CAJUNLAWYER
Member
Are they needed for .22's any more or are they a relic of bygone eras?
Why doesn't the new Colt King Cobra .22 have counterbored cylinders?
- Thread starter CAJUNLAWYER
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
This is just a guess but I would think that it would prevent the firing pin from ever contacting the cylinder. I have a few K22s that somebody, not me, evidently dry fired resulting in a dimple on the rear of the cylinder.
That's correct when it comes to centerfires, but not true with rimfires.
S&W .22 revolvers still have them today. Virtually all quality .22 rimfire revolvers have had counterbored (recessed) cylinder chambers since about 1935.
.22 LR's have hollow rims containing priming compound. Failures are not unheard of and the counterbore protects the shooter and bystanders from possible injury.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 27,660
- Reaction score
- 21,318
It is difficult to tell from public photos, but it appears the .22 King Cobra may have a rim of steel around the rear cylinder face to keep debris from blown heads from going out the sides. If so it is just like an older H & R 999 Sportsman I used to have.
My guess is someone here has one and can confirm.
My guess is someone here has one and can confirm.
OP
CAJUNLAWYER
Member
One would hope so-as not having the counterbored cylinder just makes no sense-It just cheapens the whole revolver-no reason NOT to have it for a rim fire.
Not recessed, no ring, and the reason is that it is cheaper to manufacture. However, you do get the cool vented barrel the .357Mag King Cobra doesn't have/need. Your hand may need some medical attention when a .22LR cartridge ruptures, but it will never get a burn from a blazing hot barrel! Can't have everything in a $999 revolver!
OP
CAJUNLAWYER
Member
Why isn't the new COlt 22 counterbored???
Is there any reason other than to cut corners? The lack of counterboring (recessed) cylinder charge holes for a .22 without a raised rim around the whole cylinder is a turn off for me with regad to this gun. Or is counterboring .22's no longer needed in this day of modern ammo??
Is there any reason other than to cut corners? The lack of counterboring (recessed) cylinder charge holes for a .22 without a raised rim around the whole cylinder is a turn off for me with regad to this gun. Or is counterboring .22's no longer needed in this day of modern ammo??
Erich
Member
They wanted to keep it affordable. 
GypsmJim
Member
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 4,056
- Reaction score
- 7,071
I had to see for myself so I looked it up. I am assuming we are talking about the new King Cobra .22.
Closeup pics of the back of the cylinder show that the entire center portion of the cylinder is recessed, rather than every single chamber. As such, if a case head were to rupture it would not force gasses outward.
Maybe they think that is a good alternative. Apparently, customers don't seem to mind since current auction prices are about $1800, for a gun with a list price of $999.
Closeup pics of the back of the cylinder show that the entire center portion of the cylinder is recessed, rather than every single chamber. As such, if a case head were to rupture it would not force gasses outward.
Maybe they think that is a good alternative. Apparently, customers don't seem to mind since current auction prices are about $1800, for a gun with a list price of $999.
Colt has been doing that for centerfire for a while now, nothing new.
DS-10-SPEED
Member
I managed to get one at list price, I ordered it last July and it took 4 months to get it. I had issues with light strikes in DA mode and sent it back to Colt for repair a couple weeks ago, they called me and told me they have to replace the gun or give me my money back. Since I'm in no hurry for it I told them to send me another gun. They said it will be a couple months before they can get me another one. They must be re-engineering something. It is a very nice looking revolver and I also thought it was strange not to be recessed for the rims. What also is different is that the firing pin hits the bottom of cartridge rim as opposed to the top. I'll see in a couple months what they did to fix the DA issue.
Attachments
Last edited:
sigp220.45
US Veteran
Wow - so no counterbore, no rececessed area, no rim around the circumference of the cylinder?
I’m with Caje, that does look strange.
Last edited:
GypsmJim
Member
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 4,056
- Reaction score
- 7,071
.22 revolvers have had the chambers in the cylinder "recessed" for eons. That's because it's a rimfire case and the rim is where the "primer" propellant is located.
When an old military rifle has had the crown destroyed from many cleanings with a steel ramrod, a reamer or drill is inserted into the muzzle to form a new crown. That's "counterboring".
When an old military rifle has had the crown destroyed from many cleanings with a steel ramrod, a reamer or drill is inserted into the muzzle to form a new crown. That's "counterboring".
It’s more likely they are not doing another run of them for a couple months.
I had a Ruger SP101 that went back to Ruger twice for an improperly cut forcing cone that spit lead everywhere and also quickly leaded the bore, as in starting to key hole after just 12 rounds.
The first time they sent it back to me saying they had adjusted the ejector star and I knew that wasn’t a fix. Sure enough it leaded as bad as ever. I sent it back a second time and they advised they would “escalate” it to their first line supervisory staff who were apparently actual gun plumbers instead of unskilled workers.
After a couple more weeks they called and told me it was not factory repairable, and that they could either refund my money, if I sent them the original receipt, or send a new one to the FFL of my choice. Since they had already screwed me on $75 in shipping when they lost the original receipt I sent with it, the first time I returned it (since they were not doing shipping labels at that time) and refused to reimburse me without it, I opted for a new one.
About a month later I followed up on why it had not arrived and they told me they would not be able to send me one until they did a new run of them. They were scheduled to do that in another 5 months. All in all it took me 7 months from initial purchase to have a working revolver in my hands.
DS-10-SPEED
Member
You may be right on the run, but the reason I thought they are doing some change was that I could see nothing wrong with the gun other than a weak main spring. My thought was why would they need replace the gun for just a new stronger spring or some other easily replaceable parts? Or maybe they don't have a repair department.
Last edited:
I've been on the receiving end of ruptured rimfire cases on 2 occasions. The first time, in my sordid youth, with an old Stevens "Crack Shot" rifle without a recessed chamber; the second time a couple of years ago with a Ruger 77-17 due to poor annealing of the 17 HMR cartridge case. The Ruger had a recessed chamber, but the rifle was without a "Hatcher hole" to vent the resulting gasses. My point is that bad stuff sometimes happens with rimfire cartridges.
I'm guessing that Colt's designers believe that with the FP at 6:00 position any jet stream from a ruptured primer would most likely be directed into the center of the ratchet wheel and thereby could provide a measure of safety. However, this would not account for case-head separation, which can also occur. I believe (as S&W did after around 1925) that a 22 revolver should have recessed chambers.
I've coveted the new Colt King Cobra 22's and would have bought one at MSR had one been available. Now I think that I'm glad that none came my way. Thanks to the OP and also to DS-10-Speed for bringing this to my attention. I think that I'll just wait until Colt adds recessed chambers to their new model 22 revolver. -S2
ETA: the original 22 D-Backs had recessed chambers.
I'm guessing that Colt's designers believe that with the FP at 6:00 position any jet stream from a ruptured primer would most likely be directed into the center of the ratchet wheel and thereby could provide a measure of safety. However, this would not account for case-head separation, which can also occur. I believe (as S&W did after around 1925) that a 22 revolver should have recessed chambers.
I've coveted the new Colt King Cobra 22's and would have bought one at MSR had one been available. Now I think that I'm glad that none came my way. Thanks to the OP and also to DS-10-Speed for bringing this to my attention. I think that I'll just wait until Colt adds recessed chambers to their new model 22 revolver. -S2
ETA: the original 22 D-Backs had recessed chambers.
Last edited:
There was no reason my SP101 could not have been fixed either, unless of course they didn’t have trained staff capable of recutting a forcing cone, or worse case installing a new barrel. The timing was fine.
My biggest irritation was that Ruger didn’t retain a quantity of revolvers for immediate replacement, or did not arrange for one of their distributors to send one out.
Locally, I wasn’t pleased the shop/Ruger dealer I bought it from had another in stock and would not replace it on the spot. In fact they would not even send it back for me.
It’s the last new Ruger I’ll ever buy.
Nah, they just can't think outside the rim!
Joking aside: I'm no Colt expert, but could it be possible that it's just an oversight? When did Colt last make a rimfire revolver? Was it the Diamondback 35 years ago?
Similar threads
