Revolver Carbines

How the fuck is that better or quicker than a bolt action with clips?

>>33519433
I'm talking about if they improved the guns so that it would work similar to a revolver only with larger ammo and, of course, a larger gun.

>>33519426
Cylinder gap and subsequent gas venting.

File: Cylinder&Slide-Smith&WessonModel625-45ACP-0.jpg (57KB, 350x453px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 350x453px

>>33519426

1st of April was 2 days ago, bro.

But in case you're actually this retarded:
1) Cylinder gap bleeds gasses very fucking close to your face, unless you implement a special gas seal cylinder like the Nagant or have very tight fitting. The former is complex, the latter is bad when used in dirty environments.
2) Machining is far more complex as the chamber has to be timed to precisely interface with the barrel. This part is also prone to wear, making them dangerous to shoot after long service or abuse.
3) Reloading a bolt action rifle with a stripper clip is faster than reloading a swing out cylinder, unless you use a moon clip. But a stripper clip is far easier to store many of than moon clips due to their relative shape.
4) Shooting inappropriate ammo can cause the case to set back in the cylinder, jamming the action.
5) Bolt actions offer far superior locking surfaces and are simpler to machine and assemble.

>>33519426
Just fuck my offhand accuracy up senpai.

Have fun blasting the soldier next to you with hot gas and lead fragments with every one of your laughably inaccurate shots.

>>33519479
Thanks. I am a retard by the way so thank you for not getting mad at me.

File: 1358791455531.jpg (75KB, 500x289px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 500x289px

>>33519618
>I am a retard

Hey man, knowing it is the first step to doing something about it. No one was born with firearms knowledge anyway, we all had to learn.
Half this board is full of retards that don't know they're retards, so you're already ahead of the curve.

>>33519641
I have good knowledge on modern fire arms and I can identify most modern guns but I'm a total newbie when it comes to old guns and how they work.

I've heard that sometimes the gasses would set off all other rounds into your hand

>>33519700
>I've heard that sometimes the gasses would set off all other rounds into your hand

With black powder revolvers? Sure. That's why they'd use wax to seal the front of the cylinder to prevent chainfire.

There's no chance of that with modern ammo though.

>>33519788
ah

>>33519471
>>33519479
>>33519492
>muzzle gap
In other words it's because nobody has actually tried to fix the gas sealing problem before or since the 1895 Nagant. They could give a shit and make an innovative revolver, but fuck it let's make a knock off of some mainstream gun instead.

>>33520286
No the gas loss is true of pistol revolvers, an that problem hasn't been solved either. You simply will not get the same force and range

>>33520286
Yeah, spend all that effort for no real gains in performance. Such innovation.

>>33520922
Why is Nerf so based?

>All these dumbfucks in this thread have never heard of the Pieper Revolving Carbine
Doesn't look like summer outside, but I could be wrong.

>>33520922
that's cool as fuck

>>33520286
People did solve the gas problem with the 1895 revolver.

They then proceeded to ask why they had solved this supposed problem and, seeing as there was no logical answer given the endless advantages offered by other designs never pursued it further.

Also

>muzzle gap

>>33521050
>Only utilized by the Mexican National Police
> as a result, less than 20k made
>Good luck finding ammo
>$1500+

>>33521050
>I played Battlefield 1

Nothing like a new, proprietary cartridge for your gun that's more expensive to produce and significantly less powerful and more susceptible to mud and dirt than its bolt action contemporaries.