Looks like it should work, I can hardly wait for the range report....
Robert
Printable View
Looks like it should work, I can hardly wait for the range report....
Robert
Looks great to me! Been waiting to see how this turned out, and it seems to have turned out well. I wonder if when the spacer was made for the extractor you could have counterbored the extractor side for the diameter of existing extractor and thereby filled the gap between the extractor and the recess in the cylinder. It would have had a seamless look.
You have done an excellent job. I think I might try my hand at it. I have an older Model 66 with a blown cylinder and the topstrap has about a .030" bow in it. I think it can be easily straightened and would make a fine .32 Mag. Barrel is 6" so it would require a bit more work but would have adjustable sights.
Thank you for your inspiration!
Kewl! Nice you see this project finally wrapping up. Keep up the good work!
Crank,
RE: your Shop Cleanup report; have you found your Powder List yet?
Best Regards,
Chev. William
Chev,
I thought I listed what I had a while back. I haven't found any other powders, so I am very limited.
Stonecrusher,
Just as a precaution, unless you are lucky enough to have access to Magna-flux testing, there is an old school trick they taught us in gunsmithing school. Strip all of the parts you can, especially the rear sight assembly, off of the frame. Get a large enough container to immerse the frame and soak it in fresh gasoline for 15-20 minutes. With some paper towels at hand and a good magnifier, pull the part out and quickly wipe all of the gasoline off. Watch for any lines of wetness in the window of the frame. The gasoline will penetrate any cracks and then as it dries it will crawl out and show itself. It's the poor man's version, but it works. That way you can rest easy that the frame is not compromised. Straightening the top strap will take a steady hand and a prudent use of force, but it should not be too difficult. I will recommend that you spring for the cylinder from Bowen, to save a lot of extra work. I would not hesitate if I were to do it again, since it would have saved quite a few hours and there were enough times that the risk of ruining what I had would have scrapped the cylinder I used. If you are comfortable with your skill level and you don't mind the tedium, by all means, follow what I have documented. Have fun with it, you will have something the other kids won't have.
Thanks to all for the compliments.
Mark
Added 2014JUN30: This lot of 90 cases had been set aside waiting for suitable "Lathe Time" are now in the process of being run through my Sizing die again, but this time in the "RC" press, to coin the rim thinner and cut down on the "Lathe Time" needed to finish them. Chev. William
Chev,
When, I referred to your data, you had already covered everything I have.
Thanks
Mark
OK. then I guess you are set for the .25ACP Rifle loads. Please keep us posted on future results.
Also, a couple of Curiosity questions:
What is the Largest Size Revolver Frame in current production suitable for 'wildcat modifications'?
How many .25 Stevens Diameter Cartridges may be fitted into a cylinder with enough safety margins?
How many .32 Extra Long Cartridges may be fitted into a cylinder with enough safety margins?
What got me thinking was seeing Rugar 8 and 10 Cartridge .22 Revolvers at my Local Gun Shop.
Best Regards,
Chev. William.
No, I was wondering if there was one that could be modified to hold 10 rounds of .32 Extra Long size cartridges in CF configuration and at least a 6" barrel.
Another thought was for 10 rounds of ".250ALRM" in a longer Barrel, like a 'Buntline' design.
Just some 'Wild Thoughts' wiht no funds to pursue them.
Best Regards,
Chev. William
I'm actually getting a little irate that S&W didn't make this gun. They wanted to sell us an over priced J frame (I don't care how nice it was, it isn't what the market or myself wanted) and I bet this configuration maybe in a 2", 3", and 4" would have sold. Throw in an adjustable sight version and I bet that would have sold too.
If you go back in the thread, Maximumbob54, you will find a link to my version of the adjustable sighted gun you are describing, "Project 616." Just like Crank's fixed sight version, I had a 22 cal cylinder rebored to 327, but unlike his sleeved barrel, mine uses a rebored 617 barrel (4") with the heavy under lug. Everyone who sees it is impressed, but there would probably not be a huge market for it since folks who want classic revolvers seem less interested in new-made Smiths with MIM parts and Internal Locks. I guess it's just a sign of the times. :|
Froggie
Just as an FYI, the Blackhawk 327 FM is an 8-shooter, and it uses a standard diameter Ruger Blackhawk™ cylinder. I'm guessing an L-frame cylinder could easily take the same treatment, but I really like the K-frame for the 32 and I'm not sure I would hold out for a purpose made cylinder (as opposed to the standard 6 holes drilled) just for one more round. If you can't get the job done with 6 shots, one more probably won't help. For competition, a K-32 speed loader from Safariland would be nice.
Froggie
Are you kidding? I would love a 616. And I would think a seven shot .327 K frame cylinder would work for the same reason the L's seven shot .357 works because the stop notches are milled between the cylinders instead of over them creating a weak spot on each chamber.
Maximumbob,
Froggie has a valid point, many people have developed a distrust of and/or a negative mindset towards many of S&W's current crop of revolvers. Add to that, the painfully high prices and you have seriously hampered the sale-ability of a number of these offerings. I personally, was waiting for Ruger to release the GP-100 in a 6", instead they killed the 4" and left me with no choice. Add to that, the fact that many people swear they would buy such and such offering, but when it is, they hesitate to wait for reviews or for the price to settle down. The simple fact is, if it isn't out there, the only option is spend the money to build what the manufacturers fail to offer. I happened to be blessed with the equipment and enough knowledge to be dangerous to save a few bucks at face value for a project such as this, but as I was reminded, my labor is not being charged but it isn't free. Add to that, the financial investment in my equipment and I could have paid any number of high end pistol-smiths to build me a lot of guns and still have money in the bank. I do this stuff because I love it and I enjoy the development process. I am guilty of having a number of projects that are not "finished", but they are functional and simply need to have the window dressing added to make them complete.
Mark
Well I know I swore I would buy a .45 Colt 4" Redhawk if they brought them back and I'm nagging and harassing my LGS to hurry up and find one.
And when I see one of the new Single Sixes in .327 for sale I will have one of those as well.
Hee-Hee!:bigsmyl2: Already blew up my buddy's phone and e-mail telling him to get my name on the list from Lipsey's for a 7 1/2". I am headed towards oblivion and will have way too many .327's by the time I get there. Heck, I still need to shoot the GP-100 and test the extractor mod on the 64-7, then I need to start threading the barrel for my Dan Wesson. My friends say that I have a compulsive (or was that repulsive?) personality, when I develop an interest in something I tend to go a wee bit overboard. Once, I was on an XP-100 kick and wound up with three at one gun show, now I have five of the buggers. By the way, I wasn't trying to lump you in with the masses when I said that a lot of people talk about what they would buy and then get wishy-washy, so no offense was intended. The sad fact is that the number of people that actually have a sincere interest in many great concepts is too small for the bean counters to care about. It doesn't invalidate the need for a gun/caliber offering, but face it, they are in business to make money. If I had my way, I would be placing my order for a Webley-Fosbery or a Mateba, but alas they are gone and I won't pay what they want for one of them now. I just like uncommon stuff. However, as the saying goes, sometimes you are better off not meeting your heroes. Two guns that I lusted after in my youth were the Steyr GB and the original Automag, I have since owned both. The Steyr was unspectacular for accuracy and got dangerously hot during rapid fire drills and the Automag was a high strung exotic that demanded meticulous upkeep and loading it to the ragged edge of sanity to keep it cycling. Both have sinced passed out of my hands. If I spot a Redhawk in LC, I will let you know.
Mark
7 each of .327 Fed. Mag. would also mean 7 round of .32 Extra Long (CF Replacements) but with a smaller diameter Chamber and therefore thicker walls.
Rebuilding for .250ALRM or .250ALRx sizes and lengths (.276" diameter/.302" Rim and up to 1.380" case length) might allow for an 8 shot but I would guess 9 or 10 chambers would start to thin the walls a bit to much. Just guessing as I do not know the Cylinder Diameter of the original let alone the Chambering radius used to layout the Chamber circle.
If you know the pertinent dimensions pleas post them and I will try to see i fthey would layout for suitable arrangements. I would also presume that the minimum wall thicknesses between .327 FM chambers and the minimum thickness for chamber to cylinder exterior would also be safe fo reither .250 or .32 cartridges.
Would a larger frame one, originally set up for .45 Long Colt allow more of a smaller diameter cartridge, possibly with the addition of offset barrel of smaller Bore/Groove dimensions, allow more rounds in the Cylinder, I would think so, but do not Know so.
Best Regards,
Chev. William