Lil NAA Revolvers... I LOVE 'EM! - MP-Pistol Forum

Lil NAA Revolvers... I LOVE 'EM!

This is a discussion on Lil NAA Revolvers... I LOVE 'EM! within the Wheelguns forums, part of the Armory category; Any of you guys have any of these? I have owned at least one since they where introduced. I bought a Freedom Arms mini revolver ...


Go Back   MP-Pistol Forum > Armory > Wheelguns

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June 29th, 2014, 03:57 PM   #1
Member
 
cwlongshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: New England
Posts: 91
Talking Lil NAA Revolvers... I LOVE 'EM!

Any of you guys have any of these?

I have owned at least one since they where introduced. I bought a Freedom Arms mini revolver with a 4 shot cylinder. I sold it off after getting a NAA... Kinda wish I kept it.

Anyhow, being as I am such a fan of the 22Magnum these are a natural. I have a 22short, 22 LR and two magnums.

Family photo:



I just added a set of CVang grips to my 1 1/8" Maggie..



These guns conceal like no body's business.. PUN INTENDED!! :3: They are super quality stainless steel. Mine have been under water many dozens of times with NO ILL effects! They shoot rat shot as if they had smooth barrels too!!

Mine have dispatched a couple dozen deer, (coup de grāce ) another couple dozen Grinners, coons and skunks as well as rats around the chickens over the years. I even once shot a pigeon IN FLIGHT with a single projectile (NO CRAP!!) and a 15# Snapping turtle!



Now I am thinking I NEED a 2" Black Widow...

Tell me about yours!

CW

Last edited by cwlongshot; July 2nd, 2014 at 03:44 PM.
cwlongshot is offline  
Old July 2nd, 2014, 06:00 AM   #2
Member
 
cwlongshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: New England
Posts: 91
No one enjoys these lil revolvers??

I decided and just ordered a 2" Black Widow and a CVang grip for it. I will make a kydex neck holster.

CW

It s gonna look like this:

Here is a story from Paco Kelly. http://www.gunblast.com/Paco_BlackWidow.htm

Last edited by cwlongshot; July 2nd, 2014 at 03:45 PM.
cwlongshot is offline  
Old July 2nd, 2014, 06:26 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Rick M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Weeki Wachee, FL
Posts: 1,757
I've had a .22LR one for over 25 years now.

I can't remember the last time I carried it, but it's kept in a zippered wallet in my car.
Rick M is offline  
 
Old July 8th, 2014, 06:58 AM   #4
Member
 
cwlongshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: New England
Posts: 91
Talking

I'm kinda SUPRISED more of you guys haven't tried these!

Your missing out for sure they are great lil fun backup guns!! Like Rick said above I too have been carring one for many many years!! Will not be without them!!

CW
cwlongshot is offline  
Old July 8th, 2014, 08:44 AM   #5
Member
 
OperatorX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Northeast
Posts: 260
I had the 22 LR/Mag combo. I gave it to my brother when he became a cop, just after my NAA Guardian .32 came in. Wished I had kept it.
OperatorX is offline  
Old July 8th, 2014, 01:09 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: LA (Lower Alabama)
Posts: 410
Had a .22 lr model and sold it. If I bought another it would be .22 mag.

Did have the pleasure of a tour of the factory in Utah about the time they came out with the .32 Guardian. Very nice people and they gave me a couple of lapel pins, revolver and Guardian.
Holeshot is offline  
Old July 9th, 2014, 06:21 AM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 384
I have an old FA version in 22LR; one of the ones marked "Casull's Improvement". It's easier to conceal than any other gun I own, but that's about the only thing it has going for it imo. It's low-capacity (the FA doesn't have the between-chamber hammer notches, so safe capacity even with the LR version is limited to four rounds), it's slow to fire one-handed, and throwing mini-mags at a measured 708fps, it's only slightly more powerful than my .177 pellet rifle.

I dropped it for a lot of the same reasons I dropped the beretta 21A .22lr, which I also still own but almost never use for anything. Now for deep concealment I simply stick with the little LCP.

Not my pic, just one snagged from armslist. There's undeniably a difference in size, but not as much as one might think; and not a whole lot of difference in concealability imo:


Compared to the mini-revolver, the lcp does weigh and additional 4 ounces. But it gives three & a half times the power per shot, times 75% more shots, is more than six times the muzzle energy on tap in a gun that's still tiny yet substantially easier to shoot. Another way to state the difference in per-round power, is that my .22LR mini-revolver (even loaded with mini-mags) is roughly 27% as powerful as a micro-.380. That's way below my comfort level; obviously that's strictly a personal comfort-zone thing and ymmv.

For a tackle-gun box, I can definitely see a role for the mini-revolvers and if I fished, that's where mine would live. But beyond that I've given up on mine for much of anything else.
John in ar is offline  
Old July 10th, 2014, 05:05 AM   #8
Member
 
cwlongshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: New England
Posts: 91
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by John in ar View Post
I have an old FA version in 22LR; one of the ones marked "Casull's Improvement". It's easier to conceal than any other gun I own, but that's about the only thing it has going for it imo. It's low-capacity (the FA doesn't have the between-chamber hammer notches, so safe capacity even with the LR version is limited to four rounds), it's slow to fire one-handed, and throwing mini-mags at a measured 708fps, it's only slightly more powerful than my .177 pellet rifle.

I dropped it for a lot of the same reasons I dropped the beretta 21A .22lr, which I also still own but almost never use for anything. Now for deep concealment I simply stick with the little LCP.

Not my pic, just one snagged from armslist. There's undeniably a difference in size, but not as much as one might think; and not a whole lot of difference in concealability imo:


Compared to the mini-revolver, the lcp does weigh and additional 4 ounces. But it gives three & a half times the power per shot, times 75% more shots, is more than six times the muzzle energy on tap in a gun that's still tiny yet substantially easier to shoot. Another way to state the difference in per-round power, is that my .22LR mini-revolver (even loaded with mini-mags) is roughly 27% as powerful as a micro-.380. That's way below my comfort level; obviously that's strictly a personal comfort-zone thing and ymmv.

For a tackle-gun box, I can definitely see a role for the mini-revolvers and if I fished, that's where mine would live. But beyond that I've given up on mine for much of anything else.

I also had two of the freedom arms four round guns. Very well built wish I had not sold them!!

As for slightly more powerful than a 177 pellet. Well, no not quite. . Bellcity's may be similar but a VERY HEAVY pellet weight 13 grs and that LR is 36-40grs. But it is less powerful than a 32 or 380 but it's not 27%... The two CF calibers run. 8-900 fps with 60 & 80g projectiles. 30 & 50% more then the LR but in vel alone. Energy they both have a little more. (Heavier projectiles) trouble with both of those is they are also ballistically inferior to the slender for weight 22 bullet. Meaning the 32/380 are near caliber in legnth (almost round) this is inferior balicticslly, esp for penetration. The LR is known to "bounce around" once inside. Trama is greatly increased. It's a soft lead lrojectile that WILL expand on hard items. The other two may, but more likely they would bounce off. About the worst I can say for the RF defensive is they have a drastically inferior primer. This alone is the largest reason they are not better supported defensively. BUT this is some what circumvented with use I a multi chamber firearm like a revolver where simply thumbing the hammer or squeezing the trigger brings another cartridage to bear.

No they ain't for everyone and I don't condone them as a primary but fun and a good back up. Hell yea I like and use them! JMPO but shared by many others.

CW
cwlongshot is offline  
Old July 15th, 2014, 04:24 PM   #9
Member
 
cwlongshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: New England
Posts: 91
Talking

I picked up a Balck Widow tonight!!



Time for a new family photo!!



CW
cwlongshot is offline  
Old July 16th, 2014, 10:33 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwlongshot View Post
...As for slightly more powerful than a 177 pellet. Well, no not quite. . Bellcity's may be similar but a VERY HEAVY pellet weight 13 grs and that LR is 36-40grs. But it is less powerful than a 32 or 380 but it's not 27%... The two CF calibers run. 8-900 fps with 60 & 80g projectiles. 30 & 50% more then the LR but in vel alone. Energy they both have a little more. (Heavier projectiles) trouble with both of those is they are also ballistically inferior to the slender for weight 22 bullet. Meaning the 32/380 are near caliber in legnth (almost round) this is inferior balicticslly, esp for penetration. The LR is known to "bounce around" once inside. Trama is greatly increased. It's a soft lead lrojectile that WILL expand on hard items. The other two may, but more likely they would bounce off. About the worst I can say for the RF defensive is they have a drastically inferior primer. This alone is the largest reason they are not better supported defensively. BUT this is some what circumvented with use I a multi chamber firearm like a revolver where simply thumbing the hammer or squeezing the trigger brings another cartridage to bear.

No they ain't for everyone and I don't condone them as a primary but fun and a good back up. Hell yea I like and use them! JMPO but shared by many others.

CW
I can only speak for what I've chronographed out of my own guns.
P32 with corbon 60 grain = 1058 fps for 149 ft/lbs
LCP with WW/USA 95-grain fmj-fp = 884 fps for 165 ft/lbs
LCP with Rem 102 JHP = 845 fps for 162 ft/lbs
FA mini-revolver with 36 grain CCI mini-mags = 708 fps for 40 ft/lbs.

Those are actual numbers, measured from my guns; the mini-revolver running 40 ft/lbs even with mini-mags. So for comparison:

40 / 149 = 26.8% of the .32acp from a P32
40 / 165 = 24.2% of the .380 LCP with 95 fmj
40 / 162 = 24.6% of the .380 LCP with 102 jhp
When I was saying 27%, I was being as generous as I could.

Reversed, it means the .32acp is 372% as powerful as the mini-revolver, the .380 fmj is 412% as powerful, and the .380 rem jhp is 405% as powerful. (Also bear in mind that none of these .32 or .380 loads are plus-p either. The corbon .32 is fairly hot for a .32, but still not plus-p.)

The .22 from a short barrel loses a lot of its zing. From a short revolver barrel with its cylinder gap, it loses even more. The same mini-mags from my little beretta 21A average 847 fps for 57 ft/lbs, or more than 42% more power with the same mini-mag than the mini-revolver gets. Similarly, the same mini-mags from my 4 3/4" revolver run 1029 fps (85 ft/lbs), more than twice as powerful as the same load from the mini-revolver. Again, I don't claim to speak for anyone else's guns - these are measured out of mine, but I suspect the patterns hold relatively consistent. It may also be that the NAA guns have inherently 'faster' barrels than the FA/Casull guns. I can't confirm that one way or the other, but Casull products aren't generally known for slow barrels.

If a person really likes the mini-revolvers, there's definitely something to be said for that. I like compact revolvers, my desk gun is a 450C snub in .45Colt. But I know (from testing) and accept that that gun is less powerful than other revolvers with the same ammo. And with short barrels, the differences don't have to be huge. Example - the hornady 185FTX that runs a measured 865 fps from a 3" taurus judge (friend's gun, measured on my chrono), only runs 797 from the 450C. So the slight difference between a 2" ported barrel and a 3" unported barrel makes the difference between 261 ft/lbs and 307 ft/lbs.

I'm kind of rambling here; apologize for that. Just wanted to clarify with personally-experienced numbers what these guns (at least my guns) actually produce.

As far as the pellet-gun comparison, again measured numbers. My Gamo Hunter gets 1080 fps with 9-grain pellets for 23 ft/lbs. So my .22 mini-revolver with mini-mags has 17 ft/bs more energy than my .177 pellet rifle. Again, not presumptions or data picked up somewhere; actual numbers chrono'ed from my actual guns. That difference is undeniably substantial percentage-wise, but only because these are such miniscule power-levels to begin with. I personally consider 17 ft/lbs to be a 'slight' difference in power; ymmv on that.

No offense meant, to each his own, and if a person genuinely likes them, that's certainly a valid factor to consider in the overall equation. Just wanted to clarify & give the basis for my earlier comments.
John in ar is offline  
Old July 16th, 2014, 02:14 PM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 384
Just got me curious, and admittedly a little bit annoyed at being called incorrect when simply relaying personally-observed information. I'd never looked into this before since I pretty much retired my own mini-revolver decades ago, but I got curious & checked NAA's website. They have chronograph info for the different calibers in various barrel lengths & it was interesting.

.22LR, 1-1/8" and 1-5/8" barrels:
North American Arms Ballistics - Long Rifles 1 & 1/8"
North American Arms Ballistics - Long Rifles 1 & 5/8"

.22 Magnum, 1-1/8" and 1-5/8" barrels:
North American Arms Ballistics - Magnums 1 & 1/8"
North American Arms Ballistics - Magnums 1 & 5/8"

Their numbers on the .22LR in 1-1/8" pretty much match mine, so that would tend to make me take their word for the others. My gun gets 708fps with 36-grain minimags; they list their final average velocity as 681 with 40-grain minimags; so a muzzle-energy difference of only 1 ft/lb (40 vs. 41). Close enough to what I've found with mine; so taking their other numbers at face value this is what we get.

.22LR, 1-1/8" Mini-mags - 41 ft/lbs
.22LR, 1-5/8" Mini-mags - 44 ft/lbs

.22Mag, 1-1/8" Maxi-mags - 55 ft/lbs
.22Mag, 1-5/8" Maxi-mags - 64 ft/lbs

It isn't until you get to the big versions that anything much changes; and even then only with the magnum version. For the mini-master with the four-inch barrel in .22magnum, which imo doesn't really qualify as "mini-revolver" status anymore:


they show 972 fps with the same 40-grain maxi-mags; for 84 ft/lbs of energy. Or half the power of the standard-pressure .380 loads above.

4" .22mag Mini-Master ballistic info page: North American Arms Ballistics - Mini Master Magnum

Just offered as a 'fwiw'; not meaning to start a flame war or anything. Just passing along easily-findable, documented info in the hopes of spreading some objective information & maybe dispel some amount of erroneous presuppositions.


{edit - and also just fwiw cwlongshot, those really are some neat-looking revolvers there. Just because I don't personally like them for power reasons, doesn't mean I don't think they're slick little guns.}

Last edited by John in ar; July 16th, 2014 at 02:54 PM.
John in ar is offline  
Old July 17th, 2014, 05:52 AM   #12
Member
 
cwlongshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: New England
Posts: 91
Your addition is correct and based on those figures you are of coarse correct. Thing is The difference is what we get from our chronograps. My results are about 20% faster then yours. :

I'm in the lo 900's with a LR and between 1000/1100 fps in my Maggie's. Results nearly double your energy figures. My 1050 fps average in Maggie is mirrored buy dozens of Utube videos from various people. I like Hornady CD and Winny PDX1 THe cd is a. 45g pill at 1000+ resulting in a 100+ FPE.

Like you I can only speak to my own results from my various firearms shot thru my chronograph.

CW
cwlongshot is offline  
Old July 17th, 2014, 03:01 PM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwlongshot View Post
...The difference is what we get from our chronograps.

...Results nearly double your energy figures...
Fair enough. Those ones from NAA's site matched mine so close, I assumed they'd be pretty universal.
John in ar is offline  
Old July 22nd, 2014, 03:30 AM   #14
Member
 
cwlongshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: New England
Posts: 91
I picked up TWO MORE! :

I WANTED a PUG. But when I got to shop they had a used Earl 1860. So I worked a package and left with both.



I told ya I loved these things! Hope the Earl is a shooter! (4" barrel)

CW
cwlongshot is offline  
Old August 13th, 2014, 04:02 AM   #15
Member
 
cwlongshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: New England
Posts: 91
My Earl got a new set of rosewood grips and a holster! I haven't had time for the range but I did pop a few rat shot loads. It's a fine "shot" gun too at close range!!





I'm working on some kydex holsters for the BW too..

CW
cwlongshot is offline  
Reply

  MP-Pistol Forum > Armory > Wheelguns


Search tags for this page

22 wmr revolver naa black widow size comparison

,

comparison of naa black widow and naa pug

,
concealability of the naa minimaster
,

cvang grips

,

cvang grips for north american arms black widow

,

naa black widow size comparison

,
naa earl pocket holster
,
naa mini 22 wmr size
,

naa pug grips cvang

,
naa under water
,
north american arms factory
,
vang chong grips for naa
Click on a term to search for related topics.

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
9mm revolvers tatters Wheelguns 25 May 25th, 2015 09:24 AM
Classic Revolvers Like A Boss Wheelguns 26 May 4th, 2015 07:24 PM
M&P Revolvers M&P Freak MP Talk 7 September 25th, 2012 08:12 AM
M&P Revolvers KRWeiss MP Revolvers 3 September 11th, 2009 06:31 PM



Powered by vBulletin 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © 2006-2012 MP-Pistol. All rights reserved.
MP-Pistol is a M&P pistol enthusiast forum, but it is in no way affiliated with, nor does it represent Smith & Wesson Holding Corp. of Springfield, MA.