9mm revolver

[Jake'sDad]

I think its the free bore the bullet has to jump before it reaches the forcing cone. With ball ammo it grouped 18 inches at 25 yards. I then tried some 250 grain lead bullets I load in my 45 colt and loaded them in the ACP cases and that shrank groups to 6 inches. In 45 colt it will group 2.5 inches at 25 yards. I email the smith about the problem but he never replied.

Pat

I wouldn't have thought the freebore would make that much of a difference. Maybe the difference in bore size between .45 Colt and ACP?

I always thought that combo would make a great woods gun. You could carry warm .45 Colt loads in the cylinder for critters, with a couple moon clips of acp for backup if it was two legged trouble.

[Alaskapopo]

I wouldn't have thought the freebore would make that much of a difference. Maybe the difference in bore size between .45 Colt and ACP?

I always thought that combo would make a great woods gun. You could carry warm .45 Colt loads in the cylinder for critters, with a couple moon clips of acp for backup if it was two legged trouble.

Its a modern 25 Mountain Gun so the bore size is the same with the ACP and the 45 colt at .452. Older 45 colts were .454. I do carry a 45 colt for a woods gun but its a Hamilton Bowen Ruger Redhawk with a 5 shot cylider. The handload I use is a 350 grain gas checked lead bullet at 1350 in my gun.

Pat

[glocktogo]

Its a modern 25 Mountain Gun so the bore size is the same with the ACP and the 45 colt at .452. Older 45 colts were .454. I do carry a 45 colt for a woods gun but its a Hamilton Bowen Ruger Redhawk with a 5 shot cylider. The handload I use is a 350 grain gas checked lead bullet at 1350 in my gun.

Pat

That is a studly piece of kit you have there!

[prestonoconnor]

I would really like a 642 in 9mm. I wish S&W would make a 642 m&p. I think the 642 is light enough; I don't need scandium. I like the big dot sights and rather spend the money saved for a crimson trace boot grip, alessi ankle holster and kramer pocket holster.

[tpd223]

The tapered and rimless case being used in a revolver is a real issue.

I had a 940 for awhile, and had several friends who had them as well. All had extraction issues. Mine would often lock up so bad I had to use a mallet on the extractor rod to ge the round out.

Mine went back to S&W twice and they couldn't get it un****ed. They gave me a brand new 642 when they couldn't get the 940 running.



Moonclips work well for competition guns, they suck for concealment guns.

[seb5]

My first back up was a 940. I got into the whole idea of 9mm revolvers for a time and owned the Ruger Speed 6, Ruger Blackhawk, Ruger SP101, S&W 940, and a pair of S&W 547's in the early 1990's. To me the 547 was the most useable of the 9mm's. It was a "K" with 3 or 4" heavy barrel, very similar to a model 10. After messing with them and the various S&W 25's and 625's I came to the conclusion that the S&W 25's and 625's were really the only revolvers chambered for auto rounds that were worth a damn.

The 940 went for a 42, then a 442, and to the current pre lock 342 that I've owned for many a year. For me the .357 in a 10-12 oz. "J" is not worth the trouble. I carry .38 +P or +P+ and feel as confortable as I can with a 5 shot snub.

As an FYI if you can find an old box of .357 Federal it works just like a 45 Auto Rim in the 940's. Instead of carrying a spare full moon that will get bent in your pocket I used the .357 Federals in Bianchi Speed Strips as reloads.

[anachronism]

A friend of mine bought one of the first .357 S&W scanium revolvers on the market. I told him if he wanted real adventure, he should try 145 gr Silvertips in it, since they were the nastiest recoiling load I've found. Yup, just like having a cherry bomb go off in your hand. He cleaned the gun and left it in the safe from that point on.He thought my 940 was pretty much in the same class recoil wise, but it really wasn't. I'm just not a 9mm man, I like heavy bullets and straight cases.

[oldtexan]

The tapered and rimless case being used in a revolver is a real issue.

I had a 940 for awhile, and had several friends who had them as well. All had extraction issues. Mine would often lock up so bad I had to use a mallet on the extractor rod to ge the round out.

Mine went back to S&W twice and they couldn't get it un****ed. They gave me a brand new 642 when they couldn't get the 940 running.



Moonclips work well for competition guns, they suck for concealment guns.

Ten years back or so I had a couple of 940s. I remember having the extraction isssues with some brands of ammo(even standard pressure factory stuff), and not with others, but can't remember which was which. Had the chambers polished locally; that helped but didn't completely fix the problem. Got rid of both of them because of that, and because after carrying them for a while I came to view them as simply too heavy for pocket carry; replaced them with 642s.

As the pocket 9mm autos get better and better(IMO), I find that my interest in a 9mm revolver wanes.

[Skang]

Rumor on the S&W Forum is that they are coming out with one later this year. A rep from S&W told a forum member this info who then posted about it. Its supposed to be based on the new Bodyguard revolver.

I am very interested. Been looking for small carry weapon.

[williejc]

Because of many different sources of 9mm ammo--foreign, domestic, commercial, military--considerable case dimensional variation exists within this caliber. This fact and the tapered case often results in a troublesom combination for revolvers.