Odd but intriguing idea... 5.7 revolver?

M

Micahweeks

New member
Would it be possible to make a revolver chambered in 5.7? I brainstormed the idea in the "revolver innovations" thread, but I've been obsessing over it ever since. What do you think (ammo availability aside) of the idea? How would it perform? How many shots would a GP100/686 sized gun hold? Would such a gun be terribly expensive to make? Would such a gun increase the popularity of the caliber?
 
Bottle neck cartridges regardless of shoulder angle and non rimmed have always have had significant problems in revolvers, i.e. S&W with the .22Jet. Moon clips would be required. A single shot by TC would be the better route IMHO or just stay with the semi auto platform.
 
Gotta go with longranger on this - bottleneck cartridges and revolvers have never played well together - the shoulder expands, the case can't fully reseat, and the gun gets tied up.
 
Well, that's why I asked. Lol. Wasn't sure if it was possible. So, there is no way around the bottleneck cartridge problem? How does an auto address that issue?

Benefit over 22 mag? I have a 22 mag and have shot a pretty good amount of 5.7 in the past year or so. I find it to be slightly easier recoil, a bit flatter shooting, and the rounds they demo'd at the Academy were just brutal (but, as I understand it, civilians can't get those, so irrelevant I guess).
 
"Bottle neck cartridges regardless of shoulder angle"

Well, sort of the case.

Case working pressure also plays a major role.

The .38-40 and the .44-40 are both bottlenecked cartridges, have never had issues as long as they've been kept to the original working specs.

The same was true of rounds like the .22 Harvey Kay-Chuc (sp??), which really took the ballistics right to the edge of what would be a problem.

The limit was really reached with the .22 Remington Jet, chambered in the Smith & Wesson Model 53. Its ballistics were simply too hot, and the combination was known for locking up.

Handloaders could back off a bit to lessen the chance of a cylinder lock up, but ballistics would suffer, making the gun a lot less attractive.
 
The .38-40 and the .44-40 are both bottlenecked cartridges, have never had issues as long as they've been kept to the original working specs.
Click to expand...

That is true that they are bottle neck,but have rims on the case same as 32-20 they work fine take the rim off the cartridge and it has issues in a revolver.Moon clips are pain for reasonably quick reloading.I just don't see the need for another rimless revolver cartridge given the past experiments and marginal success.
 
Last edited:
another forum I'm a member of, has some very forward thinking "gunny's" they are chambering for relatively high pressure bottlenecks... sharp shoulders & straight cases needed... actually the 5.7 may work better than most, because of the lacquer on the case...

I played around a bunch with the 5.7 early on, & have a custom contender barrel in that chambering, but have never tried it in a revolver...
 
I don't really see a point to it. What would the market be? would it be a j frame snub or a long barreled k frame? would you get extra rounds in the cylinder? It needs a selling point. SD? varmint gun? its to expensive to be a plinker. I don't see it happening.

5.7 chambered in all of 2 guns.
 
I suppose the closest thing in current production would be the Smith & Wesson Performance Center revolver chambered in .17HMR.
 
"So, there is no way around the bottleneck cartridge problem? How does an auto address that issue?"

The problem with a bottleneck case in a revolver is that it pushes back against the recoil shield. If it pushes back hard enough, it essentially jams the gun and the cylinder won't rotate.

That's not an issue with a semi-auto because the case is ejected.


"That is true that they are bottle neck,but have rims on the case same as 32-20 they work fine take the rim off the cartridge and it has issues in a revolver.Moon clips are pain for reasonably quick reloading.I just don't see the need for another rimless revolver cartridge given the past experiments and marginal success."

OK, I misread how you were phrasing your original statement.

The rim on the case is there solely for headspacing. Take the rim off, as in the S&Ws chambered for .45 Auto, and the case can headspace on the case mouth, or it can headspace on the moon clip.

I disagree that moon clips are a pain for reasonably quick reloading. They can make for a lighting fast reload; they also have the added advantage of positive extraction.

For a concealed carry revolver a moon clip is really no more difficult to deal with than a speedloader.
 
What about 17 HMR?

Gotta go with longranger on this - bottleneck cartridges and revolvers have never played well together - the shoulder expands, the case can't fully reseat, and the gun gets tied up.
Click to expand...

How does this affect revolvers in 17 HMR?

I don't own one but my friend has a Taurus Tracker,,,
He loves that gun and swears by it's performance.

Aarond

.
 
I'm converting a revolver from 22 Hornet to K Hornet right now... you just have to follow some guidelines as I pointed out in my previous post... ( sharp shoulder, straighter case body, & high enough pressure to expand the case into the chamber walls, along with dry clean chambers & brass )

I've never heard of anyone doing it with a 5.7 but with the lacquered case the 5.7 has, I wouldn't be surprised if it worked...

BTW... they work better in single actions, as the cases can get a little sticky ;)
 
Gotta go with longranger on this - bottleneck cartridges and revolvers have never played well together - the shoulder expands, the case can't fully reseat, and the gun gets tied up.


aarondhgraham said:
How does this affect revolvers in 17 HMR?

I don't own one but my friend has a Taurus Tracker,,,
He loves that gun and swears by it's performance.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Does your friend primarily shoot in single action? It's a long-barreled gun, so I'm betting he does so for accuracy. A lot can be overcome by honkin' down on that hammer spur, even if the shooter doesn't realize it at the time.

Here's an interesting thread on the 17hmr Tracker:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=733129
 
A bit more on revolvers and bottle necked cases. It is not a matter of a rim; the .22 Jet is rimmed. What happens with a bottle neck case is that when the round is fired, the case backs up against the breech face while at the same time (if the pressure is high) the front of the case expands to the chamber shoulder.

So you have a case that now is enough larger than it was before it was fired that it cannot be easily pushed back into the chamber (even a little) to allow the cylinder to rotate. That expansion happens to all bottleneck cases in all types of firearms, but in a bolt type, the case is extracted and ejected; it doesn't have to move back into the chamber, and reloaders usually have to resize the case to get it to do so. But in a revolver, the case must be free to move at least a small amount or the cylinder won't rotate.

Jim
 
Freedom Arms makes a neck cased revolver. They call it the 224-32, it's a 327mag case necked down to 22 cal. It has more snort than the 5.7. Looks like they are getting about 2,200-2,300 fps out of a 40 gr bullet.

Here's a gunblast review
http://www.gunblast.com/Freedom97-224-32.htm

I don't really see the point to it either, but to each his own. Some day I'm going to pony up the $2,000+ for a FA revolver, but this caliber won't be on my radar.
 






Here's a Freedom Arms Model 97 in 224/32 FA. As long as you keep the chambers dry, the case won't back out and bind the cylinder. However, if there's even just a little oil film in the chamber, the case can back out. (Don't ask me how I know this...:o). I generally wipe out the chambers and tumble reloaded rounds to ensure there's no oil anywhere before I shoot.

Muzzle velocity with the load shown is around 2200 fps...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top