See ruger 10/44. Similar to the ruger 10/22 with its simple blowback operation and rotary magazine design. It came standard with 5 round magazines, however aftermarket magazines can be acquired placing you at a capacity of 15+1 rounds of 44 magnum with a reload speed equal to that of just about any box magazine fed weapon. My reload for a 10/22 was slightly faster average than my AR15 reload, usually running me (trained but in no way exceptionally skilled or particularly experienced) about 3 seconds.
The ruger 44 carbine is a tube fed semi-auto rifle. It was supplanted by the deerslayer, deerfield, or 99/44 (the model name had bit of controversial history) rifle that uses a drop rotary mag and action based off the mini-14. Both rifles are out of production. Ruger does still make the 77/44 a bolt action 44 mag rifle that uses a drop rotary mag.
@@zraal3759 I was referring specifically to the discontinued 10/44 model. I didn't know it was even a thing that existed until some old redneck told me about it and I looked it up. That bolt action sounds nice though
Actually it's kind of perfect because while it's somewhat accurate to a real world revolver everything is bigger, chunkier, and more exaggerated. So it's easy to show details
The gas shields increase the chain fire probability by a lot. It's not a problem with today's fully sealed cartridges, but during the civil war era, that wasn't the case. Colt himself explicitly didn't add a shield on the model 1855 because of that very reason.
@@VonWipfenfelsit still isn't a big deal if you seal it with wax or right kind of grease but considering that both sides could barely provide hardtack and powder at times (not to mention general shortage of food in csa) that's just wishful thinking. T. Your Local black powder enjoyer (lung cancer represent o/)
@@Sk0lzky You are absolutely correct in that! I was merely explaining why this particular design feature wasn't found in the guns of that era, there were absolutely ways to prevent chain fires back then.
The idea of a gas-seal between the cylinder and barrel is older than that; the Collier flintlock revolver had a cylinder cammed forward under spring tension all the way back in 1814.
@@JamesPolymer Trying to make an airtight seal without a cartridge is doable, certainly, but it requires tighter tolerances than even modern rifles manage, or some kind of gasket to fill in the gaps. Both of these were doable for large artillery pieces , but infantry rifles were expensive enough as-is.
Yes but that is cartridge revolver most of the revolving rifle came from the cap and ball era where you were dealing with losse ball and poweder or paper cartridges at best
I'm sure you know this but chain fires are usually one maybe two other chambers going off. I know I wouldn't want my hand in the way of that. I do agree that gas is probably the main reason it wasn't done.
After the civil war the army issued cartidge revolver rifles, which has basically no risk or chain firing. They very quickly realized the cylinder gap was an issue an stopped using them pretty much instantly.
@infernaldaedra eh, not more than a revolver pistol. The one the army tried out was basically a carbine version of the colt peacemaker IIRC. The issues it was meant to solve were with a lever action repeaters. That being that the rounds put the weight more towards the front of the gun and a carbine length allows fewer rounds to be loaded. Burning yourself or using a terrible grip to avoid buring yourself made them drop it. There may also have been some risk of burning your face, since you often have a rifle up at your shoulder to fire, which isn't an issue with a pistol.
@@infernaldaedrait's the singular example in which an obscene number were built before seeing combat. The mechanism is just too delicate for standard use and was replaced as soon as a viable option became available. Good idea and a nice civilian gun though
And/or the paper cartridges themselves, though sometimes lard was used. Muslim and Hindu troops in India at one point got *very* pissed when finding out the paper cartridges they were issued by the British, which had to be ripped open with your teeth, were coated in pig and/or cow fat.
Not a very good combat remedy but yeah that works, a better way would be oversized bullets, they issued em to pistols so when you use them they sheared off just s little rim of lead, not massively oversized but enough to have a small disk come off
@isaiahdennhardt9409 it helps you still should put some good on the cylinder. Vaseline or Crisco or what ever ya have. or if you wanna seat a wad behind your shot.
I can think 3 ways this could have been fixed a chauchat like foregrip would help to keep the arm safe from the gases and chainfiring but it would be unconfortable making it break action so you can place shields on the sides (and use less powerful loads of gunpowder due to it having a estructural weakpoint) And the Best, giving it a nagant like action any way that rifle totally needs wood on the front, I can see why nobody liked it, it has the risk of chainfiring, the gas could burn your arm on a Best case escenario, and if you manage to shoot enough times the whole thing would be unconfortably Hot to hold it properly
I Sadly forgot the guy who did it but there is a video where they explicitly provoke a chain fire reaction. In the worst case your whole gun makes Boom in the best case you produce a stray bullet, but even a foregrip wouldn't necessarily save your hand. Everything in front of cylinder is a Ouch zone in around nearly 60° angle (have to guess but the foregrip needs to be so long it is basically a stand). There are multiple models of that revolver mechanism done and all "failed" till the point we where able to produce reliable and "save" cartridges. And we where able to reload them in a fast efficient way. And when the time for a revolver rifle finally came it gets a bit strange, thanks to the lever action technology.
Still even with a foreguard, unless you're wearing protection for your arms, your supporting arm is still gonna get hit by the gas. Best idea would be to have a sealed chamber like the nagant, such as the Pieper M1893, but by the point they had figured that out, stripper clips and box magazines were already replacing it.
Left hand goes under right for support. The use of shooting sticks is also a good idea. Treat a revolving rifle like a bluntline and you won't burn yourself.
@@rainingdeathx3368 The bullet isn't going sideways out of the cylinder into your arm... Did you even watch the video? The issue is gas escaping towards your arm. Not a bullet.
They actually existed funnily enough, but were usually limited to naval and siege use due to their weight. After all, you are essentially strapping half a dozen guns togheter. Was relatively popular as a pistol though
They existed and the pistol versions were known as "Pepperbox" or "Volley" guns. They could be anything from pistol sized the ones Saltzpyre uses to Kruber's rifle variants. As mentioned they tended to be extremely heavy and took a very long time to reload. They weren't generally something you would see people just toting around.
I love how to show cylinder gap you pulled out a replica boltok pistol from Gears of War, great game. It’s exactly what you’d expect it is but it’s still impressive.
Yeah, but by that point better options were available. If you wanted a PCC in 1895-1896 you could get any of a whole plethora of lever action guns with much higher capacity, as well as a couple models of early self-loader just starting to come onto the market.
The Soviet Nagant Revolver would have actually been a wonderful candidate for this carbine design. The revolver was designed in such a way that the forcing cone actually entered each chamber when cycled and did not leave a cylinder gap, which also allowed the Nagant to be effectively suppressed. I think there are a few more revolvers with similar designs but the Nagant is just the most famous, being the sidearm that brought down Berlin.
Typically the way I've seen these fired is with a "two handed pistol grip". The idea was that both of your hands were wrapped around the trigger, the stock is for more stability.
There was a system designed that was basically a shield in front of the cylinder to direct almost all the gasses away from the shooter’s hand. It wasn’t too expensive or cumbersome or anything. I think chain firing really was the main concern
Chain fire is a modern problem with our love of smaller diameter bullets, leaving gaps for hot gasses to reach the charge in adjacent cylinders. And the relative low power gasses escaping from 19th century revolvers can be avoided by using a "chicken wing" position with the support arm.
there are solutions for cylinder gap problem (for example some kind of a cylinder cover that directs all escaping gas away from user's hands and face) but it was simply not worth it because lever-action and bolt-action rifles were still better for mass usage
Actually, with these revolving rifles the training doctrine preferred that operators of the weapon keep both their hands positioned behind the cylinder. One hand to operate the hammer and trigger with the support hand bracing that hold. Not too awkward when you try it for yourself. It was just more expensive than tossing muskets to infantry so that’s why the few that were in service were assigned to special units like the sharpshooters and a few in light/mounted infantry units.
Shhh we don't use facts here. Every single one of the shorts I've seen talking about revolver rifles has been wrong. The answer was always budget but that's not a fun answer so we keep getting dumb videos like this.
The circuit judge is a modern revolver rifle that solved the problem with cylinder gap without doing anything about the cylinder gap. It simply has a gas shield that covers a portion of the bottom of the cylinder. The circuit judge is not the first revolver rifle to do this but it would not be easy to implement on a cap and ball black powder revolver rifle.
Also, the gasses escaping means less pressure behind the bullet, not a big deal with something as short as a revolver but a rifle has a lot longer barrel that isnt being used very effectivly as its leaking out the back.
If im not mistaken, there are Revolvers with no cylinder gap like the Nagant. It has a super heavy pull, but that might be way less of an issue with a rifle where you have more area to machine additional support and a stronger cylinder cycling mechanism.
These rifles were also a lot more expensive and more complex to maintain than regular muzzle-loading rifles. They could equip specialists like the cavalry with repeating rifles, but not the hundreds of thousands of regular infantrymen.
Owner of a Beretta Stampede here. Can confirm: the flash is aggressive. It is still one of the most fun firearms I own, and by golly is it a conversation starter.
The nagant revolver solved that problem with a combination of a forward boving cylinder and ammo casing that seals the gap. Sadly it was never utilized after that particular pistol.
Chain firing was a major issue in revolving rifles, it wasn’t just the hot gas, honestly that was probably the least of your concerns in the instance of chain firing that would easily take fingers as opposed to “ouch hot” there was a revolving rifle introduced by colt if I am not mistaken that was adopted for a short time due to the convenience of not constantly having to load and reload a musket but chain firing was so frequent that they would rather use their muskets or service revolver as opposed to the rifle, while a regular revolver would still occasionally suffer from chain firing in the case of a revolving rifle your other hand was in front of the cylinder that doesn’t discriminate between enemy and your fingers
There are ways around this problem. Modern revolver rifles have a shield that blocks the gasses from going forwards, and are fine as long as you don’t get too close to the cylinder from the side. You can also design a system similar to a nagant revolver with no cylinder gap because the cylinder moves forwards into the barrel creating a seal
I once owned a Uberti revolver carbine in 45lc and it instructs you to hold it like a handgun and has extra brass bits that came off the trigger guard towards the end of the stock to support a two handed grip behind the cylinder
Good to know. I always saw chain fire referenced as the sole reason for the failure of revolving rifles, but never saw anyone explain why revolving pistols succeeded where the rifles failed. This makes a lot more sense.
There are modern revolver rifles that have a shield for the cylinder gap. But realistically, they weren't common for a better reason: A cylinder is a far weaker, more limited, and more mechanically complex system than a bolt that locks into and seals a chamber. Sure, there were plenty of lever guns using pistol cartridges like .45 LC, but most brass cartridge repeaters of the time were using far more powerful rifle rounds that would make a cylinder far to large and heavy to be practical, or would just blow them up.
Couldn't they have put a shielding around the cylinder that directs the gas away from the support arm? A solid semi sealed cylinder would probably increase the likelihood of chainfiring but perhaps a slotted shield to guide the gas would work. It would direct the gas away from the support arm by directing the gas upwards towards the top of the gun and away from the support arm (the shielding is installed corresponding to dominant hand). The shield would also have a slot for airflow as to not retain heat from subsequent firing
Honestly a single action revolver rifle that uses the Nagant cylinder sealing system might have worked well back then (I see a lot of comments saying the same thing, I am not original or clever and will be disappearing into the Alaskan wilderness to regain my honor)
A solution to this would be to have the cylinder move forward to seal the gap The Nagant Revolver did this where the whole cylinder would move slightly forward and seal the gap. The ammo was also unusual in that it's casing extended past the actual bullet to further assist in this. With modern construction and materials we could probably do this without the unsual ammunition just fine.
not all revolvers have cylinder gap, but those that didn't (and don't now) tend to have extra weight and complexity dedicated to cylinders that would push forward and "lock" with the barrel, or parts of the cylinder that would move, or other complex things that added to weight and added points of failure. modern revolver rifles are really for utility. Cases where you are firing different loads and being able to have a cylinder makes it quicker to load and unload. comes into play if you are using a rifle that fires .45-70, .410, Flair, and other variant rounds and you may need to switch in a woods situation. (needing to load flair rounds in an emergancy)
Easy way to solve that would be making the cylinder step forward kind of like a Nagant revolver. It would work best with shotgun shells. The cylinder could rotate and move forward and lock in place, the shotgun shell will open up and no gas would be able to escape. Ive been wanting a 12gauge revolving shotgun but have never seen one in person.
The Nagant M1895 revolver says hello. The only revolver the creators were smart enough to make the cylinder press against the barrel in moment of fire, thus sealing the gap
Because of this reason when they shouldered revolver rifles they would place their off hand on the stock to brave the weapon. A good example of this is in the movie the hateful 8
There were and are revolving rifles that don't explode your hands. for the old ones, you just hold it behind the cylinder. The Circuit Judge has blast deflectors and I have seen it fired with a standard rifle grip.
The only idea that could think of would be to have the gun completely sealed on the left hand side, so that the percussion would only go out the right side but it would force you to be right handed and you have to reload the cylinder the right hand side.
Archers actually wear a protection on the bow holding forearm to protect from the string dragging against the skin. It dawns on me that a user of these revolver rifles could have worn some kind of protection. If we dig into history, it wouldn't suprise me if we found that some of those that did use these rifles actually did wear some kind of protective bracelet.
funny enough this problem was easily dealt with in 2 different ways. 1. you have a spring mechanism that closes the gap and have a extra long case that seals it when the gases expand like the nagant revolver, or the pieper 1893 carbine, or 2. you use a blast shield on the side of the frame to deflect the gases up and away from the users arms. currently the Rossi circuit judge does this and it works just fine.
Personally the only time a revolver based rifle would have to be used in my opinion is due to lack of resources in a post apocalyptic survival scenario.
With the powder they were burning and the calibers they were shooting, they weren't worried about cylinder gap. They were more than likely too expensive to make. The culprit more than likely being production time.
Also, black powder is extremely dirty, there are reports of the cilinders being hard to reload and jamming because of fouling, battles usually lasted hours so this was unacceptable.
So, easy fix idea. Left side of the cylinder gets a shield so the gas all ejects out the right. As long as the rifle can be reloaded from the right side, anyone right handed is covered. Needing a seperate model for lefties is not fun though.
2 Issues 1) There are Mosin revolvers which compress the cylender forward during firing that eliminate the gap (and are among the only revolvers capable of being silenced) but the added mechanical complexity isn't worth it and wasn't invented until long after revolver rifles weren't necessary. 2) Black powder weapons are very low velocity by modern standards, meaning way less side venting, and you can buy a modern revolver shotgun now, with hight velocity powder and its completely fine.
2 answers 1) the trigger pull on the Nagant M1895 revolver was about 3x higher than other revolvers, even on single action. There's a reason that's pretty much the only example after 130 years. 2a) Less side venting, yes. But still venting superheated gas and burning powder. 2b) there are revolver shotguns. Interestingly, the Rossi Circuit Judge, Russian NTs255, SR410, etc tend to have parts that channel gas away from the hand on the cylinder or frame. Please fact check that. www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-samsung-rvo1&sca_esv=564519451&sxsrf=AB5stBh2mH_tXbzUsrKe2NfXeuW3OnsEBw:1694476043928&q=revolver+shotgun&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjeybaV36OBAxXuMUQIHc2cCVoQ0pQJegQIChAB&biw=360&bih=649&dpr=3#imgrc=a9Hm7oDCokCuvM
Imperial Russia adopted a revolver in late 1890s, that had this issue solved by pushing the cylinder forward a little every trigger pull, locking the chamber into the barrel as the cartridge detonates. Unfortunately this makes reloading difficult as the cylinder can no longer pop out.
This explanation does make sense, given that revolver rifles were primarily used by cavalry who wouldn't have had that issue with their long rawhide gloves, however the real reason is undoubtably because the US Army didn't want to spend the money on them. They were only ever issued to cavalry, and only because it's hard to reload a single shot rifle on horseback. All other models used in the war were privately purchased.
chain firing is such a damn piece of fudd lore. I'm not saying it's impossible, but the chances are so remote as not really be worth thinking about near as much as it is in fudd lore.
The Gears revolver helped me imagine some vestigial steampunk piece of kit like an aluminum and asbestos archer's armguard for the support hand to deal with cylinder gasses...
My understanding was that the idea it was about chain-fires comes from a belief folks had at the time that installing some kind of shield or shroud to protect your forward hand from the blast would increase the risk of chain-fires. Although now that I'm thinking about it, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, because based on the safety procedures of the time, it seemed like folks of that era understood pretty well that chain-fires occur at the back of the cylinder with the caps (especially with the more sensitive and energetic caps they used back then), rather than at the front with hot gas leaking past a loaded ball (unless you were using undersized ammunition). Although maybe such a shroud would direct enough venting gas back onto the caps the be a hazard, or possibly onto the shooter's other hand
I have one of those, I hold it in a specific way that gives me the stability of a rifle without putting my skin at risk from the ouchy gasses. I don’t know how to explain it but it works well and I love it. I wish they could design one that has the gap sealed off like the Russian Nagant revolver designed by Leon Nagant.
There's another reason. Very little velocity is gained in the longer barrel. It may even be lost. It really suffers from gas loss during the longer barrel dwell time. Take a look at Ballistics By the Inch results for a .22 Magnum revolver carbine. .22 Magnum is especially vulnerable to velocity loss in the revolver for some reason, but very lackluster velocity results. And there was a way to measure velocity with reasonably good accuracy in the 19th century. Which was the ballistic pendulum. Then there was always the pine board penetration test, which was commonly used to compare ammunition performance well into the 20th century.
Raise your hand if you'd want a .44 Magnum rifle you could reload as fast as a revolver.
(Raises hand)
Why not a .45?
-70.
See ruger 10/44.
Similar to the ruger 10/22 with its simple blowback operation and rotary magazine design. It came standard with 5 round magazines, however aftermarket magazines can be acquired placing you at a capacity of 15+1 rounds of 44 magnum with a reload speed equal to that of just about any box magazine fed weapon. My reload for a 10/22 was slightly faster average than my AR15 reload, usually running me (trained but in no way exceptionally skilled or particularly experienced) about 3 seconds.
The ruger 44 carbine is a tube fed semi-auto rifle. It was supplanted by the deerslayer, deerfield, or 99/44 (the model name had bit of controversial history) rifle that uses a drop rotary mag and action based off the mini-14. Both rifles are out of production. Ruger does still make the 77/44 a bolt action 44 mag rifle that uses a drop rotary mag.
@@zraal3759 I was referring specifically to the discontinued 10/44 model. I didn't know it was even a thing that existed until some old redneck told me about it and I looked it up.
That bolt action sounds nice though
Whipping out a Boltok from Gears as a demonstration goes NUTTY
It really does.
Actually it's kind of perfect because while it's somewhat accurate to a real world revolver everything is bigger, chunkier, and more exaggerated. So it's easy to show details
It looks so good
I thought it was Hellboy’s “Good Samaritan.”
@@samiamrg7Would be a good example too though.
"Allow me to demonstrate-"
*pulls out comically large revolver
Pretty sure it's a prop replica of the one from Gears of War
@@bearb3786 I know where it's from
*pulls out a comically large revolver that doesn't actually have the cylinder gap he's trying to demonstrate
@@bearb3786 it's a Swarm or locust boltok revolver!
Yet he only uses it to explain where the hand goes so @@Xrelent
Ah yes
The Bigger Iron
No its the biggest iron
The Biggerest Iron
At this point its
The big Steel
To the town of Auga Frea, rode a stranger one fine day…
@@keulron2290 Hardly spoke to folks around him, didnt have to much to say...
"...but the biggest would be cylinder gap."
*Pulls out Shaq's revolver*
*Cole Train's
@@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy
THE COLE TRAIN RUNS ON WHOLE GRAIN BABY!
WOOO!
😂😂 shaqs
@@AnimusDesynched_751 oh my lord this is the first time I met someone who knew it
@@creepytitan
Aye - nice to see another Gears fan.
They actually make gas shields to protect the shooter on a lot of revolver carbines
The gas shields increase the chain fire probability by a lot. It's not a problem with today's fully sealed cartridges, but during the civil war era, that wasn't the case. Colt himself explicitly didn't add a shield on the model 1855 because of that very reason.
Also: long sleeves/gloves.
@@VonWipfenfelsit still isn't a big deal if you seal it with wax or right kind of grease but considering that both sides could barely provide hardtack and powder at times (not to mention general shortage of food in csa) that's just wishful thinking.
T. Your Local black powder enjoyer (lung cancer represent o/)
@@Sk0lzky You are absolutely correct in that! I was merely explaining why this particular design feature wasn't found in the guns of that era, there were absolutely ways to prevent chain fires back then.
I thought you held revolver carbines behind the cylinder?
The design of the Nagant M1895 would have remedied that problem. It was just a bit late. Still, fun thought. Terrible outcome for your limbs.
The idea of a gas-seal between the cylinder and barrel is older than that; the Collier flintlock revolver had a cylinder cammed forward under spring tension all the way back in 1814.
@@JamesPolymer Trying to make an airtight seal without a cartridge is doable, certainly, but it requires tighter tolerances than even modern rifles manage, or some kind of gasket to fill in the gaps. Both of these were doable for large artillery pieces , but infantry rifles were expensive enough as-is.
Fun fact they actually made a revolver rifle based off that system called the Pieper M1893
Yes but that is cartridge revolver most of the revolving rifle came from the cap and ball era where you were dealing with losse ball and poweder or paper cartridges at best
You a hunt player by chance?
I'm sure you know this but chain fires are usually one maybe two other chambers going off. I know I wouldn't want my hand in the way of that. I do agree that gas is probably the main reason it wasn't done.
After the civil war the army issued cartidge revolver rifles, which has basically no risk or chain firing.
They very quickly realized the cylinder gap was an issue an stopped using them pretty much instantly.
@@patrickdix772not to mention you need to have several bores instead of one making cost to manufacture much higher.
@infernaldaedra eh, not more than a revolver pistol. The one the army tried out was basically a carbine version of the colt peacemaker IIRC.
The issues it was meant to solve were with a lever action repeaters. That being that the rounds put the weight more towards the front of the gun and a carbine length allows fewer rounds to be loaded. Burning yourself or using a terrible grip to avoid buring yourself made them drop it. There may also have been some risk of burning your face, since you often have a rifle up at your shoulder to fire, which isn't an issue with a pistol.
@@patrickdix772 yeah and the issues listed were solved in old revolvers like the nagant that would seal the chamber with a cambered bore design
@@infernaldaedrait's the singular example in which an obscene number were built before seeing combat. The mechanism is just too delicate for standard use and was replaced as soon as a viable option became available.
Good idea and a nice civilian gun though
this guy casually pulls up a gears weapon to explain how cylinders in revolvers work
Fun tip for black powder revolvers, to mitigate the risk of chain firing, you can pretty much just smear the front of the cylinder with crisco.
And/or the paper cartridges themselves, though sometimes lard was used. Muslim and Hindu troops in India at one point got *very* pissed when finding out the paper cartridges they were issued by the British, which had to be ripped open with your teeth, were coated in pig and/or cow fat.
Not a very good combat remedy but yeah that works, a better way would be oversized bullets, they issued em to pistols so when you use them they sheared off just s little rim of lead, not massively oversized but enough to have a small disk come off
@daltongarrett3393 that might be a bit of a rumor, considering both Hindu and Muslim Indians were apparently offended.
@isaiahdennhardt9409 it helps you still should put some good on the cylinder. Vaseline or Crisco or what ever ya have. or if you wanna seat a wad behind your shot.
@@daltongarrett3393that is one epic prank.
"what's that?"
"This is a revolver, Sol."
"It's a fucking anti-aircraft gun, Vincent."
I can think 3 ways this could have been fixed
a chauchat like foregrip would help to keep the arm safe from the gases and chainfiring but it would be unconfortable
making it break action so you can place shields on the sides (and use less powerful loads of gunpowder due to it having a estructural weakpoint)
And the Best, giving it a nagant like action
any way that rifle totally needs wood on the front, I can see why nobody liked it, it has the risk of chainfiring, the gas could burn your arm on a Best case escenario, and if you manage to shoot enough times the whole thing would be unconfortably Hot to hold it properly
I Sadly forgot the guy who did it but there is a video where they explicitly provoke a chain fire reaction. In the worst case your whole gun makes Boom in the best case you produce a stray bullet, but even a foregrip wouldn't necessarily save your hand. Everything in front of cylinder is a Ouch zone in around nearly 60° angle (have to guess but the foregrip needs to be so long it is basically a stand). There are multiple models of that revolver mechanism done and all "failed" till the point we where able to produce reliable and "save" cartridges. And we where able to reload them in a fast efficient way. And when the time for a revolver rifle finally came it gets a bit strange, thanks to the lever action technology.
A foregrip on a revolver sounds like COD vanguard stuff honestly
It was fixed by using a better gun in general. Lmfao
@@ichmich9324i believe ops comment was referring more to cylinder gap than chain fire
Still even with a foreguard, unless you're wearing protection for your arms, your supporting arm is still gonna get hit by the gas. Best idea would be to have a sealed chamber like the nagant, such as the Pieper M1893, but by the point they had figured that out, stripper clips and box magazines were already replacing it.
Left hand goes under right for support. The use of shooting sticks is also a good idea. Treat a revolving rifle like a bluntline and you won't burn yourself.
He already mentioned having to use a terrible grip in the video.
it would also be cool if they made a cutlass type handguard for the supporting hand, like a sheild that would protect the hand
The bullets would go through both it and your hand
@@rainingdeathx3368 The bullet isn't going sideways out of the cylinder into your arm... Did you even watch the video? The issue is gas escaping towards your arm. Not a bullet.
@@rainingdeathx3368a .44 round ball isn't puncturing through anything more than sheet metal lol.
The Taurus circuit judge uses that idea, just has a little deflector plate.
Solution: Make it like Kruber's repeater handgun from Vermintide 😂
If you know then you know.
They actually existed funnily enough, but were usually limited to naval and siege use due to their weight. After all, you are essentially strapping half a dozen guns togheter. Was relatively popular as a pistol though
They existed and the pistol versions were known as "Pepperbox" or "Volley" guns. They could be anything from pistol sized the ones Saltzpyre uses to Kruber's rifle variants.
As mentioned they tended to be extremely heavy and took a very long time to reload. They weren't generally something you would see people just toting around.
I love how to show cylinder gap you pulled out a replica boltok pistol from Gears of War, great game. It’s exactly what you’d expect it is but it’s still impressive.
It could probably work with a system like the Nagant m1895
Yeah, but by that point better options were available. If you wanted a PCC in 1895-1896 you could get any of a whole plethora of lever action guns with much higher capacity, as well as a couple models of early self-loader just starting to come onto the market.
The Soviet Nagant Revolver would have actually been a wonderful candidate for this carbine design.
The revolver was designed in such a way that the forcing cone actually entered each chamber when cycled and did not leave a cylinder gap, which also allowed the Nagant to be effectively suppressed.
I think there are a few more revolvers with similar designs but the Nagant is just the most famous, being the sidearm that brought down Berlin.
I'd just run some sturdy gauntlets, should be fine 😂
He just cually pulled out a revolver straight from Fallout...💀💀💀
It’s the boltok from Gears of War.
Typically the way I've seen these fired is with a "two handed pistol grip". The idea was that both of your hands were wrapped around the trigger, the stock is for more stability.
Man pulled out the Boltok, major respect.
Revolving rifles becoming popular sounds like a neat Alternate History concept.
"allow me too demonstrate"
*pulls out a borderlands gun*
Bro uses a Warhammer40K gun as a demonstration, mad respect.
thats a boltok, not a warhammer weapon
You versus the guy she told you not to worry about:
LMFAO
" Mainly because"
Proseeds to pull out worlds largest pistol
There was a system designed that was basically a shield in front of the cylinder to direct almost all the gasses away from the shooter’s hand. It wasn’t too expensive or cumbersome or anything. I think chain firing really was the main concern
Thank you. People hardly ever talk about that part.
As someone who really loves revolver rifles the fact that ill probably burn my arm if I ever get to shoot one disappoints me
Chain fire is a modern problem with our love of smaller diameter bullets, leaving gaps for hot gasses to reach the charge in adjacent cylinders.
And the relative low power gasses escaping from 19th century revolvers can be avoided by using a "chicken wing" position with the support arm.
there are solutions for cylinder gap problem (for example some kind of a cylinder cover that directs all escaping gas away from user's hands and face) but it was simply not worth it because lever-action and bolt-action rifles were still better for mass usage
The Boltok Revolver is such a BADASS PISTOL!
You should look up the remington 1858 revolving rifle. A good example of a revolving rifle.
Actually, with these revolving rifles the training doctrine preferred that operators of the weapon keep both their hands positioned behind the cylinder. One hand to operate the hammer and trigger with the support hand bracing that hold. Not too awkward when you try it for yourself. It was just more expensive than tossing muskets to infantry so that’s why the few that were in service were assigned to special units like the sharpshooters and a few in light/mounted infantry units.
Shhh we don't use facts here. Every single one of the shorts I've seen talking about revolver rifles has been wrong. The answer was always budget but that's not a fun answer so we keep getting dumb videos like this.
The circuit judge is a modern revolver rifle that solved the problem with cylinder gap without doing anything about the cylinder gap. It simply has a gas shield that covers a portion of the bottom of the cylinder. The circuit judge is not the first revolver rifle to do this but it would not be easy to implement on a cap and ball black powder revolver rifle.
There are offhand grips for these types of rifles that allow you to hold them relatively well, located right below the trigger guard.
People seem to think chain firing was some super common thing in old guns. This is the real reason.
He says this while the nagant exists lol
I was NOT expecting a Boltok Jumpscare, bloody amazing!
"let me demonstrate what I mean"
*Proceed to pull out a fictional gun*
Thanks, dude. I love things that make sense!
Forgot what world I lived in when he whipped out his Trusty,Busty,Fussy,Gusty,Boltok.50
This guy's revolver would fit into Warhammer 40k pretty well
Also, the gasses escaping means less pressure behind the bullet, not a big deal with something as short as a revolver but a rifle has a lot longer barrel that isnt being used very effectivly as its leaking out the back.
If im not mistaken, there are Revolvers with no cylinder gap like the Nagant. It has a super heavy pull, but that might be way less of an issue with a rifle where you have more area to machine additional support and a stronger cylinder cycling mechanism.
These rifles were also a lot more expensive and more complex to maintain than regular muzzle-loading rifles. They could equip specialists like the cavalry with repeating rifles, but not the hundreds of thousands of regular infantrymen.
Owner of a Beretta Stampede here. Can confirm: the flash is aggressive. It is still one of the most fun firearms I own, and by golly is it a conversation starter.
The nagant revolver solved that problem with a combination of a forward boving cylinder and ammo casing that seals the gap. Sadly it was never utilized after that particular pistol.
"Big Iron on his hiiiiiiiiiieeeeeeeeeehhhhpppp"
-Marty Robbins
Chain firing was a major issue in revolving rifles, it wasn’t just the hot gas, honestly that was probably the least of your concerns in the instance of chain firing that would easily take fingers as opposed to “ouch hot” there was a revolving rifle introduced by colt if I am not mistaken that was adopted for a short time due to the convenience of not constantly having to load and reload a musket but chain firing was so frequent that they would rather use their muskets or service revolver as opposed to the rifle, while a regular revolver would still occasionally suffer from chain firing in the case of a revolving rifle your other hand was in front of the cylinder that doesn’t discriminate between enemy and your fingers
There are ways around this problem. Modern revolver rifles have a shield that blocks the gasses from going forwards, and are fine as long as you don’t get too close to the cylinder from the side. You can also design a system similar to a nagant revolver with no cylinder gap because the cylinder moves forwards into the barrel creating a seal
I really want a revolving rifle version of the Nagant
That's the kind of gun that Scout TF2 uses. Except instead of rifle rounds it's shotgun rounds.
Cost is one if not major factors why it wide spread out side calv and breach loaders were faster and easier to maintain.
I know time periods don't match up and stuff but it'd be funny to see a BIGGER IRON with a vertical grip.
Bro just casually pulled out a Locust weapon
This gun demonstration is really educational
I once owned a Uberti revolver carbine in 45lc and it instructs you to hold it like a handgun and has extra brass bits that came off the trigger guard towards the end of the stock to support a two handed grip behind the cylinder
12 gauge Revolver shotgun, the SR-410
My dude got the Warhammer 40k Bolt Revolver
Good to know. I always saw chain fire referenced as the sole reason for the failure of revolving rifles, but never saw anyone explain why revolving pistols succeeded where the rifles failed. This makes a lot more sense.
There are modern revolver rifles that have a shield for the cylinder gap. But realistically, they weren't common for a better reason: A cylinder is a far weaker, more limited, and more mechanically complex system than a bolt that locks into and seals a chamber. Sure, there were plenty of lever guns using pistol cartridges like .45 LC, but most brass cartridge repeaters of the time were using far more powerful rifle rounds that would make a cylinder far to large and heavy to be practical, or would just blow them up.
The fewer points of failure, the better!
Even if revolving cylinders do make the pp hard 😔
There is a company who came up with a way to suppress a revolver. They figured out a way to seal the cylinder gap on revolvers. So there is that.
Couldn't they have put a shielding around the cylinder that directs the gas away from the support arm?
A solid semi sealed cylinder would probably increase the likelihood of chainfiring but perhaps a slotted shield to guide the gas would work. It would direct the gas away from the support arm by directing the gas upwards towards the top of the gun and away from the support arm (the shielding is installed corresponding to dominant hand). The shield would also have a slot for airflow as to not retain heat from subsequent firing
Bro just casually pulling out the Mega hand cannon 55million death Star destroyer. 💀
Honestly a single action revolver rifle that uses the Nagant cylinder sealing system might have worked well back then (I see a lot of comments saying the same thing, I am not original or clever and will be disappearing into the Alaskan wilderness to regain my honor)
A solution to this would be to have the cylinder move forward to seal the gap
The Nagant Revolver did this where the whole cylinder would move slightly forward and seal the gap.
The ammo was also unusual in that it's casing extended past the actual bullet to further assist in this.
With modern construction and materials we could probably do this without the unsual ammunition just fine.
not all revolvers have cylinder gap, but those that didn't (and don't now) tend to have extra weight and complexity dedicated to cylinders that would push forward and "lock" with the barrel, or parts of the cylinder that would move, or other complex things that added to weight and added points of failure.
modern revolver rifles are really for utility. Cases where you are firing different loads and being able to have a cylinder makes it quicker to load and unload.
comes into play if you are using a rifle that fires .45-70, .410, Flair, and other variant rounds and you may need to switch in a woods situation. (needing to load flair rounds in an emergancy)
Easy way to solve that would be making the cylinder step forward kind of like a Nagant revolver. It would work best with shotgun shells. The cylinder could rotate and move forward and lock in place, the shotgun shell will open up and no gas would be able to escape. Ive been wanting a 12gauge revolving shotgun but have never seen one in person.
The Nagant M1895 revolver says hello. The only revolver the creators were smart enough to make the cylinder press against the barrel in moment of fire, thus sealing the gap
So happy to recognize the Boltok
Because of this reason when they shouldered revolver rifles they would place their off hand on the stock to brave the weapon. A good example of this is in the movie the hateful 8
There were and are revolving rifles that don't explode your hands. for the old ones, you just hold it behind the cylinder. The Circuit Judge has blast deflectors and I have seen it fired with a standard rifle grip.
The only idea that could think of would be to have the gun completely sealed on the left hand side, so that the percussion would only go out the right side but it would force you to be right handed and you have to reload the cylinder the right hand side.
That gas issue is easily solved by a deflector plate around the gap so that the gasses vent up,not down
Archers actually wear a protection on the bow holding forearm to protect from the string dragging against the skin. It dawns on me that a user of these revolver rifles could have worn some kind of protection. If we dig into history, it wouldn't suprise me if we found that some of those that did use these rifles actually did wear some kind of protective bracelet.
they still make. heritage has one called the rancher carbine and its pretty fun to shoot
funny enough this problem was easily dealt with in 2 different ways. 1. you have a spring mechanism that closes the gap and have a extra long case that seals it when the gases expand like the nagant revolver, or the pieper 1893 carbine, or 2. you use a blast shield on the side of the frame to deflect the gases up and away from the users arms. currently the Rossi circuit judge does this and it works just fine.
So a Nagant revolver could be effectively made into a revolver? Cylinder gap closes which is why they can get a suppressor.
Several revolvers push the cylinder forward as you squeeze the trigger
Personally the only time a revolver based rifle would have to be used in my opinion is due to lack of resources in a post apocalyptic survival scenario.
With the powder they were burning and the calibers they were shooting, they weren't worried about cylinder gap. They were more than likely too expensive to make. The culprit more than likely being production time.
Love the life size Boltok Pistol from Gears of War being used as an example
Also, black powder is extremely dirty, there are reports of the cilinders being hard to reload and jamming because of fouling, battles usually lasted hours so this was unacceptable.
So, easy fix idea. Left side of the cylinder gets a shield so the gas all ejects out the right. As long as the rifle can be reloaded from the right side, anyone right handed is covered. Needing a seperate model for lefties is not fun though.
so you remove the cylinder gap, push the cylinder forward to seal as part of the action, it's something that was actually done
Love the N7 Cap mate!!
Always great to see another Mass Effect Fan!!
The Nagant M1895 Revolver would actually push the the cylinder forward against the barrel when you pulled the trigger to make a seal.
2 Issues
1) There are Mosin revolvers which compress the cylender forward during firing that eliminate the gap (and are among the only revolvers capable of being silenced) but the added mechanical complexity isn't worth it and wasn't invented until long after revolver rifles weren't necessary.
2) Black powder weapons are very low velocity by modern standards, meaning way less side venting, and you can buy a modern revolver shotgun now, with hight velocity powder and its completely fine.
2 answers
1) the trigger pull on the Nagant M1895 revolver was about 3x higher than other revolvers, even on single action. There's a reason that's pretty much the only example after 130 years.
2a) Less side venting, yes. But still venting superheated gas and burning powder.
2b) there are revolver shotguns. Interestingly, the Rossi Circuit Judge, Russian NTs255, SR410, etc tend to have parts that channel gas away from the hand on the cylinder or frame.
Please fact check that.
www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-samsung-rvo1&sca_esv=564519451&sxsrf=AB5stBh2mH_tXbzUsrKe2NfXeuW3OnsEBw:1694476043928&q=revolver+shotgun&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjeybaV36OBAxXuMUQIHc2cCVoQ0pQJegQIChAB&biw=360&bih=649&dpr=3#imgrc=a9Hm7oDCokCuvM
That’s why I would assume in BF1 the tanker or pilot had really long leather gloves to minimize that possibility if I recall
Imperial Russia adopted a revolver in late 1890s, that had this issue solved by pushing the cylinder forward a little every trigger pull, locking the chamber into the barrel as the cartridge detonates. Unfortunately this makes reloading difficult as the cylinder can no longer pop out.
That thing where the mouth of the cylinder comes into contact with the barrel is called the forcing cone.
This explanation does make sense, given that revolver rifles were primarily used by cavalry who wouldn't have had that issue with their long rawhide gloves, however the real reason is undoubtably because the US Army didn't want to spend the money on them. They were only ever issued to cavalry, and only because it's hard to reload a single shot rifle on horseback. All other models used in the war were privately purchased.
chain firing is such a damn piece of fudd lore. I'm not saying it's impossible, but the chances are so remote as not really be worth thinking about near as much as it is in fudd lore.
There’s a modern one of these with a plate a little bit in front that protects your hand
The Gears revolver helped me imagine some vestigial steampunk piece of kit like an aluminum and asbestos archer's armguard for the support hand to deal with cylinder gasses...
My understanding was that the idea it was about chain-fires comes from a belief folks had at the time that installing some kind of shield or shroud to protect your forward hand from the blast would increase the risk of chain-fires.
Although now that I'm thinking about it, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, because based on the safety procedures of the time, it seemed like folks of that era understood pretty well that chain-fires occur at the back of the cylinder with the caps (especially with the more sensitive and energetic caps they used back then), rather than at the front with hot gas leaking past a loaded ball (unless you were using undersized ammunition).
Although maybe such a shroud would direct enough venting gas back onto the caps the be a hazard, or possibly onto the shooter's other hand
I have one of those, I hold it in a specific way that gives me the stability of a rifle without putting my skin at risk from the ouchy gasses. I don’t know how to explain it but it works well and I love it. I wish they could design one that has the gap sealed off like the Russian Nagant revolver designed by Leon Nagant.
There's another reason. Very little velocity is gained in the longer barrel. It may even be lost. It really suffers from gas loss during the longer barrel dwell time. Take a look at Ballistics By the Inch results for a .22 Magnum revolver carbine. .22 Magnum is especially vulnerable to velocity loss in the revolver for some reason, but very lackluster velocity results. And there was a way to measure velocity with reasonably good accuracy in the 19th century. Which was the ballistic pendulum. Then there was always the pine board penetration test, which was commonly used to compare ammunition performance well into the 20th century.