Joined
·
1,990 Posts
Have any of you seen this yet?
S333 Volleyfire - Standard Mfg. Co. LLC
S333 Volleyfire - Standard Mfg. Co. LLC
New Gun
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Joined
·
1,257 Posts
Seems to be an answer to a question no one ever asked.
Awkward shape, very awkward trigger that's too exposed, very unlikely to be able to make an effective holster, can't safely just be carried in a pocket or in a waist band, slow and awkward to reload with the small cartridges, and violates a Prime defense principle....
NEVER, EVERY plan on getting more then one shot in a Real World defense situation.
In this case you'd get two, but the .22 Mag is not noted for being a good stopper.
I've talked to people who carried .22LR pistols as a defense gun claiming "I can get off 10 rounds as I'm falling".
To which I reply... "But what happens if the gun malfunctions or a round misfires and you only get ONE shot"?
Bad things happen, guns break/malfunction, ammo misfires, the other guy gets off a lucky shot that hits your gun hand or even the gun, you trip and fall, etc.
Your life saving defense gun must be able to do the job with ONE SHOT.
If you get more, great, but you better be able to save a life with just one.
Plus, why would you want something like that when you could have a 9mm Kahr Arms CM9 weighing 15.8 ounces and holding 6 rounds of 9mm +P.
Or how about a Kahr CW380 weighing 10.2 ounces and holding 7 rounds of .380.
There's also S&W "J" frame revolvers with 5 rounds of .357 Magnum at 11.4 ounces.
All of these are "clean design" guns that can be carried safely, there are plenty of effective holsters including pocket holsters, and reloads are fast. Spare ammo can be carried in magazines or speed loaders.
In short, yet another "gimmick" gun that no one serious would ever carry.
Awkward shape, very awkward trigger that's too exposed, very unlikely to be able to make an effective holster, can't safely just be carried in a pocket or in a waist band, slow and awkward to reload with the small cartridges, and violates a Prime defense principle....
NEVER, EVERY plan on getting more then one shot in a Real World defense situation.
In this case you'd get two, but the .22 Mag is not noted for being a good stopper.
I've talked to people who carried .22LR pistols as a defense gun claiming "I can get off 10 rounds as I'm falling".
To which I reply... "But what happens if the gun malfunctions or a round misfires and you only get ONE shot"?
Bad things happen, guns break/malfunction, ammo misfires, the other guy gets off a lucky shot that hits your gun hand or even the gun, you trip and fall, etc.
Your life saving defense gun must be able to do the job with ONE SHOT.
If you get more, great, but you better be able to save a life with just one.
Plus, why would you want something like that when you could have a 9mm Kahr Arms CM9 weighing 15.8 ounces and holding 6 rounds of 9mm +P.
Or how about a Kahr CW380 weighing 10.2 ounces and holding 7 rounds of .380.
There's also S&W "J" frame revolvers with 5 rounds of .357 Magnum at 11.4 ounces.
All of these are "clean design" guns that can be carried safely, there are plenty of effective holsters including pocket holsters, and reloads are fast. Spare ammo can be carried in magazines or speed loaders.
In short, yet another "gimmick" gun that no one serious would ever carry.
Joined
·
1,727 Posts
If I was intent upon using a round that is hard to find, expensive, and nearly impossible to reload I think I'd go with the FN five-seven.
But I'm not.
But I'm not.
It looks like a great fit if anyone is doing a Science Fiction movie or TV series. It looks very futuristic.
I like the concept, it is quite creative, but two smaller caliber rounds firing simultaneously might do a job that a single heavier caliber round could do, as far as delivering muzzle energy. Also, a revolver holding five or six rounds in, say, the .38 Spl. range could allow more firing attempts than one holding four shots' worth of double chambers.
However, there is a unique benefit to the design: If one round fails to fire, there is a backup there. There is a better chance that at least one of the two rounds will fire, even if one of the rounds in a twin set of chambers fails. This is a marked contrast to the "Twin 1911" autoloader design, where one chamber jamming could jam the whole piece.
I like the concept, it is quite creative, but two smaller caliber rounds firing simultaneously might do a job that a single heavier caliber round could do, as far as delivering muzzle energy. Also, a revolver holding five or six rounds in, say, the .38 Spl. range could allow more firing attempts than one holding four shots' worth of double chambers.
However, there is a unique benefit to the design: If one round fails to fire, there is a backup there. There is a better chance that at least one of the two rounds will fire, even if one of the rounds in a twin set of chambers fails. This is a marked contrast to the "Twin 1911" autoloader design, where one chamber jamming could jam the whole piece.
Joined
·
7,286 Posts
csmkersh,
I owned a HS derringer in .22 magnum in the mid-1970s until a New Orleans doctor with more $$$$$$ that brains offered me over 100.oo cash for it.
(I had bought a pair of .979 silver grips for in Juarez & I have to say that it looked "pretty OK" with the sterling grip panels against the back metal.)
yours, sw
I owned a HS derringer in .22 magnum in the mid-1970s until a New Orleans doctor with more $$$$$$ that brains offered me over 100.oo cash for it.
(I had bought a pair of .979 silver grips for in Juarez & I have to say that it looked "pretty OK" with the sterling grip panels against the back metal.)
yours, sw
Joined
·
1,990 Posts
Remember the Cop .357?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COP_.357_Derringer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COP_.357_Derringer
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
