Wake up S&W
- Thread starter reccpd101
- Start date
Over-riding Legal Issue
Manufacturers across the board are reluctant to accept product suggestions from the public because the chambering you suggest may already be in the works. Then, when the product materializes, a small percentage of suggesters will sue the manufacturers for "theft of ideas" and demand a royalty. Yet, "theft of ideas" is usually not enough to sustain a lawsuit. The idea must first be reduced to a protectable form. Even a defective lawsuit must be defended against and that involves substantial legal fees for the manufacturer. including a disclaimer against future royalties doesn't persuade them. If there's a way to extract money from a manufacturer, someone has already thought of it.
Manufacturers across the board are reluctant to accept product suggestions from the public because the chambering you suggest may already be in the works. Then, when the product materializes, a small percentage of suggesters will sue the manufacturers for "theft of ideas" and demand a royalty. Yet, "theft of ideas" is usually not enough to sustain a lawsuit. The idea must first be reduced to a protectable form. Even a defective lawsuit must be defended against and that involves substantial legal fees for the manufacturer. including a disclaimer against future royalties doesn't persuade them. If there's a way to extract money from a manufacturer, someone has already thought of it.
Last edited:
We avoided such problems by noticing the submitter that any submission is without confidentiality or recompense.
That's not really a big issue.
I'm one of those people. I personally don't see the use for a 3" barreled revolver and won't even consider buying one.
To me a J frame .357 is another one I would never buy or pick up to look at.
Qmark
Member
With what a new S&W revolver costs. I wish they’d go back to the day when one could special order barrel length, sights, square or round frame and the real grips of yesteryears. Make the doofus proof lock and hole optional. By eliminating the middle man directly to the buyer’s FFL. S&W could easily make a decent profit by bumping the list price 10%.
Boy, wouldn't that be sweet! I'd design my own .44 mag and make it a 2" like the run of Camfour distributors.
Unfortunately, we're like those snowballs in hell - ain't gonna happen.
Unfortunately, we're like those snowballs in hell - ain't gonna happen.
BigBill
Absent Comrade
I’d like a revolver in 7.62x25 for plinking.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2015
- Messages
- 1,358
- Reaction score
- 1,576
Bottleneck cartridges in revolvers tend to cause problems. When fired the cases push back and fire form in the chamber. The bottleneck prevents the empty case from sliding forward so the cases are still pushing back against the frame causing drag.
I'd like to see the Model 325 in 9mm and with 8 rounds capacity. Also, I'd like to see the return of the Nightguard series but in Aluminum so the costs can be reduced. And an N Frame .22lr with 13-15 chambers. If they can get 10 rounds into a K Frame, what could they get in an N Frame......?
Echo40
Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2017
- Messages
- 4,040
- Reaction score
- 7,866
Let me give you some free advice, if you like something that Taurus is selling, then buy it.
Between my family and I there are a total of 5 Taurus brand firearms in my household, I've never had any issues with any of them.
I've said it before and I'll say it as many times as the subject is raised, the issue with Taurus isn't lack of quality or reliability, but rather terrible QC/CS, which in turn has resulted in the illusion that a lack of overall quality/reliability is the issue due to the sheer amount of negative feedback from those who got a lemon and had to deal with Taurus' inept CS Representatives and couldn't reach a positive conclusion.
In reality, Taurus has no worse overall quality control than Ruger, but unlike Taurus, Ruger actually has very good Customer Service, ergo those who get a lemon tend to get the issue sorted out promptly, thus leaving them with a much more positive opinion of the company.
It also doesn't help matters that many folks have a bad habit of making Taurus' reputation for lack of reliability something of a self-fulfilled prophesy when they go in so expecting the firearm to fail that any hiccups they experience during their first trip out to the range get immediately self-diagnosed as symptoms of a much bigger problem when in reality the gun just needs broken in. (And before anyone says, "My Smith ain't need no break-in!" Your Smith & Wesson probably cost you 2x the amount of a Taurus.)
In addition, I've seen a lot of folks in videos online who really seem to neglect their Taurus firearms, handling them with far less care than they do their other firearms, and thus likely neglecting them even furthermore behind the scenes. You can't expect a firearm that you neglect, handle carelessly, and do not clean/lube on a regular basis to maintain perfect function/reliability.
Between my family and I there are a total of 5 Taurus brand firearms in my household, I've never had any issues with any of them.
I've said it before and I'll say it as many times as the subject is raised, the issue with Taurus isn't lack of quality or reliability, but rather terrible QC/CS, which in turn has resulted in the illusion that a lack of overall quality/reliability is the issue due to the sheer amount of negative feedback from those who got a lemon and had to deal with Taurus' inept CS Representatives and couldn't reach a positive conclusion.
In reality, Taurus has no worse overall quality control than Ruger, but unlike Taurus, Ruger actually has very good Customer Service, ergo those who get a lemon tend to get the issue sorted out promptly, thus leaving them with a much more positive opinion of the company.
It also doesn't help matters that many folks have a bad habit of making Taurus' reputation for lack of reliability something of a self-fulfilled prophesy when they go in so expecting the firearm to fail that any hiccups they experience during their first trip out to the range get immediately self-diagnosed as symptoms of a much bigger problem when in reality the gun just needs broken in. (And before anyone says, "My Smith ain't need no break-in!" Your Smith & Wesson probably cost you 2x the amount of a Taurus.)
In addition, I've seen a lot of folks in videos online who really seem to neglect their Taurus firearms, handling them with far less care than they do their other firearms, and thus likely neglecting them even furthermore behind the scenes. You can't expect a firearm that you neglect, handle carelessly, and do not clean/lube on a regular basis to maintain perfect function/reliability.
I've found that .357 chambers will also accommodate and fire .38 Super and .38 ACP without alteration.
So your .357 Magnum will really fire 4 cartridges - .38 special, .357 magnum, .38 super and .38 ACP.
The semi-rim on the .38 Super and .38 ACP (same case) is a bit thinner than the .357/.38 special cases, but it usually makes no difference in providing for reliable ignition.
John
So your .357 Magnum will really fire 4 cartridges - .38 special, .357 magnum, .38 super and .38 ACP.
The semi-rim on the .38 Super and .38 ACP (same case) is a bit thinner than the .357/.38 special cases, but it usually makes no difference in providing for reliable ignition.
John
Echo40
Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2017
- Messages
- 4,040
- Reaction score
- 7,866
Just be aware that the .357 Magnum runs at 35,000psi whereas .38 Super runs at 36,500psi, so use of .38 Super in a .357 Magnum Revolver will result in accelerated wear, and at no particular benefit because .357 Magnum is substantially more powerful and less expensive than .38 Super, so unless you've got a huge supply of .38 Super on hand with nothing better to shoot it out of, it's best to stick with .38 Special or .357 Magnum.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2015
- Messages
- 1,358
- Reaction score
- 1,576
Not a problem in my .32-20.
I guess the .32-20 has a shoulder but its not much of one. I never owned anything in that caliber but being an old cartridge I am guessing it has thin brass which minimizes the problem and much less pressure than a 7.62x25. The 7.62 Tok has a much more pronounced shoulder too.
Look up why S&W discontinued the 2 Jet chambered model 53. There were other problems but cylinder binding was the main reason.
The 32-20 has a lot more in common with the 22 Hornet than the 7.62x25. Taurus makes a 22 Hornet revolver and I have not read any complaints about. Probably for the same reasons your 32-20 revolver works.
BTW, keeping the chambers clean helps too. Do you keep your 32-20 clean?
I heard
Of course, after every range trip. But she'll ingest 2-3 boxes in a trip without issues.
Comparing the two, you're right the 7.62 does have a more pronounced shoulder
32-20
7.62 x 25
JJEH
Member
I don't think we'll ever get a can-do-it-all from any factory... I mean that's why we have master gunsmiths that truly can perform any custom work there is. That way we have something truly unique and special.
Same with the car industry. I bet 90% of car owners personalize their vehicle in some way.... rims, grille, exhaust, whatever. They do have their "performance brands" i.e. Mercedes-Benz AMG, BMW M series, Dodge SRT, etc. They come pretty close to being great but they still get personalized.
S&W has their PC and I like their products. But again, is it perfect as it comes? Probably not and we still think about switching grips, sights and/or re-chamber.
What I'm trying to say is; would it be nice to get it like this from the factory? Yes. Would I prefer it to get it custom made exactly to my specs? Yes.
If you spend all this money on an item I rather have an unique one that suits me like I want it to.
Same with the car industry. I bet 90% of car owners personalize their vehicle in some way.... rims, grille, exhaust, whatever. They do have their "performance brands" i.e. Mercedes-Benz AMG, BMW M series, Dodge SRT, etc. They come pretty close to being great but they still get personalized.
S&W has their PC and I like their products. But again, is it perfect as it comes? Probably not and we still think about switching grips, sights and/or re-chamber.
What I'm trying to say is; would it be nice to get it like this from the factory? Yes. Would I prefer it to get it custom made exactly to my specs? Yes.
If you spend all this money on an item I rather have an unique one that suits me like I want it to.
Echo40
Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2017
- Messages
- 4,040
- Reaction score
- 7,866
I remember that at one point in time Taurus was in the process of making a Revolver chambered in .223 Remington of all things, which had generated a lot of buzz, but the project was quietly cancelled and further investigation by inquiring minds revealed that behind the scenes, Taurus just couldn't prevent the cylinder from binding up, and also there were a lot of problems with extraction in which the tolerences/clearances had to be extremely precise, so precise that it was driving up production costs above and beyond what Taurus felt comfortable investing in an oddball .223 Remington Revolver.
Taurus doesn't design their *ahem* "more unique" firearms because they have a lot of eccentric designers working for them, but because they know that there's money to be made producing firearms with a bit of novelty or unique characteristics to them, but they also know that folks typically aren't willing to spend a lot of money on something which isn't exactly practical.
Case in point, consider the Taurus Judge. Despite its utility, it is most often fiercely denigrated by professional shooters or firearms trainers for being a sort of jack-of-all-trades, master of none, yet it continues to sell over a decade later because it's an interesting premise offered at an affordable price.
Folks can go right on ahead struggling to make arguments like; "There's nothing cool about a Big Bore Revolver that shoots both .45 caliber bullets and shotgun shells!" or "There no fun to be had shooting a hand cannon which yields dramatic effects on target downrange without excessive concussive blast or brutal recoil!" not to mention cherry-picking scenarios in which it obviously isn't going to do well in order to support their stance, but sales say otherwise, and insulting the intelligence of those who bought one doesn't make you sound smart, it just confirms that you're a hipster or the shooting communities equivalent of a image-conscious highschool jock.
So yeah, a Revolver chambered in 7.62x25 Tokarev would likely have very high production costs without significant mass market appeal, and as cool as such a thing would be, nobody would want to buy one at a high price, especially considering that most fans of 7.62x25 Tokarev are used to paying only a couple hundred dollars for MilSurp Tokarev Pistols, thus making the price seem so much higher by comparison.
Taurus doesn't design their *ahem* "more unique" firearms because they have a lot of eccentric designers working for them, but because they know that there's money to be made producing firearms with a bit of novelty or unique characteristics to them, but they also know that folks typically aren't willing to spend a lot of money on something which isn't exactly practical.
Case in point, consider the Taurus Judge. Despite its utility, it is most often fiercely denigrated by professional shooters or firearms trainers for being a sort of jack-of-all-trades, master of none, yet it continues to sell over a decade later because it's an interesting premise offered at an affordable price.
Folks can go right on ahead struggling to make arguments like; "There's nothing cool about a Big Bore Revolver that shoots both .45 caliber bullets and shotgun shells!" or "There no fun to be had shooting a hand cannon which yields dramatic effects on target downrange without excessive concussive blast or brutal recoil!" not to mention cherry-picking scenarios in which it obviously isn't going to do well in order to support their stance, but sales say otherwise, and insulting the intelligence of those who bought one doesn't make you sound smart, it just confirms that you're a hipster or the shooting communities equivalent of a image-conscious highschool jock.
So yeah, a Revolver chambered in 7.62x25 Tokarev would likely have very high production costs without significant mass market appeal, and as cool as such a thing would be, nobody would want to buy one at a high price, especially considering that most fans of 7.62x25 Tokarev are used to paying only a couple hundred dollars for MilSurp Tokarev Pistols, thus making the price seem so much higher by comparison.
oddshooter
Member
I'm not sure some out there know a lot about the New 32's.
My Ruger Blackhawk Buckeye Convertible shoots both 32-20 WCF and 32 H&R magnum. Those are not your Grandma's 32-20 shooters or the ones blues legend Robert Johnson sang about in the 20's.
I regularly shoot my handloads to 1330fps with 135g pills. Their accuracy can be phenomenal. The Blackhawk barely sneezes. These are Ruger Tanks !
And way past that is the 327 federal magnum approaching 1800fps;
that is 357 magnum territory.
The handloading of the bottleneck cases in 32-20 is sheer joy when you get the kinks worked out. I'm on the 4th reload with some of my cases and they look brand new.
The only reforming of my 32-20 cases came when I fired them in a 30 Caliber revolver. The 30 Carbine is not bottle necked and the 32-20 cases became straight wall cases when fired. Interesting test, but really a dumb idea to loose good 32-20 cases.
Prescut
My Ruger Blackhawk Buckeye Convertible shoots both 32-20 WCF and 32 H&R magnum. Those are not your Grandma's 32-20 shooters or the ones blues legend Robert Johnson sang about in the 20's.
I regularly shoot my handloads to 1330fps with 135g pills. Their accuracy can be phenomenal. The Blackhawk barely sneezes. These are Ruger Tanks !
And way past that is the 327 federal magnum approaching 1800fps;
that is 357 magnum territory.
The handloading of the bottleneck cases in 32-20 is sheer joy when you get the kinks worked out. I'm on the 4th reload with some of my cases and they look brand new.
The only reforming of my 32-20 cases came when I fired them in a 30 Caliber revolver. The 30 Carbine is not bottle necked and the 32-20 cases became straight wall cases when fired. Interesting test, but really a dumb idea to loose good 32-20 cases.
Prescut
Acroyer
Member
I would like to see them take their M&P .45acp and fit a 10mm barrel to it.
Then, I would buy an M&P.
10mm has made a bit of a comeback, but S&W has nothing to offer in that caliber other than the 610, which not many folks are really interested in.
Then, I would buy an M&P.
10mm has made a bit of a comeback, but S&W has nothing to offer in that caliber other than the 610, which not many folks are really interested in.
keithhagan
Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2018
- Messages
- 221
- Reaction score
- 130
I have a model 66 re-chambered to 7.62x25. Works like a dream, with no issues. Moonclips for 9x19 are a perfect fit; they work with 9x18 makarov, too (ask me how I know).
The problem isn't with bottlenecked cartridges, per se, the problem is with cartridges that have relatively long necks and sloping shoulders (e.g. 22 Jet). It gives them a relatively large bearing surface to set back on firing. Cartridges with sharp shoulders and very short necks (like 7.62x25) are non-issues re: binding the action.
Similar threads
