- Thread Starter
- #21
Why should they be?Why shouldn't they be?
Seems you need less material and the material doesn't need to withstand the pressures a centerfire does.
Probably just supply and demand as has been mentioned.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Why should they be?Why shouldn't they be?
This is a bizarre little tangent that I can't substantiate.Why should they be?
Seems you need less material and the material doesn't need to withstand the pressures a centerfire does.
Probably just supply and demand as has been mentioned.
If you buy a good one, the .22 version takes as much material and work as it's centerfire counterpart.617 Smith is about the same price as a 686, I believe. They're not really that much MORE expensive.
How does a, for example, S&W J-Frame .22 use less material than any other chambering?Why should they be?
Seems you need less material and the material doesn't need to withstand the pressures a centerfire does.
Probably just supply and demand as has been mentioned.
Not familiar with that particular model. Is the cylinder and barrel the same thickness as its centerfire counterparts?How does a, for example, S&W J-Frame .22 use less material than any other chambering?
All external dimensions are exactly the same.Not familiar with that particular model. Is the cylinder and barrel the same thickness as its centerfire counterparts?
Yes, unless it's a model specifically for the .22LR ie: Ruger Wrangler.Is this the same for other manufacturers as well?
I'll have to take a look at the ones we use at DRRC. I've never compared them side by side. I think we've got a GP100 or two.All external dimensions are exactly the same.
Yes, unless it's a model specifically for the .22LR ie: Ruger Wrangler.
I don't know what DRRC is, but I worked for a holster manufacturer. I've blueprinted several from various manufacturers and created CAD files for them. I've designed and machined many pressure forming molds for them, a Ruger GP100, S&W L-Frame, etc. all carry the same external dimensions...they have to!I'll have to take a look at the ones we use at DRRC. I've never compared them side by side. I think we've got a GP100 or two.
Interesting!I don't know what DRRC is, but I worked for a holster manufacturer. I've blueprinted several from various manufacturers and created CAD files for them. I've designed and machined many pressure forming molds for them, a Ruger GP100, S&W L-Frame, etc. all carry the same external dimensions...they have to!
With that said, from a manufacturing perspective, creating a GP100 is the same no matter what the final chambering is. They use the same amount of material, machine time, operator time and final assembly and finishing time whether forged then final machined, or completely machined from billet.
If anything, due to the smaller bore diameter, you're actually receiving more material in the final product than a larger chambering!