Moonclip Conversion

Tom-Fairfax · August 19, 2011, 05:19 PM

I've been told by some gunsmiths, that a moonclip conversion cannot be performed on a revolver unless the extractor is flush with the back of the cylinder. This apparently isn't usually problem for the majority of models. However, I'd be interested to hear from anyone who might have heard otherwise because (as I was griping about elsewhere) I own a Charter Arms revolver in which the extractor protrudes about 1 MM outside the cylinder.

T. O'Heir · August 20, 2011, 12:14 AM

Hi. I'm not convinced that a moon clip is a better thing than a speed loader. A moon clip is really for adapting a rimless cartridge for a 1917 revolver too. .45 ACP in a revolver, for example.
Don't think I'd spend the money on a Charter revolver anyway.

Tom-Fairfax · August 20, 2011, 08:20 AM

I didn't mention that ammunition for this revolver is no longer being manufactured. Hence, speedloading is not an issue. I also own a S&W commemorative model of the WWI era M1917 .45acp you mention. Fitting these with moonclips was supposed to be a stopgap measure until enough Model 1911s were manufactured. However, using moonclips to enable the use of rimless ammunition also offers significant cost benefits.

The economics of converting a Charter to moonclips is really not a consideration for me. I want to make this revolver functional because that will make it unique. In contrast, converting it to .38 special will simply ruin it. Besides, when did practicality ever matter to a pistol collector?

Jim Watson · August 20, 2011, 08:52 AM

What, you have one of the 9mm Federals and want to clip it for 9mm P?
It sounds like a reasonable means of keeping the gun in service.

Pinnacle does not list Charter but says:
"Other conversions may be available, contact me for availability."
http://www.pinnacle-guns.com/revolver.asp

There are really two problems here. Can the cylinder be cut for clips and are there clips that will fit? I would say that if the Charter did not have the same bolt circle for chambers as a S&W J frame and use the same clips as a 940, you would be out of luck. One off clips would be more expensive than the mill work on the cylinder.

Tom-Fairfax · August 20, 2011, 10:06 AM

I recently left a phone message at Pinnacle about this, but it will probably take time to get a response because of their heavy workload.

While perusing GunsAmerica, I noticed that someone actually converted one of these to .357. Since that's a hair too big for a 9 MM Pit Bull to chamber, the seller must have bored out the cylinder. Does anyone know if that type of conversion also requires modifications to the barrel?

kraigwy · August 20, 2011, 12:03 PM

Contact Clark Custom Guns about your question.

http://www.clarkcustomguns.com/moonclip.htm

Moon clips are diffidently better and faster then speed loaders. I shoot ICORE with speed loaders and a Model 64 and there is no way I can compete with those using similar guns using moon clips.

The benefits of moon clips far out way stock guns, besides being faster to load, it's easer to recover brass, they are less bulky on your belt, plus when modified to use moon clips, you can still load normally,either single loading or with speed loaders.

Clark charges about $100 for the conversion with quick turn around. As soon as the shooting season is over, you can bet my cylinder is off to Clark.

Jim Watson · August 20, 2011, 12:31 PM

Quote:

While perusing GunsAmerica, I noticed that someone actually converted one of these to .357. Since that's a hair too big for a 9 MM Pit Bull to chamber, the seller must have bored out the cylinder. Does anyone know if that type of conversion also requires modifications to the barrel?

The .357 or even .38 Special is longer than 9mm Fed so would require the cylinder to be rechambered. I don't know the OD of 9mm Fed but if it is the same as 9mm P, it would leave the chambers somewhat oversize at the rear. This would be similar to the situation of surplus British lend-lease .38 S&Ws being rechambered to .38 Special. A Special would bulge a bit but probably not split. I don't think I would want to shoot a Magnum in it, though.
I see no reason to have to alter the barrel.
Consider that the one on Guns America is for sale. He might be selling his problems in a rechambered gun.

I have read that one reason (besides low sales) that the 9mm Fed was dropped was because a .38 S&W rated for 1/2 or 1/3 the pressure would chamber the ammo. Does it work the other way 'round? Could you shoot .38 S&W in the 9mm Fed gun?

Tom-Fairfax · August 20, 2011, 01:47 PM

Here's a comparison between the two cartridges:

9 mm Federal (9x19 mm)
Type: Rimmed
Diameter .355 in (9.0 mm)
Case length: .754 in (19.2 mm)
Cartridge length: 1.163 in (29.5 mm)

Except for the rim, this cartridge is identical to 9 x 19 Parabellum.

.38 Super

Type: SemiRimmed
Diameter: .358 in (9.1 mm)
Case length: .900 in. (22.9 mm)
Cartridge length: 1.280 in (32.5 mm)

The cylinder on the Pit Bull is about 1 and 5/8 inches long, so it should contain the entire .38 cartridge.

Kraig: Thanks for the referral to Clark Custom, but they won't work on this gem.

Jim Watson · August 20, 2011, 04:21 PM

I don't see the point of .38 Super, it would require both rechambering and clip cut, the semirim is doubtful on revolver headspace.

I was referring to the old .38 S&W revolver cartridge.

Tom-Fairfax · August 20, 2011, 06:45 PM

Now I understand. A direct comparison between the two cartridges suggests that there isn't a whole lot of difference between them.

9 mm Federal (9x19 mm)
Type: Rimmed
Diameter .355 in (9.0 mm)
Case length: .754 in (19.2 mm)
Cartridge length: 1.163 in (29.5 mm)

.38 S&W

Type: Rimmed
Diameter: .359 in (9.1 mm)
Case length: .780 in. (19.8 mm)
Cartridge length: 1.200 in (30.5 mm)

I can't estimate what effect the .004 inch difference in the diameter of
cartridges may have, so I guess I'll have to locate a box of .38 S&W and see if the cartridges fit the cylinder of my Pit Bull.

Thanks.

triggerman770 · August 20, 2011, 08:15 PM

why not see if you can round up a couple of moon clips for the Ruger GP100 in 9mm. these feature an open center that would surrounf the ejector and may..or may not eject. the configuartion look to be that the edges of the clip would take the space of the rim.
here is a link to a diagram. the part # is 34. but currently they show out of stock. possibly Ruger has some

http://www.gunpartscorp.com/catalog/...spx?catid=8355

Tom-Fairfax · August 21, 2011, 01:53 AM

As I just mentioned to one of the posters in this thread, it seems that the best approach would be to leave the revolver as is and determine if I can fire .38 S&W ammunition with it. From a purely theoretical standpoint, this should work. While the ammo is more expensive and less powerful than 9 MM Parabellum, the revolver would remain intact and, thereby, presumably retain its present value as a curiosity. If that doesn't work, the next step is to try fitting it with Ruger clips. The remaining options don't seem particularly viable because the gunsmiths I have contacted to date simply do not want to deal with converting this firearm or don't believe it's possible to do so. In any case, I'm insistent on making this revolver functional or disposing of it because there's no room in my safe for scrap iron. I'll report back as soon as I locate some .38 S&W and try it in this revolver.

Thanks again for your insights.

Tom-Fairfax · November 13, 2011, 12:47 PM

Deleted

August 19, 2011, 05:19 PM	#1
Tom-Fairfax Member Join Date: August 19, 2011 Posts: 25	Moonclip Conversion I've been told by some gunsmiths, that a moonclip conversion cannot be performed on a revolver unless the extractor is flush with the back of the cylinder. This apparently isn't usually problem for the majority of models. However, I'd be interested to hear from anyone who might have heard otherwise because (as I was griping about elsewhere) I own a Charter Arms revolver in which the extractor protrudes about 1 MM outside the cylinder.

August 20, 2011, 12:14 AM	#2
T. O'Heir Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 12,453	Hi. I'm not convinced that a moon clip is a better thing than a speed loader. A moon clip is really for adapting a rimless cartridge for a 1917 revolver too. .45 ACP in a revolver, for example. Don't think I'd spend the money on a Charter revolver anyway. __________________ Spelling and grammar count!

August 20, 2011, 12:03 PM	#6
kraigwy Senior Member Join Date: June 16, 2008 Location: Wyoming Posts: 11,061	Contact Clark Custom Guns about your question. http://www.clarkcustomguns.com/moonclip.htm Moon clips are diffidently better and faster then speed loaders. I shoot ICORE with speed loaders and a Model 64 and there is no way I can compete with those using similar guns using moon clips. The benefits of moon clips far out way stock guns, besides being faster to load, it's easer to recover brass, they are less bulky on your belt, plus when modified to use moon clips, you can still load normally,either single loading or with speed loaders. Clark charges about $100 for the conversion with quick turn around. As soon as the shooting season is over, you can bet my cylinder is off to Clark. __________________ Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071

August 20, 2011, 08:15 PM	#11
triggerman770 Senior Member Join Date: August 9, 2009 Location: Metro Atlanta Area Posts: 125	moon clip conversion why not see if you can round up a couple of moon clips for the Ruger GP100 in 9mm. these feature an open center that would surrounf the ejector and may..or may not eject. the configuartion look to be that the edges of the clip would take the space of the rim. here is a link to a diagram. the part # is 34. but currently they show out of stock. possibly Ruger has some http://www.gunpartscorp.com/catalog/...spx?catid=8355 __________________ Small Arms Restoration, Inc. smallarmsrestoration.net Proud member of Georgia Carry.org www.georgiacarry.org

November 13, 2011, 12:47 PM	#13
Tom-Fairfax Member Join Date: August 19, 2011 Posts: 25	Charter Arms Pitbull Moonclip Conversion Update Deleted Last edited by Tom-Fairfax; November 13, 2011 at 02:44 PM.

August 20, 2011, 08:20 AM	#3
Tom-Fairfax Member Join Date: August 19, 2011 Posts: 25	I didn't mention that ammunition for this revolver is no longer being manufactured. Hence, speedloading is not an issue. I also own a S&W commemorative model of the WWI era M1917 .45acp you mention. Fitting these with moonclips was supposed to be a stopgap measure until enough Model 1911s were manufactured. However, using moonclips to enable the use of rimless ammunition also offers significant cost benefits. The economics of converting a Charter to moonclips is really not a consideration for me. I want to make this revolver functional because that will make it unique. In contrast, converting it to .38 special will simply ruin it. Besides, when did practicality ever matter to a pistol collector?

August 20, 2011, 08:52 AM	#4
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,543	What, you have one of the 9mm Federals and want to clip it for 9mm P? It sounds like a reasonable means of keeping the gun in service. Pinnacle does not list Charter but says: "Other conversions may be available, contact me for availability." http://www.pinnacle-guns.com/revolver.asp There are really two problems here. Can the cylinder be cut for clips and are there clips that will fit? I would say that if the Charter did not have the same bolt circle for chambers as a S&W J frame and use the same clips as a 940, you would be out of luck. One off clips would be more expensive than the mill work on the cylinder.

August 20, 2011, 10:06 AM	#5
Tom-Fairfax Member Join Date: August 19, 2011 Posts: 25	I recently left a phone message at Pinnacle about this, but it will probably take time to get a response because of their heavy workload. While perusing GunsAmerica, I noticed that someone actually converted one of these to .357. Since that's a hair too big for a 9 MM Pit Bull to chamber, the seller must have bored out the cylinder. Does anyone know if that type of conversion also requires modifications to the barrel?

August 20, 2011, 01:47 PM	#8
Tom-Fairfax Member Join Date: August 19, 2011 Posts: 25	Here's a comparison between the two cartridges: 9 mm Federal (9x19 mm) Type: Rimmed Diameter .355 in (9.0 mm) Case length: .754 in (19.2 mm) Cartridge length: 1.163 in (29.5 mm) Except for the rim, this cartridge is identical to 9 x 19 Parabellum. .38 Super Type: SemiRimmed Diameter: .358 in (9.1 mm) Case length: .900 in. (22.9 mm) Cartridge length: 1.280 in (32.5 mm) The cylinder on the Pit Bull is about 1 and 5/8 inches long, so it should contain the entire .38 cartridge. Kraig: Thanks for the referral to Clark Custom, but they won't work on this gem.

August 20, 2011, 04:21 PM	#9
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,543	I don't see the point of .38 Super, it would require both rechambering and clip cut, the semirim is doubtful on revolver headspace. I was referring to the old .38 S&W revolver cartridge.

August 20, 2011, 06:45 PM	#10
Tom-Fairfax Member Join Date: August 19, 2011 Posts: 25	Now I understand. A direct comparison between the two cartridges suggests that there isn't a whole lot of difference between them. 9 mm Federal (9x19 mm) Type: Rimmed Diameter .355 in (9.0 mm) Case length: .754 in (19.2 mm) Cartridge length: 1.163 in (29.5 mm) .38 S&W Type: Rimmed Diameter: .359 in (9.1 mm) Case length: .780 in. (19.8 mm) Cartridge length: 1.200 in (30.5 mm) I can't estimate what effect the .004 inch difference in the diameter of cartridges may have, so I guess I'll have to locate a box of .38 S&W and see if the cartridges fit the cylinder of my Pit Bull. Thanks.

August 21, 2011, 01:53 AM	#12
Tom-Fairfax Member Join Date: August 19, 2011 Posts: 25	As I just mentioned to one of the posters in this thread, it seems that the best approach would be to leave the revolver as is and determine if I can fire .38 S&W ammunition with it. From a purely theoretical standpoint, this should work. While the ammo is more expensive and less powerful than 9 MM Parabellum, the revolver would remain intact and, thereby, presumably retain its present value as a curiosity. If that doesn't work, the next step is to try fitting it with Ruger clips. The remaining options don't seem particularly viable because the gunsmiths I have contacted to date simply do not want to deal with converting this firearm or don't believe it's possible to do so. In any case, I'm insistent on making this revolver functional or disposing of it because there's no room in my safe for scrap iron. I'll report back as soon as I locate some .38 S&W and try it in this revolver. Thanks again for your insights.