Using Wall Anchors as 22LR Snapcap in a Revolver

[ckpj99]

Ocelot - the revolver I used for the test is an H&R 929 "Sidekick." The firing pin as a flat face and is over 1mm thick at the front, in fact according to my calipers, it is .05" wide.

[JJNA]

And guess what, there was a mark on the paper. This means that the firing pin DOES contact the cylinder when wall anchors are used as snap caps, at least in my gun.

And what happens when you do the exact same thing with a 22 casing? Does it also not leave a mark on the paper?

[OcelotZ3]

The problem I've had in the past using 22lr brass as snap caps, not in a revolver, is that they deform even after a single strike and get stuck in the chamber. I've sometimes had to use dowels or cleaning rods to remove them. Hence I stopped using them.

[OcelotZ3]

I just did the same experiment with my H&R Sportsman 999. I took a small piece of paper, punched the correct size hole with a little overlap, put a yellow wall anchor through it, put it in the revolver and marked the firing pin with a sharpie.

I got very faint marks at first. But it turned out that the paper wasn't flat against the back of the cylinder. Further dry fires showed an even fainter mark. I then was very careful to force the paper all the way against the cylinder after closing via the gap, and then I fired with the revolver pointed down in order to keep the paper in place. No marks after 3 tries.

So as far as I'm concerned, they seem to protect enough in that particular gun. I might try the same experiment with some semi-autos. Could be interesting.

[PzGren]

Energy absorption and efficiency on impact largely depend on density, the plastic wall anchors have a significantly lower specific weight and density than the firing pin and through the deformation will catch the impact. The softeners used will help avoid cracking and giving the rim some resilience. It is much the same with modern car bumpers, plastic and polyurethane have better absorption than steel.

When looking at the rims on the wall anchors, it is plain to see that they are thicker than .22 l.r. rims, which are actually a fold of the case with the primer inside and get permanently indented when hit by the firing pin. They are not pierced from a single hit, nor from being hit twice but turning the rim is always a good idea - on spent brass as well as on wall anchors.

I have used spent brass, even with colored wood dowels to allow feeding in my Hämmerli 208, and wall anchors alike and both do their job of cushioning the firing pins on some of my pricier rimfire revolvers.

I would not want to get a replacement firing pin for any of my Korths.

[OcelotZ3]

Oh man, I would love a Korth... Those are some good-looking guns!

[PzGren]

OcelotZ3,

Oh man, I would love a Korth... Those are some good-looking guns!

The newer ones with the underlug are nice looking but I actually prefer the 24 to 29 series without the underlug, despite the fact that my 26series .357 Magnum has only a five shot cylinder.

For me the Korths are not about looks but the quality and care that went into the production of these fine revolvers. For instance, the cylinder chambers are not only reamed and polished but have a ball bearing pressed through it, smoothing the surface and giving it extra density. I have a 1952 vintage S&W K-22 that I love and cherish but it is plagued with the typical extraction problems of the earlier K-22s. The Korths do not have this problem and it is making cleaning very easy to be able to remove the cylinder with a push of the button.

The early Korths (21 to 23 serials) are as ugly but as accurate as the Colt OMMs. The Korth still has some grips on it that I made myself but have replaced with originals since the photo.



The newer Korths are as beautiful as the Pythons.



Since I have several vintage rimfire revolvers, protecting them from damage during dryfiring is an old concern for me - and something I take serious.

[JERRYS.]

first, some rimfire guns are safe to dry fire, check the owner's manual for this statement.

next, use the right tool for the right job. if dry wall anchors were the fix-all, the snap caps wouldn't have been able to stay on the market.

[PzGren]

next, use the right tool for the right job. if dry wall anchors were the fix-all, the snap caps wouldn't have been able to stay on the market.

There are different snap-caps made out of different material available. Some are better, some are worse. Tipton makes red hard plastic snap caps that chip easily. Pachmayr, on the other hand makes snap caps out of soft plastic that is close to dry wall anchors. and a pack of 24 costs about $15.

As long as people blindly trust to get what they pay for, companies like Pachmayr and Tipton will make good profit margins.

[Bill DeShivs]

Empty cases are cheaper, better, and safer for your gun than ANY rimfire snap caps.

[hartcreek]

I have one thing to say to those of you using plastic crap wall anchors instead of spent .22 rounds or snap caps.......Numrich because you will be ordering from them some time.

[PzGren]

Empty cases are cheaper, better, and safer for your gun than ANY rimfire snap caps.

Bill,

I knew that we would eventually agree on something! Snap caps are a waste of money and as the red hard plastic ones crack so easily, the damage resulting from undetected failure is nothing I want on of my guns.

hartcreek,

I have no money to waste. I collect Korth revolvers and have to bring a kid through medical school.

[Sport45]

Originally Posted by ckpj99

By that logic, Bill, a couch cushion has less cushioning that a brick. "If I smack a brick with a two by four, it barely leaves a mark, but if I smack a couch cushion it gets all deformed and out of shape." Softer does not always mean LESS protection. Would you rather put a brick on your forehead and let me smack that brick with a two by four, or would you rather have put a thick couch cushion on your forehead and let me smack that. Which do you think will do more damage to your head and the two by four.

I'll take the brick any day, the heavier the better.

The martial arts guys are smart enough to use cinder blocks.

[jdscholer]

After reading this entire thread, I just had to go to the cabinet and drag out my old Ruger Single Six. It was used when I got it in the early 1970's, and a more used (and abused) pistol you will not likely encounter. I myself have dry-fired it with no protection a gazillian and three times, and I'm thinkin, My God!! It must be ruint by now.

Well I pulled out the cylinder, and shined a light expecting to see gnarly peen marks in the rim recess, and -- nuthin. Not a sign that there has ever been any steel to steel contact. Looked at the end of the firing pin and -- smooth, rounded, unblemished. Checked the frame face thinking it must be at least dimpled out from the beating it's taken, and nope.

Now I can't say that any other 22 hand guns would fare the same as mine, but I did check my old Colt Woodsman, and it is also undamaged, and I would suspect that there are many other brands and types where dry fire simply isn't a problem.

I do see a value in dry-fire as an aid to marksmanship, and believe that some fundamentals can be better learned with no live ammo than with. I'll probably go on dry-firing most of my firearms at least to some degree, and if I ever have a problem, I'll consider it the cost of doing business. jd

[Bill DeShivs]

The greatest danger of dry-firing is a broken firing pin.
Your Woodsman should not be dry-fired.