Does a modern top break have a place in today's concealed carry world?

T

TruthTellers

New member
I was thinking about the venerable J frame/LCR snub revolver and how they're still an effective option for concealed carry, but it got me to thinking if a modern design top break wouldn't be a bad alternative option. Top breaks may not be as strong, but I think the opinion among experts is that shooting whatever you shoot best with, even if it's a weaker ammo (like .22 LR, .32 Long, .38 S&W) because it's shot placement that matters and faster follow up shots is always good.

The swing out revolvers can shoot weaker ammo too, but my thinking is that if a top break can be made very small (think NAA Ranger but a bit larger, yet still smaller than a J frame) and still be faster to reload and have a more positive extraction/ejection of cases. Since there's no clearance issues with the grips, all the cases would be ejected and using a speedloader wouldn't have space issues either.

Clearly most of my thinking is about reloading a revolver and making it faster and better. Reloading isn't common in a defensive gun use, but then it becomes a question of the size of the revolver. If a top break smaller than a J frame can be done using modern metals and manufacturing, would it have an appeal? What if the price of such a top break was considerably less than today's J frames and LCR's?

What do you people think?
 
Top break, swing out, whatever... something in 32 H+R magnum between the J frame and NAA ranger - five shot is fine. Designed from ground up as a 32 not some converted 38 with an extra shot.
 
I have a British Enfield top break in 38/200. With the longer barrel, its not hard to get it open and the empties out, not sure how it would be with a short barrel, especially if you might have sticky cases. The shorter you go with the barrel, the less leverage youre going to have. (I keep looking for a 2" Enfield. If I find one, Ill let you know how it goes :))

The cases dont always all come out when you open the gun, especially if you dont invert the gun when you do it.

I can load my S&W revolvers pretty quick using a speed loader. The same speed loaders work with the Enfield, but I dont get the job done as quickly.

To be fair, I really havent put much time and effort into figuring it out either. The Enfield is fun to shoot, but basically a range toy.

The S&W's just seem more fluid getting them reloaded compared to the top break.

If you practice the reload, revolvers really arent all that slow to get reloaded and going again. Might even be quicker than trying to get one of the "little" autos reloaded.

Personally, I still think the speedloaders are your best bet, and the Safariland's are my choice as long as you can find them for your gun.
 
The .32 H&R magnum requires the cylinder to be too long.
I have always said, that if a major manufacturer came out with a double action stainless 5 shot top break, or even swing out that is sized for the .32 acp cartridge, they could sell a million of them.
 
Bill DeShivs said:
The .32 H&R magnum requires the cylinder to be too long.
I have always said, that if a major manufacturer came out with a double action stainless 5 shot top break, or even swing out that is sized for the .32 acp cartridge, they could sell a million of them.
Click to expand...
I agree, but you likely know as well as I do that the industry has no interest in the .32 caliber at all when it comes to concealed carry guns.
 
A modern Top-Break has been a dream of mine for years.
I wish I could get Ruger interested. With modern steels and heat-treatment, there is no reason a top break can not be made to hold any modern cartridge and not beat or wear out. My dream guns (and from tec-drawings I have done ) would be for 22 in the small frame 327 Fed Mag, 38 and 357 mag for the mid frame and a heavy frame for 41 44 and 45.
Such guns today can be used for concealed carry, but the true market is the outdoorsman and sportsman. In the last 20 years it seems all the guns are being made for the police and CCW market, but there are still LOTS of hunters, hikers, fishermen and timber men who I believer would just love a good modern well made break-top.
 
I've always thought that a top-break revolver in a decent self-defense chambering would be a good choice for self-defense for folks who like revolvers.

You'd need something other than one of the common revolver calibers available today because the cartridges are too long to be ideal.

Something like .38Spl but in a redesigned case no longer than is really required. .38Spl is very long because it was originally a black powder cartridge and that case volume was needed for performance.
 
The .32 H&R magnum requires the cylinder to be too long.
I have always said, that if a major manufacturer came out with a double action stainless 5 shot top break, or even swing out that is sized for the .32 acp cartridge, they could sell a million of them.
Click to expand...

Can I get an AMEN?! I have a couple of those old H&R Bicycle Top Breaks (one completely rebuilt and others in near mint condition) and those little guys are smaller than an I-Frame. I really wish NAA would pick it up. I would gladly pay $500 to $700 for something similar in stainless steel chambered for 32 ACP. Heck of a lot more effective than NAA's in 22 LR & Mag.
 
In .38 or 32 it would probably work.
I think it would be expensive, due to machine work and fitting.

I'd pay for one just to play with it..
 
TruthTellers said:
I was thinking about the venerable J frame/LCR snub revolver and how they're still an effective option for concealed carry, but it got me to thinking if a modern design top break wouldn't be a bad alternative option. Top breaks may not be as strong, but I think the opinion among experts is that shooting whatever you shoot best with, even if it's a weaker ammo (like .22 LR, .32 Long, .38 S&W) because it's shot placement that matters and faster follow up shots is always good.

The swing out revolvers can shoot weaker ammo too, but my thinking is that if a top break can be made very small (think NAA Ranger but a bit larger, yet still smaller than a J frame) and still be faster to reload and have a more positive extraction/ejection of cases. Since there's no clearance issues with the grips, all the cases would be ejected and using a speedloader wouldn't have space issues either.

Clearly most of my thinking is about reloading a revolver and making it faster and better. Reloading isn't common in a defensive gun use, but then it becomes a question of the size of the revolver. If a top break smaller than a J frame can be done using modern metals and manufacturing, would it have an appeal? What if the price of such a top break was considerably less than today's J frames and LCR's?

What do you people think?
Click to expand...

The Internet Gunsphere buzz I'm seeing right now has folks saying smaller caliber snubbies (.22, .22 Magnum and .32) have a place in self defensive use, as long as the smaller diameter bullets is getting you commensurately more of them, and penetration is good.

So, in that sense, yeah, a modern top break might work.

Could an equivalent quality top break be made as inexpensively as a swing out cylinder one?

How much would it get you, in terms of speed, over a (now) conventional swing out cylinder gun? You still have a lot of 2 handed manipulation you need to do.

Assuming there's much difference in reload speed, is it even needful?
 
Most of the top breaks I have have a lug of some sort machined into the frame. The locking mechanism is a separate piece that moves. Why can’t the lug be hardened with the frame and the locking mechanism be hardened somewhat softer and the lock be a ‘maintenance ‘ piece? I do realize that maintenance of a critical locking mechanism is outside of the current paradigm regarding firearms.
 
I think a "tool steel" Safety Hammerless would be a worthwhile hideout gun.
There are a lot of people advocating .38 Special Midrange Wadcutters, which would fit a .38 S&W length cylinder.
A .32 ACP revolver with stronger materials than .32 S&W would work, too. Lots of people improvising with ACPs in revolvers, even though an overload in the old guns.
 
If Kimber can already fit 6 .357into the cylinder size of a LCR or J frame, then I am sure that someone can find a way to fit 7 .32 into the same size cylinder. 7 shot j frame size revolver would be on my want list.
 
The .32 H&R magnum requires the cylinder to be too long.
I have always said, that if a major manufacturer came out with a double action stainless 5 shot top break, or even swing out that is sized for the .32 acp cartridge, they could sell a million of them.
Click to expand...
I am in full agreement with Bill (rare occurrence LOL).
Something in the line of the Taurus 380 revolver, but even a bit smaller.
 
JohnKSa said:
I've always thought that a top-break revolver in a decent self-defense chambering would be a good choice for self-defense for folks who like revolvers.

You'd need something other than one of the common revolver calibers available today because the cartridges are too long to be ideal.

Something like .38Spl but in a redesigned case no longer than is really required. .38Spl is very long because it was originally a black powder cartridge and that case volume was needed for performance.
Click to expand...
I agree. I think something like .38 Short Colt would work fine loaded to .38 Special pressures. Not only would it be sufficient in power, but being able to shoot it in .38's and .357's would make it popular too as I'd imagine anyone buying a top break .38 Short Colt would already have some .38 or .357 revolvers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top