357 mag neutered

[M-Tecs]

Every CHAMBER of a fire arm... ie if a double barrel shotgun, both barrels get a proof load, If your using a single shot you get 1 round loaded in.. A revolver gets one in every chamber.

Have seen in the CIP data at least, that the european proof testing using a standard " magazine" of proof ammunition now adays.

SAAMI nor the US manufactures have any such requirements. Several European Countries require 100% proof testing by independent proof houses and they are stamped accordingly. In the US proof testing is normally done inhouse and is 100% voluntary.

What each manufacture does varies greatly. Some function test each firearm with SAAMI spec ammo, some test with proof loads in random samples/or all and some don't function test or proof test with live ammo in the majority of firearms they ship. That is for civilian sales. Government Contracts may have additional requirements.

As far as SAAMI goes, the rule that the Gun companies are required to follow is that the fire arms MUST be able to survive ROUTINE usage of ammunition that hits 125 to 150% of MAXIMUM AVERAGE PRESSURE for the cartridge.

Thus if the SAAMI 357 magnum

http://www.lasc.us/SAAMIMaxPressure.htm

357 Magnum - 35,000
357 Remington Max - 40,000

is taken into account and put into that industry agreement,, the 357 magnum revolver needs to survive routine usage of loads hitting 43,750 to 52,500 PSI. If you notice thats well in the 41 magnum and 357 Rem Max..

That is for CHAMBERS/CYLINDERS and NOT the frame

Please site your sources?????????????

[Outpost75]

That's a pretty nice savings.

Did you do any figuring on the chambers still being in the elastic regime with the proof loads before offering this?

The life cycle testing is a long standing 'feature' of govt contracts. Sometimes I wonder how they come up with the 2000, 5000, or 10,000 cycle numbers. Having written a few RFP's the specs can be just a 'sounds good' number, and, as long as the contractors don't object, it stays in there. Did have one where the contractors said, 'no way', so we revised the RFP. Then I was on the 'other side' and raised the same kind of concern on a couple of RFPs that were later revised.

Company at the time was sponsoring two engineering graduate students at MIT who did the finite element analysis and comparisons of two revolvers having been through the standard proof and 5000 round endurance vs. the proposed accelerated endurance test. Their results were reviewed by Picatinny Arsenal and Rock Island before the change was approved.

[downzero]

It’s possible to approach 1100fps from a 6” Barrel using the 38+P, 20K loads. That’s not enough of a difference from the 1280 Magtech loading to really make a difference. IIRC, I believe 20K was the original pressure limit and 22.5k the original +P for .38Spl - which puts them on even more equal footing. I don’t disagree that .357 has significantly more power, I was just trying to say that in the current anemic factory loadings, it’s not loaded anywhere close to even current SAAMI spec. For most of us, and nearly any practical application - a decent .38Spl will do all we ask and then some. It is as you said, if you need more, you need to step up to a larger caliber or preferably a rifle.

I don't have a 6" 38 Special, but I have doubts that can be done within 38 Special +P pressure limits. Either way 357 Magnum is way more powerful even out of a 4" barrel with the same payload.

[BunkTheory]

I don't have a 6" 38 Special, but I have doubts that can be done within 38 Special +P pressure limits. Either way 357 Magnum is way more powerful even out of a 4" barrel with the same payload.

Well in the world of fun stuff, it can be done.

COnsider how in the smith and wesson forums they like to discuss barrels that are somehow FASTER then others, and some barrels that are slower then others.

Consider how that the ruger black hawks chambered in 45 ACP actually experience an average increase of 100FPS over the same load fired in a standard size 1911 due to the chamber design in the cylinder..

MOST factory ammunition is tested at 4" for 38 special.. so if the box says 920fps in a 4 inch barrel, should my 6 inch barrel not at least break 1000?

[tazman]

MOST factory ammunition is tested at 4" for 38 special.. so if the box says 920fps in a 4 inch barrel, should my 6 inch barrel not at least break 1000?

You would think so but that often is not the case.
I had a S&W 686 with the 8 3/8" barrel that consistently shot slower than any other shorter barreled revolver I owned using identical loads. Sometimes by as much as 150 fps. Notice the operative word "had".
It should not happen that way, but it sometimes does. Handguns make their own rules.

[charlie b]

Company at the time was sponsoring two engineering graduate students at MIT who did the finite element analysis and comparisons of two revolvers having been through the standard proof and 5000 round endurance vs. the proposed accelerated endurance test. Their results were reviewed by Picatinny Arsenal and Rock Island before the change was approved.

Kinda figured that would be the case Didn't think the company would risk that much without analysis.

[M-Tecs]

Well in the world of fun stuff, it can be done.

COnsider how in the smith and wesson forums they like to discuss barrels that are somehow FASTER then others, and some barrels that are slower then others.

Consider how that the ruger black hawks chambered in 45 ACP actually experience an average increase of 100FPS over the same load fired in a standard size 1911 due to the chamber design in the cylinder..

MOST factory ammunition is tested at 4" for 38 special.. so if the box says 920fps in a 4 inch barrel, should my 6 inch barrel not at least break 1000?

Most factory 45 ACP revolvers and pistols have SAAMI spec chambers. They do have different throats.

I do personally own two USFA 45 Colt/45 ACP and a total of 6 Ruger's with the 45 ACP cylinders. All in 5 1/2. None of them exhibit you claimed "average increase of 100FPS over the same load fired in a standard size 1911 due to the chamber design in the cylinder" per my chronograph. Infact they show the normal expected cylinder gap velocity variations. I do have 1911 45 ACPs in both 5" and 6" for comparison. I also have Contender barrels 45 ACP but they are longer so can't do a direct comparison.

I do have Dan Wessons that I have checked cylinder gap velocity differences that I have compared to Contenders of the same length but not in 45 ACP. Never seen a cylinder gap gun including Ruger's that showed anything like a 100 FPS increase. They all showed the normal and predictable loss. What are you basing your claim on???

Some actual test results here that mirror my testing http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/gaptests.html

[zarrinvz24]

You would think so but that often is not the case.
I had a S&W 686 with the 8 3/8" barrel that consistently shot slower than any other shorter barreled revolver I owned using identical loads. Sometimes by as much as 150 fps. Notice the operative word "had".
It should not happen that way, but it sometimes does. Handguns make their own rules.

I would imagine that the powder you were utilizing is a big part of that. Some of the faster powders are expended before the bullet departs the barrel, this is why 22LR rifles can demonstrate slower velocity with some of the longer rifles like Match rifles. The extended distance between the front and rear sight are worth the drop in velocity in that case.

If you are using fast powders like Bullseye and W231, I could see instances like this happening - or in factory loadings. Did you ever try handloads with full charge of H110/W296 or 2400?

[Outpost75]

MOST factory ammunition is tested at 4" for 38 special.. so if the box says 920fps in a 4 inch barrel, should my 6 inch barrel not at least break 1000?

The 4-inch vented test barrel was generally used only when required under terms of a government contract. Most ordinary commercial .38 Special ammo these days is qualified in a 6-inch solid industrial test barrel. Some ammo still get tested in the 4-inch vented test barrel, but you can confirm that going to the law enforcement data sites for the various manufacturers.

[Walks]

If all revolvers are fully pressure tested ?
Then why in the 1990's did I see so many Smith & Wesson stainless steel revolvers with only 2 chambers of their cylinders darkened with powder residue ?

[tazman]

I would imagine that the powder you were utilizing is a big part of that. Some of the faster powders are expended before the bullet departs the barrel, this is why 22LR rifles can demonstrate slower velocity with some of the longer rifles like Match rifles. The extended distance between the front and rear sight are worth the drop in velocity in that case.

If you are using fast powders like Bullseye and W231, I could see instances like this happening - or in factory loadings. Did you ever try handloads with full charge of H110/W296 or 2400?

The loads tested were factory magnum 158 grain bullet loads. I also tested some of my 296 and 4227 loads. Same result.
They were all tested the same day over the same chronograph using revolvers with different barrel lengths using the same boxes of ammunition.
I was expecting the long barrel to give higher velocities but it didn't happen.
The other revolvers were S&W 686 with a 6 inch barrel and a model 19 with a 4 inch barrel. Both were faster than the long barrel.
The long barreled 686 had less than 100 rounds through it. The others had much higher round counts.

[Outpost75]

if all revolvers are fully pressure tested ?
Then why in the 1990's did i see so many smith & wesson stainless steel revolvers with only 2 chambers of their cylinders darkened with powder residue ?

bingo! Give that man a cigar!!!!

[Outpost75]

You cannot make a valid comparison of velocity vs. barrel length without knowing the barrel-cylinder gap. I have measured new S&Ws in gun shops with BCG of 0.010", which today is factory spec. 20 years ago that would have been rejected for an "open front gage" condition. A gap of 0.010" in .357 will result in a velocity loss of 60-80 fps, depending upon amunition type, compared to a gun at Mean Assembly Tolerance pass .005/hold .006".

[tazman]

You cannot make a valid comparison of velocity vs. barrel length without knowing the barrel-cylinder gap. I have measured new S&Ws in gun shops with BCG of 0.010", which today is factory spec. 20 years ago that would have been rejected for an "open front gage" condition. A gap of 0.010" in .357 will result in a velocity loss of 60-80 fps, depending upon amunition type, compared to a gun at Mean Assembly Tolerance pass .005/hold .006".

I suspect that was the issue. This particular revolver was a 686-3. Old enough it should have been manufactured to good tolerances. I didn't have a bore scope at the time so I don't know the condition of the inside of the barrel. I also never measured the gap.
It was accurate enough but not sufficient to overcome the expectations of velocity. I was planning to use it deer hunting and the velocity drop was a deal breaker for me. My 6" 686+ was easier to carry and just as accurate.
Since I didn't want to spend money correcting any issues it had, it went down the road.

[Harter66]

There are like 6 cartridges that have a direct conversion from CUP (copper units of pressure) measured with a case vent against a copper pellet then measured on a scale like a BHP hardness tester only for expansion/compression and direct port or piezoelectric PSI (Pounds per Square Inch) .

Lead units of pressure in 12,16,& 20 ga are close to psi up to about 12,000 psi .
Rem Nitro Steel is rated at 1050 BAR right on the cases that converts to 15,000 psi . That ain't the old 13,000 LUP number ......

For what it's worth the data in my 69 ,72 ,74 and 86 Hornady manual remained in changed .

[robertbank]

Not sure if this adds to the conversation but here are two result comparisons:

14.5 gr of 4227 20" Rossi 1606fps 170gr 358429
14.5 gr of 4227 4.4" GP-100 1044fps 170gr 358429

14 gr of 2400 20" Rossi 1764fps 155gr 358156GC
14 gr of 2400 4.2" GP-100 1346fps 155gr 358156GC

Take Care

Bob

PS: Rossi is now down the road. Now have a Remlin 1894CS

[blue32]

I've seen the data discrepancies but I also suspect powder like 2400 is a bit faster burning than that of old. Once I took my 686 to the top I got a bigger gun - a 480. 1,045 loads later and I doubt I will ever need to test the limits.

[curioushooter]

I am glad you discovered this.

And yes, the lower powered magnum rounds are much easier on said firearms.

It wasn't just 357. 44 and 41 Mag also had power reductions.

IMO they were loaded too hot to begin with at the factories. Elmer Keith nailed it with his loads for the heavy 38 & 44 special. And his 44 Mag had reduced power from the factory loadings.

I've only tested one or two shots of a full Keith load of 17 grains of 2400 behind a 255-260 grain SWC in 44 special. 16.5 grains propels it over 1200 FPS in both my 5.5" Blackhawk and 6.5" 624. That's plenty.

I will tell you that I like this brilliant load a whole lot more than the 26 grains of 296 I used to put behind 265 grain RNFP in my SuperBlackhawk. That was a brutal and un-fun load. Not very accurate either, from what I could tell. It basically retarded my development in shooting by about 5 years. And does it have greater killing effect? Doubtful. All the gel I've shot and every deer body I've processed has led me to the conclusion that little is gained here. The bullet is the same size. Both of these loads will perforate a deer at basically any angle at ranges revolvers like this can be effectively used. The wound and related blood loss will be very similar, perhaps indistinguishable. Frankly, the very mild skeeter load (7.5 grains of Unique with a ~255 grain SWC), will probable do the same.

And just consider efficiency. My memory may be a little poor here, and since my shooting jorunal was lost in 2014, I have to work from memeory. But here you go:

26 grains of 296 with a 265 Grain cast RNFP went about 1300 FPS in my 7.5" barreled New Model Bisley SuperBlackhawk 44 Magnum. (I sold this long ago swearing off 44 mag in the process only to come back to that caliber years later).

16.5 grains of 2400 goes about 1200 FPS in my 5.5" barreled "flattop" New Model Bisley Blackhawk. Same loads clips 1250 FPS in my 6.5" S&W 624. Both in 44 Special.

7.5 grains of Unique with a 260 grain cast MP molds H&G 503 SWC goes about 900-950 FPS (the so called "skeeter" load). 8.5 grains of Unique will clock about 1025-1050--nearly the same performance level (100-200 FPS slower) as what 2400 can deliver at twice the approximate charge weight. And the "skeeter" load is so mild in a heavy barreled revolver like a Flatop Blackhawk that it feels like a so-called "target" load. You can shoot all day long with it. No problem. You can really develop tremendous confidence with such a load, which is what really matters if you want to hunt. It is also wonderfully accurate. 8 grains of PowerPisol or 7.5 grains of Unique deliver really good accuracy in my Blackhawk.

13.5 grains of 2400 behind a 158 or 172 grain SWC is plenty for medium sized revolvers. If you use a 357 case it is even less pressure than the heavy Keith load. This is a potent load, with excellent range and accuracy, without overwhelming the shooter. Really powerful 357 loads aren't very fun in the medium frames (K, Security-Six), and are downright awful in the small frames (J frames, SP101). Sure with the heavier framed GP and L or N frames goes ahead, but might as well as go with a big bores if you've got big chores.

[Jtarm]

Not sure the ageing process always adds wisdom but sore wrists speaks to reality. Nothing I shoot at or might shoot at will do much walking about when 150,-180gr of lead passes through them at between 900 - 1,000 fps. Much more than that and the wrists remind me how old I am but nothing about how smart I might be.

Take Care

Bob

Quote of the day.

Your revolver and your joints will last much longer.

[BunkTheory]

I am glad you discovered this.

And yes, the lower powered magnum rounds are much easier on said firearms.

It wasn't just 357. 44 and 41 Mag also had power reductions.

IMO they were loaded too hot to begin with at the factories. Elmer Keith nailed it with his loads for the heavy 38 & 44 special. And his 44 Mag had reduced power from the factory loadings.

I've only tested one or two shots of a full Keith load of 17 grains of 2400 behind a 255-260 grain SWC in 44 special. 16.5 grains propels it over 1200 FPS in both my 5.5" Blackhawk and 6.5" 624. That's plenty.

I will tell you that I like this brilliant load a whole lot more than the 26 grains of 296 I used to put behind 265 grain RNFP in my SuperBlackhawk. That was a brutal and un-fun load. Not very accurate either, from what I could tell. It basically retarded my development in shooting by about 5 years. And does it have greater killing effect? Doubtful. All the gel I've shot and every deer body I've processed has led me to the conclusion that little is gained here. The bullet is the same size. Both of these loads will perforate a deer at basically any angle at ranges revolvers like this can be effectively used. The wound and related blood loss will be very similar, perhaps indistinguishable. Frankly, the very mild skeeter load (7.5 grains of Unique with a ~255 grain SWC), will probable do the same.

And just consider efficiency. My memory may be a little poor here, and since my shooting jorunal was lost in 2014, I have to work from memeory. But here you go:

26 grains of 296 with a 265 Grain cast RNFP went about 1300 FPS in my 7.5" barreled New Model Bisley SuperBlackhawk 44 Magnum. (I sold this long ago swearing off 44 mag in the process only to come back to that caliber years later).

16.5 grains of 2400 goes about 1200 FPS in my 5.5" barreled "flattop" New Model Bisley Blackhawk. Same loads clips 1250 FPS in my 6.5" S&W 624. Both in 44 Special.

7.5 grains of Unique with a 260 grain cast MP molds H&G 503 SWC goes about 900-950 FPS (the so called "skeeter" load). 8.5 grains of Unique will clock about 1025-1050--nearly the same performance level (100-200 FPS slower) as what 2400 can deliver at twice the approximate charge weight. And the "skeeter" load is so mild in a heavy barreled revolver like a Flatop Blackhawk that it feels like a so-called "target" load. You can shoot all day long with it. No problem. You can really develop tremendous confidence with such a load, which is what really matters if you want to hunt. It is also wonderfully accurate. 8 grains of PowerPisol or 7.5 grains of Unique deliver really good accuracy in my Blackhawk.

13.5 grains of 2400 behind a 158 or 172 grain SWC is plenty for medium sized revolvers. If you use a 357 case it is even less pressure than the heavy Keith load. This is a potent load, with excellent range and accuracy, without overwhelming the shooter. Really powerful 357 loads aren't very fun in the medium frames (K, Security-Six), and are downright awful in the small frames (J frames, SP101). Sure with the heavier framed GP and L or N frames goes ahead, but might as well as go with a big bores if you've got big chores.

In the olden days they did not mind slight slower velocities with BIG for caliber bullets. Look at them 180-230 grain slugs for the 38 family. Slow yes, heavy penetration yes, hard on the gun maybe if you sit down and shoot a 5 gallon bucket every year of them.

But on the contrary aspect, Id like a 44 and have enough in the upper range to handle anything. Problem is the only 44 magnum revolvers i can seem to find in stock online, or advertised online, are those L frame magnums that im not willing to take wtih "serious loads" or cost 1500$.

If im going to deal with recoil, ill rather take a full size 357, load up 158 grain slugs with 13 grains 2400 and use the WHOLE cylinder on mr bear, and not be scared of popping off a single round with that light weight 44 magnum built on the same L frame..