Well I'll be d@mned.... - 1911Forum
1911Forum
Advertise Here
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > >

Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-07-2015, 11:44 PM
jam_o_matic jam_o_matic is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 199
Well I'll be [email protected]

From Martin Tuason, posted on 22 TCM KREW on Facebook:

Quote:
Hi everybody. Just a FYI the new round is not called REV. It will be called the the 22 TCM9R the 9R standing for 9mm revolution.

Why because I will make a conversion for every major 9mm gun out there in the next 5 years which I think will change the people's minds about fast bullets with no recoil. It revolutionary don't you guys think?

The REV is reserved for the super secret pistol which will revolutionize the polymer pistol market.
I've got goosebumps...
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-08-2015, 12:08 AM
gumbee gumbee is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Orange County,California
Posts: 2,936
That's quite a promise to make BUT, looking forward to it!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-08-2015, 07:04 AM
Uncle Alvah Uncle Alvah is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ernul NC
Posts: 530
Quote:
22 TCM9R

I guess I don't have a basic understanding of what that round is all about.
Can ya help a guy out?

-Performance wise it is the same or below te 22TCM?It is based on the .223 case yes/no?
-Why is it suitable for use in converting such a wide array of 9mm made by whomever, but the .22 TCM is not?

I read Martins post also, but I lack the background on the round to really understand whats going on here.
You buy the TCM because you want high velocity, low recoil, high mag capacity. So in a nutshell, why does someone want a 22TCMR9?
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #4  
Old 01-08-2015, 10:21 AM
jupiter7 jupiter7 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: West, TN
Posts: 2,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Alvah View Post
I guess I don't have a basic understanding of what that round is all about.
Can ya help a guy out?

-Performance wise it is the same or below te 22TCM?It is based on the .223 case yes/no?
-Why is it suitable for use in converting such a wide array of 9mm made by whomever, but the .22 TCM is not?

I read Martins post also, but I lack the background on the round to really understand whats going on here.
You buy the TCM because you want high velocity, low recoil, high mag capacity. So in a nutshell, why does someone want a 22TCMR9?

Simple physics, the TCM fits in .45 sized guns with an overall length of 1.265. Fair to assume the new cartridge will be shorter to fit in 9mm sized guns.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-08-2015, 07:34 PM
jam_o_matic jam_o_matic is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Alvah View Post
I guess I don't have a basic understanding of what that round is all about.
Can ya help a guy out?

-Performance wise it is the same or below te 22TCM?It is based on the .223 case yes/no?
-Why is it suitable for use in converting such a wide array of 9mm made by whomever, but the .22 TCM is not?


I read Martins post also, but I lack the background on the round to really understand whats going on here.
You buy the TCM because you want high velocity, low recoil, high mag capacity. So in a nutshell, why does someone want a 22TCMR9?
Supplementing what jupiter7 already posted, Modern Weapon Systems is set to unvail their Boberg XR9-S subcompact conversion to 22 TCM9R at Shot Show.

They're claiming 1934fps and 397 ft/lbs out of a 3.38" barrel.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-08-2015, 07:54 PM
Steam Boat Steam Boat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by jam_o_matic View Post
Supplementing what jupiter7 already posted, Modern Weapon Systems is set to unvail their Boberg XR9-S subcompact conversion to 22 TCM9R at Shot Show.

They're claiming 1934fps and 397 ft/lbs out of a 3.38" barrel.
Daym ! That will be one speedy little bullet.
Wonder what it will clock out of a 5" barrel, or even a rifle ?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-08-2015, 08:19 PM
Grampaw Grampaw is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Pacific North Wet
Age: 80
Posts: 451
I will keep my 38 super. It is well tested, very functional and will kill nearly anything on this continent if I do my part.
__________________
HM2 FMF
Animal Hospital and Taxidermist Either way you get your pet back
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-09-2015, 10:35 AM
OldEagleEars OldEagleEars is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Shawnee, Kansas; a suburb of Kansas City
Age: 75
Posts: 2,289
It sounds like a smart move to get the TCM concept into huge 9mm market without trying to get all those folks who have 9mm's already to buy totally new guns. The idea of trading projectile weight for speed to get the same effect on the target has been going on for years. Since I can think of nobody who actually WANTS more recoil in a firearm, the reduction of even the moderate kick of a 9mm should be a real selling point (especially among females and we "older" shooters). Since I already have a TCM/9mm Rock and my only other 9mm gun is a revolver, I probably won't be in the market..though a wheelgun using the extractor tabs that my Charter Pitbull has to run TCM or TCM9R and based on the current Armscor .38 revolver frame might be kinda fun to play with!
What'cha think about that?
__________________
"De gustibus non disputandem est"
(In matters of taste there can be no disputes)
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-09-2015, 07:51 PM
jupiter7 jupiter7 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: West, TN
Posts: 2,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldEagleEars View Post
It sounds like a smart move to get the TCM concept into huge 9mm market without trying to get all those folks who have 9mm's already to buy totally new guns. The idea of trading projectile weight for speed to get the same effect on the target has been going on for years. Since I can think of nobody who actually WANTS more recoil in a firearm, the reduction of even the moderate kick of a 9mm should be a real selling point (especially among females and we "older" shooters). Since I already have a TCM/9mm Rock and my only other 9mm gun is a revolver, I probably won't be in the market..though a wheelgun using the extractor tabs that my Charter Pitbull has to run TCM or TCM9R and based on the current Armscor .38 revolver frame might be kinda fun to play with!
What'cha think about that?
Bottleneck cartridges don't work really well in revolvers. Would most likely stress the design of the rimless tabs.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-10-2015, 11:12 AM
OldEagleEars OldEagleEars is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Shawnee, Kansas; a suburb of Kansas City
Age: 75
Posts: 2,289
jupiter7 - "Bottleneck cartridges don't work really well in revolvers. Would most likely stress the design of the rimless tabs"
Good point and the history of bottleneck use in revolvers is pretty negative, but I wonder at what the recoil pressure of the TCM round is compared to that of the 9mm Luger cartridge. The amount of mass being ejected out the front is significantly less (40gr vs. 115/124gr, about one-third) and the extractor tabs are same used on the .40 Pitbull so I expect they are up to the task. It would seem that a properly chambered cylinder for the bottleneck cartridge combined with the positive locking of the tab to prevent set-back on firing it should be feasible. The extractor tab system works very well on my Pitbull which makes the idea of a TCM wheelgun good chewing gum for the mind.
__________________
"De gustibus non disputandem est"
(In matters of taste there can be no disputes)
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-11-2015, 05:44 AM
jupiter7 jupiter7 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: West, TN
Posts: 2,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldEagleEars View Post
jupiter7 - "Bottleneck cartridges don't work really well in revolvers. Would most likely stress the design of the rimless tabs"
Good point and the history of bottleneck use in revolvers is pretty negative, but I wonder at what the recoil pressure of the TCM round is compared to that of the 9mm Luger cartridge. The amount of mass being ejected out the front is significantly less (40gr vs. 115/124gr, about one-third) and the extractor tabs are same used on the .40 Pitbull so I expect they are up to the task. It would seem that a properly chambered cylinder for the bottleneck cartridge combined with the positive locking of the tab to prevent set-back on firing it should be feasible. The extractor tab system works very well on my Pitbull which makes the idea of a TCM wheelgun good chewing gum for the mind.
I'm just thinking of expansion at the shoulder pushing the tabs back. With straight wall the neck expands out but the bottleneck tends to push back but without tabs they bounce. Bet extraction will be sticky. I've got a tad experience with bottlenecks in revolvers(both gone now), a NAA mini in .17 and a Magnum Research BFR in 30-30. The Bfr required near full house loads as it pushed primers out with light loads and bound the cylinder. Full loads with a full cylinder required near brute force to extract. I never shot the .17 as it was discontinued right after I bought it, sold for a profit quickly, but read of many issues.

As you said, an interesting idea none the less, I wouldn't be the guinea pig though
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-11-2015, 06:20 AM
robport robport is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Chesapeake VA
Posts: 118
Interesting, but if it takes off, I'm assuming the regular TCM cartridge will quickly become extinct, like so many other cartridges in the past.

It's a good thing we got that 9mm barrel with the TCM pistol.
I guess we will have to buy the new barrel too.

Oh well, I'm only using the 9mm barrel now...lol
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-11-2015, 10:01 AM
swmp9jrm swmp9jrm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 74
Based on the one picture I've seen (on the Armscor Facebook page), it appears that the TCM9R cartridge uses the same brass as the TCM, but has a shorter, round-nose bullet. This would suggest that the TCM9R should work fine in the original TCM guns. But maybe I'll supplement my inventory of TCM just in case!!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:42 PM.


NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS SITE: By continuing to use this site, you certify that you have read and agree to abide by the Legal Terms of Use. All information, data, text or other materials ("Content") posted to this site by any users are the sole responsibility of those users. 1911Forum does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of such Content.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2015 1911Forum.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved