Top break revolvers in Titanium?

[GeauxTide]

I'm always fascinated by the arguments placed after logical answers. Why couldn't they get a propeller aircraft to break the speed of sound? Why can't rifle barrels last forever? Why can't engines last forever? Why can't I live forever?

[jhvaughan2]

While we are designing it, make it use shorter ACP rounds so the cylinder and over all dimensions can be shorter.

And make it so the cylinder can just be dropped out and another loaded on dropped in.

[James K]

This idea crops up from time to time, and the whole thing boils down to "I want one, so they ought to make it and I don't want to hear any arguments!"

Two things are against it, one being the latch. There is always a gap (there has to be so the gun can be opened) and every time the gun is fired the latch tries to pull apart and batters itself. Titanium alloys are tough, but won't take that kind of thing any better than most steels.

Then there is the problem with cartridge length. Look at the old break tops and examine the way they work and it is evident that ejection will be a problem with long cartridges.

Of course, I already know the response - "I want one, so they ought to make it and I don't want to hear any arguments!"

Jim

[Jim Watson]

Gee, I thought I was the only one who noticed the Internet Gunboard Edition of the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition.

[Rainbow Demon]

Since top break double rifles have sucessfully handled cartridges at the upper limit of sane chamber pressures, its at least feasible for a top break revolver of sturdy enough construction to handle magnum level pistol cartridges.
Such a revolver would be massive.

[johnwilliamson062]

Is Ti stronger than steel per in^3? I know it is by weight, but my understanding was steel is considerably stronger by volume, at least when heat treated.

The item is really just novelty. No one is going to carry it. As such they should do what they do with almost every novelty gun design. Make it in 22lr.

[newfrontier45]

Titanium is not magic. Its claim to fame is its light weight, not it's strength. For it is no stronger than steel but is more difficult to machine. It would be easier to produce one from 17-4 stainless steel and be stronger to boot. The problem is the amount of hand-fitting necessary to make it work for the long term. The market is simply too small for a $2000 hand-built break-top that can't operate much above ~20,000psi.

[Bill DeShivs]

The top break latch is often cited as the weak point in the design. The latch could be redesigned.

[Winchester_73]

Maybe someone should write S&W - maybe they never thought of this Titanium schofield? Maybe no company ever had such a grand idea.

[CCCLVII]

A break top 357 or 44 mag would be awesome! I would be willing to take money from me retirement for such a a gun.

"I want one, so they ought to make it and I don't want to hear any arguments!"

hey that was my argument!

[kcub]

Every time I hear that top breaks are weak I think about the 10 gauge side by side my dad left me.

Bolshoi!

[Bill DeShivs]

I think the design would be perfect for the semi rimmed autopistol cartridges- .25, .32, and .38 ACP.
The .38 Special and longer cartridges would be problematic with ejection.
Titanium is not necessary.

[barnbwt]

There is always a gap (there has to be so the gun can be opened) and every time the gun is fired the latch tries to pull apart and batters itself.

All previous revolver latch designs to the best of my knowledge were non-tensioned. A yoke simply wrapped around a post, or two. A spring kept the yoke in place, but the post (frame) still had some play. These designs battered/wore fairly quickly.

Break-open actions using tensioned latches do not have this problem when designed properly. An African game cannon has enormous bolt thurst, yet a good one will last many shots. This is because tension in the mating surfaces prevents a gap from opening that can lead to wear or battering. A latch/lock does not have to have a gap to open/close, just a spring.

Improving upon the old trunk-latch style frames would not be difficult, but it would be expensive. Unlike a modern DA/SA, a designer doesn't have 100+ years of production tricks to keep costs low and the product consistent. But the concept is far from impossible. The trick is designing the locking surfaces to remain compressed together harder than the forces shaking them apart.

Heck, my half-baked auto-revolver design can theoretically handle 90kpsi proof loads because I centered the latch pivot over the barrel (like every break open rifle/shotgun). The loads holding the action closed are so low that the cylinder axle can be used as the latch member, like an old Colt SA. Maybe I'll finally be able to get a proof-of-concept-model made by hooking up with these guys--or just panhandling over at Kickstart.com

TCB

[Deja vu]

I am a 357 magnum fan so I would buy one of these if they where priced about like any name name brand revolver of the same quality.

I like different guns

[barnbwt]

I am a 357 magnum fan so I would buy one of these if they where priced about like any name name brand revolver of the same quality.

That's the impossible part. Especially for a small shop or startup. Baikal had the .357 MP412 concepts/first production batch made with polymer lower frame elements (and Russian build standards, no doubt) which may have made them cost-competitive. But our arms trading agreement with the Russians in the '90s put the Kibosh on that dream. Won't no one touch it now (even though all the Xbox guys pined embarassingly for them after the latest COD and MW games ).

I'm thinking my design, what with all its machined/fitted parts...~1000$ give or take, just to make the thing . Many times that for prototyping/testing/marketing/etc.--you see why it wouldn't fly

TCB

[Deja vu]

I f it was a nice quality gun I would not have any issue laying down more than $1000.00 That said I would not lay down that money for a "cool gun" that does not work.

[johnwilliamson062]

Maybe no company ever had such a grand idea.

Until very very recently it seems to me that firearms companies were interested in only new designs suitable for military contracts OR regurgitating old designs with VERY minor changes. Look at some of the VERY easy and OBVIOUS advances made in the last ten years. Why wasn't there a polymer revolver 5 years after the Glock? No police department or gov't agency was going to adopt any revolver.
Gun makers seem to be rediscovering the civilian market as a segment large enough to warrant R&D.

They probably thought of it and then said, oh no, DOD won't buy that.

[D-Ric902]

I would think a modern top break that is cut for moon clips

both front and rear sights on the top (so the accuracy would not suffer from loose tolerance)

Double action like the lightning and thunder but more robust action parts

Jerry Miculek could make that sucker rock

[jglsprings]

It is amazing what pops up around here from time to time...

barnbwt
Senior Member

Join Date: May 17, 2012
Posts: 142



Vash the Stampede's 45LC Top Break Blaster

I'm sure Dirty Harry's Model 29 will rank highly. I think my 8-shot .357 TRR8 looks pretty mean, with its evil matte black finish and faceted shroud. Did I mention it's looks are backed up with 8 rounds of .357? Weighs as much as a gun half as intimidating, too

TCB

This showed up over here in another thread...

http://thefiringline.com/forums/show...80&postcount=2

Unfortunately it looks like it is only a movie prop... LOL!

http://thefiringline.com/forums/show...94&postcount=4

[Master Blaster 2]

Taurus already came out with a Titanium Snubbie.. I have one in 45Colt a M450. Great gun however to expensive to make. If you ever see a Titanium Taurus snap it up.

[Snow Dog]

Taylor's & Co make several Schofield reproductions in .38 Spec, .44-40 and .45 LC. There should be something there that appeals to fans of the top-break action. They're not cheap but from what I've heard they are of decent quality.

h ttp://www.taylorsfirearms.com/cartridge-revolvers.html?cat=121