Small Revolvers used as Kit Guns

Status
Not open for further replies.

chicharrones

needs more ammo
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
10,844
Location
Galveston Bay is an Hour Away ©
How about a photo thread and discussion on small revolvers that can be used as Kit Guns?

I don't have the name sake made by S&W, but I do have a Ruger and a recently picked up Charter Arms that seem to fall into the Kit Gun size and weight range. Both of my specimens have 3 inch barrels and are chambered in .22LR, with the Ruger weighing 23 ounces and the Charter Arms weighing 19 ounces.

View attachment 905361
 
Last edited:
S&W 63, 4". Colt Sport Woodsman, 4". Old, really old, old enough to be good Rossi 51, pinned and recessed. Walther PPK/S 22. Biggest problem is deciding what to take "shroomin".
 
Does a s&w 32 long jframe with a three inch barrel count?

I believe so! Some of the things I've read include some small frame .38 Special revolvers into Kit Gun territory. I think overall size is the major factor here?

That being said I have 4 additional revolvers that qualify as kit guns based on those parameters. LCR357, LCRx357, LCR22WMR and my 2-1/4" SP101.
 
Here are photos and f my S&W 60 Pro .357 and my S&W 63 .22LR - one photo of the 63 has the factory grips the other is the 63 with the Hogue Monogrip. ( I actually couldn’t figure out how to delete the first shot so I left it)
 

Attachments

  • 8CD5468C-9906-44C2-A326-461ADA81ACEC.jpeg
    8CD5468C-9906-44C2-A326-461ADA81ACEC.jpeg
    134.4 KB · Views: 32
  • EE92DFA9-0ADA-449D-B062-0E5125C47EB3.jpeg
    EE92DFA9-0ADA-449D-B062-0E5125C47EB3.jpeg
    122.8 KB · Views: 35
  • 56A7A0EE-149D-4C5B-B4AA-961D5259C89F.jpeg
    56A7A0EE-149D-4C5B-B4AA-961D5259C89F.jpeg
    120.7 KB · Views: 34
View attachment 905370 Here's my entry..my 3" LCRx22WMR sporting Pachmayr Diamond Pro grips in lieu of the originals.
The LCR22 has turned out to be my favorite plinker. Have to say that pic makes me want to get the LCRx in 22.cal.

I would also like to get a Birds head Heritage with a 3" barrel and a mag cylinder. Have a Heritage in a standard 5" and has proven itself to be a good little plinker.
 
Even though my .32 Long I-frames have 4" barrels, they're still pretty small and easy to pack. According to this article, the original "kit gun" was a .22 in an I-frame, so I guess it's close enough.

Thanks for the link! From what I've seen, S&W made 4" barreled Kit Guns by name. It would seem that J-Frame sizes or smaller are the common ground, not simply overall size. :)
 
I own one of the S&W Kit Guns. An old Flat Latch with 4" barrel and adjustable sights. It shoots like a laser. It amazes me how accurate that little blaster is. Similar guns I own are a 4" model 31-1 and 3" model 30-1 both in 32 long. And last a rare model 36-6 with 3" full lug barrel in 38 special. I had wanted a 3" 38 J-Frame ever since the late gunwriter Terry Murbach wrote about a 3" fixed sight 38 he had adjustable sights added to and called it the "Trail Masterpiece". TM was my favorite gunwriter and I was fortunate enough to be able to trade emails with him for a few years before he passed away.
 
S&W 63, 4".

my S&W 63 .22LR - one photo of the 63 has the factory grips the other is the 63 with the Hogue Monogrip.

A few years ago I wanted a S&W 63, but the Ruger Bearcat got my money. Then a few months ago, I wanted a 63 again but a few other guns happened and one of those is that Charter Arms Pocket-Target (aka Pathfinder). I still have yet to hold a 63, probably a regretful thing on my part. :oops:
 
A few years ago I wanted a S&W 63, but the Ruger Bearcat got my money. Then a few months ago, I wanted a 63 again but a few other guns happened and one of those is that Charter Arms Pocket-Target (aka Pathfinder). I still have yet to hold a 63, probably a regretful thing on my part. :oops:

Good thread. I get tired of threads all based on whats the best gun shoot someone else with. Its nice to talk about Trail/Kit guns for a change.
 
I’m not familiar with the term kit guns. Has to be 3 inch?

Not at all. The best I can tell they usually have small frames, such as a S&W J-frame, or a Ruger LCRx. Here's a link speaking mostly about Smith & Wesson. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kit_gun

Ruger Single Sixes and old H&Rs also have small frames.

Yet my Single Six with a 9.5" barrel would not qualify as a kit gun, while a Single Six with a 4.62" barrel could, IMO. :)
 
Last edited:
The LCR22 has turned out to be my favorite plinker. Have to say that pic makes me want to get the LCRx in 22.cal.

I would also like to get a Birds head Heritage with a 3" barrel and a mag cylinder. Have a Heritage in a standard 5" and has proven itself to be a good little plinker.

The LCR22WMR was my first LCR..that sweet little shooter so impressed me...now I can't stop buying them. The 3" is a very accurate shooter ..the longer barrel and adjustable rear sights are a win/ win.
 
I guess that I have the opinion that a 22/32 kit gun is a something along the lines of a 2" barreled S&W J-frame chambered in 22LR.

That said, I have a S&W Model 63 and Model 34, both 22LR chamberings, but with 4" barrels. Both would be a good kit gun.

I also have a 3" barreled S&W 317. This would bet a more compact kit gun along with the lighter weight of the aluminum frame.

The gun on the upper left is a K-frame, Model 18. Not exactly a kit gun so ignore it for the purposes of this thread

The upper right is my Model 34, lower left is the Model 317, the lower right is a Model 51 (22 Magnum)

index.php
 
Howdy

They were called kit guns, or more properly 22/32 Kit Guns, because they were small enough to fit into a fisherman's tackle box, or kit. 22/32 because they were 22 rimfire revolvers built on the I frame (later the J frame) which started out as a six shot 32 caliber revolver. I picked up this Model 63 a bunch of years ago. It left the factory around 1980-1981. I was lucky enough to get the box and all the goodies, including the pamphlet about the ammo that S&W used to sell.

poih6fD2j.jpg




While we're on the subject of I frames................


The very first I frame was also the very first revolver S&W made with a solid frame and a swing out cylinder in 1896. I picked up this 32 Hand Ejector 1st Model Double Action Revolver (Model of 1896) a bunch of years ago from a local shop. It left the factory in 1898, it is a little bit unusual with its 6" barrel. The finish is quite worn, but it functions just fine. The 32 S&W Long cartridge was introduced with this model.

po5DxIXFj.jpg




The action of this model is quite unusual. There is no thumbpiece to push forward to open the cylinder. To open the cylinder you grab the knurled end of the ejector rod and pull it forward.


But the really unusual part of the design was the way the cylinder locked up. It harkended all the way back to the old Tip Up design of the 1850s. Notice the rounded nubs on the top of the hammers.


pmdFkViUj.jpg




The bolt was actually above the cylinder, mounted in the top strap.

pleCpuH4j.jpg




The bolt rotated around a pin in the top strap.

pm8gvbhLj.jpg




There was a split spring under the bolt that normally kept it in the down position, engaged in the cylinder locking slots. When the hammer was cocked, the rounded nub would rotate the bolt up, disengaging it from the cylinder, allowing the cylinder to rotate. The front of the rounded nub was wedge shaped, so that when the hammer fell, it wedged the split spring open. This allowed the spring to keep the bolt pulled down, keeping the cylinder locked in battery. When the hammer was cocked for the next shot, the cycle repeated. This was exactly the way the old Tip Ups from the 1850s worked. Notice the rear sight is positioned directly about the pivot pin, so that when the bolt rocked up the sight picture had minimal movement. The bolt only popped up about 1/8" or so at the most, so there was almost no noticeable motion to the rear sight. Not that it really mattered, the hammer spur blocked the sights when it the hammer was down, you could only sight the gun when the hammer was cocked. I'm not sure why S&W reverted to this old system with the first 32 Hand Ejector, but I suspect it might be because Colt put out their first revolver with a swing out cylinder in 1889. Perhaps S&W reverted to the old system because they had not fully developed the modern Hand Ejector design, and wanted to get something out to the market place. Just a theory of mine. In 1899 S&W put out the first 38 Military and Police revolver with the normal operating system for the cylinder and the bolt, and by 1903 the 32 Hand Ejector followed suit.

pmjCWVFdj.jpg




This nickel plated Model of 1896 left the factory in 1899. They all had engraved cylinders, with the S&W name, address, and patent dates engraved between the flutes. Notice the very squared off appearance of the frame near the hammer. This was the only model to have that squared off appearance.

pn8KyMauj.jpg




The 38 Regulation Police, at the top of this photo, and the 32 Regulation Police at the bottom were interesting I frames. Both of these little revolvers shipped in 1924. You can tell by the positions of the cylinder flutes that the 38 was only a five shooter, while the 32 was a six shooter. As marked on the barrel, the 38 Regulation Police was chambered for the 38 S&W cartridge, not the 38 Special. The original I frame cylinders were not long enough for the 38 Special cartridge.

pnTuTLDvj.jpg




These little revolvers had an interesting way the grips were mounted. The grip frame was very small. The wooden grips were slightly larger and were inletted for the metal grip to fit inside.

pmFmDApAj.jpg




S&W actually obtained a patent on this type of grip design.

pnJTuyhAj.jpg




Because the bottom of the grip was covered with wood, the serial numbers of the Regulation Police revolvers were marked on the front of the grip frame.

poznwp6pj.jpg





No discussion about S&W I frames would be complete without mentioning the first 22/32 Hand Ejector, the Bekeart models. Other than the tiny M frame Ladysmiths, S&W was not making a 22 Rimfire target revolver with a swing out cylinder. Perhaps they thought there was no market. Phillip Bekeart was a San Francisco gun dealer, and in 1911 he persuaded S&W to make a small run of 292 22 caliber target revolvers on the I frame. This Bekeart is not a true Bekeart to some collectors because it shipped in 1940.

poeqIdYFj.jpg




The Bekeart grips were longer than the Regulation Police grips, but they too were inletted for the small I frame grip frame. Notice these grips required two screws, and yes they are different lengths, and yes it messes up things if you try to put the wrong screw in the right hole.

pl5tkHI6j.jpg




Because the Bekeart models were much larger than the tiny M frame Ladysmiths, they were called the 22/32 Heavy Frame Target model. This photo shows how much larger the I frame revolvers were than the tiny Ladysmiths, but how much smaller they were than a K frame K-22. The 22/32 Heavy Frame Target revolvers were the only solid frame side swinging target revolvers S&W made until the K-22 appeared in 1931.

pnxbJ96Oj.jpg




One more photo to compare the size and shape of an I frame 22/32 Heavy Duty Target revolver with a modern J frame 22/32 Kit Gun. This Heavy Duty has conventional grips. It shipped in 1923. Notice how much shorter I frame cylinder is and notice how the J frame trigger guard is more elongated. I frames had traditional curved leaf main springs while J frames have coil main springs. The longer cylinder of a modern J frame makes them able to fit 38 Special cartridges, but 38 Special J frames are still only five shooters.

pn87C8kkj.jpg




A J frame 38 Special Flat Latch Model 36 (Chiefs Special) from 1961. A five shooter.

pormKit0j.jpg
 
Last edited:
Size isn't the only concern, weight plays an important role. Generally you want it under 25oz, which is where a lot of Charter Arms revolvers fall into. If only they would make their aluminum frame models with longer barrels, they'd be EXCELLENT kit guns. They'd weigh less than the LCRx, cost less, but they wouldn't have the adj. sights or great trigger.

So what do I have that could be considered "kit guns"... well, quite a few, that's most of what I buy.

NAA Minimaster

NAA.jpg

Really the definition of a Kit Gun and probably the lightest, most practical one given it weighs around 3/4 of a pound loaded. .22 LR and .22 Mag cylinders so you have the option of .22 LR for low noise applications or small game gathering, while the .22 Mag has the power when you need the power and use the right ammo.

The sights are tall and very easy to see and shoot with, the grip is extremely comfortable. The trigger takes getting use to, I've given this to expert shooters and they struggle to hit the broad side of a barn and the accuracy however leaves something to be desired. IDK, maybe 3 inches at 15 yards is acceptable for a kit gun? I do know when I shoot steel I hit it near every time and I've been able to hit plates at 50 with this gun reliably. North American Arms isn't making the barrels to win competitions, but I'm going to keep looking for an ammo that can group tighter.

Excluding black powder revolvers, this was actually the first handgun I ever bought. I figure the first one I wanted was going to be survival focused and I could not think of a lighter, more versatile or affordable gun at the time I bought it.

H&R top break - .32 S&W Long

HR1.jpg

How can this be considered a kit gun? It's small, it's light (easily under 20 oz), and it's cheap. .32 S&W Long isn't a powerhouse and this can't handle a steady diet of max power handloads, but I shoot Trail Boss in it and that does a good job for most things and is more powerful than .22 LR.

Charter Arms Professional - .32 H&R Mag

Charter Pro.jpg

Weighs something like 22oz, holds 7 rounds, decent barrel length... very much a kit gun in function, but marketed as a carry gun. It will fulfill both roles well, but it would be even better if Charter would fix the damn front sight issue.

Taurus Public Defender

Public Defender.jpg

Getting on the big side of things here, but you think about what you gain with something like this: .45 Colt power, larger amount of birdshot vs the smaller calibers, 4 pellets of 000 buck for any "close encounters", plus with adapters the ability to shoot any .22, .32, 9mm, .380, or .38 ammo. All of that in the smallest Judge you can buy.

Ruger SP101 - .327 Federal Mag

SP4.jpg

This is the heaviest of all the guns I'm listing at just under 30 oz. It's actually heavier than the Taurus, but it's not huge. This has close to .357 Mag power, but holds 6 rounds and allows the shooting of the less powerful .32 S&W Long. Pretty accurate, good sights, decent DA trigger, but there is nothing about the single action that I like.

Charter Arms Bulldogs - .357 Mag

Dare I say that 6 inch is a kit gun??? At under 30oz in weight, it's not a chore to carry and the power level to size ratio is something to marvel at.

index.php
 
Last edited:
I have two Kit Guns, one's a revolver...and the other one isn't!

Bought my wife a LNIB Model 34 for her first ever gun. Got it for a great price as I was good friends with one of the salesmen at the gun shop. Beautifully made all it needed was a slightly larger grip as my wife didn't care for the factory ones. Got a Hogue Monogrip and it really makes for a much more comfortable grip on the gun. Okay DA and nice and light SA trigger along with the 4" barrel makes for some accurate shooting with the right ammo.
j6dsjCZ.jpg

As for my other Kit Gun, what can I say it does a great job as one even though it doesn't have a cylinder!
fbAgtTf.jpg
 
I am very interested in this thread, thanks for starting it! I really enjoy small frame revolvers.

I have an SP101 4", which is a little on the large end of the kit gun spectrum both in size and caliber, but is my "if I could only have one" handgun. My 442 is a handy little package, but is more in the snub nose carry gun catagory.

I have been considering a model 63 or 317, but am thinking I might need to get something in .32 and start reloading another caliber... Gives me something to sit here and dream about for a little bit anyway. Very excited yo see what others are using in this size class.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top