.22 Hornet Revolver

[miroflex]

Hello all,

I have recently been told that single action revolvers were made in .22 Hornet calibre also. Has anyone seen or handled one of these? How accurate are they?

Regards.

[TC]

Hello all,

I have recently been told that single action revolvers were made in .22 Hornet calibre also. Has anyone seen or handled one of these? How accurate are they?

Regards.

Miroflex
You have heard right. I saw and handled only one such revolver many years ago. But it had a conventional double action trigger but with a loading gate and ejection rod with a housing under the barrel just like a single action. A very strange design indeed. It belonged to someone in Bengal and had come for repairs to a gunsmith in Kolkata. I cant remember the make but I do distinctly remember it was in stainless steel and had wide wooden grips. The gunsmith had to fire a couple of rounds to see if everything was ok. So he let me fire one shot, or two maybe. It was very smooth. The barrel was around 5 inch and it had a six shot chamber. I cant remember anything more. But I am sure others can help.

TC

[miroflex]

Hello all,

I have recently been told that single action revolvers were made in .22 Hornet calibre also. Has anyone seen or handled one of these? How accurate are they?

Regards.

Miroflex
You have heard right. I saw and handled only one such revolver many years ago. But it had a conventional double action trigger but with a loading gate and ejection rod with a housing under the barrel just like a single action. A very strange design indeed. It belonged to someone in Bengal and had come for repairs to a gunsmith in Kolkata. I cant remember the make but I do distinctly remember it was in stainless steel and had wide wooden grips. The gunsmith had to fire a couple of rounds to see if everything was ok. So he let me fire one shot, or two maybe. It was very smooth. The barrel was around 5 inch and it had a six shot chamber. I cant remember anything more. But I am sure others can help.

TC

Dear TC,

Thank you very much for recording your recollections of the .22 Hornet revolver, TC. It seems to have been a most interesting design. I also once owned a .32 double action revolver with a side loading gate and ejection rod.

Let us see what others say about the .22 Hornet revolver.

Regards.

[TwoRivers]

I am not aware of any revolvers ever factory produced in caliber .22 Hornet, though quite a few have been converted. Usually to a slightly shortened and blown-out, less taper, case. All it takes is a revolver with a cylinder length long enough for the overall length of the Hornet, no less than 1.75". Which is slightly longer than a cylinder required for the .357 and .44 Magnums. In addition, a cartridge with as much taper as the .22 Hornet tends to bind up the cylinder when fired. That was what killed off Smith & Wesson's revolver in .22 Jet. And the cartridge.

A double action revolver with loading gate and ejector rod is strange animal indeed, even more so in stainless steel. I am tempted to believe the terms "single action" and "double action" are misunderstood and confused, as the terms are not really logical or self explanatory to the novice.

[miroflex]

I am not aware of any revolvers ever factory produced in caliber .22 Hornet, though quite a few have been converted. Usually to a slightly shortened and blown-out, less taper, case. All it takes is a revolver with a cylinder length long enough for the overall length of the Hornet, no less than 1.75". Which is slightly longer than a cylinder required for the .357 and .44 Magnums. In addition, a cartridge with as much taper as the .22 Hornet tends to bind up the cylinder when fired. That was what killed off Smith & Wesson's revolver in .22 Jet. And the cartridge.

A double action revolver with loading gate and ejector rod is strange animal indeed, even more so in stainless steel. I am tempted to believe the terms "single action" and "double action" are misunderstood and confused, as the terms are not really logical or self explanatory to the novice.

Two Rivers,

I have been told of a revolver in .22 Hornet by an arms and ammunition dealer in India. The calibre is not popular enough in India to justify a conversion from some other bore to .22 Hornet. I have asked to see the weapon. This may take some time as the dealer and the owner of the revolver live in different cities.

As regards double action revolvers with side loading, I believe the Harrington and Richardson "Young America" model had these features along with an ejector rod.

Regards.

[The Doc]

microflex,
The A/A dealers in our country are great story tellers , this gent probably means a single action .22 wmr .

TwoRivers,

A double action revolver with loading gate and ejector rod is strange animal indeed, even more so in stainless steel.

This one is a .32 rimfire.
http://www.littlegun.info/arme%20americ ... a%20gb.htm

best,
Rp.

[TwoRivers]

Yes, those old little H&R revolvers are. But those would neither have a long enough cylinder, nor sturdy enough to turn into a .22 Hornet. Nothing in current production, especially in stainless steel, comes that way.

[timmy]

A great many early double action revolvers were not made with a swing out cylinder. For instance, the look of the Colt Single Action army, complete with ejector rod' was used as the format for Colt's first double action revolvers, the Lightning and the Thunderer:


Colt Lightning Double Action Revolver


Colt Single Action Army Revolver

Even the British Adams Revolver used an ejector rod and loading gate in the 1870s


Adams Double Action Revolver (I could not find a smaller picture. Please open the URL in a new window to see the whole revolver.)

Given the number of companies making double action handguns between 1870 and the present all over the world, this could be any sort of manufactured gun, or perhaps a conversion. It would be interesting to know just what you saw!

Generally, tapered and bottle necked cartridges have not had a good record of success in revolvers, as the cartridge usually tends to slip back and force itself against the recoil plate, jamming the action. Many attempts, for example, have been made to neck down a .44 caliber case to .357, and none ever proved successful.

This is the same problem that plagued the Smith & Wesson .22 Jet, which Two Rivers mentioned. The .22 Jet was essentially a 357 Magnum case necked down with a long, shallow taper to take a .224 bullet and achieve high velocity with a flat trajectory.

This might tend to make one think that your friend saw a conversion, but anything is possible. A conversion would be relatively easy to effect, given a long enough cylinder,. Of course, if this was someone's experimental conversion and they had access to reloading equipment, it is possible they simply seated the bullet deeper to bring the overall loaded length within the dimensions of the cylinder. If there's one thing one can certainly learn, it's that if it can be tried, someone has done it, no matter how outlandish or unsuccessful!

[TC]

I am not aware of any revolvers ever factory produced in caliber .22 Hornet, though quite a few have been converted. Usually to a slightly shortened and blown-out, less taper, case. All it takes is a revolver with a cylinder length long enough for the overall length of the Hornet, no less than 1.75". Which is slightly longer than a cylinder required for the .357 and .44 Magnums. In addition, a cartridge with as much taper as the .22 Hornet tends to bind up the cylinder when fired. That was what killed off Smith & Wesson's revolver in .22 Jet. And the cartridge.

A double action revolver with loading gate and ejector rod is strange animal indeed, even more so in stainless steel. I am tempted to believe the terms "single action" and "double action" are misunderstood and confused, as the terms are not really logical or self explanatory to the novice.

TwoRivers,
Two .22 hornet revolvers that immediately come to mind are the Magnum Research BFR 22 H10, made in stainless steel and in single action
and the Taurus Raging Hornet in double action and again in stainless steel. Both are factory productions.

And, as pointed out by Miroflex and Doc H&R did produce DA revolvers with loading gates. There could be one or two more by smaller companies but I can't say for sure.
As far my account of the stainless steel revolver goes, I said it was years ago (more than 20 may be) and I cannot even remember the make. Its in my memory because it was unusual, as I stated. It could very well be a conversion. I never claimed it was a factory production.
As far as "double action" "single action" etc goes I am certainly not confused... and more certainly not a novice

TC

[TC]

Thank you so much Timmy,
I completely missed the Adams and the Colt. Just remembered when I saw your post. In fact I got an old Adams lying in a local gun shop photographed for one of my articles on Indians who won't give up their passion for guns, IFG, gun laws etc.

It just struck me that the Bulldog also came with DA trigger and loading gate.

cheers

TC

[miroflex]

microflex,
The A/A dealers in our country are great story tellers , this gent probably means a single action .22 wmr .

TwoRivers,

A double action revolver with loading gate and ejector rod is strange animal indeed, even more so in stainless steel.

This one is a .32 rimfire.
http://www.littlegun.info/arme%20americ ... a%20gb.htm

best,
Rp.

Dear Doctor,

The dealer is quite knowledgeable and experienced. I believe he knows what he is talking about. Let us wait and see what he actually comes up with.

Regards.

[TwoRivers]

TC: I apologize for not making it clear that I was restricting my remarks to current revolvers suitable for the .22 Hornet, and was attempting not to hijack the thread into a discussion of obsolete and unsuitable designs.

Both Magnum Research and Taurus once listed .22 Hornet revolvers, but you will not find them on their product lists today. Taurus has the unfortunate habit of announcing and cataloguing guns and chamberings that, to our regret, never become available. I would like to hear from anyone who actually got his hands on a Raging Bull in .22 Hornet. I never could. They were catalogued, but never available.

Stainless steels was not used for guns until double-action revolvers with ejector rods had become an obsolete design and had long disappeared from the market.

On another general note, Smith & Wesson's .22 Jet revolver used a barrel with .22 RF dimensions, and the cartridge was loaded with a .222 diameter, not .224, bullet.

Cheers.

[miroflex]

Yes, those old little H&R revolvers are. But those would neither have a long enough cylinder, nor sturdy enough to turn into a .22 Hornet. Nothing in current production, especially in stainless steel, comes that way.

Two Rivers,

I know that the relatively short chamber of the H & R "Young America" revolver, which is meant to accomodate the S & W .32 short and similar cartridges, cannot accomodate the .22 Hornet, which is a relatively longer cartridge.

I was merely trying to point out that side loading double action revolvers are not an unknown proposition. In fact, their solid frame provides greater strength and rigidity than top break revolvers of similar size and weight. Loading one cartridge at a time and then rotating the cylinder to expose the next chamber is of course a slower process.

Regards.

[TwoRivers]

Two Rivers,

I know that the relatively short chamber of the H & R "Young America" revolver, which is meant to accomodate the S & W .32 short and similar cartridges, cannot accomodate the .22 Hornet, which is a relatively longer cartridge.

I was merely trying to point out that side loading double action revolvers are not an unknown proposition. In fact, their solid frame provides greater strength and rigidity than top break revolvers of similar size and weight. Loading one cartridge at a time and then rotating the cylinder to expose the next chamber is of course a slower process.

Regards.

Of course they are not. Just about all the revolvers adopted by European armies, Rast-Gasser, Nagant varieties, Glisenti, were of that variety. Not to forget H&R's paperweights in the States. But by the time the .22 Hornet came along in the late 1920s they were of obsolete design, and certainly not of stainless steel. A .22 Hornet revolver of that pattern, and stainless steel, would indeed be highly unusual.

Regards.

[TC]

TC: I apologize for not making it clear that I was restricting my remarks to current revolvers suitable for the .22 Hornet, and was attempting not to hijack the thread into a discussion of obsolete and unsuitable designs.

Both Magnum Research and Taurus once listed .22 Hornet revolvers, but you will not find them on their product lists today. Taurus has the unfortunate habit of announcing and cataloguing guns and chamberings that, to our regret, never become available. I would like to hear from anyone who actually got his hands on a Raging Bull in .22 Hornet. I never could. They were catalogued, but never available.

Stainless steels was not used for guns until double-action revolvers with ejector rods had become an obsolete design and had long disappeared from the market.

On another general note, Smith & Wesson's .22 Jet revolver used a barrel with .22 RF dimensions, and the cartridge was loaded with a .222 diameter, not .224, bullet.

Cheers.

Two Rivers,
This is only a discussion so lets throw the apologies out
I completely agree with you on the commercial failure of .22 Hornet revolvers for all the technical reasons. I have not handled either the BFR or the Taurus (Not possible in India unless I resort to unfair means) but have witnessed re-sellers in the US offering huge discounts without much success to get these off their shoulders. That should tell the story.
True, stainless steel came much later but the weapon I referred to did have a stainless steel body unless of course the man who owned it removed the bluing and got in chromed in dull finish. I saw the weapon for not more than 15 minutes at the gunsmiths. And it was loooong ago.. Wish I could trace the weapon today and offer some more information.
I would however not agree that all H&R revolvers were paperweights. One of the handguns my father owned till his early death was a Model 999 Sportsman. It was a superb revolver and gave me years of joy. Sure it was no Smith or Colt but it was a delight-to-shoot plinker.

Cheers.

TC