Courtesy Standard Manufacturing
Previous Post
Next Post

You don’t see a lot of unique designs come along in concealed carry guns any more, but Standard Manufacturing’s new S333 Thunderstruck double action only revolver is nothing if not unique. Their aluminum-framed wheel gun packs eight .22 magnum rounds and launches two of them with each trigger pull.

It’s probably a natural evolution of their S333 Volleyfire.

Standard named the gun for the rule of threes…most defensive gun uses take place at three yards or less, require three shots or less and are over in three seconds are less. With that in mind, they’ve produced a new lightweight (1 lb., 2 oz.) revolver they’re calling “a perfect self-defense weapon.”


The S333’s trigger is (again) a unique, two-finger design that rests behind an open, partial trigger guard post. Firing the gun requires a two-finger pull. As demonstrated in the video above, the S333 won’t fire with one finger in either position, even if you depress the upper trigger blade safety.

According to the video, the S333 Thunderstruck has an MSRP of $369, but it’s for sale on the Standard Manufacturing site for $425 with a holster. Here’s their press release . . .

Standard Manufacturing S333 thunderstruck
Courtesy Standard Manufacturing

Standard Manufacturing Co, LLC based in New Britain, CT announces the release of their new 2019 S333 Thunderstuck(TM) volley fire revolver.

Available now, the Standard Manufacturing Co, LLC S333 is the ultimate in personal protection. With each pull of the trigger, the S333 simultaneously fires two .22 magnum rimfire cartridges resulting in an incredible combination of firepower with very little recoil.

The S333 is the most reliable self protection firearm available because it functions as a double action revolver, which is far superior to any automatic pistol which is rendered useless when a jam or misfire occurs. The S333 also features an innovative redundant firing system unlike any other revolver devised.

Additionally, the S333 is the safest self-protection firearm available due to its blade style safety on the trigger, which must be depressed before the trigger can be pulled. The travel of the trigger then actuates a transfer bar, which will only then allow the gun to fire. This will only occur with a complete pull of the trigger; no other revolver on the market has this type of safe and reliable system.

The compact design and light weight of the S333 makes it an ideal carry gun, which can easily and readily be dispatched from a pocket, purse, or any holster.

The S333 is manufactured in New Britain, CT from 7075 aircraft grade aluminum with a high strength steel cylinder and barrels, and features titanium firing pin and cylinder inserts. The S333 also has red dot front and rear sights and a polymer grip.

The S333 can be purchased by calling 860-225-3401 or at

Standard Manufacturing s333 thunderstruck
Courtesy Standard Manufacturing

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. I’m a bit surprised that firing more than one round with a single pull of the trigger fits within all the ATF regulations.

    • Firing more than one projectile with a single pull of the trigger is the definition of a machine gun. Sure looks like it meets the definition.

        • Don’t try to start a Bubba debate about NFA. The definitions in that atrocity of a bill are actually very clear.

        • No, the rules say a gun firing more than one shot (not projectile) per trigger pull is a machine gun.
          The double .45 (Arsenal Firearms AF-2011) fit that description, yet the ATF said it’s OK.
          Bumpfire stocks don’t fit that description, but they are machine guns.
          Somewhere, the ATF is getting people with poor reading comprehension.

        • Yes sir, that is what Trump did to us armed Citizens, and conservatives are okay with gun control as long as it is their party that does it..
          Trump’s bumpstock ban also made it to where the statists will now argue that since a bumpstock is now a machine gun, then any weapon system that it can be attached to is considered readily convertible to a machine gun, and will need ATF poll tax.

        • “Any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger”

          As discussed in the other comment threads, “automatically” doesn’t mean volley fire.

        • Up to a point ,many of alcohol and tobacco redefined shotguns as above a certain gauge as other. So the police /military grenade launcher is not a shotgun even the shell started out in a punt gun and was shortened down from 8in. to about 5in.shooting the equal 40 12ga. shell. Killing 50ducks.

      • The ATF makes exceptions for multi-barreled firearms. If more than one round comes out with a single pull in a single barrel, that’s an MG. With 2 barrels/2 rounds, it’s supposedly not.

      • Two barrels. That makes the difference here from what I understand. One barrel and you would be correct. I have everything from a ‘micromini” NAA revolvette in .22LR to a S&W .460 XVR and a Ruger .480 Alaskan. Also have a Bond Arms that shoots .357 MAXIMUM and it does; very well, and am waiting on a Tanfoglio Witness Hunter in 10 mm and everything in between, yet I still want one of these. What can I say? I buy them not because I NEED them or even WANT them, but because I can……for now….well, maybe I want to just a little bit too!

    • Per the website this is all I see –

      “12. How is this not classified as a machine gun?

      The ATF has determined after examining the sample that is classified as a firearm under the gun control act. This means it transfers just as any other handgun would in your state.”

      I’d be interested in that it is certainly different. Allegedly looking at adding in additional calibers too.

      • Of course, the BAFTE issued similar determination letters on SlideFire (and years before that, on the Adkins Accelerator). Years later, they changed their mind and declared that either of those items was an illegal machine gun (read: potential serious time in Club Fed).

        WRT the Adkins Accelerator, the courts backed up the BATFE and deferred to its interpretation of the NFA, holding that nothing prevented BATFE from “changing its mind,” even though Adkins unquestionably did everything by the book and was going to be financially ruined by the change.

        Moral: *never* count on BATFE being bound by anything said in a determination letter.

        • Isn’t it the case that there are numerous models of double-barreled shotguns capable of firing both barrels on a single trigger pull? Not that any such models are modern; nor that they were significant in the number of units produced? (I don’t know; pure speculation here for comment by gunsmith historians.)

          Now, let’s suppose there were none. Very well. Could many double-barrel shotguns be “easily modified” to tie together their multiple triggers? Or, if a single trigger with a mechanism to shift control from the spent chamber to the second chamber, couldn’t such a design be “easily modified” to make the trigger discharge both chambers on a single trigger pull?

          If there are any such artifacts long established in American design and distribution, then ATF and the courts would have a tough time of this. Any ATF ruling to prohibit this novel design would imply that any/all such “double-barreled” shotgun designs are likewise construed to be “machine guns” under the continuously revising interpretations of the definition of machine gun. All such artifacts would have never been registered and could never be newly registered under the NFA`34+Hughes.

          How would the courts, to say nothing of the public, react to a novel “interpretation” that the venerable “double-barreled shotgun” has somehow been redefined as a “machine gun” without Congress exercising its legislative responsibility?

          England has evolved to the point where “Her Britannic Majesty” retains nearly zero power to make laws; nearly all legislative power is held by Parliament. Conversely, America seems to be evolving in the opposite direction where Congress debates and fiddles while the second branch – the Executive power – assumes the authority to “make law”.

          This line of reasoning extrapolates vastly beyond the scope of the narrow right-to-arms. It cuts to the heart of separation of powers to achieve checks-and-balances. Could SCOTUS ignore a case that brought such a challenge? Could it do so prudently on the grounds that the issue in question is “merely” a 2A matter of insignificant concern?

        • “Isn’t it the case that there are numerous models of double-barreled shotguns capable of firing both barrels on a single trigger pull?”
          Such guns (and Century is importing one now,and has been for years, and several other brands exist) require two separate triggers to be pulled, thus two separate trigger pulls.

        • And this time they’ll have 4473 totally-not-a-registry forms to look through once they decide they’re machine guns.

      • Like most striker fired pistols, it has one trigger and a trigger safety.
        It requires two fingers to pull the trigger, but there’s only one trigger.

        • Nope, simultaneous. Thus more than one shot per trigger pull (the Act says nothing about sequential or simultaneous), thus a machine gun per the Act.
          As with most things the government (any government) meddles in, consistency is not required, nor seen.

    • We can safely assume that their lawyers researched this point to their satisfaction. So, let’s see if we understand this correctly:
      – Any firearm that discharges multiple CONSECUTIVE rounds on a single trigger-pull (i.e., “burst-fire”) IS an NFA`34 “machine gun”.
      – Any firearm that discharges multiple SIMULTANEOUS rounds on a single trigger-pull (i.e., “pepper-box”) is NOT an NFA`34 “machine gun”.

      I wonder if some clever manufacturer could study this design and make a modification to introduce a slight delay in the discharge of one of the two barrels. Both chambers would be discharged on a single trigger-pull, just that one would follow the other by a few milliseconds.

      Upon rejection of the design by ATF (on NFA`34 grounds), the competitor sues, pursuing his case to SCOTUS. I do NOT anticipate that SCOTUS would take the case; the case would certainly be lost at the Circuit level. Then, an identical case taken up by a collaborating manufacturer in a 2’nd, 3’rd, etc. Circuit. Eventually, one of these Circuits would soberly rule on the absurdity of the distinction: consecutive IS; simultaneous is-NOT. Wise judges in such a Circuit would recognize the jeopardy to our system of rule-of-law if absurd distinctions could be held to be Constitutional on the most minute of “rational basis test” grounds. How far would a government attorney have to bend over backwards to imagine that legislators might-have-construed a rational basis for such a distinction, thereby justifying a difference in treatment?

      Still, no SCOTUS cert would be granted for a century; yet, we would throw a monkey wrench into the Constitutional precedence of rational-basis-test of rule-of-law. Making ourselves a pain-in-the-ass might be more effective than mustering at the barricades.

      • Pepperboxes do not fire simultaneously. They are revolvers with multiple rotating barrels instead of one barrel and multiple rotating chambers.

        You may be thinking off ducksfoot guns (ducksfeet?).

        • I think it was a reference to the pepperbox’s known habit of firing all (or multiple) barrels simultaneously via flash-over, rather than by design.

    • I don’t think volley fire weapons count because it is still one trigger pull firing the weapon and the rounds are set off simultaneously so even though two rounds are fired it’s only a single event. If the gun fired one chamber then the other is fired via a mechanism causing a delay, like it relied on recoil impulse or gas to fire the second barrel, then it would be a machine gun.

      So weapons like this, that double barreled 1911, a double barrel shotgun, and anything similar really are not different mechanically or legally than any other single barreled weapon.

      Now if it was something like from a while back on the internet where the guy put a two ARs together top to top and crossed the gas tubes so the lower cycled the upper and vice versa then it would be a machine gun. But then again I think that was already a machine gun because he needed an auto sear so the top one fired after it was cycled buy the lower one firing first.

      • The Act does not differentiate between sequential and simultaneous. Instead it says more than one round per trigger pull is a machine gun.
        That the ATF makes that distinction is a problem. That it considers bumpfire stocks to be machine guns (in defiance of the Act’s language) is also problematic.

        • That distinction is necessary to avoid lumping shotguns in with full autos. All shotguns are capable of firing multiple projectiles simultaneously.

      • Do you remember the name of that stacked AR? I remember seeing it but my google skills cant find it again

    • I was thinking the same thing. Isn’t two shots with one pull of the trigger technically a machine gun?

      • That is likely the way this was approved for sale. Something in the design requires that the first finger fires one barrel, and the second finger fires the other. This would be why two fingers are required.

    • Looks like it has two triggers which conveniently must be pulled simultaneously with two different fingers.

    • Yeah, it’s totally illegal. They’re just flying in the face of the US government and are going to make it even though they know the ATF will shut them down.

    • This type of firearm is considered legal under the design of Volleyfire. Due to the weapon having two barrels multiple rounds can be fired with only one pull of the trigger unlike a machine gun which fires multiple rounds through only one barrel with each trigger pull.
      Mine should be arriving at my local FFL in several weeks.

    • Precisely! Education in America is CRAP. We graduate more MORONS than any other Nation. Why is that? Because there are Billions of dollars to be made so keep them moving through the “system” even if they learn nothing they’ll be paying off Government LOANS for decades. Financial servitude is one step away from SLAVERY…. and they have been working this SCAM for at least 60 YEARS. Damn Commies.

  2. So if it fires two rounds with one trigger pull, doesn’t that technically make it a machine gun? Or maybe it’s more like a SxS shotgun with two triggers?
    Just curious…

    • It is legal to fire 2 projectules at once. There was that double barrel 1911 thingy a while back, and some other thing that shot 2 rounds of .25 acp at the same time. Just don’t let Trump know…

      • According to the ATF’s actions, there’s a difference between “legal,” and conforming to the law.

        “It is legal to fire 2 projectules at once.”
        No, according to the Act, it’s illegal for one trigger pull to fire two rounds (not projectiles, but rounds).
        A double barrel shotgun with two triggers requires two separate (even if simultaneous) trigger pulls to fire both rounds at the same time. No difference than if you fired two guns at the same time.

  3. 2 x .22 mag = .44 magnum!

    Scratch that, make it fire all 8 cylinders in .22 LR at once!

      • Exactly. Not all guns have to be for serious bidness.

        Let us never forget guns are supposed to be fun.

      • At $369 for an aluminum framed concealable revolver, I bet they’ll sell quite a few on the novelty factor alone. It’s not a horrible value for the money even as a novelty.

        I’m still waiting for a range report video. Couldn’t find one on youtube.

        • I’m thinking it’s a POS like the Leonad “revolver”.

          So 369 is a little pricey to me.

          Dont expect much and you will probably be ok.

  4. Maybe that’s the reason for the pair of triggers: one pull apiece, each only firing one round. Dumbest thing I’ve seen in years.

  5. That thing is just plain silly. A novelty, but somewhere there is an idiot that will buy one. And bet his life on it.

    • Just like no matter how dumb an article of clothing looks, there is a woman, who will buy it. And some guy who will tell her she looks good in it if he thinks it will get him to the promised land.

      • A woman would look good carrying this gun if she can carry it in a bra holster.

  6. So, it looks like you have two fingers on the trigger and only one on the grip? That ratio seems off

      • That wasn’t a contest, it was a friendly non-competitive demonstration. Also, entering a drunken lumberjack contest would probably be about a wise as purchasing this pistola.

  7. Oh that’s just dumb. How about a gunm that fires 9 .36 caliber projectiles at once? I’d buy one of those

  8. Am I the only one who noticed the trigger guard sux?!? Plenty of real revolvers in 38special that weigh less…

    • Came here to say that.

      No real trigger guard and a ginormous trigger?

      Let’s see what happens when people pocket carry that, trigger safety or no trigger safety.
      At least 5mm glockleg hurts less than 9mm, I hope.

      • Worst than Glock leg, 5.7mm +5.7mm =11.4 mm, two bullet paths, more chance of hitting something vital….

  9. I find the design intriguing and want to try one out but I can’t imagine I’ll like that trigger. Had I designed it the lower part of the trigger would basically just act like a grip safety and one it was pulled the upper part would just be a normal trigger.

    Of course even then I still can imagine a scenario where someone could try to get a high grip on the gun and having their ring finger block the trigger pull if it wasn’t in the finger grooves properly.

  10. Standard’s assertion about this gun being the safest gun on the market is rather spurious, at best.

    The claim, (…transfer bar, which will only then allow the gun to fire. This will only occur with a complete pull of the trigger; no other revolver on the market has this type of safe and reliable system.”) is actually bullshit.

    As early as the 1900s, Iver Johnson had transfer bar mechanisms, which they touted in their advertisements about “hammer the hammer.” Charter Arms revolvers have always used transfer bars. A number of Colt DA revolvers also have them. And Ruger introduced their transfer bars when they screwed everyone over by discontinuing the Old Model Blackhawk in favor of the new bastardized version in 1973.

    Of course, all the claims made here were lifted from the company’s own website and perhaps their other advertising propaganda.

    • Why did you take that quote out of context?

      In context of the previous paragraph about the two-finger trigger and the trigger blade, there claim scenes perfectly accurate.

  11. The ATF classifies this as volleyfire and not a machine gun. Google ATF and volleyfire and you should find a letter they released a few years ago about the original pepperbox iteration of this pistol that was never released.

  12. ✋Wait ✋a minute! I’ve seen “GUNS” like this! In Borderlands 2 on my home Xbox one! LOL! They even have “Advanced elemental firearms” like electrical discharges, powerful body melting corrosives, extreme incendiary rounds, explosive projectiles, or Slag rounds/toxic goop that causes additional damage!” Plus, double barrel firearms, machine pistols, etc…Looking forward to Boarderlands 3…lol…

    • Lol!
      Boarderlands IS a pretty awesome game; very little plotline, TONS of weapons and no end of targets to explode into a violent, gory shower of pieces!

  13. “Each pull of the two-finger trigger fires two rounds simultaneously ” More than 1 round with single trigger pull, think is’s a machine gun,,,, The binary triggers for AR’s fire one when pulled, the next one on release of trigger. Not the same thing….just saying…

  14. I’m amazed a company thought abbreviating “Standard” to “STD” and then using that abbreviation in multiple places was a good idea.

    • Hey, it’s right up there with the #metoo movement.

      Do they not remember that it was the pound sign before it was “hashtag”?
      So in essence, they are abbreviating
      “Pound me too”

  15. That anyone is even asking the ATFs permission is sad. The constitution of the United States of America does not change its mind, unlike the ATF.

  16. This would be the gun you keep hidden the trunk near the luminous escape latch. Kidnappers stuff you in you trunk, but when they stop to get you out; you’ve got a surprise for them.
    Or am I just writing a script proposal for the next Vin Deisel movie ?

  17. Need a belt fed double barrel .22 WMR SA/DA revolver with a 20 ga shotgun barrel center line below.

    Put a red laser on the left grip and a green one on the right.

    Somewhere’s we will need to fit in an “Open from other end” warning label. May need a couple more engineers on staff to figure that one out.

    • The warning label would be wasted on anyone who might buy one – it is obvious they can’t read.

  18. Where’d the 3, 3, 3 stats come from?

    Interesting positioning as designed for emergency self-defense. Puts a fine point on any challenge to the design, or use.

    “This gun is useless for hunting, and worse than that for target shooting. Designed based on federal statistics (I’m assuming — ed.) on D G Us in extremis, with multiple industry standard features to prevent it going off until you mean it to, this is a purely personal, purely defense arm.”

    “Defense with safety extends to the cartridge choice, n unique orchestrated firing, allowing projectiles that won’t over penetrate to still better stop an attacker.”

    Really, I’m intrigued by the unequivocally defense-motivated design choices, whether they really help with that or not.

    — Why’d you shoot him? He was gonna kill me.

    — Why that gun? Seemed safest, most effective way to stop someone you didn’t prevent from trying to kill me.

    DiFi n Bloomie’s bots will go bonkers, but it’s design directly frames the uncomfortable question. Net, they’d rather you just die quietly than have the means to address their failure to protect you.

    An arm that’s useless for sniping, and limited for spree shooting, makes the point plain. Can people have an equalizer when confronted by imminant violence, or do we demand that they just lose?

    Seems like the kind of thing we should maybe issue to teachers…

  19. Ah, no. This gun is trying to be a solution for for a non-existing problem but if you think that problem exists: just buy dual projectile ammo!

    This ill be a short lived novelty, Like single shot .223 and 7.62X.39 pistols. I wouldn’t pay 1/2 the MSRP even if i wanted an oddball piece.

    When Mfr dropped the alternating snake shot cartridges line for “a cloud of protection”: they were desperate to come up with something to market non-starter.

    With any avg defensive cartridge: you want to spread the damage and not hit the same spot. This would apply to the defensively mild .22mag also. So, eight small & light projectiles basically hitting four spots is not advantageous. You can buy dual projectile defensive rounds in several calibers. If we use same logic as this guns design highlights: your basic six shot revolver would fire as fast as this one and follow with foug more projectiles. If you have a higher capacity pistol you can far exceed this oddballs capabilities.

  20. I am trying to figure out “why” someone would design a gun like this. What does this design give you that is better than what I would consider a “normal” handgun.

  21. I like this “Volleyfire 2.0” design much more than the original pepperbox style model.

  22. Apparently, this thing doesn’t fire bullets. As said in the video “two shells hitting simultaneously”. One could assume that it must use seashells as the projectile. Even shotguns that actually do use shells, don’t actually use the shells as the projectile.

  23. If they are taking suggestions for the S333-A1, a cylinder for .22LR is first on the list. .22WM is LOUD. Too loud to discount the noise hazard in such a short barrel.

  24. Kinda cool for a range toy, but really just another gimmick. It might have a limited utilitarianism for older people or people with a weak grip, but in general not something worth carrying for the price.

  25. Just for fun, wondering if it would check all the above legality requirements: How about a 10 barrel, 22LR, fired by 10 very narrow triggers, slightly staggered and together no wider than one standard trigger, and a semiauto mechanism than reloads all 10 barrels by the time the triggers reset. That’s 1 pull per trigger, per barrel, per round, and still gives you maybe 1200 rounds per minute (until your fire gets tired or it overheats). Still not a MG?

  26. Any weapon with a trigger pull safety is not safe. It is too easy to accidentally pull that center piece.. Trust me I have done it……

  27. Look at the picture, it is two triggers and requires two fingers to pull. Probably how they got around the machine gun definition

    • As mentioned in at least a dozen comments, this isn’t a machine gun. A machine gun has a single barrel.This revolver has two barrels which fire simultaneously with one trigger pull.
      The extended trigger with built in safety is ergonomically designed for easier pull especially among anyone say with arthritis, weak or small hands, etc, etc.
      A machine gun fires multiple rounds through ONE barrel with ONE trigger pull…..OR in select mode one round per trigger pull depending on the weapon.
      The S333 fires TWO rounds through TWO barrels with each pull.
      Weld two pistols side by side and connect the triggers….same thing.
      Volleyfire is not defined as a machine gun. This revolver won’t replace my EDC .357 MAG, but hey it’s new and cool! Mine will be here in a couple of weeks.

  28. Hell no. I can’t imagine trying to draw that with just my pinky and ring finger with my adrenaline going through the roof or to use three fingers and then try to hang on to it while moving my middle finger around the ginormous awkward double trigger. I’ll take good trigger discipline over a gun that was designed to be dropped any day. It looks like a horrible gimmick that was not designed by combat veterans.

Comments are closed.