Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: S&W Alloy revolver frames & cylinders

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    5,153

    Default S&W Alloy revolver frames & cylinders

    In researching forgings for firearms I stumbled across US Patent 6711819. This patent covers the manufacturing of the scadium alloy revolver frames and cylinders that S&W uses for their lightweight magnums - Models 329, 357, and the smaller 336s etc.

    The patent describes the manufacturing including forging and heat treating of the parts to make them suitable for use in magnum firearms. One thing that caught my eye was the statement that castings were not strong enough for aluminum alloy firearms in heavy calibers.

    I had always wondered why Ruger never make an alloy revolver like S&W and Colt - now it appears I know the answer. Cast alloy frames just are not strong enought to take the pounding of the heavy loads.

    The link is: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/67...scription.html
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  2. #2

    Default right

    And what makes you think the alloy frames S&Ws hold up that well. You are incredible. Now you're starting a forging vs casting thread about ALLOY frames. What is wrong with you? You need counseling, that's for sure. Please everybody, leave this one alone, PLEEEEEZE!!!

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    5,153

    Default Read the patent

    Did you read the patent? It is quite interesting regardless of what you think about Rugers or S&Ws.

    I don't think there is any doubt in anyone's mind about an alloy frame holding up as well as a steel frame - but that isn't the point.

    Do you have any ideas about why Ruger doesn't make an alloy frame revolver- there is quite a market for them.


    Quote Originally Posted by mauserboy View Post
    And what makes you think the alloy frames S&Ws hold up that well. You are incredible. Now you're starting a forging vs casting thread about ALLOY frames. What is wrong with you? You need counseling, that's for sure. Please everybody, leave this one alone, PLEEEEEZE!!!
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  4. #4
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    730

    Default S&W alloy ....

    S&W doesn't use Scandium for cylinders ... frames only. The Scandium Airweights have titanium cylinders. And Ruger owns a titanium manufacturing operation , in Arizona, I believe. (I have 2 titanium hammers - a 14 oz framer and a 10 oz finish hammer made by and marked RUGER.) I think that they don't compete in the lightweight revolver market by choice, not because S&W holds a Scandium patent. That didn't stop Taurus, i.e., their Titanium Tracker models ... very light and stout. I for one would like to see Ruger make a lightweight version of their Redhawk 4" .44 mag and .45 Colt .... I like the Redhawk, but too heavy, to me , for every day carry.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    5,153

    Default S&W Airweights

    I'm not even sure S&W uses the processes in the subject patent - I couldn't find any patent references with my 329 PD. They may have aquired the patent to avoid competition or other reasons.

    I'm not sure what patent - if any- Taurus uses on their guns. The reports I have heard on them have not been good in any event and tend to lock up after being fired a few times; the locking NOT being from bullets backing out of the cases.

    There was outfit down in Houston, TX some years back that was using titanium investment castings for AR-15 receivers for a while but don't know if they are still in business. I would think the stresses on a AR-15 receiver would be pretty low compared to a magnum revolver.

    A lightweight Ruger would be interesting but I suspect ti would require a major change in their manufacturing methods.


    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    S&W doesn't use Scandium for cylinders ... frames only. The Scandium Airweights have titanium cylinders. And Ruger owns a titanium manufacturing operation , in Arizona, I believe. (I have 2 titanium hammers - a 14 oz framer and a 10 oz finish hammer made by and marked RUGER.) I think that they don't compete in the lightweight revolver market by choice, not because S&W holds a Scandium patent. That didn't stop Taurus, i.e., their Titanium Tracker models ... very light and stout. I for one would like to see Ruger make a lightweight version of their Redhawk 4" .44 mag and .45 Colt .... I like the Redhawk, but too heavy, to me , for every day carry.
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    526

    Default

    And who says that Ruger isn't manufacturing them for other companies?? I know that Ruger builds revolver frames for other manufacturers -- but you don't hear much about that.

    tvfinak, you just won't let this go, will you. The fact of the matter is that your beloved S&Ws aren't very strong and the returns are telling -- they are getting pounded loose, just like the old Model 29s. Rugers don't have this problem.......

    I am a Smith and Ruger owner, and while I love my S&Ws (I have 4 of them), they just can't handle the beating in any caliber........

  7. #7
    Member Big Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Palmer,Alaska
    Posts
    1,737

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitworth View Post
    And who says that Ruger isn't manufacturing them for other companies?? I know that Ruger builds revolver frames for other manufacturers -- but you don't hear much about that.

    tvfinak, you just won't let this go, will you. The fact of the matter is that your beloved S&Ws aren't very strong and the returns are telling -- they are getting pounded loose, just like the old Model 29s. Rugers don't have this problem.......

    I am a Smith and Ruger owner, and while I love my S&Ws (I have 4 of them), they just can't handle the beating in any caliber........

    Please, Please, Please folks, throw dirt on this one. Lets not get into this crap again. What was the advise Murphy gave us before?
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tryants." (Thomas Jefferson

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    526

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Big Al View Post
    Please, Please, Please folks, throw dirt on this one. Lets not get into this crap again. What was the advise Murphy gave us before?
    Of course, Al, you are right. I think tvfinak is just trying to cook up an argument again -- yes, and I took the bait. I will decline to partake in this further.........

    Troll away................

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    5,153

    Default No comparison

    Since Ruger does not even make an alloy frame magnum revolver I don't see how this can start an argument. I think everyone can thank S&W and Taurus for making these lightweight magnum revolvers. While they clearly aren't as durable as steel revolvers they do have a unique place in the handgun world.

    I just remembered that I have an old Bearcat with an alloy frame but it isn't a magnum by any stretch.

    The patent does have a lot of interesting information in it about alloy - not steel - frames if one takes the time to read it.
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  10. #10
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    730

    Thumbs up A titanium Ruger Redhawk?

    Titanium weighs about 60% of what the same volume of steel weighs. The barrel would require a steel liner, perhaps the internal parts also, so not all parts could be titanium .... however, a 48 oz Ruger Redhawk 4" 44 mag, could be reduced to 30 or 32 ounces, by making the frame and cylinder out of titanium. I'd like that. And I'm certain it would be as durable - long term - as a unit completely out of steel.

    Scandium alloyed aluminum weighs about 40% of the same volume of steel, but is not as tough as steel or titanium, but is more than tough enough for the intended purpose of the Scandium Airweights.

    I'd love to see Ruger develope a titanium Redhawk. I think they could sell all they produced.

    I'd buy one in .45 Colt, do an action job, and then Magnaport it. Be a nice woods carry piece. But I also yearn for a S&W M329PD. So many toys, so little time. And, as my wife always says .... and too many (sled) dogs to feed. Oh, well.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    5,153

    Default Lightweight Ruger

    How about getting S&W to make an alloy XFrame? That wouldn't be much bigger than a Redhawk and would be certain to generate all the recoil anyone could ever hope for.

    For an alloy Redhawk there may be some patent issues for Ruger to sort out with S&W - they seem to own the patent I referenced.

    Perhaps Ruger could get S&W to make some strong forged alloy frames for them


    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    Titanium weighs about 60% of what the same volume of steel weighs. The barrel would require a steel liner, perhaps the internal parts also, so not all parts could be titanium .... however, a 48 oz Ruger Redhawk 4" 44 mag, could be reduced to 30 or 32 ounces, by making the frame and cylinder out of titanium. I'd like that. And I'm certain it would be as durable - long term - as a unit completely out of steel.

    Scandium alloyed aluminum weighs about 40% of the same volume of steel, but is not as tough as steel or titanium, but is more than tough enough for the intended purpose of the Scandium Airweights.

    I'd love to see Ruger develope a titanium Redhawk. I think they could sell all they produced.

    I'd buy one in .45 Colt, do an action job, and then Magnaport it. Be a nice woods carry piece. But I also yearn for a S&W M329PD. So many toys, so little time. And, as my wife always says .... and too many (sled) dogs to feed. Oh, well.
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  12. #12
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    730

    Default A Ruger lightweight Redhawk

    tvfinak ....

    S&W's patent is for a Scandium alloyed aluminum frame.

    If Ruger wants to make a lightweight Redhawk, the frame doesn't have to made of a Scandium alloy. They can make it out of titanium. Some folks may consider that to be preferable anyway. And, NO, S&W doesn't own a controlling patent for a titanium frame.

    Ruger doesn't venture into the specialized market for lightweight revolvers ... only because they choose not to.

  13. #13
    Moderator Paul H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    5,594

    Default

    Just remember that forgings start as castings

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    5,153

    Default What is the point?

    I guess we could go even further back and say that everything metal part starts as dirt or rock but I'm not sure where we would go with that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Paul H View Post
    Just remember that forgings start as castings
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    5,153

    Default Stiffness may be an issue

    I'm certain Ruger can do anything they wish to do as can any well managed American company.

    Machining is certainly an issue for a titanium frame; stiffness may be another issue a manufacturer would have to face. Ruger could make a titanium frame easier than S&W since S&W's frame are considerably more complicated that Rugers.

    I would take hard look something like the Security Six in a 5 shot .41 Mag cartridge or similar i.e. something largert than a .357 mag. For a lightweight .357 class revolver S&W will be hard to beat.


    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    tvfinak ....

    S&W's patent is for a Scandium alloyed aluminum frame.

    If Ruger wants to make a lightweight Redhawk, the frame doesn't have to made of a Scandium alloy. They can make it out of titanium. Some folks may consider that to be preferable anyway. And, NO, S&W doesn't own a controlling patent for a titanium frame.

    Ruger doesn't venture into the specialized market for lightweight revolvers ... only because they choose not to.
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  16. #16
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    730

    Thumbs up Lightweight revolvers ....

    I've long been a fan of S&Ws and Rugers. My woods carry pistol of 10 years is a S&W M396 Mountain Lite in 44 special (Performance Center action job and Trijicon night sights, 21 ounces loaded). I really like it, because, unlike my M29's and Mountain gun, I carry it. It doesn't get left in the truck or at home. When I drive dogs, I wear it ... don't put it in the sled bag. Stoked with Buffalo Bore's Heavy .44Specials - 970fps/255 grain hardcast/gas checks - it has more punch and penetration than a .357 in a very compact carry unit. Several years ago, I actually downed a moose with it - at about 20 yards. I have a great deal of affection for the little beast. The initial muzzle jump/recoil is fierce, but the momentum dissipates quickly, to get back on target.

    BrownBear has convinced me that I probably should be packing a M329 like his - action job and magnaported. A woodsman that wants a lightweight Redhawk can dream and wish, but the S&W M329 is here and now, and it has the wonder of a silky smooth S&W action and trigger. Actually, its a piece of modern high tech weaponry art.

    I think I just talked myself into something. When does the Permanent Fund Dividend show up?

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    5,153

    Default Awesome gun

    The 329 PDs are a real wonder in the firearms world. The killing power -weight ratio has got to be about the best out there in a handgun.

    You are absolutely correct about carrying it - I'll drop my 329 in my pocket where I would never take the time to attach my 629 to my belt. Odds are much greater that I'll have it when I need it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    I've long been a fan of S&Ws and Rugers. My woods carry pistol of 10 years is a S&W M396 Mountain Lite in 44 special (Performance Center action job and Trijicon night sights, 21 ounces loaded). I really like it, because, unlike my M29's and Mountain gun, I carry it. It doesn't get left in the truck or at home. When I drive dogs, I wear it ... don't put it in the sled bag. Stoked with Buffalo Bore's Heavy .44Specials - 970fps/255 grain hardcast/gas checks - it has more punch and penetration than a .357 in a very compact carry unit. Several years ago, I actually downed a moose with it - at about 20 yards. I have a great deal of affection for the little beast. The initial muzzle jump/recoil is fierce, but the momentum dissipates quickly, to get back on target.

    BrownBear has convinced me that I probably should be packing a M329 like his - action job and magnaported. A woodsman that wants a lightweight Redhawk can dream and wish, but the S&W M329 is here and now, and it has the wonder of a silky smooth S&W action and trigger. Actually, its a piece of modern high tech weaponry art.

    I think I just talked myself into something. When does the Permanent Fund Dividend show up?
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •