail gun.

 

[rockquarry]

There's a lengthy article in a (1980s, I think) Gun Digest or Handloaders Digest where the author experimented with this. I haven't read it in along time. It has something to do with cast bullet obturation as I recall.

It was written by Dave Scovill who was later editor of HANDLOADER and RIFLE magazines for about twenty years. Scovill can be considered a cast bullet expert and I'm pretty sure the article is a significant step above many YouTube experiments. Scovill used a Colt single-action.

 

[Baltimoreed11754]

Make a fine belly gun.

 

[StrawHat]

…I'm not sure of the legality of firing a revolver without the barrel because you have removed the rifling. Does the lack of rifling make it a short barreled shotgun?…

Did not BATF require the barrel to be removed for import and subsequent sale?

Kevin

 

[double-dipper]

Shooting 500 Magnum with No Barrel - YouTube

Proof right there you don't have to be smart to have a YouGoob channel. Silly people will watch anything!!!!

 

[mtgianni]

I recall reading a test in the 80's where someone ran a DW 357 through the Chronograph with all the barrel lengths and then no barrel. Don't recall the results.

 

[edwardyoung]

There's nothing stupid or unsafe or illegal about shooting that gun with the barrel removed. Gee whiz.

 

[steelslaver]

As J&G has sold thousands of these without any barrel, and the BATF hasn't shut them down I wouldn't get my underwear to bunched up about it. There is a difference between a smooth bore and a no bore. LOL besides the section of frame the bullet passes through has 36 to the inch rifling.

While after a 100 rounds or so it may mess the threads up a little bit, it isn't going to really hurt anything. The initial pressure in cylinder would remain the same and drop off even faster than a barreled gun. You would have to have a real bad center pin and hole in the recoil shield and the sloppiest yoke in the world for the .358 bullet to touch the .540 hole in the frame. I fail do see where a couple cylinders could cause any harm.

Some peoples total lack of curiosity, sense of adventure and unwillingness to try anything slightly out of the norm is appalling. Some guys won't even handle anything not 100% factory. If everyone had been like that firearm development would never have gone far. We owe lots of rounds, guns and equipment to experimenters. Some of you guys act like John Browning and PO Ackley should have been locked up.

I bought 7 of the J&G guns. Made 3 357s all 4" one a Smolt using a Python barrel, 2 327 Federals, a 6" adj sight and a 3"" fixed , a 4" adj sight 38 and another 4" dual cylinder 38/9mm. Never fired one without a barrel. But, only because I was sure what would happen and I have better things to do with my ammo.

 

[ericrlarson]

There's nothing stupid or unsafe or illegal about shooting that gun with the barrel removed. Gee whiz.

I just wouldn't want my gun flipping up in the air and falling on the ground.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[edwardyoung]

I just wouldn't want my gun flipping up in the air and falling on the ground.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A normal grip on the handle will prevent that

 

[ericrlarson]

A normal grip on the handle will prevent that

No doubt!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[steelslaver]

I just wouldn't want my gun flipping up in the air and falling on the ground.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is missing the barrel, not the grip frame.

 

[Borderboss]

This seems like a heck of a deal to get a round butt K-frame. Barrels are available and relatively inexpensive. It doesn't say otherwise, so I'll assume all the working parts are there except for the barrel. If I needed another K-frame .38, I would be on that one.

 

[cmj8591]

Some peoples total lack of curiosity, sense of adventure and unwillingness to try anything slightly out of the norm is appalling. Some guys won't even handle anything not 100% factory. If everyone had been like that firearm development would never have gone far. We owe lots of rounds, guns and equipment to experimenters. Some of you guys act like had John Browning and PO Ackley should have been locked up.

That is the truth for sure! Imagine if Elmer Keith has said, "I better not put that 18.5 grains of Unique in that balloon head, 44 special. That's way over what the reloading manual says!". I get wanting to be safe and not wanting to ruin a gun, but it's not your gun and I don't think your going to get hurt, at least physically, from watching someone do something to their gun on You Tube.

 

[ericrlarson]

It is missing the barrel, not the grip frame.

Yes, I understand that!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[steelslaver]

originally sarcasm. That is good, I missed it

 

[Dakotakid]

I believe Dave Scovill did this in the Handloader magazine awhile ago to test bullet upset at different velocity ??? he used a s a colt with brl removed ?

 

[rockquarry]

I believe Dave Scovill did this in the Handloader magazine awhile ago to test bullet upset at different velocity ??? he used a s a colt with brl removed ?

Now that you mention it, I seem to recall something along those lines in HANDLOADER, but the original (and perhaps lengthier piece) was in one of the GUN DIGEST publications some years before the HANDLOADER version.

Scovill did a lot of technical experimental cast bullet work.

 

[Imissedagain]

I'm going to try that between barrel swaps on my No.1 Tropical.
Hardware store said they would exchange the case of Gorilla Tape for Kong Wrap and a gallon of Extra Crazy Glue.
Hold my Perrier Jouet please.

 

[sigp220.45]

There are a lot of "my Daddy said" people in the gun world.

The little .410 that could - Bing video

Before these guys showed up if you asked somebody what would happen if you cranked off a .454 Casull round in a cheap Brazilian single-shot .410 the answers would be:

- The breech will split.

- The .387 barrel will banana peel.

- The fired casing will fuse to the chamber

- You'll die.

Then these Southern boys tried it. And NOTHING HAPPENED.

The breech didn't explode. It turns out there is a massive amount of steel around a .410 chamber.

Steel is harder than lead. Bullets are designed to change shape. A .454 bullet forced down a .387 steel tube turns into a .387 bullet right away.

The spent casing popped right out. Five times

These Sons of the South actually did something besides wring their hands.