Sacrilege!

[briandg]

The firing pin might be at a slight upward angle for proper primer engagement.

Might that create a small risk if grit or gunk gets into the firing pin passage? the upward angle with the same straight strike of the hammer would create pressure against the hole that may absorb some of the momentum. Maybe not a problem, maybe a problem.

Other than that I see it as a possibility and maybe a good idea. Maybe 10 mm would be a possibility as well since it gives a distinct advantage over cylinder size.

We have to remember that moving a cylinder from a bore size of .357 to .450 will result in a very significant change in cylinder size, as it will not only have to be increased by .2 inches just to accommodate the added diameter, it will also require a bit heavier steel to accommodate the larger charge.

The .45 may not be possible given the current tooling.

[Jim Watson]

There are several barge loads of rifles and shotguns with angled firing pins that seem to work OK.

I am kind of surprised that Ruger has not brought out a LMR with medium frame and six .38s or five .44 on that design. I guess they figure it would cut into sales for the GP100 which they likely paid for the equipment long ago.

[briandg]

rifles and shotguns are not tiny firing pins in pocket pistols with light weight hammers and light springs. Not comparable. The firing pin set up in any compact striker fired handgun can't be compared to the tent stake sized striker in some of the rifles that I have looked at. those create huge amounts of inertia.

Maybe pocket crud would be enough to interfere with the canted pin because of friction or not, but the hammer fired system of my bodyguard has failures to fire. Not going to happen on my m700.

[briandg]

You can only get the .44 calibers in the Smith L frame, the .45 calibers only fit in the N frame. As far as I can determine the LCR is about the size of the J frame smith. This thing probably couldn't accommodate anything larger than a .38 special without a complete redesign.

Still, a nice Idea.

[seeker_two]

Good points. Also, the amount of cylinder rotation needed to go from one chamber to the next would increase.

Might just be simpler to design a new gun.....

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[WheelGunMan]

Originally Posted by briandg

You can only get the .44 calibers in the Smith L frame, the .45 calibers only fit in the N frame. As far as I can determine the LCR is about the size of the J frame smith. This thing probably couldn't accommodate anything larger than a .38 special without a complete redesign.

Still, a nice Idea.

I have a LCR in .357 magnun.

[Dave T]

Smith says 44 Special won't work in a K-frame and requires the L-frame. Then they warn not to use heavy loads or bullets (they recommend 200g as max) in the 696.

Meanwhile Charter Arms manages to squeeze five 44 Specials into a gun the size of the D-frame Colt. And, for the most part it works.

Curiouser and curiouser!

Dave

[briandg]

I have a LCR in .357 magnun.

My post was not about power, it was about size, and the .357 has almost identical dimensions as the .38 in all ways except length of brass.

The statement was that anything with a higher diameter cartridge case would require a larger cylinder, and since the cylinder would be too large to allow the barrel to line up with it, the entire frame would have to be remade.

[briandg]

Smith says 44 Special won't work in a K-frame and requires the L-frame.

dave, Like I said above, it's probably not a matter of the strength of the gun. It's going to be because the K frame has a limited amount of space between the bore center and the axis of the cylinder.

It's pretty simple to put a .22 lr into a K frame, the cylinder is bored so that it matches the bore rather than boring it down where the larger round would fit. Just minor fitting after that. but you just can't fit a cylinder that is too large into a frame that is too small. Charter used a deeper frame opening than the K did.

[WheelGunMan]

Originally Posted by briandg

My post was not about power, it was about size, and the .357 has almost identical dimensions as the .38 in all ways except length of brass.

The statement was that anything with a higher diameter cartridge case would require a larger cylinder, and since the cylinder would be too large to allow the barrel to line up with it, the entire frame would have to be remade.

My bad... misunderstood your post.