Hey all - sorry I never really did too much with this data. Have gotten really busy with a lot of stuff at work/in my personal life so shooting, forums, etc are taking a back seat.
However, if someone else is more interested and ambitious than I am, here is a link to the raw data ( read only). Feel free to do what you will with it!
Yay! Only one running a 9mm revolver. [emoji41][emoji106]
This just makes your username more appropriateOriginally Posted by Screwball
Haters gonna hate... and ain’ters gonna ain’t. [emoji6]
Which one?
Real guns have hammers.
S&W 642-1, converted with a Pinnacle cylinder.
How come they're not more popular than .38 in this day and age? I don't know hardly anything at all about J frames but aren't there quite a few 9mm options?
Would love to learn more about this... I wonder if my 442 would be convertible?
Ken
BBI: ...”you better not forget the safe word because shit's about to get weird”...
revchuck38: ...”mo' ammo is mo' betta' unless you're swimming or on fire.”
Definitely a big discussion with that question...
Main reasons... better semi-auto options, lack of support from manufacturers, and people wanting to stick with tried/true.
I converted my revolver mainly because I wanted to start consolidating around 9mm. Didn’t really work out, as my P938 never really replaced the LCP (.380). Not to mention my larger gun is a Glock 30S. It did get .38 Special out of the equation, as I preferred 9mm performance... not to mention more positive extraction with the moon clips (9mm casings clear the cylinder on ejection, .38s... depending on grip, can get caught up; reloads are also shorter in comparison, which is another plus).
I also didn’t like the 9mm options available when I switched. The LCR was out, but not the LCRx... which I might have swapped over if it were (rather the exposed hammer, but also didn’t want to have to get new holsters and train on a vastly different trigger for the same DAO revolver). But I compared my 642-1 to my father’s .357 LCR... which the 9mm is identical. A LOT heavier! My 642-1 is an Airweight, which carrying is night and day compared to the 9mm LCR... and even the original 940 that S&W had poor experience with.
But moving away from weight... it is a five shot revolver. My P938 with flush magazine holds 6, with another in the chamber (40% increase). P365 blows it away, without a reload. That is part of why companies really don’t go full throttle with the 9mm in a revolver. Then add in crimp jump, which is a problem on certain rounds (Hornady is good to go with crimps, and UMC bulk doesn’t cause an issue within a cylinder... which is all you really need). If it would sell... they would have put it out. But S&W also doesn’t see a 10mm M&P being a smart move... so they might just be asleep at the wheel.
S&W had a poor experience with the 940, and with someone in the industry (Clapp) telling them that nobody would buy the prototype “942” they sent him... research dollars went elsewhere. Was mentioned in other threads... don’t remember if here or another forum... that S&W likely couldn’t build 3rd Generation guns if they responded to requests for them. While they may be able to put out revolvers now... I feel the art of producing revolvers is definitely past it’s time (two-piece barrels, MIM parts... all make production easier, but quality does go down). That was why I “made” my revolver. It is also why I don’t buy newer S&W revolvers anymore.
Small revolvers are not the easiest firearms to shoot. Sights suck, recoil is perceived worse than larger pistols, and it usually takes a lot of dedication to run them proficiently. Can even say that about guns like the LCP... because it is extremely easier to shoot my P938 compared to the LCP. Why put the effort when you can put in less and become better with a pretty compact semi-auto? Not a jab at anyone, but L/E moved from revolvers for a reason. I’m sure if you ask people who primarily carry a revolver, “why,” you’ll get everything other than it is superior to a Glock/SIG/whatever else. I’m probably not your typical revolver shooter, being I’m just got into the start of my fourth decade on Earth (30s)... but I really do appreciate them. While I like common semi-autos, and will continue buying them when I leave a state that wipes it’s ass with the 2nd Amendment... my last handgun purchase was a Colt 1917 revolver. My next likely will be a S&W 1917 to match it. C&R license makes out of state pistol purchases possible, bypassing NJ pistol purchase permits (refuse to give them anymore money than I must), but I think I’d still have bought the Colt. And likely the same with the S&W.
I’ll link you my original thread from S&W forum... but there is also that TK 9mm Conversion thread. Pretty much, cylinders are cut for 9mm/moonclips.
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-rev...m-642-1-a.html
I’ve posted a few times, but before I get strung up... do your research into it. I had a guy on another forum tell me how dangerous it was, and played like it was super secret squirrel s*** that he asked an engineer at S&W when he was talking at a trade show. If you find that thread (I’m a variation of this user name on any forum I post on... maybe with a 216 following it), I pointed out my skepticism about it.
Gun was rated for .38 +P. 9mm has higher pressure. However, these conversions go back to at least 2008 (S&W Forum is a good source of info). Mine has been in my revolver since 2015... going on four years. No issues... however, I run standard pressure 147 grain in it (I think +P is asking for problems, but some guys with 360 frames do it).
If you want to go back and forth, I recommend getting another cylinder, converting, and having it fitted. 9mm converted cylinders will shoot .38s, but possibly will stick and/or cases bulge.
Mods, sorry for the thread drift. No issue answering questions in PM or in another thread... but going to try to let it go back to the survey.
nevermind --
Last edited by idahojess; 02-17-2019 at 01:38 PM.
Reply With Quote