Revolver in 300 blackout

[Barry54]

The BFR is available as a 300 BO. It is on the menu for their "build a custom gun".

For 30 cal, the 30 carbine and 327 are good enough if you want a standard sized revolver.

For more than 30 carbine, the BFR in 30-30 or 307 are king of the hill. Seems to me, getting a 30-30 BFR with an extra cylinder for 300 BO ($350) would make more sense than a BFR in 300 BO only.

Now if I was going with a BFR for hunting, 35 cal would be much more tempting than 30 cal. Probably 350L if factory ammo is desired, possibly 357 Max for reload only.

Well it does exist! Thank you!!

And then I got to studying the options and saw 375 Winchester & 375 JDJ.

Decisions Decisions…

[Gunslinger1911]

Love this -
"4. You can't waste as much ammo with a 6-8 round cylinder as you can with a 30 round magazine in an AR."

I was surprised when S&W chambered the X frame in 350 Legend. Wouldn't think there would be a big market.
Remember, when originally developed, the X frame was also going to house 223.
As said, I would think you would lose a good bit of vel with the short bbl.
The BO would be about the same.

Doesn't mean I haven't considered getting one (already have an AR in 350)

[P Flados]

Well it does exist! Thank you!!

And then I got to studying the options and saw 375 Winchester & 375 JDJ.

Decisions Decisions…

I actually have a 357 Max revolver (Dan Wesson IHMSA special) and I have lots of IHMSA capable contender barrels. High power / long range handguns are generally only "worth it" when you have a real use for them. With IHMSA matches no longer being held in my area, the big stuff does not see much action at all.

Any revolver bigger than a 454, is physically too big for most normal "revolver" jobs. Long range hunting probably is better accomplished with a single shot gun.

However, having an oversized revolver that could be used for long range hunting has an emotional appeal that can not be denied. I seriously doubt that my 357 Max will ever be sold even if I never shoot it again.

I feel that 0.375" to 0.41" guns are close to optimum for long range hunting with revolvers having 8" - 10" barrels. This range of bores combines good terminal performance with good ballistics between the gun and target (drop and wind drift). Recoil will be more reasonable than larger caliber rounds having the same performance. Excess recoil hurts field accuracy for most folks and field accuracy is the key to effective long range hunting.

Either the 375 supermag and the 414 supermag (in Dan Wesson or in a converted Ruger) seem about the right case capacity for a "stretched frame" hunting handgun.

The long BFR is really too long, but has a following and seems to be able to stay in production.

The 375 Win would be a nice round for long range hunting in a BFR with cast. The case is probably overcapacity for a revolver length gun, but will work if you can put up with the blast. I am not sure what J-words you would be able to find that would both expand well at long distance and yet penetrate well up close.

[atfsux]

First off, most people interested in .300 Blackout are also interested in it for use with a suppressor. Revolvers don't allow for that.

Second, there have already been revolvers that pretty much duplicate ballistically what a .300blk would produce, which were the .30carbine Ruger Blackhawks and the AMT AutomagIII for autos. Not many were ever sold, making them collector pieces today.

Thirdly, forcing cone erosion and flame-cutting on magnum revolvers is a real problem for long-term durability when it comes to long case cartridges like the .357maximum, .460S&W, .500S&W and the .30carbine. You would experience a similar issue with .300blk.

And fourth, tapered or necked cartridges in revolvers have issues with cylinder binding. The swelling of the case as it pushes the base against the rear of the frame tends to keep it there, making the case bottom drag on the face of the frame. This was most pronounced in the S&W Model 53 that was chambered in the .22Jet. A relatively weak and not very powerful round based on the .38 case necked down to .22, it was a jam-o-matic due to cylinder binding. Although the neck on the .300blk is not as pronounced as it is with the .223, it is still enough that it would produce the same results.

[Barry54]

I’m not like most people I suppose. I’ve had a 300 Whisper barrel for over 20 years and never got around to buying a suppressor. I enjoy being able to use the entire range of 30 caliber bullets. 85 grain up to 250 grain. What is the upper limit for 30 carbine? 125 grain?

30 carbine is the equivalent to 300 Whisper/blackout just like the 300 is the equivalent to 30-30 Winchester.

I’ve read about flame cutting of the top strap, but I don’t think the 300 could be worse than other available chamberings. I just checked the Hodgdon website and saw 23 grains of H110 for a maximum charge in 357 magnum. The largest H110 charge for 300 is 20.3 grains. The maximum charge for the standard 110 grain 30 carbine load 15 grains of H110. I’m not a mathematician. Is the 300 twenty five percent more or thirty three percent more than the 30 carbine? It’s still less than the antique 357 magnum.

Have you looked at a 300 cartridge? The trim length is 0.078” longer than the 357 magnum. Would all the additional cylinder length on a 300 drop the pressure some before the gasses hit the cylinder gap?

My biggest reservation for ordering one is the bottleneck case issue.

[Daver7]

A couple of folks say that a bottle neck cartridge in a revolver causes problems.
I can think of 2 that have been around for over 100 years 32-20 and the 44-40
And they seem to work fine.

[steve urquell]

A couple of folks say that a bottle neck cartridge in a revolver causes problems.
I can think of 2 that have been around for over 100 years 32-20 and the 44-40
And they seem to work fine.

Yeah they do...at 13-16,000 CUP while the blackout can run 55,000. A totally different animal.

[atfsux]

A couple of folks say that a bottle neck cartridge in a revolver causes problems.
I can think of 2 that have been around for over 100 years 32-20 and the 44-40
And they seem to work fine.

The taper of those is real gentle, so it isn't likely to produce the cartridge set-back described. The degrees of the .38-40 taper is just 6 degrees The .300blk, however, while the shoulder is small, it is still 23 degrees. That angle imparts energy rearward far differently than the shallow 6 degrees of the .38-40.

[contender1]

I understand how some people just walk to the beat of a different drum. They desire something very different than the normal.

But when it comes to building a firearm,, of any odd caliber or dimension,, what us laymen can NOT see is the potential for something dangerous.
We may see a caliber in a certain type of gun, such as the .300 BLK,, and think it's be fun in a revolver. It may be just fine in such firearms as an AR,,, but there is one area not mentioned above. (Unless I missed it.) Pressure spiking & cylinder or frame strength. An AR chamber is different than a cylinder. The action design (semi-auto with gas bleed off vs a contained cylinder chamber) can also be of a potential concern.
As laymen,, we do not have the facilities or the expense of actual pressure testing of the WIDE range of potential loads that MIGHT get used in a revolver.

I see short barreled "rifle" calibers all the time offered in an AR pistol design. And I ask myself a few simple questions. (1) What purpose does it fill? (2) Is it using the case/bullet/powder combo efficiently? (3) What does something like that cost?

And when looking at doing something such as a .300 in a revolver,, I ask; "Is it safe?" Now,, if BFR offers it,, then,, yes,, it may well be safe in their revolver.
So then,, I revert to how efficient can it be & what purpose will it be used for.

And yes,, there have been a few calibers that use a tapered case & succeeded. Just as mentioned above. But by far,, the sharper shouldered ones suffer from problems when put in a revolver cylinder. Single shot guns like the Contender do not have the same issues.
Revolvers are different animals.

But if a person desires something like the OP does,, all I can say is; "If offered by a company like BFR,, then by all means spend your money or you'll never be satisfied."

[HumptyDumpty]

I'd be interested, if it were a modernized version of the Nagant revolver, specifically for suppressed shooting. With the benefit of modern materials and engineering, I wonder if it would be possible to get the DA trigger down to a manageable weight. Big, impractical, and awesome, I can think of only one other person besides myself, who would want one (I've got a friend who loves LOVES wacky stuff like that), but we'd both buy it in a heartbeat. I actually think there might be a market for such a gun, in a more standard chambering

[Barry54]

[QUOTE=

I see short barreled "rifle" calibers all the time offered in an AR pistol design. And I ask myself a few simple questions. (1) What purpose does it fill? (2) Is it using the case/bullet/powder combo efficiently? (3) What does something like that cost?
"[/QUOTE]

(1) 357 magnum energy on paper anyway, from 30 round detachable magazines.
(2) 5.56, not really. Lots of muzzle blast. 300 shines with H110 and velocity gains in relationship to barrel length is comparable to other magnum cartridges using H110 powder.
(3) The BFR costs about four times as much as a common AR platform pistol in 300bo.

[contender1]

As I said,, "all I can say is; "If offered by a company like BFR,, then by all means spend your money or you'll never be satisfied."

Go for it.

But if you re-read my post I was relating what I would ask MYSELF if I were to be looking at anything.

For me,, "paper energy" isn't worth anything to me. I want a caliber/bullet/load to actually do a job. I own a .300 BLK in an AR-15. It has an 18" bbl. And it still isn't my first choice over other things. But I got it for a specific purpose, and while the opportunity to prove it's value hasn't yet appeared,, I'll have it to test out. If it doesn't perform downrange,, and anchor the animal(s) as I need it to do,, it'll leave here. And I use a rifle powder,, not H110.
The 5.56/.223 has a proven track record if used as intended,, small to medium game, varmint killing. But we were not talking about that caliber. And I do not believe in using a 5.56/,223 in a handgun length bbl either.

You asked about building a .300 BLK in a revolver,,, and yes,, it appears BFR can make you one. You want something odd or different,, expect to pay for it.

Just do not expect any major manufacturer to build one for the mainstream market. Just not enough people would buy them.

[JohnForrest]

It would be interesting to hear what Ruger or S and W had to say about it.

I've been interested in 30 cal. stuff for a while but small frame guns are getting hard to hold on to for me. I am headed for a 30 Carbine Ruger and loading it to match 32 H and R levels. Best way I see to get a revolver with target sights in the frame size I want. Starline has brass for about 30 cents. I wonder if I could get a 32 ACP cylinder made?

[Brassmonkey]

Think I’d rather have 300 hammer in a revolver over 300 blackout.