|
|
Post by bushog on Oct 2, 2022 15:51:21 GMT -5
If I want a k frame S&W .22 convertible is it better to start with a M17 and add a .22 mag cylinder or a M48 and add a .22lr cylinder?
|
|
|
|
Post by boolitdesigner on Oct 2, 2022 16:12:45 GMT -5
Not knowing what S&W uses for groove diameters on their barrels, it might be difficult to guess what the M48 uses. The M17 is going to work fine. If the M48 is 0.224" then a 22 LR cylinder will shoot like the Colt handguns do as they both use 0.224" and shoot poorly. I've had the M53 22 Jet with both cylinders and it shot fine considering the Jet was set up for 0.222" bullets (Hornady ones). Find out!
|
|
|
|
Post by bushog on Oct 2, 2022 16:16:20 GMT -5
Not knowing what S&W uses for groove diameters on their barrels, it might be difficult to guess what the M48 uses. The M17 is going to work fine. If the M48 is 0.224" then a 22 LR cylinder will shoot like the Colt handguns do as they both use 0.224" and shoot poorly. I've had the M53 22 Jet with both cylinders and it shot fine considering the Jet was set up for 0.222" bullets (Hornady ones). Find out! That line of thinking was parallel with mine….. I’ve got all the parts! |
|
|
|
Post by starmetal47 on Oct 2, 2022 17:33:30 GMT -5
I have a Model 617 Smith with six inch barrel. Fantastic accurate revolver. Years ago I bought a 22 Mag cylinder for it direct from Smith. On the 617 the barrel is the correct size for the 22lr. The 22 Mag cylinder is choked down in the front of the cylinder throats. It also shoot damn good.
|
|
|
|
Post by 45MAN on Oct 2, 2022 19:26:36 GMT -5
OVER 40 YEARS AGO I PERSONALLY FITTED A MODEL 17 CYLINDER TO A 6" MODEL 48, AND, IIRC, IT SHOT EXCEPTIONALLY WELL WITH THE MODEL 17 CYLINDER.
|
|
|
|
Post by bushog on Oct 2, 2022 22:18:07 GMT -5
So it sounds like I can go either way…..
I do have a 651 and a 63 cylinder as well as a 35-5 and a 51 cylinder for a couple j frames…
|
|
|
|
Post by starmetal47 on Oct 3, 2022 8:51:46 GMT -5
So it sounds like I can go either way….. I do have a 651 and a 63 cylinder as well as a 35-5 and a 51 cylinder for a couple j frames… Yes and know. If your barrel has the 22lr bore and groove diameter then you're okay. If it has the 22 mag bore and groove diameter then your accuracy won't be as good with the 22lr. Now don't get me wrong, it's not terrible. I had two Colt 22's one a Diamond Back and the other a New Frontier Single action. The single action was very accurate (it was a convertible) the Diamond Back for what it was, wasn't so stellar. |
|
|
|
Post by bushog on Oct 3, 2022 11:25:09 GMT -5
So it sounds like I can go either way….. I do have a 651 and a 63 cylinder as well as a 35-5 and a 51 cylinder for a couple j frames… Yes and know. If your barrel has the 22lr bore and groove diameter then you're okay. If it has the 22 mag bore and groove diameter then your accuracy won't be as good with the 22lr. Now don't get me wrong, it's not terrible. I had two Colt 22's one a Diamond Back and the other a New Frontier Single action. The single action was very accurate (it was a convertible) the Diamond Back for what it was, wasn't so stellar. I think that what everyone has indicated... |
|
|
|
Post by jfs on Oct 3, 2022 20:21:20 GMT -5
Many years ago gunsmith fit mag cylinders to M-17 and M-34... The 34 likes CCI while the 17 prefers Winchester....
|
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Oct 4, 2022 3:31:35 GMT -5
I have a Model 617 Smith with six inch barrel. Fantastic accurate revolver. Years ago I bought a 22 Mag cylinder for it direct from Smith. On the 617 the barrel is the correct size for the 22lr. The 22 Mag cylinder is choked down in the front of the cylinder throats. It also shoot damn good. ***** Most interesting. Over the years, it’s been my impression individual manufacturers find it convenient to cite SAAMI specifications to justify product dimensions as a way of curtailing discussion. Yet, to deviate arbitrarily. Add to this soup generous dimensional excursions and it becomes impossible to correlate a logical SPECIFICATION PACKAGE. A cartridge case must fit a chamber, a bullet must fit a cartridge case, chamber, and bore. Transitions must be smooth enough to not throw a revolver bullet off balance as it sleds cartridge case to leade to throat (chamber exit hole) to forcing cone to bore & rifling. A probable reason the .22 Winchester Magnum Rimfire’s fatter case & bullet is to prevent firing in a Long Rifle, for which there were a great many rifles and handguns available dating back to the late 1800’s, and still in service when the WMR was introduced. Among revolver makers, Bill Ruger made his Single-Six of stronger steel than employed by some competitors; for a long time heat treating the Single-Six frame same as Blackhawk and Super Blackhawk centerfires. Later altering heat treatment of Single-Six, while nevertheless keeping it stronger than about any other rimfire revolver. To my thinking there is no reason the .22 WMR can’t share bore diameter with the Long Rifle. It’s the release of the bullet that matters, and for that the WMR chamber requires more diameter. My old K-22 .22LR enjoys ever-so-slightly tapered chambers and the same could be done for a magnum cylinder. The INCLUDED ANGLE of the forcing cone might be lowered to 7-degrees or so. Any revolver chambered for .22LR that’s stronger enough for .22 WMR thus becomes candidate for an all-accurate convertible.If S&W has already done it satisfaction, barrel stock can be simplified to the Long Rifle bore. A Ruger survey showed very few owners of the Single-Six Convertible actually used the mag cylinder. Yet when Ruger shifted the Convertible from front line Single-Six production, customers screamed, so Ruger restored the Convertible to prominence. WMR groove diameter should have been retired permanent. David Bradshaw |
|
|
|
Post by starmetal47 on Oct 4, 2022 10:20:09 GMT -5
I have a Model 617 Smith with six inch barrel. Fantastic accurate revolver. Years ago I bought a 22 Mag cylinder for it direct from Smith. On the 617 the barrel is the correct size for the 22lr. The 22 Mag cylinder is choked down in the front of the cylinder throats. It also shoot damn good. ***** Most interesting. Over the years, it’s been my impression individual manufacturers find it convenient to cite SAAMI specifications to justify product dimensions as a way of curtailing discussion. Yet, to deviate arbitrarily. Add to this soup generous dimensional excursions and it becomes impossible to correlate a logical SPECIFICATION PACKAGE. A cartridge case must fit a chamber, a bullet must fit a cartridge case, chamber, and bore. Transitions must be smooth enough to not throw a revolver bullet off balance as it sleds cartridge case to leade to throat (chamber exit hole) to forcing cone to bore & rifling. A probable reason the .22 Winchester Magnum Rimfire’s fatter case & bullet is to prevent firing in a Long Rifle, for which there were a great many rifles and handguns available dating back to the late 1800’s, and still in service when the WMR was introduced. Among revolver makers, Bill Ruger made his Single-Six of stronger steel than employed by some competitors; for a long time heat treating the Single-Six frame same as Blackhawk and Super Blackhawk centerfires. Later altering heat treatment of Single-Six, while nevertheless keeping it stronger than about any other rimfire revolver. To my thinking there is no reason the .22 WMR can’t share bore diameter with the Long Rifle. It’s the release of the bullet that matters, and for that the WMR chamber requires more diameter. My old K-22 .22LR enjoys ever-so-slightly tapered chambers and the same could be done for a magnum cylinder. The INCLUDED ANGLE of the forcing cone might be lowered to 7-degrees or so. Any revolver chambered for .22LR that’s stronger enough for .22 WMR thus becomes candidate for an all-accurate convertible.If S&W has already done it satisfaction, barrel stock can be simplified to the Long Rifle bore. A Ruger survey showed very few owners of the Single-Six Convertible actually used the mag cylinder. Yet when Ruger shifted the Convertible from front line Single-Six production, customers screamed, so Ruger restored the Convertible to prominence. WMR groove diameter should have been retired permanent. David Bradshaw I don't know of any 22 rimfire old or new or inbetween that would chamber the longer fatter 22 WMR nor do any of my cohorts. I might imagine a shot out 22 WRF might. Another thing that would negate that is if it's a bolt action 22lr rifle the action doesn't open enough to get the longer 22 WMR in it. Why go the route of the 22lr dimensions when they could just gone the route of the .224 specs? Yeah I know there are lots of firearms out there at the time the 22 WMR came about that confusion would have been caused. You know though that did have with other cartridges like the 22 Hornet. It wasn't a .224 groove in the beginning and there were smaller diameter 22 bullets for it. If I'm not mistaken the 22 Jet uses the smaller diameter bullet. Another is the 45 Colt. It had the .454 groove at first and today it's .452. The 8x57 Mauser didn't start out with a .323 groove. The list goes on. What they should have settled on if they weren't going to change the 22lr dimenions, which I can agree with, is to have choked all the 22 WMR cylinders. This situation didn't exist with convertible 22lr rifles because there was no such thing. Either you bought the 22lr rifle or the 22 WMR rifle. |
|
