e5ea69 No.543568
What's your opinion on them?
c3d475 No.543581
Obsolete. Still being produced because of the aesthetics.
576d8f No.543585
>Pros
Fills a niche that semi-autos cannot in that you can have at least six ≥9x19 rounds with a grip that can be more comfortable for those with smaller hands or short fingers.
There is no minimum clearance between your body and the gun for those with shrouded hammers, so nothing snags if you're getting jumped.
Generally easier to learn how to shoot accurately than a semi-auto due to the grip and the trigger mechanism.
Very little can happen in terms of malfunction unless you're using a Taurus in anything more powerful than .38 Special.
Speedloaders are everywhere, speedstrips can be concealed more easily than magazines, moonclips are quick and efficient.
>Cons
When something goes wrong, you're completely fucked.
Speedloaders are bulky, speedstrips are slow, moonclips are flimsy and require paying a premium for 9x19 or .45 ACP revolvers.
Five or six shot capacity.
<if you spend more you get seven or eight but start printing like hell
The market's obsession with ultra light magnums results in bruised hands even with rubber grips.
Dirty Harry switched to a semi-automatic but nobody listened.
b93c87 No.543631
>>543568
1. Like >>543585 said, their design permits the use of more powerful cartridges than are generally feasible with autoloaders (unless you go with huge ones with magazines separate from the grip like the PLR-16). Something of a niche, but useful in certain situations like a hunting or anti bear pistol.
2. Their manual of arms is extremely simple. Some people lack the physical ability to reliably do things like rack a slide. (pic related)
bc9306 No.543642
>>543581
Revolvers will be obsolete when a pistol can comfortably load ammo I can hunt with.
576d8f No.543645
>>543642
AR pistol with a .50 Beowulf upper
wham bam
thank ya ma'am
now git out
543396 No.543651
I like them. They represent the smallest package people can comfortable carry and still take on- and win - a fight with an angry bear. If all you have is a hot loaded .357, 44 or .454, you're still very well armed.
f54b9d No.543654
>>543642
>not .600 nitro express
543396 No.543656
>>543654
A handgun is a weapon of opportunity. If you can comfortably carry that thing whilst doing other non gun stuff you've got a good deal.
Otherwise it's not really worth it.
62f915 No.543672
>>543568
That it's an expert gun.
The guy with countless hours and tens of thousands of rounds on it is perfectly capable to down 6 people with 6 shots of .357 in an instant.
But unless you really commit to the platform you're better off using any semi-auto.
959ac4 No.543682
While I was in the army in Tselinoyarsk I was told I was pretty good with them.
Pretty much why I still use one.
f69ffb No.543745
>>543581
They're still good for fat rounds and reliability.
Automag pistols are a meme.
f44d64 No.543746
>>543682
Isn't that a bit autistic?
b803f6 No.543751
I dig them. I think they’ll do the job for defensive use, and they’ve made decent back up guns in the past. As for direct action stuff, except for very specific scenarios such as a singular target and a desire to leave no shell casings behind, a semi auto would serve better.
5393ef No.543753
>>543585
Pretty much this. It's not that shit can't go wrong with a revolver, but they're a lot more forgiving when shit does go wrong. A semi-auto can get jammed if you shoot it through a heavy jacket, but the same is generally not true of a revolver. Hand-loading your own ammunition for revolvers is more reliable since, like a shotgun, revolvers tend to have more tolerance for misshapen or otherwise improper ammunition, unlike a semi-auto.
For day-to-day use? I'd carry a semi-auto any day of the week since I'm not worried about long-term reliability, just short-term. For SHTF scenarios, aesthetics, and handing a gun to someone else in a jiff? I trust the revolver more.
5393ef No.543754
>>543746
Every time I see this vid, I expect him to shoot himself in the foot.
8444a6 No.543757
Ball and cap revolvers and muskets are the only weapons legal with no hassle in my country.
dbfe54 No.543758
>>543746
welp, since you mention it.
68ebeb No.543760
>>543656
A handgun is your second-to-last resort, with a good blade being the final solution. An operator never hunts with a pistol.
68ebeb No.543762
>>543761
The "you are" sort of gives it a way. It'd work much better with "you're" and then "a faggot".
c77d66 No.543769
f711ce No.543807
>>543758
>bullets already tumbling as they exit the barrel
Why don't we do this? The wounds would be massive.
68ebeb No.543809
>>543769
A profound hunter, but I speak of the general intended purpose for weaponry beyond hunting varmints, which superior technology is very much intended for.
c77d66 No.543813
>>543809
A handgun is always there if it's legal and is out of the way whilst you are doing other shit, and 44 magnum is a valid hunting option from a 4-6" bbl. From what I've read it'll flatten bear at short ranges of sub 100yrd, and drop small game a lot further.
68ebeb No.543814
>>543813
Yes, it is very useful, when used as a secondary firearm. Your rifle itself should be well suited to incapacitate or even neutralise bigger critters, which should be the focus for that weapon. The pistol is meant for close-range dealings where you don't think a knife will cut it. The many "gunslingers" people idolised in history for their use of revolvers very much relied on rifles for situations not suited to the former.
Beyond that, a traditional magazine-fed pistol proves to be the superior choice for a quick sidearm than a more hefty and complex revolver. I know bayonet charges can still be effective, these days, but that doesn't excuse staying behind in terms of technology, when the option is available.
576d8f No.543830
>>543807
That's called "keyholing" and the rounds bounce off of solid targets or don't penetrate more than an inch or so.
f711ce No.543831
>>543830
>Not penetrating more than an inch
This is good right? That means more energy is being dumped into the target, causing massive hemorrhaging.
>keyhole
If you made a hole the shape of a key it would be pretty big.
c77d66 No.543833
>>543830
>>543831
Keyholing means your bullet isn't engaging the rifling. You would be better off with a hollowpoint.
0d0655 No.543840
>>543807
Bullets don't travel as far, are less accurate, and are more affected by wind and air resistance. It also doesn't have good penetration so if your enemy is wearing armor you're out of luck, but if the enemy doesn't have armor then yes it would cause more damage.
>>543831
Not the shape of a key, the shape of a keyhole. A bullet's keyhole is larger than the normal bullet hole because the bullet wasn't stabilized and went in while tilted at an angle.
4b0efe No.543841
>>543642
>he can't kill a deer with .45 Win Mag or .45 SMC
0d0655 No.543853
>>543841
He never specified what he's hunting. Maybe he's hunting Elk, Bears, or the most dangerous creature of them all Man.
7dbbcf No.543876
>>543757
But then even if you spend all the money and time on getting a license a revolver is kind of pointless from a home defense perspective, bp revolvers already hold 6 and you can buy them much cheaper, quicker and you don't need to keep them in a safe, you can keep them loaded on your desk and it's all legal. Only downside is that the'yre single action and that they generate lots of smoke
968e8c No.543877
>>543876
>BP revolver for fucking up a nog
>Not popping a monacle for every shot fired
>Not being able to see into six dimensions to reveal the nog was really nig-fuhgwy'tAhy, keeper of the elder watermelon
8444a6 No.543917
>>543876
There are conversion kits to modern .44 Ammo for most popular revolver models though.
8444a6 No.543929
>>543877
Unfortunately? we don't have niggers to shoot and the most common perpetrator is actually a gypsy.
for 400~ bucks you can get a .50 musket with no registration, or any legalities other than showing your ID to prove you're a citizen and over 18
7dbbcf No.543930
>>543917
Why would you convert your bp revolver anyway ? Best you get is a loading gate which takes time to load too and modern .44 ammo is more expensive than just .44 balls. I don't need to mention they're illegal of course.
>>543877
Owning a gun made before 1885 doesn't make you a steampunk faggot
>>543929
I confirm this, but IMO at the very least get a double barreled shotgun if you think about home defense, 1 shot isn't much. It's best to get a revolver.
8444a6 No.543931
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>543930
>Why would you convert your bp revolver anyway?
It's just a different cylinder, and would be good for a civil war that will happen the moment EU collapses because people are being fed up with sharing country with Polish-Speaking Brigand Community, but unfortunately it's not possible with Germany still having the legal ability to intervene with their police and army to murder anyone right of merkel restore rule of law™ and (((democracy)))
Not that I own one, or would know how to obtain one.
68ebeb No.543935
>>543930
>at the very least get a double barreled shotgun if you think about home defense
Two blasts outside the house? Are you shitting me, Pole? You really taking Joe Biden's advice here?
ce8c06 No.543959
>>543568
I like the idea of them but the cylinder gap (this can be easily fixed with a Nagant like system at least), width, capacity, and crane fragility or slow reloading (loading gate)/ fragility and limited power (top break) I don't care for.
>>543645
>AR
>Pistol
Pick only one.
a10e59 No.543961
>>543959
How about a pistol sized AR then
f711ce No.543980
>>543833
Why not keyholing hollowpoints?
>>543840
Big holes are better, aren't they?
4072f4 No.544004
>>543980
Did you not read?
>Not engaging the rifling
It means the flying bullet thinging doesn't spin and doesn't hit what you're aiming at so good. Also hollowpoints are designed to open in a certain way and travel through flesh in a certain way. Keyholing is shit.
0d0655 No.544005
>>543980
>Why not keyholing hollowpoints?
Are you fucking with us or are you genuinely this ignorant?
The way a hollow point works is when it hits it's target it expands, making itself larger and causing more damage inside the target. Pic related is the before and after. The top is before with the casing; the bottom is after without the casing.
If it enters it's target at an angle or sideways it won't expand as well as it could have if it expands at all.
>Big holes are better, aren't they?
Not in general. If you have a tumbling bullet you are trading in accuracy, range, and penetration for a slightly larger hole. If you are ok with trading in the above for more damage against an unarmored target, just use a shotgun. If you don't want to trade in the above for a larger hole, you use a bigger bullet. If you want the same sized gun with relatively the same accuracy and range, but you want a more damage done to an unarmored target, use a hollow point.
4072f4 No.544009
>>544005
I remember someone a while back asking a similar question- "Why is penetration always so important? Don't you want something expanding to the size of a frypan?" ofc the size of a bullet required for a small frypan assuming 90% of the bullet peeling outwards is .50bmg
e0f4f2 No.544016
>>544009
Only in the deluded fantasies of coke snorting 70's gun rag writers is energy transfer that ludicrously, exclusively important.
f711ce No.544022
>>544005
Could you not give it multiple hollow points? Pic related
You would need an interesting barrel shape but I think it's a good idea.
bdf7cc No.544028
>>544022
No, its not. Stop posting.
0d0655 No.544033
>>544022
Alright, now I know you're fucking with us.
f37889 No.544052
>>543568
I own a Webley MKVI, Webley MKIV, Enfield No. 2, H&R Sportsman .22LR, Security Six, SP101, and Blackhawk .357. The only semi autos I own are a Tokarev and a 1908 Vest Pocket. My wife has an AR and a S&W shield and a bunch of non-fudd guns too so there's that, I just love old shit.
In other words I fucking love revolvers. Next gun I'm getting's going to be a 1917 S&W. I've been shooting and reloading for revolvers for longer than most people on here have been alive I reckon. In other words if anyone has any questions about them by all means ask me shit. I carry the SP101 and can confirm that somehow Frenchie here:
>>543672
is correct. In the amount of time, bullets, and effort it's taken me to get to the point that I can reliably put 5 bullets on target at 25 yards with a snubnose SP, I could probably have gotten to the point where I'm olympic-level good at shooting a Glock or something of its ilk. It really does take an absurd amount of time and effort to git gud with one. It is all about the trigger pull and hand position. If you're shit with a snubbie the best advice I can give you is pull that trigger so many times it's insane. I've tuned the triggers of all the modern-ish wheelguns I've ever owned to be more comfortable to me. An 8-pound wolff spring in the SP is 5000 times easier to shoot with than the stock Ruger 14-something pound hammerspring. Get a grip that enables you to fit your hand as far up the grip as possible. I'm not kidding, usually I have the webbing of my right hand either right next to the top or over the top of the grip when I'm trying to do double action distance shooting. Choke that bad boy as up as you can, always worked for me though my hands are massive so your results may vary
>>543753
This is also true, though I've had enough shit malfunction on me with my various ones that I can confirm the revolver reliability meme is usually just that. I've had one get stuck between chambers before. Hammer pulls back and the hand would catch the cylinder but not correctly and just like half rotate it between the firing pin. Makes the gun completely and utterly useless, much worse than just a stovepipe or something, needs to be disassembled and reassembled to be fixed. When a revolver breaks it's a gunsmith problem 90 percent of the time, when a semi auto breaks it's a user repair problem 90 percent of the time.
That said I still love them.But they really aren't a shitload better than a semi auto unless you SERIOUSLY practice with it.
I'm not kidding when I say I've put over ten thousand rounds through my Security Six by now and pry half of that through my carry gun. You have to practice a fucking LOT.
f37889 No.544053
Reloading isn't nearly as hard as lots of people make it out to be. It's just muscle memory like anything else. I absolutely love reloading a top break revolver, I sincerely wish there were more of them using modern metallurgy because it's an absolute joy to load a MKIV up. That one is probably the fastest reloading one I have. For all the nobody on earth that could give a shit, I find the easiest way to do it is:
Thumb on latch, depress. Left hand fingers around barrel, left thumb in trigger guard holding tension. You can now snap it open with your left hand only as your right hand gets a speedloader. Wrap left index finger around cylinder to prevent rotation. Use left hand to insert speedloader into cylinder, drop loader, move right hand to grip, snap shut.
It sounds like a lot but I'm not kidding when I say that with practice you can reload a MKIV Webley in less than three seconds if you practice doing that enough.
Now WHY you would want to get to the point where you can reload a comically outdated revolver that fires a barely above adequate for squirrel hunting round in less than three seconds is a question you have to find within yourself, but a heaping dose of autism helps
And for the record, for anyone wondering, speedloaders for a S&W Model 10 work perfectly in a Webley MKIV/Enfield No. 2. Exactly the same cylinder diameter. Safariland loaders work best, always preferred push-button style to twist style. Speed strips are a shitty meme that are just barely easier or faster than loading individual rounds by hand.
As for which way is superior for reloading a swing-out cylinder revolver AKA 99 percent of the revolvers anyone owns I honestly can't tell ya. I think I'm slightly faster doing the "speed loader left hand, don't lose your grip" method but fumble far less with the "whole gun in your left hand, right hand grabs speed loader" method. I can say that push-button loaders will shave seconds off your reloads as opposed to the HK twist style ones. I can also say that getting your cylinder chamfered really does make reloading easier at the expense of a shitload of money to get it done. I can also tell you that the cheapo HK speedloaders wear out after only a couple hundred or so reloads and I've had it happen a few times before. I can also tell you that with a Security Six revolver you really don't *need* to tilt the gun upwards to do the unloading portion of the reload, the ejector rod clears the casings no problem, and that with an SP101 it doesn't so you have to do the "up-down" thing with it.
So yeah. None of that information was probably useful to fucking anyone but there it is. If any of you faggots have any questions about revolvers, shooting them, carrying them, reloading them, or anything by all means I love this topic.
Or keep bitching about keyholing for some reason, that too…
f37889 No.544055
>>543585
I want to hurt whoever did this to a MKVI. I really want to hurt them for the fact that that really, really doesn't look like reloaded .45 in that clip, and that using hollowpoint copper jackets in a MKVI even if it is reloaded to safe pressures is hard on the light-ass rifling a MKVI has.
Remember kids, never, ever, EVER put factory-loaded .45 ACP or .45 AR into a Webley revolver. Just because it fits doesn't mean you should shoot it. Your hands will thank you when a cylinder rupture doesn't blow them the fuck off for being such a stupid dickhead and ruining an excellent old beautiful gun
576d8f No.544059
>>544055
The older ones have less meat on the cylinder, the VI is fine as far as preventing bursts - it's just that the everything else is more likely to fail due to the quick burning powder and unprecedented amount of stress it will put on the pivot pin.
also I don't think there's enough rifling to stabilize the bullet as it is, let alone enough to wear down any further
ce8c06 No.544088
>>543961
>AR
>Pistol sized
No such thing.
f37889 No.544090
>>544059
.45 ACP is around 21000 PSI CUP? Can't remember which unit loaded in modern cartridges, .455 Webley's max recommended is somewhere around 13050 if memory serves. It's very dangerous to put that hot of ammo in something that ancient. I've seen a few pictures of cylinders sheered in half by overpressured rounds, though the latch and hinge failing is more likely, it absolutely can happen. .455 was a slow-ass round.
For uncle revolverfag's perfectly safe recipe of reloading .45 Webley as economically and safely as you can, try 4.5-4.8 grains doesn't really matter which, 4.8 GR is the equivilent of one .5cc spoon on a Lee reloading spoon set so it's slightly easier but both are well under pressure and FPS of HP48 powder in a starline 45 Auto Rim case with some Remington large pistol primers and any 260 grain lead bullet you can find. There's one called "Pinbusters" I've used for a while that works nicely. It isn't great by any means in terms of accuracy but you can have the fun of firing a 100 year old gun safely and making it go bang.
I've been looking for years and NEVER found anybody selling actual .455 diameter bullets nor have I found any .455 caliber brass for sale so the auto rim with slightly too small bullets will have to do sadly
f37889 No.544091
>>544090
That should obviously say HP38, lel
576d8f No.544096
>>544090
Generally if a gun's going to blow up it depends on the integrity already being compromised by previous damage or the ammunition being unsafe for even modern firearms. That's a very, very basic note, though - don't do what you're not comfortable with and all that. I can respect safety.
7cb7b2 No.544103
>>544090
Sounds like an excellent candidate for loading it with lead bullets and trail boss. With pressures that low, you wpuld be able to get away with 95/5 lead tin and tallow for lube in a keith bullet.
a10e59 No.544114
>>544088
>>544088
A totally not ar looking like a pistol
fd606b No.544129
>>544114
>blunderbuss shaped
>comparable accuracy
>comparable noise level
Has science gone too far?
a10e59 No.544130
>>544129
As far as I know no one has slapped a 50 beowulf onto it yet
8fb511 No.544185
>>543645
>AR pistol
Are you insulting me?
>AR pistol chambered in .50 memewolf
You are insulting me.
>>543841
Call me when either of those rounds aren't pieces of shit, fuck off.
ce8c06 No.544233
>>544114
>"Like" now means "is".
>Still posting "pistols" that make a MARS .45 long look like a Kolibri, while also firing puny and/or meme ammo.
f711ce No.544240
>>544033
>>544028
>no arguments
It appears I have won.
If I shot you with one of my hollow points you wouldn't be so smug.
42d86a No.544241
>>543568
imagine getting hit by a .44 magnum.
8fb511 No.544257
>>544241
The nice thing about .44 if you get hit with it is that you wouldn't have a body left to feel pain with
ec589f No.544258
>>543568
They're cool, but ultimately I think the concept is out of date.
There's not really any good reason to have a revolver over a semi-automatic in the modern era. Besides collection, anyway.
All this said, they're pretty cool.
f711ce No.544272
>>544257
>>544257
pic related is a wound caused by a .44
8fb511 No.544279
b39d41 No.544287
I bought my 6 inch Ruger GP100 chambered in .357 from my Dad for $400. I really love the thing. I find that .357 Magnum is a joy to reload for and it's versatility is pretty impressive. Brass is cheap, casting equipment is plentiful, and you can plink with the much cheaper to make .38 Special. It's as close as I'll get to having a Colt Python essentially, and plus I have the added assurance that I can load the super hot and heavy 200 grain rounds without too much wear on my gun. I always take it camping as well since CCI makes some pretty good snake shot for .38/.357. Always good to have on hand. I'm just not a big fan of the stock grip, I want to get the one with the wood inlays like pic related.
7cb7b2 No.544308
>>544287
.357 is indeed an awesome caliber. I too love how common the brass is and how long lasting it is and how fucking versatile the cartridge is. My current load is 13.5gr w296 under a 170gr swc.
Skeeter Skelton actually mentioned this caliber and gun combination as his "oh shit son it's nuclear holocaust, what are you going to hide in the mountains with" caliber.
0b292c No.544310
>>544308
If you're who I think you are, then I love your .357 raifu too.
a9c4d0 No.544321
ok if you're a civilian and have one for CCW or self defense because honestly, 6 rounds is more than enough to kill anything that moves.
however, they are obsolete for everything else. we know from 9mm vs .45 flame wars that capacity matters but revolvers don't even have the ease of reloading that pistols do.
>>543642
they do have hunting pistols like deagle, wildey, automags, etc.
there is nothing inherently stronger about revolvers. its just the action of revolving a cylinder to align fresh cartridges with the chamber is easier to do with XBOX HUEG hunting rounds that have to extract, eject, feed, fire, repeat.
a9c4d0 No.544322
>>544321
>ok if you're a civilian and have one for CCW or self defense because honestly, 6 rounds is more than enough to kill anything that moves.
forgot to add that if you're defending against 1 or maybe 2 guys.
331db5 No.544384
>>543568
I'm left handed. I am incompatible.
b1d429 No.544518
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>544384
Stop being a defeatist nigger and git gud.
4:42 in embed related
d3afa9 No.544542
Think about every time you've had a malfunction in a semi-automatic. 99% of the time it's a failure to feed, failure to eject, double-feed, limp-wrist, or something you blame on your magazine. Catastrophic failure of the internals of a modern semi-auto is very rare.
What I like about revolvers is that they're immune to all of those problems, and while catastrophic failure of the internals may be slightly more likely due to the delicacy of the internals, in my experience:
a well-maintained late-model revolver using reliable ammo is more likely to go bang than a well-maintained late-model semi-auto using reliable ammo when the trigger is pulled.
In my opinion, this earns it top marks as a backup gun, arm-a-civilian gun, or home defense gun. I EDC a Ruger SP101 (sometimes as a BUG to my Glock 19); for home defense, my S&W 686+ is on the night stand above my Mossberg 500.
d3afa9 No.544558
>>544554
Welp, I guess that proves it: revolvers do suck. They had a good run, but this one guy's defective specimen is the nail in the coffin.
Come on, man.
376976 No.544580
>>544272
oh boy i love death grips
a9c4d0 No.544620
>>544542
>hurr pistols may jam at any time use revovler
if you have a jam on a modern non-nigger tier gun, then you are
1. using shitty bubba ammo (not a fault of the gun)
2. breaking in a gun with virgin ass tight tolerances like a race gun or something (most guns arent raceguns)
3. limp wristing like a faggot (not a fault of the gun). this does not make you revolver ocelot. that Russian faggot was too lazy to correct his technique.
d0471a No.544626
d3afa9 No.544644
>>544308
>>544310
I feel like one of you Aussies was OP of the minimalism thread a couple weeks ago.
My opinion still stands and is relevant to this thread: I would be totally comfortable bugging out into the woods with nothing but my 6" S&W 686.
The versatility offered by the revolver platform is totally unparalleled by semi-autos, which are severely limited in their range of power level and bullet shape.
d3afa9 No.544648
>>544620
And that's fine, but here's the thing:
1. Even premium ammo gets the occasional light/heavy load or a slightly deformed hollowpoint that would choke up a semi-auto but be fine in a revolver. Sometimes you may even have to go through several brands of ammo to find something your gun "likes" and can fire reliably. It's not the gun's fault, you're right, but a revolver tolerates anything you can feed it.
2. A revolver requires no break-in period to be reliable. It can help smooth out the trigger a bit, but if it fires the first cylinder full it's good to go. This is a non-issue though, because nobody should be carrying a gun that they don't have a lot of experience with anyway.
3. No, it's not the fault of the gun, but it does happen to people… unless they're using revolvers.
I'm not trying to be a dick here, but I've been shooting for a long time and have seen new, old, well-maintained, and shitty semi-autos malfunction or otherwise not perform as the user intended. With revolvers, I've either seen ones that worked or ones that are broken.
576d8f No.544652
>>544648
>and have seen new, old, well-maintained, and shitty semi-autos malfunction or otherwise not perform as the user intended. With revolvers, I've either seen ones that worked or ones that are broken.
When a semi-automatic malfunctions, you rack the slide(stripping the magazine sometimes necessary) and then keep shooting.
When a revolver malfunctions you ship it back to the factory.
That's the main difference.
b9e3b8 No.544681
>not being fit enough to throw bullets by hand to kill
Faggots
d3afa9 No.544732
>>544652
Totally agreed. All I'm really saying is that I'm more likely to get killed due to a remediable malfunction from a semi-auto than due to a total mechanical failure of a revolver.
Inb4 someone says
>you're more likely to die trying to reload
because that's a good point. We all make compromises.
22af83 No.544748
>>543568
I like them. I have a S&W Model 19, and want to get a Charter Arms Bulldog Classic. Mainly for walking around innawoods.
6a5d48 No.544749
I recently picked up a heritage rough rider .22 it's a fun little plinking gun.
f4dfac No.544870
I like revolvers because they generally have better mechanical accuracy and better triggers, don't rely on recoil to cycle the action, and are more receptive to personal tuning.
Also .38spl/.357mag are extremely versatile rounds.
0ffccc No.544904
>>544681
>not being fit enough to throw your fingers and regrow them
0df4cc No.545048
c77d66 No.545392
>>544644
Guilty as charged. I too would happily march into the woods with my .357 carbine and not feel undergunned for anything that lives here.
a52e60 No.545406
68ebeb No.545420
>>544904
>not being able to fire your finger nails using the golden ratio
fed15e No.545455
>>544285
Thanks for the hearty chuckle.
afe64d No.545512
>>545420
>not using your God tier math skills to triangulate the firing trajectory of an invisible bomb of compressed air.
d67748 No.545537
Anyone here got experience with a Chiappa Rhino?
considering buying one.
d0471a No.545577
>>545512
>not uttering certain seemingly random words in a specific order at a specific coordinate in order to reset the universe
68ebeb No.545598
>>545577
>not utilising knowledge of the menger sponge to enter alternate universes near instantaneously using the thirteen stars flag belonging to the Unites States of America
2405df No.545631
>>545598
>not being able to manipulate universes, the space in between them all, and time itself through posing
1d90bb No.546550
>>544287
where did you score one for $400?
Solid deal.
b39d41 No.546553
>>546550
My Dad. He wanted to get rid of it because he thought it was too impulsive of a buy. He was going to sell it on gun broker for $700 fat chance so I offered him $500, but since it was Christmas at the time, he thought it over and decided to give it to me for $400.
451d79 No.546563
>>546553
"Son, I'm thinking of selling my ruger for $700."
"$700?! Oy vey, there's no way you'll get $500 for that old thing! Tell you what, since it's the holiday season I'll do you a favour and buy it for $400 - you won't find a deal like that anywhere else."
b39d41 No.546588
>>546563
Wow, when you put it like that…
9aeb01 No.546592
I fired a snub nose S&W .357 and expected much more recoil from it than I got, then fired CZ75BD in 9mm in comparison. It took longer to line up the sight on the CZ than the snub nose, but trying to grip it properly and have a steady trigger pull was like trying to open the door of a car with your pinky finger. I'ld rather a good medium ground between the two.
afe64d No.546737
>>545598
>not using the corpse of Jesus Christ to ensure the prosperity of your nation by redirecting all misfortune elsewhere.
b39d41 No.546745
>>546592
Yeah, I've found that revolvers are much more controllable in single action than they are in double. Even on my GP100, the pull is so long that point of aim has a lot of time to shift around and throw me off. So I've taken up finger exercises to get better at using double action.
6c252b No.547515
They revolve.
They have their fair share of benefits and drawbacks. Obvious being the fact that they have bigger boolits, are hard to jam and look cool as fuck since you can pretend to be a noir film detective. Downsides are less ammo per reload and slower reloads, it's obvious why automatics replaced them but they still live on for concealed carry and hunters.
68ebeb No.547520
>>547515
>downsides are less ammo per reload and slower reloads
If only there were some more efficient way go load these sorts of rounds into a handgun, like some kind of encased clip inserted through where? In front of the guard? No, that's not it.
b28e1f No.547642
>>543876
You can get all six cap-n-ball shots off accurately surprisingly quick, with practice.
b6c36e No.547653
One of the supposed benefits of revolvers is that it fires bit bullets. But .44 Magnum was already kind of replicated with the Auto Mag pistol firing .44 AMP. Said cartridge is a trimmed down, necked up version of .308 Winchester. Now, if we wanted to go down a road that leads to insanity, could you do the same with Lapua Magnum to recreate the .500 S&W Magnum? Russians already made a 12.7×55mm cartridge from the brass for the VKS rifle. Of course the resulting cartridge would be well beyond simply impractical in a pistol, but .50 Action Express simply doesn't cut it in my opinion.
b668ae No.547682
>>547642
Cap n ball revolvers are fun as fuck.My Remmy gets a lot of range time. Reloading them is fun too.
Do you have any experience with Italian c&bs?
e2bb9a No.547693
File: 6e7ff0b9591f4b7⋯.png (Spoiler Image, 403.26 KB, 1102x669, 1102:669, 6e7ff0b9591f4b75d03e1c6972….png)
Can anyone help me with cap and ball revolvers? I was looking at Pietta and Uberti and have decided to go with Uberti for the apparent better QC is the difference really that drastic? if I do get a c&b. Both companies make pretty much the same guns either the army/navy/police models and a Remington revolver with the exception of the dragoons that Uberti makes. My question is what model/year is the better overall gun or if there isn't a clear choice which one would have the easier to use sights I understand they are old designs though.
also is it worth it to buy the center fire conversion cylinder and if so would I have to reload cases just to have a decent supply of black powder cartridges?
b6abcf No.547697
>>547693
Why would you buy such an outdated system?
d3afa9 No.547743
>>547697
For the same reason someone might buy a classic car. It won't be the car you choose when you need to drive somewhere, but it's nice to look at, it's fun, and it has historical significance.
28468b No.547756
Someone tell me if this is a stupid idea.
>get .357 revolver
>cut cylinder for moon clips
>run 9mm Para for ammo commonality with selfloading pistol
>run .38 Special / .357 Magnum for hotter loads and ratshot
>have best of both worlds
b39d41 No.547768
>>547756
I remember hearing about a revolver that took all rounds that were around the .357 and .355 sizes. I forgot what it was called though. But honestly I don't necessarily think that's a bad idea at all, you would just have to have the chambers resized a bit.
90f693 No.547774
>>547768
Medusa M47. Apparently Taurus is also going to make a revolver that can take .357 or 9mm with a cylinder swap, but >Taurus.
90f693 No.547783
>>547693
>would I have to reload cases just to have a decent supply of black powder cartridges?
The conversion cylinders (at least the .45 Colt ones that I know of) can use low velocity smokeless, and there's actually quite a few options for ammo thanks to Cowboy Action Shooting.
7fe36d No.547791
>>547693
1858 remington is fuckin neat because you can swap cylinders in for fast reloading.
e2bb9a No.547880
>>547697
I have a CZ 75 already so I'm pretty well covered. It sounds crazy but (due to my state) I want to walk into a store and walk out the same day with my purchase and also I wonder how a BP can fuck with the ccw laws (not that I would do it willy nilly just that the tool is there for if I ever travel into niggerville).
>>547783
>.45 colt
low velocity can be found with defensive loading's right, or at least exposed lead bullets? Also I hear cowboy loads are usually target birdshot tier so that you can shoot all day with less power/low recoil and pull off quick follow ups. Do they make proper velocity black powder loads for that too or will I have to dig around (again I'm assuming exposed lead bullets can get me good expansion maybe even better than some modern HPs).
>>547791
I was looking at that one as the front sight was large and didn't look like a spec of shit that flew on to the barrel but the general shape makes me think it can get hung up on a draw. Will it be an issue or is it no more worse than most full size modern autos. There is also the question of reloading but more specifically the conversion cylinders. Will the design allow me to reload faster than the army/navy/police conversions where the guy had to replace is pistol in the holster while he fucked about with the 2 piece cylinder inserting cartridges then re drawing his gun to slapping it in. Or am I being a retard and should just get multiple conversion cylinders and use it like I would the normal one
9b781d No.547922
>>547880
Most BP loaded cartridges are just lead and no jacketing. If you're going the rout of BP I heavily advise getting into handloading for factory BP stuff isn't too common and isn't in a wide variety, not like there was much variety back in the day.
90f693 No.547927
233e40 No.547951
I want a registered mangum with it's paper work pretty badly.
e2bb9a No.547958
File: 76a410fa00b75c5⋯.jpg (Spoiler Image, 375.97 KB, 900x900, 1:1, 76a410fa00b75c56e1ca836f7c….jpg)
>>547922
>>547927
Thanks guys. I suppose I'll buy a few boxes of the stuff to practice and save the brass. It'll give me even more reason to get into reloading.
>>547935
I actually posted that in the hopes some one would know but I got it from some shit post thread here a few months ago.
Just one last question if anyone has experience with them but how long should I expect an Uberti to last I keep hearing about BP muzzle loaders needing to be retired but never really understood what it meant. Is it people just wanting a new one since they got bored of it or is there some kind of stressing issue that it would be cheaper to buy a new one than get the parts replaced? Or is it people who cheaped out and got some chineseium gat
now my dilemma is if I should spring for the BP right now or get a glock (cause it takes glock mags and that's all I can think of :^) ) before it might fall off the totally safe gun roster fuck it I have great credit and about to have shit close on me plus I know places that do layaway payment things. Thanks again faggots
233e40 No.547960
>>544287
That actually looks like a nice looking revolver.
9b781d No.547963
>>547958
Brass framed revolvers will eventually warp if I recall. Everything else will keep going on and on provided you care for them.
90f693 No.547972
6b261d No.547974
>>545537
I hear the reliability problems they once had were solved with later models, if I had a thousand dollars to spend, I'd get the 6 incher my self.
e2bb9a No.548001
>>547972
I knew some one would pop up
>>547963
Sounds good especially since I'm leaning to the Remington now
f4dfac No.548012
>545537
THERE'S A FUCKING SEAM
9b781d No.548027
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>548001
1858's are great, not going to lie but I have always thought of doing the whole pale rider thing.
000000 No.555021
>so few posts here discussing the merits of autorevolvers
Somebody should try to improve on the Mateba/Chiappa Rhino design. Does /k/ have what it takes to do this? I imagined a couple different ideas, like changing the shape of the cylinder and/or its axis of rotation. Maybe an elliptical cylinder design that moves its axis of rotation up and down to align with the barrel should be pursued to increase ammo capacity. Or we could try a cylinder with a spiral-like chamber configuration. The autorevolver concept has a lot of unexplored potential. You probably won't ever get it to hold as much ammo as a regular automatic, but it could develop other traits that set it apart, or accentuate its already existing advantages.
6b261d No.555026
>>555021
The biggest advantage was being able to fire hot and heavy cartridges like .454 casull with little to no recoil.
Something I long to experience.
9b781d No.555032
>>555021
Have it recoil like a Fosbery.
000000 No.555036
>>555026
>hot and heavy
Interesting.
Revolvers can be very accurate, which somewhat mitigates the lesser amount of ammo, but people on the internet say that in a firefight you need a spray-and-pray gun because you'll be too stressed to aim accurately. If you want spray-and-pray from a revolver while not losing too much power, you'd be best off with .357 Magnum or some such.
>>555032
How would that be better than how it is now?
9384db No.555073
>>555036
The entire advantage of revolvers is that they can use any shape bullet you want and that they can be built like fucking bank vaults so that you can launch a 46 caliber 350 grain bullet WITH HOLLOWPOINT at 45-70 speeds.
If you could make an autorevolver with a mechanism with an adjustable gas-port it would probably bring in more money than you could wipe your ass with in a lifetime.
000000 No.555103
>>555073
A gas-operated revolver? Weird. It might not be terrible, but how would you go about doing that? And would it be enough of an improvement over recoil-operated autorevolvers to be worth it?
c1b064 No.555111
>>555103
Less complicated mechanism, since you're just porting out a portion of the gas at the start of the barrel after the forcing cone and rifling starts, with the gas piston pushing back the hammer to single action position directly. Essentially, the heart of the gun doesn't actually change, you could still fire it in DA, with only a small extra section required on the right or the top strap to accommodate the piston. The kicker (so to speak) is that after the first DA, the rest of the rounds are now automatically single action like an auto.
1f8088 No.555188
>>555021
A modern autorevolver isn't going to be good for anything aside from sex appeal unless you can figure out a gas seal mechanism that isn't dependent on the obduration of the cartridge over the cylinder gap.
f44d64 No.555192
If you want an autorevolver, then copy the Jackhammer's blow forward barrel action: https://hooktube.com/watch?v=-VKGhqIl4Gw
Yes, it sounds retarded on paper, but it seals the barrel and you could make the revolver full auto. You could even make it striker fired, and place the "charging handle" in the place of the hammer, so that it indexes one position and readies the striker.
000000 No.555205
>>555111
(chiggity checked)
>>555192
Given how badass the Jackhammer is and how much of a meme weapon it's become, I'm surprised nobody's tried to convert the design into a handgun or rifle yet. I thought of trying to implement a blow-forward cylinder, but having just the barrel of it work as a blow-forward would be better because the barrel of a revolver is truncated compared to a regular blow-forward and therefore has less mass, whereas it's going to be much harder to cut down the mass of the cylinder, and the more you take off of the cylinder the more ammo you lose.
000000 No.559428
Would it be possible to create a revolver with a helical magazine as the cylinder? That'd solve your capacity problems right quick.
53af45 No.559431
>>543929
You don't need to be citizen. You may be nigger from Burkina Faso, if you are 18 you go to shop, show ID and go out with a gun. I brought them from private sellers without any ID.
49e04f No.559434
>>544652
If a revolver doesn't work, it's because the trigger/hammer mechanism is busted. If you have the same problem in a semi-auto you're not gonna fix it by racking a slide you dipshit.
49e04f No.559436
>>545420
Toguro Jr., pls. Not everyone sold their soul to satan.
ea3f53 No.559439
>>559428
Then that would be just a weird ass automatic gun with a helical mag.
Someone in the thread said that revolver is an expert's weapon and I guess that's the core reason it's falling out of favor. You can't just spray randomly because you're limited to 6 rounds at a time, every shot has to be deliberate. And you need good deal of practice to reload quickly, although with a speedloader it's about the same as just changing a mag. My guess is that these "revovlers a shit" memes come from people who don't own any revolvers.
53af45 No.559441
>>559439
There is way more things in revolver that can fail. Those things look like clockwork inside. In semi auto pistol most malfunctions can be resolved by racking slide. If your revolved stop working when you really need it, then you have pretty bludgeoning tool.
000000 No.559443
>>559439
It'd be a sort of autorevolver, but it's hard to classify because it'd use more features of an automatic than other similar guns. What type of action would you even use for it? On a normal revolver you just rotate the round up to the barrel and then it's fired by the hammer/striker, but on a helical mag there are a whole bunch of rounds in between the round that's about to be fired and the place the hammer would normally be.
d3afa9 No.559504
>>559443
I just had an idea: what if each chamber of the cylinder was open on the outside (like a piece was missing) and there was a corresponding piece underneath the top strap that completed the chamber?
The opening in each chamber would be big enough for a cartridge to enter from some sort of magazine or belt.
In other words, each time you pull the trigger:
1. the cylinder rotates, picking up a cartridge from the magazine
2. the cylinder stops in front of the firing pin, and the chamber is made complete by the piece below the top strap
3. the gun fires
The casing is ejected by gravity as the cylinder continues to rotate.
6f93f3 No.559507
My one issue with revolvers is the mass distribution. Unlike an autoloader, where the ammunition and a decent part of the mass is in the grip, virtually all of the mass in a revolver is on a moment arm, outside your grip. All that torque makes the gun a bit harder to manipulate compared to a semiauto.
>inb4 manlet
7c43f6 No.559510
i wouldn't want to carry one, but they're super fun. especially for hand loaders. plus you can shoot black powder loads for shits and giggles.
7c43f6 No.559513
>>559507
no that is a good point, but having the weight out front like that can also be a good thing by reducing muzzle flip for quicker follow up shots. like a 1911 with a bull barrel.
but of course in any situation where quick follow up shots even matter, you'd just go semi-auto anyway.
8b2301 No.559514
>>559504
Congratulations Mr Dardick, you're a few decades late. Look up the Dardick tround
000000 No.559615
>>559443
Okay, I'm trying to imagine this. Build it just like a Mateba, a Webley, a Jackhammer or any other autorevolver of your choice except for one thing: it has a kind of concentric structure in the middle of the cylinder at the center of all the chambers that has a helical magazine inside. That helical magazine acts like a Landstad revolver, feeding ammo to the chambers, except that because it's helical it solves their problems with the extra space that the Landstad's box magazine part takes up. Anyone care to comment on the feasibility of this or what would be required to build it? The cylinder would be somewhat larger than normal, but if you used a small enough round it might not be too bad. You could also use an unusual cylinder shape to cut down on its mass or expand its ammo capacity.
000000 No.559672
>>559615
I thought about this some more and here's what I have so far. If you're going to have this feed system, you don't really need 5-6 chambers. Maybe 2-3 max will do. That'll cut down on some of the excess weight and still help avoid overheats. You don't even necessarily need a helical magazine. An ordinary tube magazine would work, and would take up less space. You'd have to have the inside of each chamber be open so it can receive ammo from the cylinder-mounted mag as each chamber cycles up to the hammer/striker, like an inverted Dardick. It may even be possible to integrate some or all of the firing mechanism into the cylinder using a blow-forward system.
You could also make a system where the magazine surrounds the cylinder instead of vice versa, but that would be incredibly cumbersome, so I don't think it's worth pursuing.
000000 No.559881
>>559672
I guess this would end up like a souped-up, modernized pepperbox revolver. It seems that it would be relatively easy to build because almost all the major components are part of the barrel assembly. Having the cylinder recoil in a blow-forward fashion might be okay if the cylinder had only 2-3 chambers. The increased mass of the helical/tube magazine, as well as its placement, would mitigate the added recoil from using a blow-forward design. But you could also build the bolt/slide separately, like on a Mateba.
8d1134 No.559891
>>559615
>>559672
>>559881
Honestly, you are better off scaling down one of those soviet gas powered revolver cannons.
000000 No.559899
>>559891
That's basically what the Landstad revolver is.
350d73 No.560638
>>559672
>>559504
Can get away with 1 chamber.
America did a single chamber lateral rotation for some telescoping caseless guns. Russia did a single chamber lateral pulley-type rotation on the AN-94. Germany and UK did a longitudinal type rotation like pic related.
Probably some others I don't know too.
P.S. Trounds are retarded.
404f1d No.560693
>>560638
i dunno man, with the tround system, they were able to get a cyclic rate of (iirc) 1500 rounds per minute from a single barreled .50 caliber gun. i probably wouldnt use it for a pistol or anything like that, but as a larger caliber, it seemed to do the job.
350d73 No.560696
>>560693
Those are normal values for revolver cannons, not a tround benefit.
The only thing the tround did was make it so that the round itself can't freely rotate in a magazine or feed mechanism, which just makes it less reliable and less universal. It requires purpose-built everything, which was the entire point of the thing, to prevent competition.
It's like that retarded iPhone screw that only Apple Inc has tools for. That's all the tround design is…
Final image is a ShKAS, a 7.62mm revolver machine gun, with a rate of fire of 1800-3000rpm.
000000 No.560709
>>560638
What are the benefits of a single chamber revolving system? It seems redundant to include anything that rotates if you're not using multiple chambers.
11a996 No.560716
Dumb question, but how do long barreled revolver chambered for high velocity cartridges even work? The cylinder gap seems like a huge obstacle to maintaining pressure past the first inch or two of travel. Is the oft-visible gap really so small that it gets so "clogged" with gas that useful pressure can be maintained behind the bullet for 6"+? How "overpressured" would a single shot pistol chambered in, say, .44 Magnum be without the gap and throat there to reduce efficiency?
f02e6f No.560718
>>543831
>his is good right? That means more energy is being dumped into the target, causing massive hemorrhaging.
That's what .45ACP fudds say.
350d73 No.560747
>>560709
There are fewer moving parts, the chamber both extracts, seals, and ejects the round. It uses one part for all that, dispenses with a regular systems needs of an extractor, an ejector, and a bolt to seal it. Efficient. Pretty immune to mud too, because of how it seals.
Second biggest advantage is the rate of fire increase. Because rotating systems are faster than reciprocal, and have less stress, the rate of fire can be four or five times as a classic system with the same materials science.
The biggest advantage is that it has fewer forces acting on the system. A reciprocal system has moving parts that affect how recoil is distributed and how it moves the rifle, this makes accuracy less possible.
>>560716
Pressure can only bleed off through the cylinder gap at a set rate. As long as pressure leaks slowly enough to keep the pressure in the barrel positive while a bullet is traveling through it… it's safe.
But a lot of revolvers do squib more often than sealed designs. And because extra pressure can leak out, the barrels don't explode from a squib, so you can actually get a squib train going. It's hilarious.
000000 No.560763
>>560747
These are all some legit points. There are still a lot of questions to answer though, since as far as I know there hasn't been a commercially produced gun designed this way, just a handful of concept pieces that never made it to market. How would you go about converting a standard autorevolver design to one based on this idea? Would it be expensive or difficult to build? It seems to me that if you don't have multiple chambers it's not really a proper revolver anymore.
3fa630 No.560772
>>555103
I've poked at this a bit, and think I could eliminate the clockwork indexing mechanism. If it works it would have only 2-5 moving parts.
2e313d No.560778
>>544296
Honestly, I like any low bore axis revolver. I'd probably never own one, but they're just neat.
350d73 No.560780
>>560763
I think the future is going to be this technology. We're already seeing these types of actions miniaturized to personal-weapon sizes. It might take awhile simply because there are a trillion rifles of the traditional type out there and they won't wear out for centuries.
The only way a rapid change could happen is if a war is started and one side has enough of an engineering capability to bring such a system to bear on all levels from infantry to aircraft cannon, and actually shows the superiority of the system by killing more of the enemy for cheaper.
2b11d2 No.560784
>>560747
Holy shit, that third one. How the hell do you shoot six squibs, stop to reload, shoot two more squibs, and only then stop to think something might be wrong?
000000 No.560787
>>560780
>We're already seeing these types of actions miniaturized to personal-weapon sizes.
I haven't seen any mass-produced examples of that. Actually, I'm curious how my idea to alter the cylinder shape would work with one of these designs. If it only has one chamber, that would give you an extraordinary amount of freedom to choose the shape of your cylinder.
What type of operation does this qualify as? All currently existing autorevolvers except for the Jackhammer are recoil-operated.
f5eda6 No.560796
>>543568
Good for idiot-proof home defense guns for owners who don't want to train often, especially given the lack of a positive safety that needs to be moved off before use at 3am in the dark when you just woke up which is why this or the Glock or similar actions are usually what I recommend for the above type of person.
That they don't leave shell casings behind is potentially interesting, especially if handloaded with something off the beaten path from typical revolver projectiles.
In terms of most of the capacity etc issues, they're more of /k/ concern than a realistic self-defense concern. IMO the main drawback of a revolver for personal defense is SIZE in terms of THICKNESS, and to some extent, profile. Any pocket semi with similar capacity and projectile power is gonna be 1/4 to 1/2 inch thinner, and that makes a big difference when wearing a concealed holster. Of course, in a CCW-designed purse, a revolver fits nicely.
350d73 No.560797
>>560784
Some idiots think they should "shoot a squib out", as in clear the barrel with the next bullet. So they just keep trying.
>>560787
I don't think it has a name yet. Revolving-rifle?
3f1a00 No.560800
>>560784
Being panic'd will do that.
000000 No.560815
>>560797
Revolving rifle already signifies a rifle that uses a conventional revolving system, which this isn't. Semi-revolver is too easy to confuse with a Mateba-style gun. There's going to have to be some thought put into this type of gun. It should be an ongoing /k/ project because nobody else seems to be doing it.
8b2301 No.560822
>>560815
Conventional back and forth is reciprocal.
Layouts where the bolt moves forward, stripping a round from the magazine and locking it into the chamber is linear.
This would be an open chamber rotary action?
383c04 No.560827
>>546553
>buying stuff from your family
What bizzaro world is this?
bccdfc No.560829
7c43f6 No.560846
>>560827
it's not that weird. i bought my car from my dad.
a6a96d No.560909
>>560696
hence why i specified the .50. but it looks like that design there would be much more universal, and would probably reach similar speeds.
abf167 No.560964
>>560827
I've never had to "buy/sell" anything to my close family, if anyone wants something, we just give it to each other. If its inappropriate to give, we just don't ask.
Like if my brother wanted a gun I don't use, I just transfer it to him and vice versa. If it's something he knows I like or I use often, he wouldn't ask for it.
I thought this was how everyone did things.
383c04 No.560982
>>560964
Yeah same here, when anon mentioned buying something from his family that blew my mind. That's like charging cab fare for dropping your wife off at work or something.
9ab95d No.561273
>>560827
A way to help members of your family without making them feel parasitic/obligated by paying them far more or selling for far less than the market would.
It's not a lingering thing and its not humiliating. I would never loan family members money, nor sell/buy them something for market price.
d3afa9 No.561676
I just sold my S&W 686 and bought a Glock.
I hate myself.
75e002 No.561678
>>561676
Function over form I guess but damn you should have just saved your pennies so you could have both
7cffc6 No.561684
Is there any revolver out there that is decent and around $500?
Seems that to own a revolver here in Cuckistan I need to spend at least a grand.
and no we don't have EAAs here
3f1a00 No.561691
>>561684
Alfa Proj guns go for 600 or so depending on caliber, or go get yourself an old enfield in .38S&W, those go for 300-500.
7cffc6 No.561692
>>561691
Where's a good place to shop for an enfield though? Thanks btw
3f1a00 No.561693
7cffc6 No.561696
3f1a00 No.561698
>>561696
Another thing always check used guns on all sites, you'd be amazed at the deals you'll get.
000000 No.561729
>>560822
This design is apparently called a rotary breech. Some other weapons that use it are the C30R (infamous for exploding during a public demonstration) and the LSAT light machine gun. You could develop a version of it that's very close to a revolver.
000000 No.561743
>>561729
Could you make a good autorevolver by incorporating a rotating barrel? I haven't seen any revolver designs that use one.
944359 No.561753
I stumbled on this revolver.
It truly made me hard as hell.
In the cuckland were I live, it costs around 2000 euros.
God I want this shit, even though the paperwork is gonna be hell to possess one.
As the S&W said, it was a SWAT team request, as a "open" weapon. Can hold 8 shots. In order to make it more light, it's built out of scandium.
In any SHTF scenario, that's definitively the shit I want to be with.