Introducing Myself and My Ammunition Conversion Clip

135

Comments

  • Wambli SkaWambli Ska Moderator Posts: 25,028 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Whatever case you make will be heard as:
    "Dear _______ ,(insert gunnmaker of choice) I have a plastic clip that goes on a .45 ACP case that allows it to be fired in your 45 colt revolver. Buy them from me. That way if something goes bad, (because of people's stupidity and penchant for lawsuits) they will sue you, instead of me, because your pockets are deeper than mine and you are the one who provided them. "
    This would be an extreme niche market. Made the oddball gun owners, not the masses. Not to mention, revolvers don't have the market share that semi autos have. Gunmakers won't even consider this as an addition.


    Yep, and THAT is why (meaning absolutely NO disrespect) you are neither is Sales or in Business Development. The fact is that gun manufacturers are already the subject of probably the highest liability exposure in any industry. At this point in time all they care about is sales and revenues. Anything that will make their wares more appealing is a huge bonus and at least one member here already said it's compelling enough for him to go look at a gun in a chambering he does not own. This is at best a 10 PowerPoint slide presentation and we go to contract...
    "Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching." General George S. Patton
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 36,648 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Yep, and THAT is why (meaning absolutely NO disrespect) you are neither is Sales or in Business Development. The fact is that gun manufacturers are already the subject of probably the highest liability exposure in any industry. At this point in time all they care about is sales and revenues. Anything that will make their wares more appealing is a huge bonus and at least one member here already said it's compelling enough for him to go look at a gun in a chambering he does not own. This is at best a 10 PowerPoint slide presentation and we go to contract...

    And one person here wants one? In this group of misfits and weirdos with eclectic tastes? (No offense to the misfits and weirdos meant) Nevermind getting SAMMI approval. And again, if gun makers tell you not to use reloads, ain't no way they will provide an item to shoot cartridge A in a gun designed for cartridge B.
    But hey if you think you can sell it, go for it. I'll kiss your ass if you can make it happen. Gonna be kissing your neck next Friday or Saturday. If you guys hurry, we can save a trip. :tooth:
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,467 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    And one person here wants one? In this group of misfits and weirdos with eclectic tastes? (No offense to the misfits and weirdos meant) Nevermind getting SAMMI approval. And again, if gun makers tell you not to use reloads, ain't no way they will provide an item to shoot cartridge A in a gun designed for cartridge B.
    But hey if you think you can sell it, go for it. I'll kiss your ass if you can make it happen. Gonna be kissing your neck next Friday or Saturday. If you guys hurry, we can save a trip. :tooth:

    Who cares what SAMMI says. On the other hand, getting SAAMI approval or even recognition would be useful but arguably impossible to get and I would not even try.

    :jester:
  • RocketmanRocketman Banned Posts: 1,118 Senior Member
    I wonder how many other ACP variety ammos this could work for?
  • gstmkr007gstmkr007 Member Posts: 46 Member
    Rocketman wrote: »
    I wonder how many other ACP variety ammos this could work for?

    I already have plans for 357 mag or 38 special to fire 380ACP and 327 federal to fire 32ACP... my patent covers them all and in any other caliber as well, not to mention it covers all methods of manufacture and materials that can be used. Basically it covers any way of adding a rim to a rimless cartridge. My plan is if the 45acp version meets with success to follow with the others in that order.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 30,056 Senior Member
    You can already fire .32 ACP in a .32 revolver in a pinch already, been done fer years. Not usually recommended....

    http://smith-wessonforum.com/ammo/332535-32-acp-32-s-w-revolver.html
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • gstmkr007gstmkr007 Member Posts: 46 Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    You can already fire .32 ACP in a .32 revolver in a pinch already, been done fer years. Not usually recommended....

    http://smith-wessonforum.com/ammo/332535-32-acp-32-s-w-revolver.html

    Would be nice and safe to have a rim on it and be shooting it out of a 327 fed mag though wouldn't it... I would buy a sp101 in 327 just to have some fun with it.
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 22,588 Senior Member
    gstmkr007 wrote: »
    I do plan to do further testing for accuracy .... and I suspect it will be more acceptable at the shorter ranges, but only testing it will tell... Does anyone have a 45 colt in single or double action machined for the moon clips? How is the accuracy on those?...should be a good comparison.
    Two or three of us have such a Redhawk
    I get good accuracy, at least as good as I can shoot, with .45 acp in it.

    The only issue, as I have posted before, is pullet pulling that degrades accuracy in the last two rnds in the clip with a lot of commercial ammo.
    My new Signature
  • gstmkr007gstmkr007 Member Posts: 46 Member
    NN wrote: »
    Two or three of us have such a Redhawk
    I get good accuracy, at least as good as I can shoot, with .45 acp in it.

    The only issue, as I have posted before, is pullet pulling that degrades accuracy in the last two rnds in the clip with a lot of commercial ammo.

    Well that is encouraging news! Thank you for that, saves me from running out and buying another gun for a test... although I would love to have a new Redhawk! It will be without the moon clips though...no need for those in my range bag now!
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 22,588 Senior Member
    gstmkr007 wrote: »
    Well that is encouraging news! Thank you for that, saves me from running out and buying another gun for a test... although I would love to have a new Redhawk! It will be without the moon clips though...no need for those in my range bag now!
    The redhawk referred to does not need the clips for 45 colt; but, if ya got big hands that model's grip is problematic.
    My new Signature
  • gstmkr007gstmkr007 Member Posts: 46 Member
    NN wrote: »
    The redhawk referred to does not need the clips for 45 colt; but, if ya got big hands that model's grip is problematic.

    So does it need the moon clips to shoot the ACP's out of it?
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 22,588 Senior Member
    gstmkr007 wrote: »
    So does it need the moon clips to shoot the ACP's out of it?
    Yes and ruger ones, the center hole is different than the ones for S&W's; and they are much more expensive.
    Also, can be bent by dropping a loaded clip or being to aggressive handling them. I bent one dropping it, but, straightened
    it out to be useable.

    No tools needed to load and unload clips.

    I got a T-grip #8, site says does not fit but does good enough http://www.t-grips.com/
    My new Signature
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 22,588 Senior Member
    I made an attempt to use O-rings as discussed above
    see Ned's shooting thread
    My new Signature
  • TrueTone911TrueTone911 Senior Member Posts: 5,621 Senior Member
    This thread is a good example of the power of this place.
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 6,589 Senior Member
    gstmkr007 wrote: »
    Well that is encouraging news! Thank you for that, saves me from running out and buying another gun for a test... although I would love to have a new Redhawk! It will be without the moon clips though...no need for those in my range bag now!

    I admit to being somewhat intrigued. I cast and handload, so the ACP option is more desirable to me as a download, or emergency option than something I'd do a lot of by choice. ACP's shot through my Redhawk's Colt cylinder leave a ring of grunge that the standard .45 diameter pistol brush isn't large enough in diameter to properly scrub. I like the idea of a lower cost option to moon clips. Here's my questions:

    Is this gizmo going to work in the Rugers, which are already set to shoot ACP's - albeit with proprietary clips?

    Will this gizmo work in the dedicated 1917 pattern revolvers in place of the moon clips? I would guess not, as the headspace of Auto Rim brass and Colt brass are two very different animals.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 20,682 Senior Member
    gstmkr007 wrote: »
    Yes, No, Winchester, I believe so.... don't know how this is relevant to the discussion :uhm:

    It's Standard Forum initiation. If you hang around you will understand.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • gstmkr007gstmkr007 Member Posts: 46 Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    I admit to being somewhat intrigued. I cast and handload, so the ACP option is more desirable to me as a download, or emergency option than something I'd do a lot of by choice. ACP's shot through my Redhawk's Colt cylinder leave a ring of grunge that the standard .45 diameter pistol brush isn't large enough in diameter to properly scrub. I like the idea of a lower cost option to moon clips. Here's my questions:

    Is this gizmo going to work in the Rugers, which are already set to shoot ACP's - albeit with proprietary clips?

    Will this gizmo work in the dedicated 1917 pattern revolvers in place of the moon clips? I would guess not, as the headspace of Auto Rim brass and Colt brass are two very different animals.

    I will investigate the Ruger angle today at my local gun shop....as for the 1917 I think I would only use this in high quality modern firearms.
  • gstmkr007gstmkr007 Member Posts: 46 Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    It's Standard Forum initiation. If you hang around you will understand.

    Thank you. Did I pass....:win: I am pretty easygoing and understanding. And in your defense, I do have a way of making a pretty big splash when I jump in the pool!
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 36,648 Senior Member
    So some spring wire that's .030 diameter wrapped around the case will work just fine. At least in measuring everything, it will. That's for using .380 in a .357 anyway. Only thing I have access to.
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • gstmkr007gstmkr007 Member Posts: 46 Member
    cpj wrote: »
    So some spring wire that's .030 diameter wrapped around the case will work just fine. At least in measuring everything, it will. That's for using .380 in a .357 anyway. Only thing I have access to.

    I am sure there will be other ways to do this... and if the zombies attack...lol don't get me wrong, they will come in handy. But I don't think the average guy is going to sit there and snip little pieces of wire and make something he can shoot when he can just order a pack of the real thing. And if he tried to sell them he would violate my patent. Bad JU JU . But nice effort! I think I tried .05 wire when I was exploring that angle. Keep going and you will see why I abandoned that approach.
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 36,648 Senior Member
    Damnit. I knew you were going to say that. I hope I can find the wire locally, I just used some solder that was .030. Because now you're gonna make me prove it works.
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • gstmkr007gstmkr007 Member Posts: 46 Member
    Anyone here interested in seeing a nice springfield 45!
    LR1.jpg 68.6K
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 22,588 Senior Member
    That the bayonet in the pic? :popcorn:
    My new Signature
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 6,589 Senior Member
    gstmkr007 wrote: »
    I will investigate the Ruger angle today at my local gun shop....as for the 1917 I think I would only use this in high quality modern firearms.

    By "1917 pattern", I mean the modern Smith 25-2's, 625's, and whatever they called their scandium version built on the same size .44 Special / .45 Colt frames with modified cylinders as the WWI weapons. These are all dedicated .45 ACP firearms - the earliest versions of which had bored-through chambers with no stop surface to headspace a .45 ACP cases's mouth. These flat out REQUIRED a moon clip to function at all. The later and current ones had that surface, and so would fire without the clip, but would not extract normally, needing the "pokey-stick-from-the-front" technique. I doubt your gadget will work with these, as the rim thickness & headspacing is a different dimensional problem. Little matter - those shooting them were probably resigned to mooners going in.

    Seems you've got something with appeal to the guys with the dedicated .45 Colt and Casull single actions that don't have an extra conversion cylinder. Those with swing-out cylinder DA's. . .have you tried extractor engagement on such guns? The Colt/ACP Redhawks. . .kinda their own animal.

    That option, pretty good for cheaper shooting or recoil reduction.

    Maybe the same thing for 9mm in a .38/357, but none of those are exactly rare or expensive.

    .380 in a .38/357? There was a time not so long ago where the .380 was the rare, expensive one. I think this would be more of a doomsday prepper desperation move than anything else. . .and they probably have other calibers in larger stockpiles.

    .32 ACP in .32 revolvers? I dunno. . .The .32 family has seriously die-hard adherents, so on the one hand, the versatility might be welcome. On the other, most of the guys with .32 revolvers are reloading and even casting for them, so reduced power loadings they can simply do in the parent brass. Again, I think it's more of a doomsday prepper option that won't hold much appeal to guys already sitting on a lot of 9mm, .45, and .38.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 36,648 Senior Member
    The 9mm won't work in the .357. Just the 380.
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 6,589 Senior Member
    gstmkr007 wrote: »
    I believe you are right.... excellent observation! This quote is from a well know source ... "It is sometimes referred to as .45 Long Colt or .45 LC, to differentiate it from the shorter .45 S&W Schofield, as both were used by the Army at the same period of time prior to the adoption of the M1887 Govt.[1] Current catalog listings of compatible handguns list the caliber as .45 LC. and .45 Colt "

    The noobie's right. Elmer Keith went into this in some detail in Sixguns (circa 1955) and decided he really had no quarrel with anyone calling it the ".45 Long" or .45 Long Colt", as there were several contemporary cartridges (all now obsolete) that it needed differentiating from. It was far more necessary to refer to the "Long" back in the cartridge's time of origin than it is now, for much the same reason that people screw up when they accidentally buy a box labeled 9x17mm (.380) to use in their 92F. Simply asking for "a box of .45" in 1879 might not have gotten you where you wanted to go.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • gstmkr007gstmkr007 Member Posts: 46 Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    By "1917 pattern", I mean the modern Smith 25-2's, 625's, and whatever they called their scandium version built on the same size .44 Special / .45 Colt frames with modified cylinders as the WWI weapons. These are all dedicated .45 ACP firearms - the earliest versions of which had bored-through chambers with no stop surface to headspace a .45 ACP cases's mouth. These flat out REQUIRED a moon clip to function at all. The later and current ones had that surface, and so would fire without the clip, but would not extract normally, needing the "pokey-stick-from-the-front" technique. I doubt your gadget will work with these, as the rim thickness & headspacing is a different dimensional problem. Little matter - those shooting them were probably resigned to mooners going in.

    Seems you've got something with appeal to the guys with the dedicated .45 Colt and Casull single actions that don't have an extra conversion cylinder. Those with swing-out cylinder DA's. . .have you tried extractor engagement on such guns? The Colt/ACP Redhawks. . .kinda their own animal.

    That option, pretty good for cheaper shooting or recoil reduction.

    Maybe the same thing for 9mm in a .38/357, but none of those are exactly rare or expensive.

    .380 in a .38/357? There was a time not so long ago where the .380 was the rare, expensive one. I think this would be more of a doomsday prepper desperation move than anything else. . .and they probably have other calibers in larger stockpiles.

    .32 ACP in .32 revolvers? I dunno. . .The .32 family has seriously die-hard adherents, so on the one hand, the versatility might be welcome. On the other, most of the guys with .32 revolvers are reloading and even casting for them, so reduced power loadings they can simply do in the parent brass. Again, I think it's more of a doomsday prepper option that won't hold much appeal to guys already sitting on a lot of 9mm, .45, and .38.

    You are probably right on your assessment of the 1917 type firearms ...CPJ Is correct in that a 9MM is not a straight walled cartridge, and they won't chamber! And in answer to the swing out cylinder ejectors, I tested them in a Redhawk in 45 colt and they worked just as a rimmed cartridge would...no problems there that I could find. On the 380's and 32ACP's you are correct on the prepper appeal being the main interest. I will be heading to the gun shop to investigate the use in the ruger Redhawk that shoots both late today....I suspect they will work...but I would like to know for sure!
  • gstmkr007gstmkr007 Member Posts: 46 Member
    NN wrote: »
    That the bayonet in the pic? :popcorn:

    It is....LOL No actually it's my Reflection model.. this was a clue for you guy's to find out a little more about me.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 17,913 Senior Member
    It takes about 30 seconds to install the .45 ACP cylinder in my Ruger Blackhawk. No strain, no pain, no moon clips, and no R. Goldberg inspired gizmos involved!
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 21,463 Senior Member
    Being contrary, I'd just use E-clips or the retaining rings that are readily available in a variety of sizes. No sense 'rediscovering America' when you could buy a bulk bag of the right sized ones for not much. Both would need a removal tool, but being spring steel they would last practically forever.
    A double action revolver is a semiauto firearm. It fires once for every trigger pull.



Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file