Attention ruger revolver fans

IN THE PAST FORTY YEARS, I've owned at least one version of every centerfire convertible revolver SR&CO ever made [ and one they did not offer...]. In no time at all convertible revolvers turn into a regular PITA when you forget to change cylinders, take the wrong one with you, bring the wrong ammunition, and you find out MOST of those convertible 357/9MM sixguns shoot worse than a new WHAMO slingshot and are a damnsite louder with their secondary cylinder. In that time I saw one[1!] that shot the 9MM cartridge quite well indeed.
My Blackhawk 45COLT/45ACP sixguns all shot like a million bucks with the secondary cylinder, so much so i just bought a second one in 45COLT and left the 45ACP cylinder in the original OM 45/45 Blackhawk.
PS: I've owned several 9MM revolvers over the years and the S&W M940's were the pick of the litter shooting like little itty bitty J-frame target guns, AMAZINGINGLY so! And the 3" M940 cranks numbers you'd not believe.
And so it goes...
 
The similarities between .45 Colt & .45 ACP are close enough, as mentioned above, to allow both calibers in the same chambers of one cylinder.
The .45 ACP sizing die CAN be used for .45 Colt cases, if you need to.

The differences between the .357 & the 9, as mentioned above, create a new ballgame.

As far as Ruger (or anybody else) making a true .357/9mm convertible DA revolver goes, it'd really be necessary to fit two entire crane/cylinder assemblies to each gun.
Which would raise the price of the gun.

If you can break the GP down to components for cleaning (remove grips, remove mainspring/strut, remove trigger assembly, remove crane/cylinder assembly), you can easily swap full crane/cylinder assemblies around between the two calibers.

Obviously no sideplate involved, and knowing how to take the gun down that far is merely a matter of knowing your gun & how to maintain it.

It would not be unreasonable to expect a GP owner to be able to do that.

The actual process of swapping assemblies would not be difficult, but it would be time-consuming, and more than a matter of merely changing ammo in the same cylinder.
Also much more involved than fitting a pair of cylinders to a Blackhawk, and/or swapping them around in a single-action design.
Denis
 
Headspacing on the 9mm would be controlled by the clips.
Cartridge length is only a side issue, in the amount of distance a 9mm bullet would "jump" before reaching the chamber's front constriction in a .357-length chamber.
Denis
 
What size throats would you even use? You couldn't use .355 because that cause problems with .357 and .358 bullets. A .357 throat wouldn't work very well on a 9mm and would potentially allow the bullet to fly freely from the middle of the cylinder all the way to the forcing cone. I can only imagine the amount of crud that would build up in the cylinder after shooting 100 rounds of 9mm through a cylinder that also chambers .357 Magnum.

I like the idea, but the more I think about it the less appealing it becomes.
 
The .45ACP can work in a .45 Colt cylinder, once you get the headspace right (clips, in a gun cut for them), the slightly undersize acp brass does swell a bit, not a good idea for long term case life, but quite workable in the short run. The low pressure of the ACP round helps a lot with this, as well.

The 9mm/.357 thing is much different. In a properly cut .357 chamber, the 9mm case doesn't even go half way in. The cylinder cannot be shut. It simply is too fat to fit.

A .357 chamber cut big enough to take the 9mm luger case is physically possible but I think it would be grossly oversize in the critical area of the .357 case head, and at the pressures of .357 I would think a case failure would be a very likely thing. NOT a good idea.

.357 Sig cylinder would make more sense. I'll bet those bottleneck rounds would drop in pretty easily in a hurry.
Click to expand...

Yes, they should. The problem is getting them to drop out after firing.

The history of bottle necked cases in revolvers is ..checkered. Some rounds work well enough, others have not. It seems to depend on both the taper of the rounds, and the pressures, combined.

"bottle necked" rounds like the .32-20 and .38-40 work fine. The .22 Hornet, and even the less tapered K-Hornet work. The .22 Rem Jet, did not work well, and had severe setback issues, often tying up the guns.

I have no idea what a .357 Sig would do, but its not exactly a low pressure round. Not allowing .357 Mag and allowing .357 Sig seems rather idiotic to me, considering that the .357 Sig was built to replicate the performance of a 4" .357 Magnum with the 125gr bullet.
 
Which raises the question, how does one remove a cylinder from a Ruger double action?

I checked the manual of one of my SP101s, and it indicates removal of the mainspring and the trigger assembly to get to the cylinder. That is way too much for any convertible concept.
Click to expand...
While it's not a simple procedure, Ruger considers it a process that any user can do--that's why it's outlined in the owner's manual.

I agree that the entire cylinder assembly, including the crane, would need to be changed out, not just the cylinder itself.
 
It's not at all difficult, but it's much more cumbersome than most would be interested in doing, just to be able to swap back & forth between two calibers in the same gun.

Few would be willing to pay the extra cost of a dual crane/cylinder GP.
Denis
 
44 AMP said:
Swapping cylinders on a Ruger SA is simple. Fitting them is simpler than doing so on a DA. I'm sure multiple cylinders could be fitted to a DA revolver, BUT, no factory I know does this. Probably due to the additional costs & complexity of fitting, vs market demand.
Click to expand...
From 2012 to 2014, Taurus sold at least one DA model with interchangeable cylinders - the 992 Tracker Convertible.
The cylinders each had their own crane assembly and there was/is a button on the right side of the frame to enable quick crane/cylinder changes (rather than removing the front sideplate screw).

The 992 is a rimfire model, but it's DA nonetheless.
 
I have a Ruger New Vaquero, which the two .45 cylinders. Ruger can find a way to do it, just would take a little more than just an extra cylinder in the box...

I have my S&W 642-1 at the gunsmith, having the 9mm conversion cylinder fitted to it's own ejector rod. He swapped the one from my .38 assembly to get it going, but I want to be able to swap cylinders by taking out that one screw.

0C16F4B7-D8DB-458A-ABC5-356095D13323_zpsw9x1669z.jpg


F1F1A079-1667-4044-90F3-E53A3D610E0D_zpsq3enji7e.jpg


If I needed to, I could fire .38s out of it... but likely the cases would stick. Why deal with it when I have a dedicated cylinder for it?

I like shooting 9mm out of that J-frame. Recoil is like standard pressure .38, and I have a lot more variety in regards to loads. Not to mention I'm issued a 9mm and 9mm on moon clips is like half the length of .38s in a HKS speedloader.
 
Ruger can find a way to do it, just would take a little more than just an extra cylinder in the box...
Click to expand...

That could be a dream gun rather than something to actually expect.
 
Last edited:
Screwball, you're putting a 35,000 psi cartridge in an aluminum framed J-frame?
Don't you think the frame will stretch in relatively few rounds to where you begin to have headspace issues?
 
I have one of the Taurus Trackers that has two different crane/cylinder assemblies: one for regular 22's and one for 22 magnums. It works well and has given me no problems.

My 45colt/45acp Blackhawk convertible seems equally accurate with either round.
 
Laz said:
Screwball, you're putting a 35,000 psi cartridge in an aluminum framed J-frame?

Don't you think the frame will stretch in relatively few rounds to where you begin to have headspace issues?
Click to expand...


First question... yes. If you look into it, S&W did the same thing in a prototype 942. Sent to a gun writer, who felt the recoil was too much and that it would never be sold. As such, it was shelved. Probably the extraction issues with the 940 also had a play in it, as well.

Second question... not really. J-frame 9mm conversions aren't a new thing, and a handful of people have made "942" revolvers in a few different ways (converting a .38 cylinder; swapping in a 940 cylinder; adding a 940 barrel with either of the two other options). I haven't seen an example of one causing issues. You see a lot of concern about pressure and barrel diameter in threads discussing it, but having a prototype made, I felt it was a viable route when you see people doing it. I do plan on watching out for it, but I really don't see it happening.

With that being said, I'm not planning on shooting +P loads (not interested in doing it, even for defensive loads). The .38 barrel was accurate enough for the rounds I fired to feel comfortable with qualifications. I'm thinking about using 147 grain Hornady XTP for my carry ammo.
 
Screwball - thanks for expanding on and sharing your thoughts and reasons. I wish you success and hope you let us know how it turns out. Very interesting project. I'll bet that little puppy is going to bark.
 
Laz said:
Screwball - thanks for expanding on and sharing your thoughts and reasons. I wish you success and hope you let us know how it turns out. Very interesting project. I'll bet that little puppy is going to bark.
Click to expand...


No problem. And thanks.

If you are a member on S&W Forum, this is the link to my thread. It is at the gunsmith being fitted now, but should be done in two weeks. After that, I likely do another range trip, then send it out to Robar to match it. Going to keep it up to date as it moves forward... good or bad. Like I said, a few people have done that conversion before and there are a handful of threads over there on it.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/438321-my-9mm-642-1-a.html
 
If Taurus can do it...

Taurus has a 22 rimfire double action revolver whose cylinders (complete crane assembly) can be swapped out by pushing a button on the frame. I have seen one in a store within the past year and personally pulled the crane and replaced it. It is easier than on my convertible Blackhawk (though not by much).

Swing the cylinder out to the normal loading/unloading position.
Press a button on the frame near the crane
Pull the crane and cylinder assembly forward, out of the frame
Put the other crane and cylinder assembly lined up with the frame
Press the button and slide the new crane/cylinder assembly in place
(Load if you want) and close cylinder.


If Taurus can do it, Ruger should be able.

Lost Sheep

p.s.

Dan Wesson style interchangeable barrels would be nice, too. Not only would it resolve the bullet size and forcing cone questions but allow a single double action revolver (carefully matching barrels and cylinders) to shoot ANY cartridge that would fit within the cylinder opening, from 22 rimfire on up to 480 Ruger.

By the way, something close to this has been done. Sometimes called "WessonHawk" or "Switch Caliber Redhawk".

http://forums.outdoorsdirectory.com/showthread.php/110325

Post #43 on page 3 posted by jwp500 2/25/2012

SwitchCaliberRedhawk.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top