Can someone explain how wheel guns can be accurate while bullets have to travel down free bore, forcing cone before engaging the rifling. Pistols and rifles try to minimize free bore, tight headspace and seat the bullet close to rifling in order to be accurate! I have seen some amazing groups out of wheel guns, so what to make a wheel gun accurate. When reloading, it is also said OAL is not critical if rimmed cartridges such as 38 SPCL, then what is critical when reloading for wheel guns for accuracy?
How wheel guns can be accurate!
- Thread starter HankC1
- Start date
I'm no expert but I'm guessing a big part is due to the fact that the sights and barrel on a revolver are always 100% fixed. In a 1911 for example you have barrel/barrel bushing alignment, slide/barrel alignment, locking lug/slide alignment to factor in. Each of these interfaces has tolerances that factor into the inherent accuracy of a pistol.
Additionally I find most revolver triggers to be better.
Additionally I find most revolver triggers to be better.
Pond James Pond
New member
I would imagine that the barrel being so rigidly held in the frame (unlike the barrel in a semi automatic that is hanging there, not attached to anything, merely pinned in place).
So the bullet is in a free-bore for a bit.... once it hits the rifling, the relationship between sights and the bore the bullet is travelling down will be exactly the same as the preceding bullet. In a semi that relationship will depend on how tightly the chamber on the barrel mates with the breech-face when the slide closes and that depends on how well the slide mates to the frame etc...
That is my guess, anyway....
And I see I've been beaten to that conclusion!!
So the bullet is in a free-bore for a bit.... once it hits the rifling, the relationship between sights and the bore the bullet is travelling down will be exactly the same as the preceding bullet. In a semi that relationship will depend on how tightly the chamber on the barrel mates with the breech-face when the slide closes and that depends on how well the slide mates to the frame etc...
That is my guess, anyway....
And I see I've been beaten to that conclusion!!
testuser79
New member
On the ammunition side, common revolver cartridges are remarkably consistent, even when downloaded significantly. I can download the .357 and .44 by several grains and still get excellent results.
Probably the large case capacity and the ability to use longer projectiles, I guess?
Probably the large case capacity and the ability to use longer projectiles, I guess?
Years ago, a gun writer (I forget who it was) remarked that the revolver is a miracle with each shot.
While the barrel and sights are rigidly consistent to one another, he pointed out that the bullet must travel "free bore," cross a gap, slap into a forcing cone,
then be aligned truly down the barrel.
Another factor of the miracle, he noted, was that each cylinder chamber must line up with the bore nearly perfectly, or maybe not so perfectly given how Smith cylinders can still wobble a bit even during firing, and the accuracy is
still produced.
And think about the bullet. It can be squeezed down some in the "free bore" part of the cylinder, than slams into the forcing cone at hopefully a decent angle, and next the bullet either expands some (depending the size of the bore) or squeezed down as in the example of a Python barrel which has a much smaller muzzle diameter than the barrel diameter directly after the
forcing cone.
And speaking of the cylinder gap, it's often not consistent from cylinder chamber to cylinder chamber as a lot of cylinder faces are not "true."
So in my unchallengeable opinion, the revolver was divinely inspired while the autoloader is a thing-a-ma-jig thought up in some guy's basement.
While the barrel and sights are rigidly consistent to one another, he pointed out that the bullet must travel "free bore," cross a gap, slap into a forcing cone,
then be aligned truly down the barrel.
Another factor of the miracle, he noted, was that each cylinder chamber must line up with the bore nearly perfectly, or maybe not so perfectly given how Smith cylinders can still wobble a bit even during firing, and the accuracy is
still produced.
And think about the bullet. It can be squeezed down some in the "free bore" part of the cylinder, than slams into the forcing cone at hopefully a decent angle, and next the bullet either expands some (depending the size of the bore) or squeezed down as in the example of a Python barrel which has a much smaller muzzle diameter than the barrel diameter directly after the
forcing cone.
And speaking of the cylinder gap, it's often not consistent from cylinder chamber to cylinder chamber as a lot of cylinder faces are not "true."
So in my unchallengeable opinion, the revolver was divinely inspired while the autoloader is a thing-a-ma-jig thought up in some guy's basement.
Good question.
The biggest reason is that "accurate" means something very different for a handgun than for a rifle.
A very accurate handgun will shoot groups of a couple of inches in size at 25 yards.
That would be miserable accuracy for a rifle. Most folks expect a reasonably accurate rifle to shoot groups about half that size at twice the distance.
Basically a really accurate handgun is something like 5 or 10 times less accurate than a decently accurate rifle.
Some things you don't question . . .
Some things you don't question; you just appreciate.
Revolvers are very accurate (by handgun standards). I own a bunch of them and they all send the projectile downrange right were I point them. "Where I point them" being the biggest variable.
Why? I don't know. I'll leave that answer for people smarter than me. I just love shooting revolvers. And I know a Smith & Wesson K-frame 38 Special w/ 4" bbl can put wadcutters through the same hole at 10 yards, repeatedly.
Some things you don't question; you just appreciate.
Revolvers are very accurate (by handgun standards). I own a bunch of them and they all send the projectile downrange right were I point them. "Where I point them" being the biggest variable
.Why? I don't know. I'll leave that answer for people smarter than me. I just love shooting revolvers. And I know a Smith & Wesson K-frame 38 Special w/ 4" bbl can put wadcutters through the same hole at 10 yards, repeatedly.
It's because the barrel and sights are fixed in place. With most semi-autos, the barrel and sights move with each shot. In order to make them lock back into place tightly and precisely enough to approach the consistency of a revolver, the gun would have to be fitted to such tight tolerances that reliability would be adversely affected. In most cases, the variance in lockup of the barrel and slide is more than enough to offset the tighter tolerances of the chamber.
Now, some semi-autos are better in these respects than others. A gun with a fixed barrel such as a Makarov, Walther PP, CZ-83 or the like can give surprisingly good accuracy because you've taken one variable, the movement of the barrel, out of the equation. Also, semi-autos with both barrels and slides fixed in place, such as a Ruger Mk. III, are capable of fantastic accuracy and it is not uncommon for them to outshoot even top-quality revolvers.
The problem, however, is that having a fixed barrel and/or sights in a semi-auto requires either a much more complex design or a blowback operation which limits the power of the cartridge. While blowbacks in larger calibers have been made, the Hi-Point pistols and the Astra 400 come to mind, they all require either an overly large and heavy slide or an excessively heavy recoil spring. The best and most practical way to make a semi-auto in a service-class or above caliber is to have some sort of locked breech and the most effective and practical way to do that is with a reciprocating slide and moving barrel of some sort. Additionally, for the purposes that a semi-auto is commonly used, their accuracy is typically considered to be good enough and thus few manufacturers see the need to go to the time, complexity, and expense of attempting to create a design that is significantly more accurate. Simply put, a 3 inch group at 25 yards is more than accurate enough for a Military, Police, or self-defense handgun.
The design of a revolver, however, keeps the cylinder locked in place until the user manually unlocks it by pulling the trigger, cocking the hammer, or actuating the cylinder release latch. Because of this, there is very little, if any change needed to the basic design to scale a very small .22 Rimfire revolver up to shoot the largest Magnum cartridge.
Now, some semi-autos are better in these respects than others. A gun with a fixed barrel such as a Makarov, Walther PP, CZ-83 or the like can give surprisingly good accuracy because you've taken one variable, the movement of the barrel, out of the equation. Also, semi-autos with both barrels and slides fixed in place, such as a Ruger Mk. III, are capable of fantastic accuracy and it is not uncommon for them to outshoot even top-quality revolvers.
The problem, however, is that having a fixed barrel and/or sights in a semi-auto requires either a much more complex design or a blowback operation which limits the power of the cartridge. While blowbacks in larger calibers have been made, the Hi-Point pistols and the Astra 400 come to mind, they all require either an overly large and heavy slide or an excessively heavy recoil spring. The best and most practical way to make a semi-auto in a service-class or above caliber is to have some sort of locked breech and the most effective and practical way to do that is with a reciprocating slide and moving barrel of some sort. Additionally, for the purposes that a semi-auto is commonly used, their accuracy is typically considered to be good enough and thus few manufacturers see the need to go to the time, complexity, and expense of attempting to create a design that is significantly more accurate. Simply put, a 3 inch group at 25 yards is more than accurate enough for a Military, Police, or self-defense handgun.
The design of a revolver, however, keeps the cylinder locked in place until the user manually unlocks it by pulling the trigger, cocking the hammer, or actuating the cylinder release latch. Because of this, there is very little, if any change needed to the basic design to scale a very small .22 Rimfire revolver up to shoot the largest Magnum cartridge.
Bob Wright
New member
A simple answer to this is to hold a funnel over a given point then pour a liquid into the funnel. As it discharges, it hits the selected point.
Now instead of a liquid and funnel, replace that with a lead bullet and rifled barrel with a forcing cone.
Proper sized cylinder throats, and a soft lead bullet with a long bearing surface and fired at the right velocity all add up to accuracy.
Bob Wright
Now instead of a liquid and funnel, replace that with a lead bullet and rifled barrel with a forcing cone.
Proper sized cylinder throats, and a soft lead bullet with a long bearing surface and fired at the right velocity all add up to accuracy.
Bob Wright
Fla_dogman
New member
Fixed barrel
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk
45 Dragoon
New member
Yap, fixed barrel, correct chambering, correct bullet size is the recipe for accuracy.
The "free bore" is not a problem (even in a "long cylinder") as long as the bullet fits the chamber. The forcing cone doesn't come into play much unless there is misalignment. So as long as there is a true axis along the way, accuracy is fairly easy.
If you get a high end revolver with a "line bored" cylinder (or have a cyl bored in your revolver) , you'll get a 5/6 shooter that fires like the same gun with each shot rather than 5/6 separate guns firing.
Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
Follow me on Instagram @ goonsgunworks
The "free bore" is not a problem (even in a "long cylinder") as long as the bullet fits the chamber. The forcing cone doesn't come into play much unless there is misalignment. So as long as there is a true axis along the way, accuracy is fairly easy.
If you get a high end revolver with a "line bored" cylinder (or have a cyl bored in your revolver) , you'll get a 5/6 shooter that fires like the same gun with each shot rather than 5/6 separate guns firing.
Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com
Follow me on Instagram @ goonsgunworks
I know fixed barrel definitely helps, do bullet weight, powder type and charge weight make much difference on wheel gun accuracy? I heard OAL is not critical! So far, I have only shot 158 grs LN in my 38 SPL. Like to try lighter bullets such as 125 grs and reload myself. I know POI will change. Semi-auto pistol can be bullet, OAL and powder sensitive. I consider switch to wheel gun and reloading, hate to chase semi-auto spent casings.
Last edited:
JohnKSa said:
Hal said:
I'm in the "somewhere in between" camp. As far as I've ever been able to tell, a "very accurate' handgun can print about 3/4" at 25 yards from a ransom rest. Maybe a wee better, maybe a wee worse. That's about 3 MOA - less accurate than a decent rifle; maybe 5-fold, but not 10-fold less.
IME, an in-spec S&W revolver ought to be able to shoot up to this 3/4"@25 yard standard. I'd expect a match-grade semi-auto to be able to do the same, but not your typical factory striker-fired gun.
Pond James Pond
New member
I think if we're comparing the accuracy of handguns to those of a rifle, I'd say we'd need to pitch them on a common ground so at distances that are equal as ratios of their respective sight radii, for example.
But given the additional stability afforded by rifle stocks I'd say a rifle still has the edge.
But given the additional stability afforded by rifle stocks I'd say a rifle still has the edge.
"...also said OAL is not critical..." Whoever told you that is very confused. If say a .38 is too long, the cylinder will jam.
"...minimize free bore..." The whole 'off the lands' thing, firstly doesn't apply to pistols and secondly is not the same distance in every rifle. It's a load tweaking technique that is done after developing the most accurate load for one specific rifle. Isn't absolutely required either.
Like JohnKSa says, accuracy standards of rifles and handguns aren't the same. Don't think there's any proven evidence of "5 or 10 times less accurate" though. Like MrBorland says, a Ransom Rest(basically an expensive, runs $400plus, unpowered machine that takes the shooter out of the equation.) can prove a handgun's accuracy. Mind you, "...to function reliably, a revolver has to be accurate as well..." Isn't true. Accuracy has nothing whatever to do with function in any handgun.
"...ratios of their respective sight radii..." No such thing. Sight radius has nothing to do with handgun accuracy. A 2" barrel can be just as accurate as a 6" barrel. A scoped rifle has no sight radius.
"...minimize free bore..." The whole 'off the lands' thing, firstly doesn't apply to pistols and secondly is not the same distance in every rifle. It's a load tweaking technique that is done after developing the most accurate load for one specific rifle. Isn't absolutely required either.
Like JohnKSa says, accuracy standards of rifles and handguns aren't the same. Don't think there's any proven evidence of "5 or 10 times less accurate" though. Like MrBorland says, a Ransom Rest(basically an expensive, runs $400plus, unpowered machine that takes the shooter out of the equation.) can prove a handgun's accuracy. Mind you, "...to function reliably, a revolver has to be accurate as well..." Isn't true. Accuracy has nothing whatever to do with function in any handgun.
"...ratios of their respective sight radii..." No such thing. Sight radius has nothing to do with handgun accuracy. A 2" barrel can be just as accurate as a 6" barrel. A scoped rifle has no sight radius.