|
Post by kings6 on Sept 10, 2009 21:55:53 GMT -5
Bill is right, the new cylinder is longer, not larger diameter. This also means the barrel protrusion in the cylinder window has to be shortened.
|
|
|
Post by dougader on Sept 15, 2009 22:06:18 GMT -5
I'm sure others have asked this before, or at least thought about it... but if the cylinder isn't any bigger in diameter, then why not just load the 32 H&R mag to 40k? Is the new cylinder heat treated or stronger in any other way than the original 32 H&R cylinder?
|
|
|
Post by kings6 on Sept 16, 2009 0:01:54 GMT -5
I don't think the cylinder has been specialy heat treated. The long length simply lets you increase the OAL and thus powder capacity without going nuclear on the pressures. Same reason to shoot the 44 Mag rather than hotrod the 44 Special to the max.
|
|
Fowler
.401 Bobcat
Posts: 3,565
|
Post by Fowler on Sept 26, 2009 9:55:15 GMT -5
I have a Buckeye 32 mag/ 32-20 conversion, they maybe the strongest 32 mag ever made with the full sized cylinder that Ruger also uses for 44 mags. You can run 32 mags to where the brass is destroyed in one or two loadings but it can not get to the 327 Federal velocities, just not enough powder space.
You can get there and perhaps a touch beyond in the 32-20 cylinder but again the brass life is significantly shortened. I have run the 32-20 easily to over 1450fps with 125gr LBTGC bullets and the cases fall from the cylinder. In my gun it starts to spit unburned powder out the cylinder gap and into my hands at these high velocities, something it does not do at 1350fps, so I quit experimenting to where the roof is. The 32-20 can get there because it has more case capacity than the 327 Federal does but that can only be done in modern guns such as the Freedom Arms and the Rugers...
|
|
|
Post by bisleyfan41 on Sept 26, 2009 12:07:40 GMT -5
Beautiful sixgun you have there kings6.
|
|
|
Post by AxeHandle on Sept 26, 2009 17:28:35 GMT -5
I am reading more justification for why my FA 32 needs not only a 327 cylinder but a 32-20 cylinder as well... FWIW don't be thinking your oversize single six cylinder can equal a FA 97 for length for those bigger bullets... Here is a FA 97 and a 38 Special Single Six...
|
|
|
Post by dougader on Sept 28, 2009 23:03:39 GMT -5
Axe, do you have the measurements on FA97 v. SS cylinders?
|
|
|
Post by AxeHandle on Sept 29, 2009 7:55:50 GMT -5
Visual stimulation not enough huh? Don't have the numbers here but I will try to remember to pull some cylinders and get some numbers tonight...
|
|
Aggie01
.375 Atomic
max
Posts: 1,771
|
Post by Aggie01 on Sept 29, 2009 10:39:35 GMT -5
IIRC, you can get about 1.55 in OAL out of a single six. the FA 97 is about 1.62.
Axe' pic might be a little misleading, looks like his single six doesn't have recessed case heads.
My planned load for my 38 single six is a 358429 over some amount of 2400. It will just BARELY fit. (1.525 OAL)
|
|