Just for fun... or maybe not.

[Tinker Pearce]

I've already looked up loading data for the .38 S&W, including which loads are OK for top-breaks. There are some decent options using hard-cast semi-wadcutters in .36o diameter that won't over-stress the gun. I'm thinking of a 158 Gr./.360 SWC load that ought to make 550-575 fps. out of this short barrel. This will give it performance comparable or slightly superior to many .380 auto loads.

If I stick to loads that have already proven safe in top-breaks I'm not worried about blowing up the gun- the S&Ws were much higher quality than most other top-breaks of their era. I am concerned about accelerated wear so I am going to adopt a nice, conservative approach and not fire the gun as much as I would a modern piece. I already know that I can shoot the gun well and hit what I aim at, so 'maintenance' practice is all that is really needed. Which is a shame; I really enjoy shooting this gun!

[Jack44]

That really is cool. And well done.

[45dotACP]

That's an interesting little piece. I know it wouldn't be much compared to a swing out cylinder smith or ruger, but I always thought a modern, break action revolver in something like a .44 special or .45 colt/.45ACP with decent sights and cut for moon clips would be just the coolest.

[Tinker Pearce]

I agree- years ago I actually designed such a beast when I worked at Detonics; the engineers had expressed an interest but it never went anywhere.

[1slow]

A cross between am modern top break and a LeMat was always a fantasy of mine. Make the center barrel 20/28 gauge and moon clips for the whole thing. Auto eject and fast loading. Would help to put some sort of round plastic nose on the shotshell to assist loading.

[45dotACP]

I agree- years ago I actually designed such a beast when I worked at Detonics; the engineers had expressed an interest but it never went anywhere.

Any particular reason? I always hear something to the effect that a top break style pistol is inherently weaker and the locking mechanism wouldn't stand up to the pressure of smokeless powder loads and eventually it'd just pop open on you. I'm no engineer or even halfway mechanically savvy, but I gotta think it's not an insurmountable obstacle...

[Joe in PNG]

This is cool- love seeing a new lease on life for old lemon squeezers.

[Tinker Pearce]

Any particular reason? I always hear something to the effect that a top break style pistol is inherently weaker and the locking mechanism wouldn't stand up to the pressure of smokeless powder loads and eventually it'd just pop open on you. I'm no engineer or even halfway mechanically savvy, but I gotta think it's not an insurmountable obstacle...

It never went anywhere because it wasn'tt an 'official' project and there was no money for new projects. Basically the engineers said, 'wow that would be cool,' so I designed it. Then they looked at the designs and said, 'Wow, that's cool. Good job.' That's as far as it went.

Top-break revolvers are inherently weaker than solid-frame guns, but Webley proved they could handle .45 ACP even with early 20th Century technology and metallurgy. Detonics actually had a large-frame prototype in .45 Colt that they showed at several shows. I believe there were plans for a .44 Magnum version but again- either there was no money or they judged that there wasn't enough interest.

[Hambo]

I've got an Iver Johnson from the end of the black powder era, which for them was around 1907-ish. Because it's a black powder frame, I loaded BP under cast bullets and went to town. It shot very well, better than I would have imagined actually, but it fouled like crazy. I think the lube on the bullets I bought doesn't agree with black powder.

Another nice chop job, Tinker!

[Chuck Haggard]

Not sure this loading is a good idea for top break guns, but there is obviously enough interest from somebody for it to be loaded;

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.ph...uct_list&c=143