Looking 4 .22 western revolver with swing out cylinder

[ArmyAviator]

My dad has a stainless High Standard .22....9 shot...swing out cylinder. Visited the High Standard site...seems they are totally outta the western style business. Anybody know who might make one?

Thank you.

Bryant.

 

[Standing Wolf]

The "High Standard" site you visited is the Houston operation, of which, the less said, the better. The real High Standard company of Connecticut has been out of business since 1984.

If I were you, I'd buy a used High Standard nine-shooter. They're not remarkably expensive, and some are pretty good plinkers. Hang out at the auction sites a month or two to get a feel for prices, and look at gun shows and in pawn shops. They're not scarce.

 

[Jim K]

They are not scarce, but I would definitely prefer to see the gun before buying. Those guns (they had several names, but all were based on the Sentinel desigh) usually have alloy frames and many are plain worn out by this time. Plus takedown is not obvious and some owners got out the big hammer.

You should be able to get a very good one for around $175, but some were made with steel frames and those tend to bring a bit more. The combination .22LR/.22 Magnum will bring around $250 in top condition.

While there is some collector interest in H-S guns in general, it has not extended much to those revolvers.

Jim

 

[tulsamal]

My Dad passed down his HS Double Nine to me. He shot the heck out of the gun during the fast draw craze of the late 50's. It still works but it isn't a thing of beauty. I've carried it around a few times to shoot rabbits but they really weren't the highest quality gun!

Gregg

 

[FPrice]

Army Aviator...

Does this look like something you might be interested in? It's a 1958 version (if the date on the box is correct) and seems to be in good condition. I am asking $175, shipped.

 

[kennedy]

I bought a HS 9 shot revolver brand new back in the early 70`s, ran about 5000 rds thru it and I can shoot it better then anything else I own(practice makes perfect) I still use it to dispatch small animals hit by cars. highly recommend it.

 

[Johnny Guest]

Used to be a lot of 'em around - -

High Standard made that same basic Sentinel revolver which FPrice illustrated, but with a Colt Single Action Army-style type grip frame and dummy ejector rod tube. I believe the latter housed the cylinder release. At lease one version, with a longer barrel, was called the "Longhorn" model.

These western style variants were mainly novelty revolvers, plinkers mostly, and did not require the rather lengthy process of ejection of empties and insertion of individual rounds through the loading gate.

On the other hand, the four-inch Sentinel was a pretty compact little piece to carry hiking and such, with ammo capacity rivaling the Colt, Ruger, and High Standard autoloaders. H-S also marketed a really nifty version with a two-inch barrel and round butt, as a defensive handgun. It even came with the frame anodized in different colors! THAT was a cute little item, the small caliber notwithstanding. Sorta like a less expensive S&W .22/32 Kit Gun.

I have only fired a few of the Sentinel-type revolvers but they seemed to be sound and well made, good value for the money.

Good luck - -
Johnny

 

[Jim March]

Yes, the HS Sentinals were really nice little guns, but first, the caveat about the alloy frames is accurate and second, due to the low price a lot were bought by beginner shooters or otherwise used as "beaters" or "tackle box queens".

RUN THE CHECKOUT .

When in good shape, these are really nice little critters...much better than the H&Rs. The eight-shot 22Mag varieties were REALLY cool.

The HS guns were "mechanically related" to a Dan Wesson (and to a large degree Charter Arms) in some of their engineering details...they did the primary cylinder latch at the crane, secondary at the rear of the cylinder, which is conducive to both accuracy and durability.

Rugers do their *primary* lockup at the rear of the cylinder but with a secondary crane latch. A case can be made that the DW/HS system is better.

(By "primary" I mean the latch with the tighter lockup...Ruger's crane-latch isn't as positive as the DW/HS crane lockup but DW and HS use just a ball-bearing detent at the rear, sort of a "semi-lockup". Ruger's rear lockup is more solid but their crane lock slightly less so. S&W up through the N-Frames generally does no lockup at the crane at all, just a bearing-detent at the end of the ejector rod. The Taurus "Raging" series is unique in having positive manually operated latches at both ends of the cylinder, which is solid as heck but you have to trip both latches at the same time.)

 

[Dot_mdb]

Maybe of interest to this discussion

According to Supica and Nahas the original .38 M&P model had NO locking lug at the front of the ejector rod. That model was made from 1899 to 1902 at which time the front ejector rod lockup was added to the new model.

Bill