Why the shrouded ejector rod on magnums

[Elerius]

I was wondering if there's some structural reason that revolvers chambered in a magnum round seem to necessitate a shrouded ejector rod. Both the M60 and M640 used to have the plain barrel and ejector when they were built in 38 special only. It seems that after they became available in .357 the design changed to a shrouded ejector rod.

I can't even think of an example of a gun chambered in magnum that DOESN'T have the shroud. Is there some technical reason for this? Or can anyone name an example to the contrary?

 

[dahermit]

I was wondering if there's some structural reason that revolvers chambered in a magnum round seem to necessitate a shrouded ejector rod.

In theory, an un-shrouded ejector rod could be bent if the gun were dropped, I see no logical reason why a magnum would benefit any more than a non-magnum from that feature. A shroud also adds weight to the front of the gun...but again, the benefit from added weight at the front of the gun would seemingly apply to the non-magnums as well.

 

[OldMarksman]

No, there is not.

 

[carguychris]

.357Mag J frame snubbies categorically have punishing recoil when loaded with anything remotely resembling full-power Magnum ammunition. My hunch is that the shrouded ejector rod was added to the Magnum models solely to add recoil-dampening weight and to give them slightly more muzzle-heavy balance to aid follow-up shots.

I can't even think of an example of a gun chambered in magnum that DOESN'T have the shroud.

The most common ones that spring to mind are the S&W Models 13 and 65 and the original (not MkIII) Colt Trooper. Other less common ones are special-order NYSP S&W M10s and OKSP S&W M64s, and the seldom-seen S&W M619. However, these are all medium or medium-large frame service revolvers, rather than snubbies.

 

[Elerius]

I meant, but didn't mention, the category of snubbies for a non-shrouded ejector, but it looks like that was guessed.

.357Mag J frame snubbies categorically have punishing recoil when loaded with anything remotely resembling full-power Magnum ammunition. My hunch is that the shrouded ejector rod was added to the Magnum models solely to add recoil-dampening weight and to give them slightly more muzzle-heavy balance to aid follow-up shots.

This seems like the only remotely plausible reason. I would point out though that guns such as the Airlite models are made to be as light as realistically possible, to the point that people complain about the recoil, particularly in the .357 models. If light weight is the goal, one would imagine you'd cut that even further by removing the ejector shroud. It just seems very mysterious to me. I guess that would mean that I could change out the barrel on a M640 in .357 back to the old unshrouded style if I were to choose, for aesthetic reasons, and not worry about it.

 

[g.willikers]

In addition to any structural considerations, Magnums should look like Magnums.
The more massive looking barrel adds to the appearance magnum buyers expect.

 

[Bob Wright]

As a matter of interest, the shrouded ejector rod was introduced with the S&W New Century model, with the idea that it lent protection to the ejector rod. This was incorporated into later guns. However during WW I when the British were looking for a source of service revolvers they tested the New Century. The shrouded ejector rod was a source of complaint, claiming that it could get caked with mud and affect the closig of the cylinder. So, S&W dropped that feature for the British contract. Since then all revolvers considered for military and/or police use have had the small locking lug only, while target and/or field revolvers retain the shroud, or full length lug.

Bob Wright

 

[old bear]

A little trivia

S&W first put the under lug on the first triplelock N frame. Not sure of the reason why, perhaps it was just for looks.
S&W removed the under lug on the second model triplelock, and received enough complaints that the under lug was returned to the third, and last model, triplelock.
The story goes that a number of, now, old time law men were bending the unshrouded ejector rod when they used the barrel of their revolvers in place of a blackjack. OUCH

 

[RIDE-RED 350r]

carguychris makes a good point..

I have fired a current production Smith model 60 with a 3" bbl. Sending mags downrange was an interesting experience to say the least!

Just a demonic little hell-b*tch!

 

[jimbob86]

A shroud also adds weight to the front of the gun...but again, the benefit from added weight at the front of the gun would seemingly apply to the non-magnums as well.

Adding weight to magums is functional. Adding the shroud to non-magnums is done for the same reason spoilers are put on Yugos: Looks. Racecars have them, so they put them on there to make them look fast .... a steel framed .38special doesn't need one, but it wouldn't look as tough next to a .357 that would have one, and for good reason.

 

[Guv]

I like the looks of a big old Colt New Service with the non- shrouded ejector rod, very business like.

 

[dahermit]

Quote:

A shroud also adds weight to the front of the gun...but again, the benefit from added weight at the front of the gun would seemingly apply to the non-magnums as well.

Adding weight to magums is functional. Adding the shroud to non-magnums is done for the same reason spoilers are put on Yugos: Looks. Racecars have them, so they put them on there to make them look fast .... a steel framed .38special doesn't need one, but it wouldn't look as tough next to a .357 that would have one, and for good reason.

Nonsense. Any weight forward of the frame adds stability when sighting. Note heavy barrels on some .38 Spl. service revolvers and barrel weights on some Olympic rapid fire guns. Ever notice that early Colt Police Positive Specials had no shroud and a pencil barrel whereas later ones had both a shrouded ejector rod and a heavy barrel? They were service guns, who do you think they were trying to impress with the extra weight? I doubt that the civil bureaucrat who ordered them for the police dept. was interested in how "tough they looked". Early un-shrouded .38 Spl.

Later shrouded (and heavy barreled).38 Spl.

 

[olddrum1]

From and old Geezer, the shroud gave the revolver a smoother line that reduced snagging, Anyway thats how it was touted.
Charlie

 

[Jim Watson]

As a matter of interest, the shrouded ejector rod was introduced with the S&W New Century model, with the idea that it lent protection to the ejector rod.

The ejector rod shroud of the .44 Hand Ejector New Century ("Triple Lock") is a functional part of the action. It has a tunnel for the bar that forms half of the third lock, seen on no other S&W. See part no 663 at
http://books.google.com/books?id=SY...lock" side plate&pg=PA334#v=onepage&q&f=false

The second British contract discontinued the third lock and the shroud, reportedly because of trench warfare mud, I suspect also to reduce costs. Look at a Triple Lock and marvel at the installation of the extra bits.

Postwar Second Model .44s were conventional Hand Ejectors without shroud and the third lock gone for good. In 1926 Wolf & Klar in Ft Worth, Tex. ordered a bunch of .44 Specials with shroud which became the Third Model. Second and Third Model .44s were both made for several years, up until 1940 according to SCSW.

The shroud protects the ejector rod, which a Smith needs more than a Colt because of the front latch point at the tip of the rod.
But mostly it looks good and was taken as the mark of a high end S&W from early days.

I can't see where it adds much weight until extended into a full lug as in the Distinguished Combat Magnum "L frame" guns came along.

 

[James K]

It was not unknown for Colts to be dropped or hit hard and the ejector rod bent. Colt actually taught police to eject empties by opening the cylinder and rapping the butt of the gun on a hard surface or on the heel of the boot if that should happen.

S&W ejector rods were both thicker (cylindrical) and had the front lug, so were much less likely to be bent.

Jim

 

[Grant D]

My Colt Lawman is unshrouded also, all my other 357"s are shrouded.

 

[Model12Win]

The S&W Model 65 doesn't have a shrouded ejector.

 

[Co Th G]

Model 58, 41 Magnum has no shroud. You don't know your revolvers very well.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

S&W first put the under lug on the first triplelock N frame. Not sure of the reason why, perhaps it was just for looks.
S&W removed the under lug on the second model triplelock, and received enough complaints that the under lug was returned to the third, and last model, triplelock.

There was only one Triple Lock, the 44 Hand Ejector, First Model, made from 1908 until 1915, chambered for the brand new 44 Special cartridge. The same basic gun chambered for the British .455 Mark II caliber was known as the .455 Mark II Hand Ejector 1st Model, but it was just a caliber variation of the 44 caliber gun. There were some Triple Locks chambered for 44 Russian, 44-40, 38-40 and 23 were chambered for 45 Colt. But they were all variations of the 44 Hand Ejector 1st Model, the only revolver Smith and Wesson ever made with the third latch.

Here is a photo of a relatively unusual Target Model Triple Lock with a 7 1/2" barrel.

As Jim Watson has already stated, the purpose of the prominent extractor shroud on the Triple Lock was to house the 'third latch' that gave the Triple Lock its name.

A U shaped bar was housed inside the shroud. One end was short and engaged the recess at the front of the ejector rod, no different than any other Hand Ejector. The other leg of the U was much longer and protruded from the rear of the shroud. One spring pushed the double ended bar back, and two pins kept the mechanism in the shroud.

A hardened insert pressed into the crane had a ramp on it that pushed the U shaped locking rod forward as the cylinder was closed. When the cylinder closed all the way, the rod popped backwards into a hole, completing the lock up of the third latch. At the same time, the upper portion of the rod popped into the recess at the front of the ejector rod.

You can always identify a Triple Lock by the two pins in the shroud, and the bright finished portion of the U shaped bar that protrudes slightly from the shroud. When the cylinder closes, as the rod is pushed forward by the ramp on the insert in the crane, the front portion of the rod protrudes further from the shroud. Another way to identify a Triple Lock is the fact that the extractor shroud is a bit 'taller' than the shroud of any other S&W. It had to extend down further to house all the stuff inside it.

Here is a view of the hardened latch when the cylinder has been closed up.

As to why Smith and Wesson felt the necessity to include the third latch, no one will ever know. It was certainly over kill, two latches have always been sufficient to keep the cylinder of a S&W revolver in position in the frame. Some have even speculated that Smith added the third latch just because they could. This was the first large caliber side swing revolver S&W had made, following the introduction of the 32 Hand Ejector in 1896 and the 38 Hand Ejector in 1899. Perhaps S&W just wanted to make a big splash with their new large caliber side swing revolver. The Triple Lock also went by the name New Century, and perhaps S&W simply put the third latch in to impress the gun buying public with how intricate their new big 44 was.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

What ever the reason, Smith and Wesson dropped the third latch with the 44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model in 1915. They also dropped the large extractor shroud, reverting to a simple underlug that received the front end of the extractor rod, no different than the 38 Hand Ejector. Smith also saved 50 cents on the cost of making the 44 HE 2nd Model by eliminating the intricate third latch.

In 1926 Smith and Wesson introduced the 44 Hand Ejector 3rd Model, also known as the Model 1926 Hand Ejector. Sometimes known as the Wolf & Klar Model for the distributor that requested it. This model did feature a shroud around the ejector rod, but the third latch was gone, never to be seen again.

The 44 Hand Ejector 4th Model was introduced in 1950. This one is a Target Model, also known as the Pre-Model 24. It is another example of a non-magnum Smith and Wesson revolver with an ejector rod shroud.