I love props, dont get me wrong, but when it comes to guns, I only really want the real thing... The taurus model that was used to make Mals Gun, i think it was a model 36 right? is fairly easy to come by, and not too expensive.... would it be POSSIBLE to make one that was REAL firing? any pistolsmiths on the forums? I know the hero for the show had to fire blanks, but theres alot of difference between a black gun and a real gun.... any thoughts here?
Ok lets break it down: Can a REAL Firing Mals Pistol be made?
- Thread starter DavidS
- Start date
In actuality, there are very few differences between the guns. Practically any gun can be made to fire blanks as long as they are available in the correct caliber for the intended firearm.
Conceivably, one could take the base gun (if available) make a positive copy and sculpt (or have machined) the correct parts to fit around it. It does look as though the screen used item was heavily modified before they built up around it (i.e. grip frame was removed, and if I recall the hammer may have been played with too) so you would want to check into the legality of modifying a real gun.
A likely substitute would be to simply buy a dedicated starting pistol close to the dimensions of the screen used, and modify it instead. I believe the only area of the base gun you see on the prop is the trigger and trigger guard. It should be easy to find a starting revolver fairly close to the real thing. I do realize that you want the real thing, but you also want to be careful regarding the law.
Hope I helped a little.
edit* I guess I just repeated this topic, huh?
http://www.therpf.com/index.php?showtopic=117206&hl=
Conceivably, one could take the base gun (if available) make a positive copy and sculpt (or have machined) the correct parts to fit around it. It does look as though the screen used item was heavily modified before they built up around it (i.e. grip frame was removed, and if I recall the hammer may have been played with too) so you would want to check into the legality of modifying a real gun.
A likely substitute would be to simply buy a dedicated starting pistol close to the dimensions of the screen used, and modify it instead. I believe the only area of the base gun you see on the prop is the trigger and trigger guard. It should be easy to find a starting revolver fairly close to the real thing. I do realize that you want the real thing, but you also want to be careful regarding the law.
Hope I helped a little.
edit* I guess I just repeated this topic, huh?
http://www.therpf.com/index.php?showtopic=117206&hl=
well ok, but MY topic is NOT about a blankfiring gun, there IS no legality about bobbing the hammer on a recolver and extending the barrel, which is what would have to be done, my questions are more about how it would affect the gun itself... the mainspring is in the grip frame, so id be affraid of messing with that, the gun wouldnt work.
This is more of a GUN questioning, not a PROP quesiont
This is more of a GUN questioning, not a PROP quesiont
Noeland
Master Member
The mainspring is removed, and a new one is built into the handle of the mal pistol.
Revolvers need ZERO modification for them to fire blanks. And be aware there are many different kinds of blank loads, half loads, flash loads that are nearly silent but give you the big fat muzzle flash, and they vary from there for different purposes. And in this day and age overlaying a digital muzzle flash over a stunt gun is no big whoop either. There are also non-gun flash makers manufatcured in the shape of police and military firearms (see the remake of Assault on Precinct 13 for some, Ethan Hawk uses them through the whole flick)
It is VERY possibly to make a firing Mal pistol, you just have to make sure the extended barrel is made by a professional gunsmith, and you have to make sure the body or shell can withstand the pressure generated by a live fire round with a projectile. Otherwise, the side panels will be breaking apart and flying off the gun. BUt if you handle those 2 needs, and they are vbery do-able needs to cover, YES, you can have a live fire Mal pistol.
Njc--------------------
Revolvers need ZERO modification for them to fire blanks. And be aware there are many different kinds of blank loads, half loads, flash loads that are nearly silent but give you the big fat muzzle flash, and they vary from there for different purposes. And in this day and age overlaying a digital muzzle flash over a stunt gun is no big whoop either. There are also non-gun flash makers manufatcured in the shape of police and military firearms (see the remake of Assault on Precinct 13 for some, Ethan Hawk uses them through the whole flick)
It is VERY possibly to make a firing Mal pistol, you just have to make sure the extended barrel is made by a professional gunsmith, and you have to make sure the body or shell can withstand the pressure generated by a live fire round with a projectile. Otherwise, the side panels will be breaking apart and flying off the gun. BUt if you handle those 2 needs, and they are vbery do-able needs to cover, YES, you can have a live fire Mal pistol.
Njc--------------------
I've been hoping for the same thing for ages David. 
Yeah, the base Taurus is a clone of the Smith model 36.. I'd likely use the latter, as I've had less than great luck with Taurus (Tauri?). And the .357 Jframe clone has a cylinder a skosh too long too work.
<div class='quotetop'></div>
That's the one big concern I'd have. The barrel should be easy -- Green Mountain, among others, makes octagonal barrels in the a bore diameter compatible with the .38... I know they make a .36, which might be a skosh too big (as you likely know, the .38 is really .357 diameter) ..but I think it'd work. Shouldn't be any harder that cutting to length, crowning the muzzle, fitting a front sight, and threading the base .. oh, and drilling a forcing cone I guess.
What I'm not certain about is the pressure from the barrel/cylinder gap. I THINK it'd be okay if the walls were thick enough.. but there should be some place for the gas to escape rather than the sideplate seams... I believe the early Galactica revolver shells had pressure relief cuts in the front of the clamshell body, but I don't see anything similar on the Mal piece.
That said, the Signal podcast the other day mentioned one of the QMX folk firing the hero with regular .38 loads, so perhaps the pressure from that gap ain't so bad?
and oh yes --
http://www.therpf.com/index.php?showtopic=104045
Yeah, the base Taurus is a clone of the Smith model 36.. I'd likely use the latter, as I've had less than great luck with Taurus (Tauri?). And the .357 Jframe clone has a cylinder a skosh too long too work.
<div class='quotetop'></div>
That's the one big concern I'd have. The barrel should be easy -- Green Mountain, among others, makes octagonal barrels in the a bore diameter compatible with the .38... I know they make a .36, which might be a skosh too big (as you likely know, the .38 is really .357 diameter) ..but I think it'd work. Shouldn't be any harder that cutting to length, crowning the muzzle, fitting a front sight, and threading the base .. oh, and drilling a forcing cone I guess.
What I'm not certain about is the pressure from the barrel/cylinder gap. I THINK it'd be okay if the walls were thick enough.. but there should be some place for the gas to escape rather than the sideplate seams... I believe the early Galactica revolver shells had pressure relief cuts in the front of the clamshell body, but I don't see anything similar on the Mal piece.
That said, the Signal podcast the other day mentioned one of the QMX folk firing the hero with regular .38 loads, so perhaps the pressure from that gap ain't so bad?
and oh yes --
http://www.therpf.com/index.php?showtopic=104045
So I reckon these are the parts we'd need (other than the base gun, of course)
1. Replacement Barrel: Available as barrel stock from several suppliers, but will need to be fit to the revolver by a good gunsmith.
2. Replacement Grip Frame. The original was EDM'd from steel stock. I imagine one of our local machinists might be able to do a run of those? Of course, fitting it to the revolver would also need to be done by a local smith. The tricky part is the layout of the frame -- it will need to have a mount for the mainspring located where it will still work the hammer well despite being at a different angle. I don't know how hard that would be. Also, the fit to the revolver frame would be a might tricky.
3. Replacement or modified hammer. Easy to swap into the orginal revolver.
4. Replacement cylinder latch. Should be easy to fabricate from plain stock.
5. Long pins to hold the cylinder covers in place, secured with the thumbscrews. Again, prolly something easily enough fabricated from stock.
And finally, the all important -
6. Brass Shell kit, consisting of:
A. Foreward body shell (pair)
B. Rear body shell (pair)
C. Cylinder cover/center body shell (pair)
D. "Safety" lever
E. Front Sight
F. Magazine body
G. Magazine friction lock to fit into the forward body shell
(this one I think could be redesigned to work a little better)
H. Top strap.
Personally, I'd love to see QMX make these.. both since it's the ethical thing (they've the license) and because they I presume have access to the original molds. Hard to beat that for accuracy.
I've not heard anything to indicate they intend to do anything but resin copies though... Perhaps we could recreate them like the original -- a 3D model, exported to wax masters in a 3D printer? I'd hate to reinvent the wheel though. C'mon Steve... please?
The parts a gunsmith would be needed for are replacing the grip frame and barrel. I know a miracle worker up this way who routinely does "production line" fixing of surplus arms, so this kind of work would prolly be something he'd be quite comfortable with. The trick would be the transfer fees involved in sending FFLs, shipping, all that. Still easily doable though, just an extra cost. Domestic anyhow, I dunno about our overseas brethren.
-K
1. Replacement Barrel: Available as barrel stock from several suppliers, but will need to be fit to the revolver by a good gunsmith.
2. Replacement Grip Frame. The original was EDM'd from steel stock. I imagine one of our local machinists might be able to do a run of those? Of course, fitting it to the revolver would also need to be done by a local smith. The tricky part is the layout of the frame -- it will need to have a mount for the mainspring located where it will still work the hammer well despite being at a different angle. I don't know how hard that would be. Also, the fit to the revolver frame would be a might tricky.
3. Replacement or modified hammer. Easy to swap into the orginal revolver.
4. Replacement cylinder latch. Should be easy to fabricate from plain stock.
5. Long pins to hold the cylinder covers in place, secured with the thumbscrews. Again, prolly something easily enough fabricated from stock.
And finally, the all important -
6. Brass Shell kit, consisting of:
A. Foreward body shell (pair)
B. Rear body shell (pair)
C. Cylinder cover/center body shell (pair)
D. "Safety" lever
E. Front Sight
F. Magazine body
G. Magazine friction lock to fit into the forward body shell
(this one I think could be redesigned to work a little better)
H. Top strap.
Personally, I'd love to see QMX make these.. both since it's the ethical thing (they've the license) and because they I presume have access to the original molds. Hard to beat that for accuracy.
I've not heard anything to indicate they intend to do anything but resin copies though...
Perhaps we could recreate them like the original -- a 3D model, exported to wax masters in a 3D printer? I'd hate to reinvent the wheel though. C'mon Steve... please? The parts a gunsmith would be needed for are replacing the grip frame and barrel. I know a miracle worker up this way who routinely does "production line" fixing of surplus arms, so this kind of work would prolly be something he'd be quite comfortable with. The trick would be the transfer fees involved in sending FFLs, shipping, all that. Still easily doable though, just an extra cost. Domestic anyhow, I dunno about our overseas brethren.
-K
Too Much Garlic
Master Member
<div class='quotetop'>(Kaylee @ Sep 23 2006, 03:29 PM) [snapback]1324970[/snapback]</div>
<div class='quotetop'>(Kaylee @ Sep 23 2006, 03:29 PM) [snapback]1324970[/snapback]</div>
I took the liberty of reposting this picture, from the "Mal Metal Pistol Envy Thread".
<div class='quotetop'>(Kaylee @ Sep 23 2006, 03:29 PM) [snapback]1324970[/snapback]</div>
The tough part would probably be to replicate the inside of the individual pieces, as only the outside are visible to scan and meassure from, unless access to original pieces or pictures of the inside of those are made available.Personally, I'd love to see QMX make these.. both since it's the ethical thing (they've the license) and because they I presume have access to the original molds. Hard to beat that for accuracy.
I've not heard anything to indicate they intend to do anything but resin copies though...
[/b]
I took the liberty of reposting this picture, from the "Mal Metal Pistol Envy Thread".
Perzactly. Thank you.. Looks like I forgot the mag "follower"
Also, We'd prolly want to deviate from the original prop by just drilling out holes in the back of the topstrap "wings" to allow for a real life rear sight. I'm sure there are several adjustable rear sights that would work in there, just can't recall any offhand.
I think the original barrel there was milled out and fit over a "pencil weight" real Smith barrel. That's just guesstimating, based on the look of the hero casting. For a limited "real life pistol" run, I don't know which would be easier/better -- turning barrel stock or the barrel liner solution. I'll ask.
I think the inside dimensions can be relatively easily inferred, given those of the host revolver to work from. Just so long as the cylinder has clearance to turn and open, we'd be fine. (Might take a little reworking of the cylinder pin lockup to, now that I think about it). It'd just take a dedicated Browncoat who knew how to work SolidWorks.
i thought about the sights too. thats a absolute MUST. I mean aint much anything more accurate than a fine long barreled revolver. so this gun has not only the opportunity to be accurate to the prop but also a good gun in its own right.....
another thing id like to deviate from is the color.... trying to make, or plate it in a brass color would be a PITA..... id much rather see it in a fine blued finish...
<div class='quotetop'>(Noeland @ Sep 23 2006, 12:55 AM) [snapback]1324846[/snapback]</div>
question here: in this picture why is the "magazine" thing removable? is there any FUNCTIONAL reason itd have to be removable?
another thing id like to deviate from is the color.... trying to make, or plate it in a brass color would be a PITA..... id much rather see it in a fine blued finish...
<div class='quotetop'>(Noeland @ Sep 23 2006, 12:55 AM) [snapback]1324846[/snapback]</div>
Njc------------------
[/b]
question here: in this picture why is the "magazine" thing removable? is there any FUNCTIONAL reason itd have to be removable?
The magazine was removable probably only for "lock and load" type schenes there's no functional reason for it that I know of.
For a real gun I would use the magazine to hold reload rounds. Obviously you'd have to pop them out of the magazine and load them into the cylinder but it'd make it useful.
For a real gun I would use the magazine to hold reload rounds. Obviously you'd have to pop them out of the magazine and load them into the cylinder but it'd make it useful.
Biggest expense is the brass body. The gripframe could be EDM'd in a run for not too awful much I think.. same for the barrels.
The body though.. yeesh. I think the best approach (short of A Very Special Someone making a run *cough cough QMX hint hint cough* ) is getting a 3D scan of one of the better replicas, and reverse engineering the inside dimensions in something like SolidWorks. Then 3D print out masters, have molds done... get a foundry to cast all the little pieces.
Oh, and the Visual Guide mentions that the original design was produced in several sizes in order to account for shrinkage in brass..something to keep in mind.
Lots of fuss, lots of bother.. lots of expense. Doable, but I sure hope the licensed route is available sometime soon -- movie or series version I'm not as particular.
The body though.. yeesh. I think the best approach (short of A Very Special Someone making a run *cough cough QMX hint hint cough* ) is getting a 3D scan of one of the better replicas, and reverse engineering the inside dimensions in something like SolidWorks. Then 3D print out masters, have molds done... get a foundry to cast all the little pieces.
Oh, and the Visual Guide mentions that the original design was produced in several sizes in order to account for shrinkage in brass..something to keep in mind.
Lots of fuss, lots of bother.. lots of expense. Doable, but I sure hope the licensed route is available sometime soon -- movie or series version I'm not as particular.
I was just figuring since the original was done in brass, might as well follow suit. Easier to cast and all that. Since the shell isn't taking any load, it shouldn't prove a problem. It's not like the repro brass frame revolvers, where brass parts are actually taking the stress of firing.
With the original prop Mal gun, all the parts actually subjected to firing stresses are steel.
That said, I'd not mind having the decorative shell done in steel -- I just thnk we'd be talking a significantly higher price, given the greater difficulty of casting and machining it. If we were to go so far as having work done in steel, I'd just as soon go with an ideallized mag-fed semi auto rather than a shell over a revolver.
Actually, I had most of the working parts for just such a beast drawn up a year or two ago, borrowing pretty heavily from the Winchester '92 action. If you like, I can see if they're still around here somewhere. There were still some bugs left to work out though.
With the original prop Mal gun, all the parts actually subjected to firing stresses are steel.
That said, I'd not mind having the decorative shell done in steel -- I just thnk we'd be talking a significantly higher price, given the greater difficulty of casting and machining it. If we were to go so far as having work done in steel, I'd just as soon go with an ideallized mag-fed semi auto rather than a shell over a revolver.
Actually, I had most of the working parts for just such a beast drawn up a year or two ago, borrowing pretty heavily from the Winchester '92 action. If you like, I can see if they're still around here somewhere. There were still some bugs left to work out though.
Let me elaborate, actually..
For starters, go over to uspto.gov and look up John Moses Browning's patents (yes, that JMB. The man has his fingerprints on just about everything that goes "bang" these days, and that's no exaggeration.).
ANYHOW.. look at the patent for the original 1892 carbine. You'll see not only is it striker-fired rather than hammer fired, it feeds from a detatchable box magazine. (I presume Winchester changed it to the traditional tube mag/hammer arrangement to appeal to their existing customer base when they bought the rights to make said boomstick.)
So there we have our guts. The bolt PULLS the round out of the top of the magazine, then lifts it up into the chamber like a regular lever gun. So far so good -- more than enough room to accomplish that in the Mal pistol. Coincedently, this setup works GREAT with rimmed "revolver-like" cartridges as we see used on Firefly a fair amount. The long reciever can even let the bolt reciprocate without slamming into your firing hand if you hold it stupid (like Mal sometimes does).
You want semi-auto? Easy.. those "screws" on the side can be gas tubes, taking gas from the barrel down to impinge on a bolt lockup. I was thinking something akin to CZ-50-something roller locking, but there's prolly a better way. The trick it that taking gas off this close to the breech isn't a terrible good idea.. having a gas tube running down closer to the muzzle (like the "loading lever" on the original concept of the prop actually.) would be much better.
So we come to cycling the action. If we use the "loading lever" gas tube, we can use those long screws as long-axis bolt "handles" -- grab the weapon with your finger tip on the front left screw, your thumb hooked in the trigger guard, and pinch -- just like old-timey 1911 pinch checks, but safer.
If we use those screws instead for gas ports, then we can use the rear sight wings as an AR-style cocking lever. Not the best choice, but it'd work. Or there might be some way of letting the "screws" do double duty, I'm not certain.
Mag release? Easy -- those "T" areas on either side of the forward reciever. Pinch in at the top, and the bottoms lever out, disengaging from grooves in the magazine. Just pinch the top of the T and out pops the mag.
And now we come to the real hassle. Getting the hammer impulse from the hammer to the cartridge primer. See, if we have a reciprocating bolt inside the reciever, then there's no way for the hammer dropping at the back of the reciever to be able to reach the rear of the bolt -- there's that big empty space between the two where the bolt needs to reciprocate to eject empties and load the next round.
We can't put the hammer inside the receiver in the position hammers normally go in with a mag-fed semi auto, because the "pull the cartridge out backwards" monkey motion gets in the way. We don't want to use a "strip straight off the top" mag, 'cause that leaves us with about 2" of usable barrel in a big ol' hogleg. Also not good. Alternately, we could have a bolt run the entire length of the receiver, and work just like the lever guns do.. the downside there is that you have the bolt running punching about 2" out the back of the gun with every shot. It's the simplest most rugged solution I can think of, but with that grip angle you're begging to chew your hand up with the slightest inattention.
Bother. Where's Matsuo when you need him?
For starters, go over to uspto.gov and look up John Moses Browning's patents (yes, that JMB. The man has his fingerprints on just about everything that goes "bang" these days, and that's no exaggeration.).
ANYHOW.. look at the patent for the original 1892 carbine. You'll see not only is it striker-fired rather than hammer fired, it feeds from a detatchable box magazine. (I presume Winchester changed it to the traditional tube mag/hammer arrangement to appeal to their existing customer base when they bought the rights to make said boomstick.)
So there we have our guts. The bolt PULLS the round out of the top of the magazine, then lifts it up into the chamber like a regular lever gun. So far so good -- more than enough room to accomplish that in the Mal pistol. Coincedently, this setup works GREAT with rimmed "revolver-like" cartridges as we see used on Firefly a fair amount. The long reciever can even let the bolt reciprocate without slamming into your firing hand if you hold it stupid (like Mal sometimes does).
You want semi-auto? Easy.. those "screws" on the side can be gas tubes, taking gas from the barrel down to impinge on a bolt lockup. I was thinking something akin to CZ-50-something roller locking, but there's prolly a better way. The trick it that taking gas off this close to the breech isn't a terrible good idea.. having a gas tube running down closer to the muzzle (like the "loading lever" on the original concept of the prop actually.) would be much better.
So we come to cycling the action. If we use the "loading lever" gas tube, we can use those long screws as long-axis bolt "handles" -- grab the weapon with your finger tip on the front left screw, your thumb hooked in the trigger guard, and pinch -- just like old-timey 1911 pinch checks, but safer.
If we use those screws instead for gas ports, then we can use the rear sight wings as an AR-style cocking lever. Not the best choice, but it'd work. Or there might be some way of letting the "screws" do double duty, I'm not certain.
Mag release? Easy -- those "T" areas on either side of the forward reciever. Pinch in at the top, and the bottoms lever out, disengaging from grooves in the magazine. Just pinch the top of the T and out pops the mag.
And now we come to the real hassle. Getting the hammer impulse from the hammer to the cartridge primer. See, if we have a reciprocating bolt inside the reciever, then there's no way for the hammer dropping at the back of the reciever to be able to reach the rear of the bolt -- there's that big empty space between the two where the bolt needs to reciprocate to eject empties and load the next round.
We can't put the hammer inside the receiver in the position hammers normally go in with a mag-fed semi auto, because the "pull the cartridge out backwards" monkey motion gets in the way. We don't want to use a "strip straight off the top" mag, 'cause that leaves us with about 2" of usable barrel in a big ol' hogleg. Also not good. Alternately, we could have a bolt run the entire length of the receiver, and work just like the lever guns do.. the downside there is that you have the bolt running punching about 2" out the back of the gun with every shot. It's the simplest most rugged solution I can think of, but with that grip angle you're begging to chew your hand up with the slightest inattention.
Bother. Where's Matsuo when you need him?
thats the most detailed break down of "what if" on this gun i have ever read.
Youve hit on alot of the ideas ive had, BUT you forgot one litle problem.
WHERE will the shells eject if you make it a semi auto?
because i was thinking a Ruger 10/22 actionm could be used fairly easily... but where will the shells eject?
youd have to end up modifying the design....... so in that case i tmight just be easier to stick to the "hidden revolver" design
Youve hit on alot of the ideas ive had, BUT you forgot one litle problem.
WHERE will the shells eject if you make it a semi auto?
because i was thinking a Ruger 10/22 actionm could be used fairly easily... but where will the shells eject?
youd have to end up modifying the design....... so in that case i tmight just be easier to stick to the "hidden revolver" design
