there's no reason for this cartridge to be as long as it is since it can fit entirely in a .38 special case It would be more efficient to just relable it as .38 Super and just make the frames like stronger like zamak and bakelite for lighter weight
there's no reason for this cartridge to be as long as it is since it can fit entirely in a .38 special case It would be more efficient to just re...
Anon, all of my full power 357 mag loadings are press charges. If you take any length of this cartridge away from me, I will find you and I will kick you right in the shin.
The hell are you shooting those out of? A falling block? Ruger No1?
A 6" gp100. It would probably do 1800-2000 out of a carbine. But I would switch powders for a carbine load anyway
How would it do out of a 10inch barrel? Have .357 mag Desert Eagle with one.
You should load one of those solid copper projectiles. Xtreme Hunter or Xtreme Defender or those Fort Scott TUIs. All around 120 grains.
grt says 1830. Now I get inaccuracies with grt in some respects sometimes, but the velocity is always very close. My chronographed velocity averages are almost always within 20 fps of whatever grt says. You will likely be a bit below as your gun probably has some kind of gas port and I didn't bother adding one
I'm not opposed to doing this, but there is an obvious legal concern for me. anyway grt says we just barely break 2000 fps with a 16" barrel but shooting my hand loads out of a 357 mag carbine is pretty far out of my personal experience
I have both GRT and QL, I want to use then as development tools for 357-44 B&D, a wildcat. QL already had it built in, had to design it in GRT.
You said that GRT gets you pretty close velocity, any way you can estimate how close it is on pressure?
Does pic related seem like a realistic velocity(20 inch 1892)? Not sure that Lil Gun or H110 calculations are all that accurate.
QL says it will go like 2750fps for the same pressure.
I have no way of verifying the pressures other than checking pressure signs. For revolvers, the very first pressure sign is cases stuck in chambers and mushroomed primers (in a revolver, merely flattened primers are not a sign of anything at all, as the cylinder slaps the primer against the recoil shield every time you shoot, but in any other firearm I would consider a flattened primer to be a sign of overpressure)
I have experienced signs of overpressure when using faster powders to optimize snubnose 357 mag performance, but I have not experienced it with this cartridge. If I were making a wildcat I would do it the hard way - I would make a ladder starting well below what GRT says is max and I would shoot through it until I started getting stuck cases, and then I would back off 5%
lil'gun might not be the best powder for the job. You're kind of in the territory of high to mid burn rate rifle powders.
Accurate 1680 is too slow and so is IMR4198 and Reloder7. Lil Gun, 296/H110, and 300MP are just the powders for Magnum Pistols.
The cartridge is really just a 44 Mag necked to 357.
Here's what QL thought, but it believed I needed even another grain to get there.
Be sure your case capacities are correct, it makes a large difference in this class of calibers.
Like the default case capacity for .357 mag in QL was about 1.5-2 grains lower than what I measured in starline brass.
Resized, unfired weighed in at 111.8gr, water filled even with case mouth was 148.3gr.
I took a sample of several and they were all within .1gr of 36.5gr.
The 33gr of water is a number that I've seen in old articles, but all of Hornady's data would be ridiculously overpressure if that were true.
Keep in mind too that's unfired, QL wants me to measure fired cases. The case will expand a little more to fit the chamber, might add another .5gr. Don't have my barrel yet, will in a month or two.
My 45 Colt has a chamber so generous that I gain 2gr of capacity over the 41.6 estimate, it's ludicrous.
>but all of Hornady's data would be ridiculously overpressure if that were true
It may have been, CUP was not a precise measure of pressure and some guns will surprise you with the amount pressure it takes to reach the warning signs, and some guns may not show any at all till kaboom.
Things may look perfect, no sticking, primers looking alright, but then you reprime and they fall in.
Quickload outright tells you in their manual that the software has problems with straightwall cartridges. You can get all sorts of wild pressures from average loads published in manuals.
I doubt Hornady was doing anything unsafe in T/C and Ruger Blackhawks when they developed those loads.
Anon I want to see how fast we can go will you ship me a few rounds
>Gun destroying load
>only 1500FPS
Man...
They don't destroy shit, I don't even get stuck cases. The max pressure is under 3000 bar, which is the CIP standard. You can't buy ammo this hot unless you go boutique or certain euro suppliers. Either way, I'd rather shoot it for .50 per instead of 2.50 per.
Thank smith and Wesson for lowering the bar instead of making revolvers that won’t break at the bar…
BUBBA NO
Funny, you can get the same performance from commercially available 10mm.
that is logical as 10mm is cartridge with similar power to 357 while also not usually having to contend with a cylinder gap
so anyway did you have a point?
Just that 10mm makes 357 obsolete.
Doesn't work in revolvers.
>but moon clips
Moon clips are fragile pieces of shit and you're a moron if you want a gun that relies on them to function. Support for them is nice, but not being required to use the gun at all.
they"re not required for firing, they only make loading and unloading easier.
Why have a revolver when you can have an auto pistol in 10mm? More bullet = more better.
you can do that with an automatic, btw
Not for multiple shots
also because it's cool
Revolvers draw and point better which I value more than extra rounds
Better to have 5/6 rounds and win the shootout than 15/15 in muh mag and dead
okay but every cartridge more powerful than 10mm (and there are quite a few) also makes 10mm obsolete according to your logic
Only if they're around the same size or smaller.
Maybe if you could fit 15 of them in a doublestack pistol. But you can't, so 10mm wins.
I like both 😀
10mm owners literally cannot go five seconds without talking about 10mm. Every single meme about them is 100% correct.
moron
Goes on to post boutique hyper ammo that matches Remington G&W .357 i could of gotten at walmart, and not scouring the internet and paying 2.50 a bullet for 20rds.
>could of
> "could of"
Anon. Just. Stop. It.
> gotten at walmart
Not for quite a while. Get out of the house once in a while. Things have changed.
But anon, the .357 loads made by the same company are even stronger than that.
>coldest unmarked gun show load
nice
P I S S I N
I
S
S
I
N
are you the guy who tried to kill Kentucky Ballistics?
> there's no reason for a penis to be as long as 8 inches since it can fit entirely in a 6 inch deep vegana. It would be more efficient to just relable it as a 6 incher and just make the pussy like stronger like with muscles and less fat for lighter weight
yeah boi
the reason it's longer is so nobody sticks a 35k psi cartridge in a gun made for 17.5k psi chamber pressure.
You're absolutely right but that was a crippling dumb design choice a century ago as if people hadn't even considered the concept of "carrying" yet
What the frick does this even mean?
>You're absolutely right but that was a crippling dumb design choice a century ago as if people hadn't even considered the concept of "carrying" yet
The frick does carrying a weapon have to do with making a higher pressure cartridge incapable of being chambered and fired in a weapon designed and chambered for the significantly lower pressure parent cartridge? And how is that a dumb design choice?
Nevermind, don't answer. You're a moron.
because it started as a blackpowder cart
I wonder what performance you get out of a .357 case full of 3fg? I guess I could do it, the GP100 breaks down pretty well for cleaning.
no it didn't you tard, it's from like 1953, and 38 special is from 1890 or something
>and just make the frames like stronger like zamak
you got BTFO in the last thread by metallurgy-anon
stop trying to shill for a fricking alloy
>metallurgy-anon
Wait a second, how many metallurgy anons are there? Must be two, because I'm one, but I didn't participate in that zamak thread.
Hey. Question. Are there any promising materials or avenues to pursue for a cartridge case material that’s stronger than brass, but still elastic, and can withstand much higher pressures? Or is there a hard limit where anything stronger will be less elastic?
There is other stuff that works, but there will be hiccups for reverse compatibility. I do think the polymer/steel composite cartridges show promise. And you can make cases out of steel, but it isn't perfect. I do think composite cases are a path forward.
Is there a max pressure rating for composite (polymer?) cases? Both for conventional and CT.
This is where the compatibility concern is coming from. I imagine you can go up in pressure quite a bit in a gun designed for composite cases, but if you chuck that in a gun not designed for that you are going to have problems.
The trick is that most of the load isn't borne by the case wall, it's resisted by the chamber walls. At the case head, however the material carries some force.
That's why you see telescopic ammunition being full polymer, but not traditional ones.
So you have a double whammy where you have a brand new gun, and a brand new ammo being released at the same time.
You can't just make super spicy .308, because morons will load it in their non-spicy rated 308 and blow them up.
I'm not him you schizo moron. I simply want the market to be flooded in pot metal guns chambered in overpressure cartridges that can be easily confused for other calibers that the weapon will still be capable of firing
Favorite .357 load for a GP-100. Great fireballs.
Good enough for Lennon
There's almost half an ass between the two of them combined
What are those asses. Lennon needs to give some of his ass crack to yoko ono.
Very true. .38 special is my John Lennon solver after all.
its so funny that anti-lennon memes and posts only started popping up on /k/ AFTER the memes became stale on discord servers.
That's why averages suck.
John has 1.45 ass.
Yoko has 0.55 ass.
On average they have 1.0 ass per person.
thats gonna be awkward for anyone who owns a .38 super
Why don't we see more bottlenecked pistol cartridges?
There really isn't a point. As you bottleneck a cartridge your most effective barrel length goes up for a given chamber pressure. It just isn't worth it for pistols.
Sure, but if you gain more velocity(you do) thanks to greater case capacity for a given caliber, then is it really pointless?
Inefficient relative to the amount of powder used, sure, but pointless is not the word I would use.
You only get more velocity if you increase pressure for a given barrel length. Otherwise the force*distance equation is the same.
Anon, your peak pressure is always reached by the time the bullet begins engraving.
You gain more velocity from a longer barrel, but two cartridges of the same caliber with the same barrel length, one with greater case capacity, one with lesser, the one with greater capacity will zing the same bullet faster.
There's simply more energy potential to perform work in the larger amount of powder, and both cartridges reach peak pressure right once the bullet is engraving.
Reloading straight wall cartridges is super easy and they last forever. I am shooting full power stuff and yet I have cases that I stopped bothering to count the number of reloads through them after the 8th one. Plus this is a revolver cartridge, so any increase in case diameter is going to mean less cartridges in the cylinder. If alternate reality 357 mag had a bottleneck I would have chosen a different cartridge in that timeline.
>Anon, your peak pressure is always reached by the time the bullet begins engraving.
No it's not. Post distance plotted GRT/QL pressure plots. if your pressure curve is the same (same peak, same total distance(barrel length)), the total work on the bullet is the same. A larger case volume only helps if you can use a slower powder because if you use the same fastness of power, your peak pressure increases because there is more of it, but the bullet is the same.
Compare an equivalent case fill of a given powder for a bottlenecked vs equal length non-bottleneck cartridge.
Anon, those charts that QL shows clearly demonstrate when peak pressure is reached, it happens less than 1 inch, ONE INCH into the barrel.
Pressure is not the only factor here, you could chop 16 inches of barrel off of this and you will still have a cartridge that is moving a 180gr bullet at 1500fps.
357 mag can't do that with 12 inches of barrel, let alone 4 inches.
The more powder you have thanks to greater case capacity, the more work you can do in a shorter amount of barrel time.
It's real simple, is it pointless? No, is it the most efficient use of powder? No.
OK, now do the same case fill, peak pressure and powder for .357magnum.
About 1300fps at 4 inches, so you gain between 150-200fps in a more voluminous case by just stuffing more powder in.
There is a limit to how much velocity is gained by just adding case capacity at a given pressure EVENTUALLY, but I didn't note that until you started going above 40gr of capacity.
>A larger case volume only helps if you can use a slower powder because if you use the same fastness of power, your peak pressure increases because there is more of it, but the bullet is the same.
If I may? Picrel is one possible consequence, for those having a hard time visualizing this. But, depending on design, metallurgy, or defects in the metal, that first inch of barrel could look the same if the cylinder wall holds.
I urge people to study picrel carefully. There are all sorts of little details demonstrated there worth keeping in mind.
metal is metal fren. Stop worruing about the small stuff like a woman
Anon, if you're comparing two cases of different volumes and you use the same bullet, same weight powder charge in each, the larger case will exhibit lower pressure than the smaller case.
There is no situation where this isn't true. So to reach the same pressure as the lower volume case you would use slightly more powder depending on the difference in volume between the cases until you reach the same operating pressure.
You can see that demonstrated above between 357-44 and 357 using the same powder, just different charge weights to reach the same pressure.
My recommendation is that you spend a little time researching what a progressive burn rate is. As pressure increases, so does a smokeless powder's burn rate, which is why case volume affects pressure so profoundly.
well no wonder it blew up, it was a smith
This.
Even their X Frame guns aren't as strongly built as the likes of Freedom Arms, Magnum Research, or Ruger Super Redhawks.
thank you for making a .357mag thread. it is my main cartridge.
>zamak and bakelite
what fricking year is this
The whole point of the length is that you can't shove it into a gun designed for .38, especially guns made with the metallurgy of the time of introduction
>"noooo a person can't put .357 strength .38's in a Rohm they just can't okay?"
>"nooo a person can't chamber .50BMG in a vintage 12 guage only meant to take
brass shells reeeeeeeee"
>"cleaning up loose amunition with a vacuum cleaner is dangerous okay! it just is!"
>"why would someone use a .416 cheytac round as an improvised hammer whyyyyyy"
Pussy
I have nothing to add, but reading this thread makes me want to become a reload chad. It will be interesting making the best loads for my snubby and my 3" K6S. And then one day I'll be able to frick with shit like .460 rowland.
Blame shit and wesson for not being able to make a gun able to handle real 357 loads, prior to S&W frickery in the 80's they were significantly more powerful and any ruger or colt would shoot them all day every day with no issues. There's a reason the frogs used rugers for their revolvers for like 40 years.