Revolvers you wish they made, but they don't ...

[WoodsPlinker]

Chiappa Rhino in 44 magnum

 

[OldBroad44]

Or just buy beef at Safeway. Lol! Sorry but you really want a LOT!

PS: What you really need is a good gun smith in your back pocket.

Actually, I think I'm just asking SW to do the sensible thing and fill a huge gap in their offerings. .44 revolvers now go up to .44 mag +P+. Loads that reach .454 Cassull power in the much more versatile affordable .44. Ruger Redhawks and Super Redhawks and certain SA revolvers handle them fine. Now that SW has designed the X-frame for the .460 and .500, it's totally ridiculous that they have nothing that can shoot the .44 mag +P+. I think if they gave us an X-frame .44 mag +P+ they would sell way more of them than the .460s or .500s.

SW already has Performance Center variants of their .629s and X-frames that have sling attachments. Nothing revolutionary about that. X-frames already come with two replaceable compensators, for use with lead vs jacketed bullets. But no unporteded option. And SW once made a revolver with the adjustable front sight with the dial for use in the silhouette game. If you want the full range from mild .44sp to .44mag +P+ without changing either the front or back sights, you are really going to need the adjustable front sight.

 

[CountryGent]

And SW once made a revolver with the adjustable front sight with the dial for use in the silhouette game.

Out of curiosity, do you recall the model? That sounds neat-o.

 

[fredball]

7.62x39

 

[OldBroad44]

Out of curiosity, do you recall the model? That sounds neat-o.

My SW book says they made 629-3 6-inch with a 4-position front sight in 1990. They made 500. Look up "629 with adjustable front sight" and you can find a pic of one from an old auction. (My device doesnt copy links. Sorry.) Also apparently made in .357.

 

[CountryGent]

Thanks @OldBroad44.

 

[KKG]

My SW book says they made 629-3 6-inch with a 4-position front sight in 1990. They made 500. Look up "629 with adjustable front sight" and you can find a pic of one from an old auction. (My device doesnt copy links. Sorry.) Also apparently made in .357.

Yep, they were some excellent Silhouette Guns. Unfortunately, they pretty much became Instant Collectables. So, what you'll find are either NIB or well used. I've even seen a couple of "Shot Out" .357 Magnums.

 

[CountryGent]

7.62x39

Interesting. They make the BFR in .30/30 WCF, so maybe that would be doable?

 

[KKG]

Interesting. They make the BFR in .30/30 WCF, so maybe that would be doable?

I'm not sure it would work. The 7.62x39mm has a higher chamber pressure and that's what caused Setback, which will lock-up the Cylinder.

 

[Grumpa]

Actually, I think I'm just asking SW to do the sensible thing and fill a huge gap in their offerings. .44 revolvers now go up to .44 mag +P+. Loads that reach .454 Cassull power in the much more versatile affordable .44. Ruger Redhawks and Super Redhawks and certain SA revolvers handle them fine. Now that SW has designed the X-frame for the .460 and .500, it's totally ridiculous that they have nothing that can shoot the .44 mag +P+. I think if they gave us an X-frame .44 mag +P+ they would sell way more of them than the .460s or .500s.

SW already has Performance Center variants of their .629s and X-frames that have sling attachments. Nothing revolutionary about that. X-frames already come with two replaceable compensators, for use with lead vs jacketed bullets. But no unporteded option. And SW once made a revolver with the adjustable front sight with the dial for use in the silhouette game. If you want the full range from mild .44sp to .44mag +P+ without changing either the front or back sights, you are really going to need the adjustable front sight.

Well, when you put it like that...………………….I get what you're saying.

 

[orygun]

Actually, I think I'm just asking SW to do the sensible thing and fill a huge gap in their offerings. .44 revolvers now go up to .44 mag +P+. Loads that reach .454 Cassull power in the much more versatile affordable .44. Ruger Redhawks and Super Redhawks and certain SA revolvers handle them fine. Now that SW has designed the X-frame for the .460 and .500, it's totally ridiculous that they have nothing that can shoot the .44 mag +P+. I think if they gave us an X-frame .44 mag +P+ they would sell way more of them than the .460s or .500s.

SW already has Performance Center variants of their .629s and X-frames that have sling attachments. Nothing revolutionary about that. X-frames already come with two replaceable compensators, for use with lead vs jacketed bullets. But no unporteded option. And SW once made a revolver with the adjustable front sight with the dial for use in the silhouette game. If you want the full range from mild .44sp to .44mag +P+ without changing either the front or back sights, you are really going to need the adjustable front sight.

When I first saw someone in this thread mention a 6 shot, 44 Mag X-frame, all I could think was, "Why?" The X-frame is very large and heavy, even in the 5" version I had. Isn't that too much weight for "only" a 44? Even if it was a 445 Supermag (which should fit that cylinder) there is more than enough mass in the gun to keep recoil reasonable, even without a brake.
I'd say if you feel like pushing the 44 Mag that hard, there are better options.

 

[OldBroad44]

When I first saw someone in this thread mention a 6 shot, 44 Mag X-frame, all I could think was, "Why?" The X-frame is very large and heavy, even in the 5" version I had. Isn't that too much weight for "only" a 44? Even if it was a 445 Supermag (which should fit that cylinder) there is more than enough mass in the gun to keep recoil reasonable, even without a brake.
I'd say if you feel like pushing the 44 Mag that hard, there are better options.

Not talking about only a .44 mag. For that I'm happy with the SW 629. Talking about .44 mag +P+. That is, .454 Casull level power. Say up to about 1600 ft lbs from a 7.5 to 9.5 inch barrel. Full factory loads of .44 mag go up to about 1200 ft. lbs.

You misunderstand me on the muzzle brake. I hate them. But the X-frames are already designed with removable brakes. The only problem is they give you the option of two different breaks, not the option of no brake. An unported non-brake brake would allow SW to give people who hate brakes a no brake option without redesigning the X-frame barrel.

Good point about the weight of the X-frame. Yikes. 72.2 oz for a .460 8.38-inch. My Ruger Super Redhawk 9.5-inch .44 can shoot .44 mag +P+, and it only weighs 58 oz.

 

[Mygrainman]

Glock revolver aside...
I know there are a couple designs out there that can be suppressed... or there were at one time. I guess you'd have to create a good seal between the barrel and the cylinder, but how hard could that be

Something suppressible, with a TRR8 sort of vibe

 

[justonemorear]

Bond Arm 460S&W derringer for a pocket gun

 

[KKG]

Bond Arm 460S&W derringer for a pocket gun

Just who do you want to put into the Hospital??? You or the Bad Guys???

 

[CountryGent]

Bond Arm

Going a step further ...

 

[justonemorear]

Just who do you want to put into the Hospital??? You or the Bad Guys???

The way snowflakes are now, probably help in court, shows I suffered as much.

 

[Dungannon]

S&W revolvers without the Hillary hole. Ruger Redhawk in .45LC and grips that don't look like an abortion.

 

[Hemlock]

Many years ago Dan Wesson made a prototype 7-30 Waters revolver when handgun hunting for everything was on everyone's mind. Never hit the market. DW made a lot of different calibers. Some caught on, some didn't. Wonder where they are now.

 

[CountryGent]

Purely for the giggles, an automatic revolver that isn't unobtanium and/or insanely expensive. There is the Webley-Fosbery, but they command huge premiums. More currently produced is the Mateba which is made in Italy, but it too is difficult to locate, and very expensive. There is the curious little .22 Zulaica made in Spain in the years leading up to the First World War, but I don't know how many, if any, left Europe and can be found in the States.