|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ruger LCP
Smith & Wesson J-Frame
I don't have a preference
Member
I don’t need to... S&W did produce it. Reread my post.Originally Posted by johnnyrem
Go on S&W Forum, and tell the guys who have done these conversions, some all the way back to 2008, that you know so much more than them. Maybe contact Pinnacle and TK Custom, and let them know their 9mm conversions are endangering their customers.
Shy of that, I don’t need to prove anything. Mine works, and works well... as do a few other shooters. Sorry to rain on your parade.
Member
The 340 you reference has a scandium frame. Not aluminum. That is why it is quite expensive. That escaped your notice in your attempt to make your point.
The information is offered as a public service to the readers here. If you have wondered why nobody has made an aluminum frame 9mm or 357, it is in one’s interest to find out why.
If it is thought that someone has more knowledge that the manufacturer of the firearm it is probably best to re-evaluate that point. It is highly doubtful anyone can do the testing, evaluation and research that the manufacturer can, with their vastly larger budget, higher tech equipment and full time engineering staff.
A call to the manufacturer to have them explain the limitations of aluminum frames is easy to do.
To any here contemplating doing things the manufacturer does not do, do yourself a favor and check into it first. That THE authoritative source is a phone call away is very helpful.
Last edited by johnnyrem; 01-04-19 at 18:18.
Senior Member
What information have you offered?
Ok, fine, scandium. So why can't they make a scandium 9mm revolver?
Last edited by Arik; 01-04-19 at 20:13.
Member
They can make a scandium 9mm revolver, which is why I was talking to a Smith rep asking for that very thing. The reasons a less expensive aluminum 9mm revolver could not and would not ever be made by them were extensively discussed.
To this point the 9mm revolvers they have made have been steel for reasons of strength and lower cost.
The whole point of my posting on this thread is to cast doubt on the idea that an aluminum frame 9mm revolver can safely and durably be made by Smith and Ruger, and if they, with a better understanding of the capabilities of the aluminum framed variants than anyone, have chosen to not make one in aluminum in nine, perhaps the reader ought to figure that converting an aluminum frame 38 to 9mm is a bad idea.
My discussion and the fact that they make no such variant is intended to lead the reader to that very logical conclusion. At the very least I may help prevent someone from doing something that is ill advised, a waste of cash compared to alternatives, and some level of disappointment.
Member
A concern with a possible 11 ounce scandium 9mm is bullet pull or jump from recoil. While a 357 is vastly worse than a 9 in this department in terms of recoil leading to bullets migrating out of cases, at least a 357 or 38 allows for a roll crimp in a hopefully deeply grooved cannelure in the bullet to help mitigate bullet jump.
A nine that light would be jumpier than any current auto loader and the 9 case doesn’t allow a more effective crimp than can be applied to the 357 or 38 case. Any taper crimping that could be applied to the 9 would be less effective in that regard, and most 9 factory loads have nothing but case grip to hold the bullet in place. I’ve pulled quite a few factory loaded bullets and noted that not even any amount of taper crimp was applied. Taper crimping is far inferior to roll crimping in a cannelure.
When you go from a 16-17 ounce revolver to an 11 ounce scandium bullets jumping out of cases gets markedly worse in any caliber offered.
Member
Who was this discussion with? Customer service or an actual engineer?
There are people in one shotgun manufacturer customer service that asked me if I was shooting 10 gauge out of a 12 gauge... and when I said it wouldn’t work, they said that the larger size can use the smaller ones (obviously thinking about shell length). Took a few minutes to not only explain the differences in gauges (smaller number being larger), but to say that shells can also be longer/shorter in the same gauge.
Another one (different company, this time a pistol) told me that 15 round magazines couldn’t be shipped back to me, since I live in NJ (was back when they were at the 15 round limit). Asked why, said they have a magazine limit in place, and just because of that... 10 rounders would be shipped back. Received a call when the gun got there, asking why I didn’t include any magazines for function checking. Tech was shocked when I told him what his people said, and tossed in two 15 round magazines for the misunderstanding.
Second issue with your post... S&W isn’t what it was years ago. It’s come up from time to time when people start discussing if they could bring back the 3rd Generation guns... but it wouldn’t be the same S&W that did those or revolvers back when quality was put above price. Making ARs and M&Ps isn’t as involved as revolvers used to be, and even now, they are nowhere near the same. I’m not saying that your discussion wasn’t with someone that might know what they are talking about (as stated previously, you make it sound like this is super secret squirrel s***), but were these people that learned how to build a revolver or just keep the line going from previous history/manufacturing shortcuts? A 942 was actually made, so it kind of goes against your view/discussion. Is that because it was before the person you talked to started at S&W in the last couple years? Or because he knows the SAAMI numbers of .38 Special +P and that 9mm is higher (doesn’t mean he knows what the frame was designed to handle)? Or is it because their market research says that people won’t buy 9mm revolvers... and he wants to not make it sound like it is falling on deaf ears? We don’t know, because you are referencing a discussion that one person here was a part of.
Sorry, but if you want to sit there and put something down as dangerous... might be a little better than just putting out a “he said” story. There are plenty of people that have revolvers proving you wrong.
That is always the next argument someone makes... then after that, bullet diameter is different between .38 and 9mm (0.357” to 0.355”), so terrible accuracy.
Main thing with bullet creep, test your rounds. Ideally, if you fire four rounds and you don’t get movement... you are good. My carry rounds, which are Hornady XTP 147 grain, I put four cylinders (minus that one round) to confirm. If it makes it simpler for arguments sake, Hornady crimps are good to go. I’ve been meaning to try Federal (use HST in my P938), but haven’t been ambitious enough.
My practice ammo tends to be UMC bulk (115 grain). Cheap, and with its weak loading, POI is actually identical to Hornady (which was similar to the .38 +P loads I used to shoot prior). No movement within one cylinder... and really, that was enough for me. I might try seeing how many rounds before movement, but even less ambitious with that.
For accuracy (as stated, that is where it goes over bullet creep), there is no problem with the difference in bullet size. I have a picture of a range officer deciding he was going to show me how to shoot a J-frame, and my somewhat rapid 2” group was a little better than his 6” group (only four shots, since one missed the target completely).
Last edited by Screwball; 01-05-19 at 13:03.
Member
The discussion was with an engineer at a trade show. If you will not accept a Smith and Wesson engineer’s ideas as valid over less knowledgeable sources it may be reasonable to question that person’s ability to judge what a more versus less authoritative source of information may be. The discussion very specifically referenced the strength limitations of aluminum revolvers and the cartridges and pressure levels they can accept. I rather doubt it can be any more relevant than that in relation to the topic under discussion at present.
What other people do with other guns of other types is not relevant to the point here. Smith and Wesson thinks a 9mm aluminum frame revolver is a bad idea and will not do it. Citing a revolver Smith and Wesson never put into production (aluminum 9mm) hardly makes your point.....rather, it handily refutes it. The fact that Ruger will also not do it is an accumulation of clear evidence that it is a bad idea.
If that is not food for considerable thought, it is your money and risk to do otherwise. Generally it is a good idea to pay close attention to what the most knowledgeable sources will and will not do with the gun discussed. That seems rather evident.
If running a guy way way past its normal maximum operating pressure does not get your attention now, it will eventually.
I have made my point and those here are free to do as they wish, but obtaining good information is a matter of asking the most knowledgeable experts about the gun’s capabilities. That would be Smith and Wesson, unquestionably. Internet sources are notoriously unreliable, so do contact Smith and Wesson and get it straight from them. May wish to talk to Ruger as well.
Some here are no doubt absolutely determined they will not bother and that is fine. But the idea that Smith nor Ruger has ever made an aluminum 9 revolver for sale to the public has planted a seed of doubt that has taken considerable root in this thread.
It needed to be said. Very much so. People do all kinds of inadvisable things all the time. What is important is what well informed people think about the advisability of what less well informed people are doing.
I always go along with the most well informed advice before pursuing a course of action. Again, that is unquestionably Smith and Wesson over anyone else. Joe Bob don’t measure up to that.
Last edited by johnnyrem; 01-05-19 at 13:49.
Member
Same token... you have whatever right to believe him over whoever else. I personally don’t believe you.
Why all the cloak and dagger regarding this? Why not just say your “talk” in the first post? For someone that wants to inform/protect people, I would think that would have been what you opened up with. What’s your credentials? What’s the engineer’s credentials? What lead up to this conversation?
Personally, if that was your first post (not the questions I just asked, but your “talk”), I would have liked to compare notes and see if I could contact this engineer about it. Not really caring now, because it seems more of a pissing match than an actual informative discussion.
But you are right... you do you. I’ll do me. That includes me shooting my 9mm 642.
Whatever you have to tell yourself... guess S&W only worries about guns being safe and no concern of profits.
Not like they ever put out an unsafe gun or one with issues that could result in a gun not working. Can be said regarding both contract and civilian guns.
Moderator
Lordy. Why so serious folks?
Let those who are fond of blaming and finding fault, while they sit safely at home, ask, ‘Why did you not do thus and so?’I wish they were on this voyage; I well believe that another voyage of a different kind awaits them.”
Christopher Columbus
Member
It’s the internet... someone always has to be right.
With that being said, I have no hard feelings towards him... in case that’s how my post came across. I don’t do things for other people’s approval, so really can’t care less if he approves or not (really meant that his post(s) isn’t changing whether or not I’m carrying that revolver). But some things just seemed odd with this discussion... as I posted.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks