View Single Post
Old September 26, 2012, 02:02 PM   #57
Winchester_73
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 2,859
Quote:
The grip frame, the barrel extension, and the cylinder all would have had to have been reworked to ensure proper cartridge clearance had the gun been rechambered in .45 Long Colt.
The frame obviously, and they could have just designed a new cylinder for 45 colt if it was too short BUT why a new barrel extension?

Quote:
"They also didn't bother with a 45 acp design of their own until decades after Colt started making the 1911."

Well, if you ignore the 1917 revolver, and its post WW I counterparts, I suppose... but, given that Smith & Wesson didn't even seriously enter the semi-automatic handgun market until AFTER World War II (largely because they didn't have to their revolvers were selling so well), I'm not sure what your point is.
The point is that they were resistant to chambering Colt ctgs. Aside from all of the "Russian contract first" stuff - S&W definitely did not want to make revolvers in colt cals. I was thinking about a semi auto design in my "no 45 acp statement", but in reality, they didn't make 45 acp revolvers in great numbers except for the 1917. I think its fairly obvious that they wanted to chamber their guns in their cals until much later, where they were they pulled much farther ahead as a company.

Quote:
Colt never entered the double-action handgun market (which Smith & Wesson entered in the 1950s) until decades after Smith & Wesson, and by the time they did the company was already so far behind the curve that they couldn't hope to catch up.... Not to mention that, pretty universally, their double action designs were largely flops both mechanically and in the market place...
I'm guessing you have a typo here. S&W entered the DA handgun market in 1880 approx and the DA swing out hand ejector marked in 1896. Colt had a 1877 DA model followed by the 1889 Army / Navy DA hand ejector revolver. The 1889 was not a flop. Production wise, I don't know if you could even call the 1877 lightning and thunderer or the 1878 45 a "flop" from a sales perspective. From a design perspective, perhaps, but they were pretty early, and so, one must allow for short comings. Can you explain your post
__________________
Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west
Winchester_73 is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04738 seconds with 7 queries