first traditional revolver rounds are rimmed.

They do make .45ACP revolvers and others they just need a moon clip

 

There are 9mm revolvers. As razor said revolver rounds are rimmed so that they stay in the cylinder.

 

Ahh... obviously my revolver knowledge is extremely lacking. I've just never came across them in my internet travels. Is there a list of manufactures/models that are common?

Is there major disadvantages to them besides ammo capacity?

I think a major advantage would be having multiple guns with the same caliber. (1 Less caliber to stock)

 

Ahh... obviously my revolver knowledge is extremely lacking. I've just never came across them in my internet travels. Is there a list of manufactures/models that are common?

Is there major disadvantages to them besides ammo capacity?

I think a major advantage would be having multiple guns with the same caliber. (1 Less caliber to stock)

I do not understand your question. Revolvers that shoot a semi auto cartridge have been around for a long long time. Back when the 1911 was introduced there wern't enough semi auto pistols to go around and so revolvers where made to take the same cartridge and where used in the revolver with half moon clips (3 rounds per side). Revolvers in the .45ACP caliber where stamped out quick from a plant that was already tooled for making revolvers to help meet the war demand. IMO a non rimmed cartridge revolver is a pain because of the moon clips as its difficult to load up the moon clips and the clips will wear out. But salvation came when after the war the revolvers where graced with the .45 rimmed which is the same as a .45ACP but you no longer need those pesky half clips.

once apon a time when remington created the .44 magnum it was just a revolver round. some genious decided to take a 30-06 shell, cut it down and resize it to accept the .44 bullet and BAM a .44 automag round was born. Its a .44 magnum without the rim. It didn't seem to be really popular though.

there are many stories about revolvers shooting rimless cartriges and why/how they came to be.

 

Charter Arms was supposed to release a few different calibered revolvers last year that would not use a moon clip...then it got delayed to 1st guarter this year....now who knows if they are really going to release them.

Another reason they may not be as popular is that semi-autos soak up a lot of recoil...revolvers not so much...especially lighter short barreled ones.

 

Hmm... Charter Arms huh? I've heard mixed reviews about them, most aren't so good.

I do not understand your question. Revolvers that shoot a semi auto cartridge have been around for a long long time. Back when the 1911 was introduced there wern't enough semi auto pistols to go around and so revolvers where made to take the same cartridge and where used in the revolver with half moon clips (3 rounds per side). Revolvers in the .45ACP caliber where stamped out quick from a plant that was already tooled for making revolvers to help meet the war demand. IMO a non rimmed cartridge revolver is a pain because of the moon clips as its difficult to load up the moon clips and the clips will wear out. But salvation came when after the war the revolvers where graced with the .45 rimmed which is the same as a .45ACP but you no longer need those pesky half clips.

once apon a time when remington created the .44 magnum it was just a revolver round. some genious decided to take a 30-06 shell, cut it down and resize it to accept the .44 bullet and BAM a .44 automag round was born. Its a .44 magnum without the rim. It didn't seem to be really popular though.

there are many stories about revolvers shooting rimless cartriges and why/how they came to be.

Ahh... thanks for the info/history lesson. Being relatively young, I'm still learning about firearms and no matter how much and how fast i try to learn, there's still a library full of knowledge I've yet to tap in to. Revolvers are something I've yet to learn much about, so thanks again for the information.

The reason I brought it up is because of a few things. I would like a snubbie revolver for the concealability plus the reliability. A snubbie S&W or Ruger LCR are obvious choices, but after firing a LCR the recoil is quite a handful. I'm confident I could practice with one and become efficient enough to defend myself at a close range, but my girlfriend is a little bit less confident in herself. It got me thinking about why she prefers a 9mm: Less recoil.

I figured if you take a LCR, and chamber it with a shorter round (.40S&W or 9mm), then it'd require a shorter cylinder (and like i said before, allowing a longer barrel or shorter overall gun) allowing it to be more concealable. I figured a 9mm or .40 shot out of a snubbie would have a lot less kick than a .38 special. People trust the little Keltecs and Kahrs, so I figured it'd probably have the same results as far as performance.

I've spent hours at gunshows and gun shops fondling all sorts of guns, and I've never seen these .45ACP or 9mm revolvers, so I never knew they existed. I've never really seen or messed with a "moon clip" so I had no idea they were a pain to mess with. I was just trying to solve a problem (the recoil of a snubbie and reliability of a small 9mm semi-automatic) and thought it may be a solution.

So i figured the pros would be:
Less recoil compared to a .38 special.
More reliability than a pocket semi-automatic.
Smaller than a revolver chambered in .38 special.

Cons would be:
Only 5-7 shots (I'm not sure what would fit)
Dealing with moon clips

Sorry for the ramblings, my son has been having nightmares, thus keeping me awake at night and leaving me sleep deprived.

 

Colt and S&W both made the M1917 .45acp revolver and I Believe the S&W 940 is 9mm

Charter arms had made .380, 9mm, .40, .45acp revolvers, some using moon clips.
Some .45LC revolvers have interchangeable .45acp cylinders

There isn't much reason reason to carry an auto cartridge chambered revolver other than ammo Interchangeability. A .44spl/mag can be had in the same size and weight as a .45acp revolver. A .38spl/.357mag can be had in the same size and weight as a 9mm revolver.

A 1917 is a nice range/cool revolver but I'd rather carry a revolver chambered in a revolver cartridge and not step down in power to have it in an auto cartridge.

 

Besides carrying less rounds I prefer revolvers to semi-autos. I spend a lot of time in the woods and outdoors, revolvers are simple and are able to take more dirt and punishment than semi-autos with a million little parts. I own and have owned many semi-autos and love them but for me nothing beats a good rugged revolver when your out in the woods hunting, camping, or getting dirty. Revolvers always go bang....

Another thing I enjoy is being able to load the cylinders with different rounds when out hunting and select the one I need. I like loading a .357 snake shot round, a couple Flat nose buffalo bores, etc...

The nice thing about .357 mag revolvers is they also shoot .38 special. so you have many options ammo wise.

 

Unfortunatly another con is that an auto caliber will loose velocity and energy due to bore and cylinder gap. One revolver all its own is the nagant revolver. Its an odd cartridge as the bullet is pushed really far into the brass and the tip is necked down. The revolver when cocked back or in the ready fire position the cylinder physically moves to the barrel and a bolt face presses against the cylinder providing a seal. The round actually seales the cylinder gap the rest of the way providing much higher velocity then if it was a more traditional revolver.


Revolvers really shine when you start getting into magnum calibers as with magnums you use slower burning powder in a long cartridge...you in effect get higher energies without dangerous chamber pressures.

 

Ah, something else I overlooked! This is why I posted this thread instead of just thinking to myself! I completely forgot about the pressure lost from the gap. Never heard of the nagant revolver, but it sounds very intriguing. I could read all day about how firearms work and even if some/most of it goes over my head, it interests me nevertheless.

I will admit magnum rounds are a little intimidating to a newcomer like myself. I've yet to get my hands on one at a range, but I do have a friend who owns a .44 Anaconda that I will see if I can borrow when he gets back in town.

 

This is a very interesting topic, IMO. I feel that a few things have been touched upon in regards to autoloader vs revolver cartridges, but I'll throw my $0.02 in too.

Revolvers, while lacking in capacity are able to handle higher pressures that would soon batter a "bottomfeeder" to death. Revolvers are about power, not double and triple taps, etc, etc. Let's compare one manufacturer's auto loads against one common revolver round for self defense:

.45 ACP 230 grain +P, 460fpe
9mm 115 grain +P, 431fpe
9mm 124 grain +P, 430fpe
.40S&W 180 grain, 400fpe

Now lets compare those numbers with the .357 Magnum shooting a 125 grain pill. That is the round that all other self defensive rounds have been compared to, and none have "bested" it to my knowledge. In fact, one was designed to mimic it in a bottomfeeding platform.

.357 Magnum 125 Grain, 625fpe

I think you can see, the power of the revolver trumps the autoloader. Revolvers will handle hotter loads for a longer time than any autoloader commonly available. Aside from being easier to load, why would I want to carry an autoloading caliber in a revolver and give up that power?

Biker

 

Here's a 9mm that doesn't use moon clips..............

Vintage Pistols - Smith & Wesson 547 Range Report

I almost bought one the other day. Someone else beat me to it, but returned it the next day. The previous owner (estate sale) had "improved" it by re-chambering it to 9X21.