Bond Arms Stinger: Thoughts?

Status
Not open for further replies.
high country said:
Glad to see these making it to market. It looks like a very compact little piece, I may be tempted at some point. I thoroughly enjoy my roughneck and the .38 and .45 Colt 4" barrels that I have for it, but it is hardly a featherweight in that configuration...

The trigger looks like the same pieces found in the standard frame models, so I am guessing the trigger pull is more or less unchanged from the larger models. For the few gents that have gotten these, do you find the pull to be similar?

I think they made a good choice going with the higher pressure .380 and 9mm. I haven't been super impressed by the performance of lower pressure rounds like the .38 and .45 Colt in the short barrels. I have had tumbling bullets and sub-par velocities. Granted I haven't tried ammo designed particularly for use in short barrels. I think a .32acp stinger would be the bees knees.
Click to expand...
Yeah, agreed. The low pressure rounds lose a lot of velocity in short barrels. Although, a 3 inch .38 barrel from BA can't be less power than a 1.75 inch snubbie (with cylinder added, and cylinder gap). I do think the higher pressure rounds like 9mm do better though. Here are the results for a 2.5 inch 9mm BA barrel.

Bond-Arms-Roughneck-velocity.jpg
 
Autodidactic said:
Yeah, agreed. The low pressure rounds lose a lot of velocity in short barrels. Although, a 3 inch .38 barrel from BA can't be less power than a 1.75 inch snubbie (with cylinder added, and cylinder gap). I do think the higher pressure rounds like 9mm do better though. Here are the results for a 2.5 inch 9mm BA barrel.

View attachment 1064935
Click to expand...

I have the 9mm 2.5" barrel that came on my roughneck still. I have only shot it a few times, but the my hand let me know that round doesn't give up much out of a short barrel.

I would be interested to see real world .380 velocities too.

The short barrels look like a nice match to that stinger frame. If it could get a 95 grain .380 bullet around 900 fps, that would send an effective message while still being manageable.
 
high country said:
I have the 9mm 2.5" barrel that came on my roughneck still. I have only shot it a few times, but the my hand let me know that round doesn't give up much out of a short barrel.

I would be interested to see real world .380 velocities too.

The short barrels look like a nice match to that stinger frame. If it could get a 95 grain .380 bullet around 900 fps, that would send an effective message while still being manageable.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I for a while was considering the normal BA .380 barrels. I couldn't really find any reviews on them online, nor youtube videos, which is strange because usually almost anything I look for I find videos or articles on. There are youtube chronograph and ballistics tests on most of the major caliber barrels for BA, from .38 to 9mm and .45/.410.
 
Autodidactic said:
Yeah, I for a while was considering the normal BA .380 barrels. I couldn't really find any reviews on them online, nor youtube videos, which is strange because usually almost anything I look for I find videos or articles on.
Click to expand...

I just went and checked ballistics by the inch, and it looks like a buffalo bore +p or a Speer Gold Dot should get somewhere in that velocity range through a 2.5" barrel.

I favor the longer barrel large bore .45 Colt in a standard frame, mostly because the frame is big already. Standard pressure .38 rounds feel downright tame in a 4" barrel with extended grips, and those get velocities similar to a 4" revolver. The barrel length is a little less since the chamber is included in the length, but there is no cylinder gap loss.

But in the stinger frame with a short barrel, 9mm seems like it would be a handful, .380 may be a sweet spot. Definitely getting added to my list of things to keep an eye out for.
 
sgt127 said:
I wonder why they made it in two auto cartridges?

Id think a rimmed revolver cartridge would be a better fit.
Click to expand...

Autodidactic said:
I think also as noted above, the higher pressure rounds do better in short barrels.
Click to expand...
Another possible reason for sticking to auto rounds could be economy. The rimmed cartridge barrel sets have extractors, the autos don't so they're a bit cheaper to make. Maybe they're just testing the market at this point and want to keep cost and consumer price down.
 
Old_Grouch said:
Another possible reason for sticking to auto rounds could be economy. The rimmed cartridge barrel sets have extractors, the autos don't so they're a bit cheaper to make. Maybe they're just testing the market at this point and want to keep cost and consumer price down.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and although I am a sucker for the classics such as .38 special, and would like a .32 revolver or .327 BA, the market is focused on auto cartridges right now.
 
'Grouch, so the empties have to be plucked out by their rims? Hmmmm.
Do I recall that crossbolt safety disengages automatically when the hammer is thumbed, or is it a two step (cock and disengage) process.
The original Remington design was slim and elegant, and it appeals to me for that reason. But if we're serious about carry guns, there are modern semi-autos that aren't much different in size, bunches easier to shoot, and have more than two rounds.
Moon
 
halfmoonclip said:
'Grouch, so the empties have to be plucked out by their rims? Hmmmm.
Do I recall that crossbolt safety disengages automatically when the hammer is thumbed, or is it a two step (cock and disengage) process.
The original Remington design was slim and elegant, and it appeals to me for that reason. But if we're serious about carry guns, there are modern semi-autos that aren't much different in size, bunches easier to shoot, and have more than two rounds.
Moon
Click to expand...
The safety doesn't disengage automatically. Manual. Have to extract auto rounds manually with BA. I agree with you about the old Remington look. It's too bad American Derringer isn't really around anymore.

One thing I will say though. A lot of micro .380's and so on of similar size to the Bond Arms 2.5 inch barreled guns, are not reliable. Also, it's a bit of a trade off. .380 versus two rounds of more powerful cartridges (assuming one doesnt' have a .380 Bond Arms).
 
Autodidactic said:
I think also as noted above, the higher pressure rounds do better in short barrels.
Click to expand...
Typically higher pressure will lose a larger percentage of velocity as the barrel gets shorter. Pressure is a curve not linear. What you're seeing is the fact that the smaller volume case is more efficient and because it's shorter it effectively has a longer barrel.
As to the Stinger, it makes no sense to me, it's not practical and it's not nostalgic.
 
halfmoonclip said:
'Grouch, so the empties have to be plucked out by their rims? Hmmmm.
Click to expand...
There is a relief cut on one side. The rim of the next round to be loaded is hooked under both rims of the fired cartridges and they are plucked out simultaneously. It is actually faster than using the manual extractor on the rimmed caliber versions. On those it's a two step procedure. i.e manipulate the extractor, grasp the empties and remove.
halfmoonclip said:
Do I recall that crossbolt safety disengages automatically when the hammer is thumbed, or is it a two step (cock and disengage) process.
Click to expand...
The safety is strictly manual. You can choose to engage it, or not. On current production guns there is a set screw that allows the safety to be locked in the engaged position. This is Bond's version of a lock. The benefit of this is that the same set screw can be used to lock the safety in the disengaged position preventing unintentional engaement.
halfmoonclip said:
modern semi-autos that aren't much different in size, bunches easier to shoot, and have more than two rounds.
Click to expand...
The Beretta 686 Silver Pigeon holds 2 rounds. Many modern semi-auto shotguns hold far more, weigh less, and cost less. Does that mean O/U shotguns should be avoided?
I've made far more posts here regarding Bond Arms derringers than I have on any other single subject. Am I a fanboy? Yes, guilty. I don't, however, recall ever having said that I carry one for personal protection or even that I think they're particularly well suited for that. The enjoyment of firearms for me, anyway, (and I suspect for several others as well) is determined by many factors beyond how many rounds I can quickly dump into a hypothetical assailant.
 
Last edited:
mavracer said:
Typically higher pressure will lose a larger percentage of velocity as the barrel gets shorter. Pressure is a curve not linear. What you're seeing is the fact that the smaller volume case is more efficient and because it's shorter it effectively has a longer barrel.
As to the Stinger, it makes no sense to me, it's not practical and it's not nostalgic.
Click to expand...
Is that true? I thought many cartridges such as .38 special do worse with very short barrels? If you look at the 9mm 2.5 inch barrel results, it appears they do better than a .38 may do. Granted, they are higher velocity out of all barrels. The case length makes sense though.
 
Autodidactic said:
Is that true? I thought many cartridges such as .38 special do worse with very short barrels? If you look at the 9mm 2.5 inch barrel results, it appears they do better than a .38 may do. Granted, they are higher velocity out of all barrels. The case length makes sense though.
Click to expand...
Higher pressure will produce more velocity, as the barrel gets shorter higher pressure will typically lose more in terms of percentage.
It has to due with burn rates and pressure curve, velocity is closer related to pressure under the curve so to speak.
IMHO the Federal HST 38 load is a great Idea for short barrels I just wish it was 20 gr heavier.
HST-pulled-bullet-1024x655.jpg
 
mavracer said:
IMHO the Federal HST 38 load is a great Idea for short barrels
Click to expand...
That's what I carry in my 642 and my Cobra. Lucky Gunner's gel tests for that round are quite impressive.
If Bond offers a .38 Spl version of the Stinger or a .38 Spl barrel set for it I will have whichever one I encounter first. I'd rather buy just the barrel but if it happens to have a frame attached to it I can live with that. One more can't hurt, right?
 
mavracer said:
Higher pressure will produce more velocity, as the barrel gets shorter higher pressure will typically lose more in terms of percentage.
It has to due with burn rates and pressure curve, velocity is closer related to pressure under the curve so to speak.
IMHO the Federal HST 38 load is a great Idea for short barrels I just wish it was 20 gr heavier.
View attachment 1065140
Click to expand...
Yeah, and Speer Gold Dot 135 grain, which I finally found some recently. I also have some Federal Punch +P, which performs out of snubbies. If it performs out of a 1.75 inch snubbie (with again added cylinder length but also cylinder gap), it will likely perform out of a 3 inch BA barrel. The Stinger barrels are both 3 inches, for the .380 and 9mm. Same goes for those calibers. A 3 inch barrel with no cycling action should perform as well as any subcompact semi-auto in those calibers, at least as far as ballistics.
 
Old_Grouch said:
That's what I carry in my 642 and my Cobra. Lucky Gunner's gel tests for that round are quite impressive.
If Bond offers a .38 Spl version of the Stinger or a .38 Spl barrel set for it I will have whichever one I encounter first. I'd rather buy just the barrel but if it happens to have a frame attached to it I can live with that. One more can't hurt, right?
Click to expand...

Love the 642. I carried mine to the store tonight. It had wadcutters in it this evening. Should probably switch those out. But I like my .38 barrel on the BA. The only reason I usually have the 9mm barrel on there is it's shorter, and makes it more concealable.
 
Last edited:
Old_Grouch said:
Interesting. Assuming he was shooting factory ammo the the .357 and .45 Colt results were about what I would expect. The .40 was actually faster than I would have guessed.
Click to expand...
The .38 was high 600's. This is what I was saying earlier. Compare this to 9mm which is going more like 900-1000 FPS out of the BA. The 138 grain 9mm tested in the chart i posted above is going 920 FPS or so out of BA, whereas the 135 grain .38 he shot was going less than 700. It may have been a light load sure, but i still think it bears out that out of these derringers likely the high pressure rounds do better. Even the 147 grain 9mm tested hit 820 out of the BA.
 
Last edited:
mavracer, that is Skeeter Skelton's 'planet wrecker special' load, made commercially. We used to load a HBWC backwards, over a coal scoop of 2400; shot a few thru' a 2.5" M66, and the 140 grain bullet was crowding 1100'sec. Mas Ayoob, or a really zealous DA, wouldn't like the handload.
OldGrouch, thnx for the explanation, and please, take no offense. My assumption was that these tiny Derringers were some sort of defensive arm, and simply felt there were better alternatives.
Not saying that we don't own some guns just for grits and shins; I reload .32s to feed all sorts of old crocks, not to mention a Scorpion PCC.
Truly wish, as previously stated, that someone made a smooth and elegant traditional double Derringer, even if it isn't in an especially useful caliber.
Moon
 
halfmoonclip said:
mavracer, that is Skeeter Skelton's 'planet wrecker special' load, made commercially. We used to load a HBWC backwards, over a coal scoop of 2400; shot a few thru' a 2.5" M66, and the 140 grain bullet was crowding 1100'sec. Mas Ayoob, or a really zealous DA, wouldn't like the handload.
Click to expand...
In theory sure in practice not so much a HBWC is designed to obturate not expand. I too played with them when young and impressionable made a 4" security six barrel look like sewer pipe trying to get them fast enough to expand in water jugs and accuracy was never very good.
 
Reference the "ouch" with the Bond Arms 9mm, I have a Bond Arms Undercover 9mm. I definitely don't like shooting fully loaded 9mm out of mine, but I do load my own and they shoot just fine, though I get a lot of FTE with that same load in my pistol, so those rounds are specifically for the derringer. Fun gun to shoot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
Bond Arms vs. American Derringer
Replies
6
Views
6K
No Quarter
N
Panzerschwein
  • Locked
Cobra Derringer
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
ArchAngelCD
ArchAngelCD
D
  • Locked
Derringers - For Serious Personal Defense
2 3 4
Replies
93
Views
13K
techcowboy
T
S
  • Locked
Bond Arms in .40 S&W?
Replies
6
Views
602
steak-knife
S
aaaaa
Bond Arms--Do they need more calibers?
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Replies
253
Views
10K
aaaaa
aaaaa
Back
Top