User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 12:26:53 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I thought that I was, the 357 loads I mentioned are also over 1000 foot pounds. Wasn't trying to be misleading or comparing apples to oranges. Are you saying that the 357 Mag with 158 gr @ 1800fps is a SAAMI load? Same for the 180gr @ 1600fps? I have not found publish data anywhere close to those velocity for those bullet wights other than Hodgdon data for 357 Mag from rifle length barrels. Hodgdon's data tops out at about 1600fps for the 158gr and 1400fps for 180. But their data is from a 10 inch test barrels not a more realistic length and vented revolver barrel. ETA: Again the reason 357 magnum sucks is not a lack of raw muzzle energy but other aspects of the cartridges as stated earlier. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 12:52:25 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are you saying that the 357 Mag with 158 gr @ 1800fps is a SAAMI load? Same for the 180gr @ 1600fps? I have not found publish data anywhere close to those velocity for those bullet wights other than Hodgdon data for 357 Mag from rifle length barrels. Hodgdon's data tops out at about 1600fps for the 158gr and 1400fps for 180. But their data is from a 10 inch test barrels not a more realistic length and vented revolver barrel. ETA: Again the reason 357 magnum sucks is not a lack of raw muzzle energy but other aspects of the cartridges as stated earlier. That is just soooooo impressive!!!! 1st you don't have a clue how low you can load a 10mm and still maintain accuracy. Then you think hodgdon is the only powder company in the world. Again the reason you think the 357 sucks is because you ain't got a clue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 1:02:54 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is just soooooo impressive!!!! 1st you don't have a clue how low you can load a 10mm and still maintain accuracy. Then you think hodgdon is the only powder company in the world. Again the reason you think the 357 sucks is because you ain't got a clue. You're going to post the video of you doing a reload in less than 2 sec with you 357 Magnum? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 1:03:38 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup, not much faster....just 125-200fps faster than 200gr Buffalo Bore loads. Personally I'm a 44 caliber person, Special/Magnum/SuperMag. They accomplish all the heavy duty pistol needs I have. Butting into this topic wasn't my first choice but with all the 10mm numbers being thrown around to establish it's dominance over the 357 Magnum I kind of felt obligated to chime in. Pushing the 357 cartridge to its true limits requires one to purchase a quality handgun, something your SW isn't. Ballistically the longer/skinnier 357 when pushed will out perform the 10mm the OP is so fond of. Just enjoy what you enjoy, have fun shooting them and be happy there's the perfect gun out there for us all.  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Oh. So not much faster than some factory 10 loads using saami spec pressure and 5" or shorter barrels. (I.E. Underwood). Your argument about narrowing the goal posts to a single specific firearm, to load ammo over pressures that might destroy other handguns, in order to make a point that .357 can be forced to do better than 10mm does at it's normal pressure kind of showcases the limitations of .357. To perform better in one metric, it has to be limited. I have the S&W ammo listing that came with my LNIB M13-2. All the velocities are vintage 70's stuff. It's unsurprising the loads have been slowed down dramatically over the decades. Yup, not much faster....just 125-200fps faster than 200gr Buffalo Bore loads. Personally I'm a 44 caliber person, Special/Magnum/SuperMag. They accomplish all the heavy duty pistol needs I have. Butting into this topic wasn't my first choice but with all the 10mm numbers being thrown around to establish it's dominance over the 357 Magnum I kind of felt obligated to chime in. Pushing the 357 cartridge to its true limits requires one to purchase a quality handgun, something your SW isn't. Ballistically the longer/skinnier 357 when pushed will out perform the 10mm the OP is so fond of. Just enjoy what you enjoy, have fun shooting them and be happy there's the perfect gun out there for us all. It's already been stated multiple times .44 is a better round than .357 for any type of performance reguarding projectile weight or velocity. What you're calling pushing the .357 to it's "true limits" is actually pushing it past it's limits. Also trying to claim K frames are not quality guns while lauding redhawks, which were brought to market as budget cast guns which are larger than necessary to make up for the metallurgy of being cast is KIND of trying hard. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 1:16:10 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, it's a tech thread, I've been posting up verifiable information, you've been yelling at clouds trying to dick measure vs discuss actual things. If you think showing data that doesn't agree with your opinion is trolling either ignore what I have to say, or I can start a pit thread so we can hash it out there instead of your shitting in a tech thread because I say things you don't like. You're the fool that said the 10mm is more versatile than the 357. I'm still waiting for you to prove it. The only thing you've posted so far is you running your lips. A link to 357 data showing loads using 90gr to 180gr bullets being reloaded in the 357 with pressures ranging from 6000+psi to 32,000+ psi. 357's rule A link to a 6" bbl'd 357 reload data/ 180gr bullet doing 1600fps+ 357's rule again Why don't you quit trolling and post data from mfg's showing the 10mm is more versatile than the 357???? Till then you're just running your lips!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 1:41:16 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What will it do with 200-220 grain bullets? The hottest .357 loads found (out of 68 ea. 200 gr. loads found): Winchester data: 200 Lead Winchester W-296- 12.4 gr. 1,335 fps Remarks: 35,000 cup Alliant data: 200 lead round nose Alliant 2400- 10.0 gr. 1,245 fps Remarks: primer: Fed. 200; min. OAL (inches): 1.575; bbl length: 5.6; psi: 32,800 Notice the second load is a little below SAAMI recommended MAP of 35,000 psi Vitavuori data: 200 Speer TMJ Vihtavuori VV-N110- 13.1 grs. 1277 fps Remarks: maximum load; OAL (in.): 1.697; '70's vintage Lyman cast manual: 195 gr. RN Hercules 2400- 12.5 grs. 1330 fps The 10mm hottest 200 gr. loads I found (out of 300+ ea. 200 gr. loads found): 200 Hornady HP-XTP or HAP Accurate AAC-9- 13.2 grs. 1255 fps Remarks: maximum load 200 Hornady XTP Accurate AAC-7- 11.3 grs. 1,260 fps Remarks: energy (ft-lbs): 704; OAL: 1.260 inches; That vast majority of 10mm 200 gr. loads ran 1100-1150 fps on the top end. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 1:41:52 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote History Yet the link doesn't show 180 grain bullets, or 6" barrels.
You say I run my mouth and am trolling then try to make claims link to data that doesn't support it? Your link clearly shows those are 10" barrel numbers. So you're either bad at reading or lying to try to sound smart on the internet. On top of accusing me of trolling for having an opinion that's different than yours that you can't even correctly articulate or support. Your other link? 10" barrel data as well. Might want to read the things you post before citing them incorrectly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 1:42:10 AM EDT
[#8]
Still waiting for the sub 2 second reload with 357 Mag, or sub 0.2 second splits with 1000 ft-lb+ 357 Mag loads. There is more to this argument than raw KE.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 1:47:38 AM EDT
[#9]
180 gr. load from Handloader #240:
180 Cast Performance WFNGC Hodgdon Lil'Gun- 15.5 grs. 1,386 fps Remarks: firearm: Colt Python; barrel length: 6" |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 1:52:48 AM EDT
[#10]
So when I got in from work this afternoon, I grabbed one of my .357's, loaded a few dozen shells then retired to the range behind my shop. After firing all these I was reminded of the merits of the cartridge; it takes a little over half as much out of my stash of lead to cast .357 bullets compared to the .44's that I normally shoot and hunt with, and about half as much powder. My 50 yd. targets still clanged when hit them and I still got in quality practice time.
Yeah OP, get rid of your .357's and let the thread die. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 2:32:55 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So when I got in from work this afternoon, I grabbed one of my .357's, loaded a few dozen shells then retired to the range behind my shop. After firing all these I was reminded of the merits of the cartridge; it takes a little over half as much out of my stash of lead to cast .357 bullets compared to the .44's that I normally shoot and hunt with, and about half as much powder. My 50 yd. targets still clanged when hit them and I still got in quality practice time. Yeah OP, get rid of your .357's and let the thread die. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 3:33:33 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If all you want to do is make metal ring cheap, .22 is good for that. Not as cheap handloads.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 3:57:50 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not as cheap handloads. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If all you want to do is make metal ring cheap, .22 is good for that. Not as cheap handloads. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 4:57:03 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
5 cents per round and dropping? Absolutely. My .357 loads today consisted a 2.5¢ primer, a pennies worth of powder and free bullets and brass. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 5:23:12 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Absolutely. My .357 loads today consisted a 2.5¢ primer, a pennies worth of powder and free bullets and brass. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
5 cents per round and dropping? Absolutely. My .357 loads today consisted a 2.5¢ primer, a pennies worth of powder and free bullets and brass. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 10:25:57 AM EDT
[#16]
Very nice, wish I had a source for free lead. My reloads are costing me about $0.12/round for 38's I use in competition. But I am buying my bullets not casting.
If we are just loading plinking ammo you could be more efficient with your powder in a shorter case (38Spl,38LC,38SC). If you stepped down to 32/327 you could be even more efficient with your lead. Plinking is not a very strong argument for 357 Magnum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 11:04:28 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yet the link doesn't show 180 grain bullets, or 6" barrels. You say I run my mouth and am trolling then try to make claims link to data that doesn't support it? Your link clearly shows those are 10" barrel numbers. So you're either bad at reading or lying to try to sound smart on the internet. On top of accusing me of trolling for having an opinion that's different than yours that you can't even correctly articulate or support. Your other link? 10" barrel data as well. Might want to read the things you post before citing them incorrectly. Well whada ya know I can put just as much BS out there as the next guy!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 11:42:25 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well whada ya know I can put just as much BS out there as the next guy!!! Actually you seem to be winning the BS contest here... I am still waiting on the video of one someone pulling off a sub 2 second reload with their 357 Magnum and/or managing sub 0.2 second splits with 1000ft-lbs+ 357 Magnum loads. Jerry Miculek can do the splits with the hot loads but you slackers are no Jerry. And even Jerry is smart enough to shoot short for fast reloads. His world records were set with 45 ACP and 9mm not 357 Magnum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 11:44:36 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Very nice, wish I had a source for free lead. My reloads are costing me about $0.12/round for 38's I use in competition. But I am buying my bullets not casting. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Very nice, wish I had a source for free lead. My reloads are costing me about $0.12/round for 38's I use in competition. But I am buying my bullets not casting. There's lots of free lead out there, you just have to be willing to look and/or work for it. Quoted:
If we are just loading plinking ammo you could be more efficient with your powder in a shorter case (38Spl,38LC,38SC). If you stepped down to 32/327 you could be even more efficient with your lead. Plinking is not a very strong argument for 357 Magnum. I normally use .38 brass but didn't want to waste good shooting light sizing cases, so I grabbed a bag of .357 brass that was ready to be loaded. The difference in using .38 brass and .357 brass is negligible. With the load I was using yesterday, I can achieve the same velocity in a .38 Special case as the .357 case using what amounts to about .8-1.0 grs less powder which amounts to about 1/4¢. So you're suggesting I buy a different caliber revolver, dies, brass and bullet moulds so I can save a little lead??? I assume you're referring to the 32/327 using ~100 gr. bullets. If that were an issue, I'd simply buy a .358" mould that cast a lighter bullet. And that brings us full circle to the versatility of the cartridge; the ability to load bullets from 90 to 200 grs. So as we see, plinking with light bullets just adds to the versatility of the cartridge. I get you don't like it, but your crusade doesn't hold much merit. I find it especially odd that you don't care for the .357 yet wax eloquently the merits of a cartridge (10mm) that requires moon clips in order to be fired in a revolver. (Please don't start with the speed with which your revolver can be reloaded, most don't care) If you want a .40 something caliber revolver, buy a .41 Magnum and you'll have a revolver chambered in an infinitely more practical cartridge, that will weigh less than your currently 3 lb. boat anchor. So you're suggesting I buy I buy a new caliber, dies, brass and bullet moulds so I could save a few grains of lead?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 12:53:47 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's lots of free lead out there, you just have to be willing to look and/or work for it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's lots of free lead out there, you just have to be willing to look and/or work for it. Yeah, but at this point in my life with a family, my time is unfortunately more valuable to me so I am stuck buying bullets. I normally use .38 brass but didn't want to waste good shooting light sizing cases, so I grabbed a bag of .357 brass that was ready to be loaded. The difference in using .38 brass and .357 brass is negligible. With the load I was using yesterday, I can achieve the same velocity in a .38 Special case as the .357 case using what amounts to about .8-1.0 grs less powder which amounts to about 1/4¢. So you're suggesting I buy a different caliber revolver, dies, brass and bullet moulds so I can save a little lead??? I assume you're referring to the 32/327 using ~100 gr. bullets. If that were an issue, I'd simply buy a .358" mould that cast a lighter bullet. And that brings us full circle to the versatility of the cartridge; the ability to load bullets from 90 to 200 grs. So as we see, plinking with light bullets just adds to the versatility of the cartridge. I get you don't like it, but your crusade doesn't hold much merit. I find it especially odd that you don't care for the .357 yet wax eloquently the merits of a cartridge (10mm) that requires moon clips in order to be fired in a revolver. (Please don't start with the speed with which your revolver can be reloaded, most don't care) If you want a .40 something caliber revolver, buy a .41 Magnum and you'll have a revolver chambered in an infinitely more practical cartridge, that will weigh less than your currently 3 lb. boat anchor. So you're suggesting I buy I buy a new caliber, dies, brass and bullet moulds so I could save a few grains of lead?? Sure but you implied that you use all that 357 stuff to have more affordable practice than your regular 44 Mag gun, so if you took that to the next "logical" step... yeah it was somewhat satirical  but that does not seem to be going over well... You guys take this way to serious... 
Clearly reload speed means jack-shit to this crowd... It was one of my original and most critical reasons 357 Mag SUCKS! and yet has gained zero traction in this discussion. Life's bitch, and I will get over it or I wont... 
"requires moonclips", you meant factor ready for moonclips!!! MOONCLIPS RULE!!! 
And on that vain that one of the reason I prefer the 10mm revolver over the 357 Mag. In addition to being easier on my ears I get similar ballistic performance to 357 Mag with 10mm but from a shorter fatter cartridge (you know those fast reloads you don't care about, but I do.) that is factory ready for moonclips. And since it's a rimless cartridge there are SAAMI specification for the extractor groove dimensions so there is no need to match particular manf. cases to particular moonclip. Rimless also allows the use of much thicker moonclips that adds robustness. 357 Magnum along with the rest of that family of cartridges are much more finicky on moonclips and they are less robust. Rimless cartridges and moonclips make an excellent combination in a revolver. In a pinch I can still shoot without since 10mm head spaces off the case mouth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 1:08:23 PM EDT
[#21]
I have no real practical use for a .357. I owned a stainless Ruger 4" GP-100 which was a beast of a gun and fairly accurate too. The .357 magnum is impressive, but for hunting I found it wanting. The report is extremely loud, and the bullet diameter/weight isn't enough for medium size game imo. I did manage to kill a small pig with one, but it took a shot in the ear from about 5 feet to finish it off. I had center punched it and a through-and-through on both hams and one down the top of it's shoulder and it kept on truckin'. Had I been using a .44mag I feel the results would have been different.
For defensive uses, I wouldn't even consider shooting a .357 in your house or car, it is painful to the ears, you will suffer significant hearing loss. Any gunshot from confined spaces would be bad, but especially so from any magnum. So my point is, if you want enough gun for hunting, skip over the .357 mag and go .44mag. or bigger, I'd even skip over 10mm, I mulled this over for awhile when I was searching for a hunting handgun, I had decided on a Glock 40 in 10mm, but common sense prevailed and S&W .44mag won out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 1:55:35 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have no real practical use for a .357. I owned a stainless Ruger 4" GP-100 which was a beast of a gun and fairly accurate too. The .357 magnum is impressive, but for hunting I found it wanting. The report is extremely loud, and the bullet diameter/weight isn't enough for medium size game imo. I did manage to kill a small pig with one, but it took a shot in the ear from about 5 feet to finish it off. I had center punched it and a through-and-through on both hams and one down the top of it's shoulder and it kept on truckin'. Had I been using a .44mag I feel the results would have been different. For defensive uses, I wouldn't even consider shooting a .357 in your house or car, it is painful to the ears, you will suffer significant hearing loss. Any gunshot from confined spaces would be bad, but especially so from any magnum. So my point is, if you want enough gun for hunting, skip over the .357 mag and go .44mag. or bigger, I'd even skip over 10mm, I mulled this over for awhile when I was searching for a hunting handgun, I had decided on a Glock 40 in 10mm, but common sense prevailed and S&W .44mag won out. I agree with the skip the 10mm for hunting, or at least I would not go out and buy a 10mm revolver expressly for hunting. I did not initially buy my S&W 610 10mm for hunting. It was bought for USPSA competition. Since I was already setup to reload 40 S&W getting into Revolver division with a S&W 610 did not require anything new on the reloading side for me. Was able to shoot the same load in my Limited/Limited-10/Revolver. But when I decided I wanted to try my hand at hunting deer with a revolver and was set/stuck on using what I already owned I worked up loads for my S&W 610 and Blackhawk. Both of my loads have similar energy but the 10mm was easier on my ears and due to the amount of time spent shooting the S&W 610 in competition I shot it more accurately. So I have been hunting with it the last few years. Took me several years to actually kill something with it due to a variety of factors but this year I finally took two does with my 10mm Both dropped pretty much in their tracts so I can't argue with the results. If I did not have already own the revolvers I do I would have looked at a 44 Mag also. I am still looking for a 44 Mag to go with my Rossi M92, and that was sort of the start of this thread as I was thinking about trading/selling the Blackhawk to help fund a S&W 629. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 2:31:04 PM EDT
[#23]
1) Go get a Cimarron model P in 45LC. One of the best construction pistols that's out there with loads of history. Also really fun cleaning it as you watch westerns.
2) Get a lever gun in same caliber. I have a Rossi 92 with the octagon barrel. Might as well be a laser for how accurate it is. 3) You are going to need to reload for the 45LC 4) Be sure to say "Murica" before each shot. Makes the gun more accurate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 2:31:21 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Actually you seem to be winning the BS contest here... I am still waiting on the video of one someone pulling off a sub 2 second reload with their 357 Magnum and/or managing sub 0.2 second splits with 1000ft-lbs+ 357 Magnum loads. Jerry Miculek can do the splits with the hot loads but you slackers are no Jerry. And even Jerry is smart enough to shoot short for fast reloads. His world records were set with 45 ACP and 9mm not 357 Magnum. Are you saying that a 10mm with the same weight, pushed to the same velocities, or similar to a .357, will be faster? It also seems like you're saying 10mm is so much better because you might be able to reload it faster. Is it really that much to matter. If you're super fast like, Jerry, my guess is he's pretty darn fast with any caliber he's dabbled in. Meaning it's more about a person skill. Sure, longer cartridges might take a bit longer. Doesn't seem like it should be enough to matter. But I'm not competing, so.... YMMV. It does seem like grasping at straws to prove a point. I totally get the loudness aspect. I didn't realize that a .357 is that much louder than other guns of similar performance. I know when I've been around .44 mags, they're freaking loud. And not just loud, when your at an indoor range, I swear the masonry walls move.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 5:28:29 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are you saying that a 10mm with the same weight, pushed to the same velocities, or similar to a .357, will be faster? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Actually you seem to be winning the BS contest here... I am still waiting on the video of one someone pulling off a sub 2 second reload with their 357 Magnum and/or managing sub 0.2 second splits with 1000ft-lbs+ 357 Magnum loads. Jerry Miculek can do the splits with the hot loads but you slackers are no Jerry. And even Jerry is smart enough to shoot short for fast reloads. His world records were set with 45 ACP and 9mm not 357 Magnum. Are you saying that a 10mm with the same weight, pushed to the same velocities, or similar to a .357, will be faster? No, I sort of mashed several point together with that sentence. I would expect splits to be about the same for either cartridge assuming they where both loaded to the same power factor. The 0.2 second splits was just that not everything is about shooting super hot loads. When you trying to shoot fast your not going to want 1000 ft-lbs loads. It also seems like you're saying 10mm is so much better because you might be able to reload it faster. Is it really that much to matter. If you're super fast like, Jerry, my guess is he's pretty darn fast with any caliber he's dabbled in. Meaning it's more about a person skill. Sure, longer cartridges might take a bit longer. Doesn't seem like it should be enough to matter. But I'm not competing, so.... YMMV. It does seem like grasping at straws to prove a point. In a competitive setting the difference between 357 and 10mm/40 reloads is significant. The larger holes in the cylinder make a big difference and the shorter cartridges make a difference. In USPSA your stage score is calculated by taking the points scored (or lost) for the hits on targets and divide that by the time it took you to shoot the stage. Think, points per second, call Hit Factor. The guy with the highest Hit Factor get 100% of the stage points and everyone else is scored as a percentage of that high Hit Factor. So if by shooting 357 Magnum it costs you an extra 1/2 second per reload, on a stage that has 3 or 4 reloads, you're giving up serious points. As I mentioned up thread at the last USPSA revolver nationals not a single one of the 86 competitor used 357 Magnum. It offered zero competitive advantage. Before the rules changes (2014) The USPSA Revolver was nearly 85% S&W 625 and about 15% S&W 610, and just a few guys shooting 38 cal (38 Super, 38 Special, 38 S/L Colt) After the rule change that allowed 7 & 8 Shots to play. The sport change to be dominate by the 8-shooters. The first year is was overwhelmingly 38 Short Colt and 38 Special with a few 38 Super(<-won the match)/9mm 8-shooters and few 6-shooters in 45ACP and 40S&W hanging on. 2016 nationals 9mm was the most represented, at 1 in 3 shooters. I totally get the loudness aspect. I didn't realize that a .357 is that much louder than other guns of similar performance. I know when I've been around .44 mags, they're freaking loud. And not just loud, when your at an indoor range, I swear the masonry walls move. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 5:30:20 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1) Go get a Cimarron model P in 45LC. One of the best construction pistols that's out there with loads of history. Also really fun cleaning it as you watch westerns. 2) Get a lever gun in same caliber. I have a Rossi 92 with the octagon barrel. Might as well be a laser for how accurate it is. 3) You are going to need to reload for the 45LC 4) Be sure to say "Murica" before each shot. Makes the gun more accurate. A man (presumably) after my own heart! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/28/2017 7:26:52 PM EDT
[#27]
I didn't get the memo. .357 works fine for me. Every one of my guns will reliably fire mouse fart loads all the way to full house 180 hard cast. My Marlin was easily take anything in the Southeast at the typical ranges encountered.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2017 4:50:35 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, I sort of mashed several point together with that sentence. I would expect splits to be about the same for either cartridge assuming they where both loaded to the same power factor. The 0.2 second splits was just that not everything is about shooting super hot loads. When you trying to shoot fast your not going to want 1000 ft-lbs loads. In a competitive setting the difference between 357 and 10mm/40 reloads is significant. The larger holes in the cylinder make a big difference and the shorter cartridges make a difference. In USPSA your stage score is calculated by taking the points scored (or lost) for the hits on targets and divide that by the time it took you to shoot the stage. Think, points per second, call Hit Factor. The guy with the highest Hit Factor get 100% of the stage points and everyone else is scored as a percentage of that high Hit Factor. So if by shooting 357 Magnum it costs you an extra 1/2 second per reload, on a stage that has 3 or 4 reloads, you're giving up serious points. As I mentioned up thread at the last USPSA revolver nationals not a single one of the 86 competitor used 357 Magnum. It offered zero competitive advantage. Before the rules changes (2014) The USPSA Revolver was nearly 85% S&W 625 and about 15% S&W 610, and just a few guys shooting 38 cal (38 Super, 38 Special, 38 S/L Colt) After the rule change that allowed 7 & 8 Shots to play. The sport change to be dominate by the 8-shooters. The first year is was overwhelmingly 38 Short Colt and 38 Special with a few 38 Super(<-won the match)/9mm 8-shooters and few 6-shooters in 45ACP and 40S&W hanging on. 2016 nationals 9mm was the most represented, at 1 in 3 shooters. Well then don't use the spit times as a reason if it's not really a reason to make your point. I totally get the reload though. I've never used one but I know some people talk about how fast the .45 moon clips can because it's just such a big hole. So it seems like 10mm/.40 is a good compromise because you have a bigger loading hole than a .38 cal and more rounds then a .45. Sounds legit. But like most of these dudes that pointed out, in the real world of hunting or self defense, I'm not sure any of that matters. I realize speed seems like it's going to matter big time if someone is shooting back at you. But maybe who makes the hits first is a bit more important than that. But I've never been shot at, so.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2017 5:04:13 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But like most of these dudes that pointed out, in the real world of hunting or self defense, I'm not sure any of that matters. I realize speed seems like it's going to matter big time if someone is shooting back at you. But maybe who makes the hits first is a bit more important than that. But I've never been shot at, so.... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe there's a reason those people say it's all about volume of fire? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2017 5:21:03 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well then don't use the spit times as a reason if it's not really a reason to make your point. I totally get the reload though. I've never used one but I know some people talk about how fast the .45 moon clips can because it's just such a big hole. So it seems like 10mm/.40 is a good compromise because you have a bigger loading hole than a .38 cal and more rounds then a .45. Sounds legit. But like most of these dudes that pointed out, in the real world of hunting or self defense, I'm not sure any of that matters. I realize speed seems like it's going to matter big time if someone is shooting back at you. But maybe who makes the hits first is a bit more important than that. But I've never been shot at, so.... For hunting is more about convenience. No loose rounds in my pocket making noise. No bulky speed-loads to manage or later loose. Two or three spare moonclips tucked quietly in a pocket. Carrying a revolver for self defense that only has 5, 6, maybe 7 or 8 rounds in it; while existing in world where semi-autos that hold 14-19 rd magazines are common and the bad guys sometimes travel in groups when doing nefarious things; and yet not thinking about and preparing for a reload seems short sighted. I don't plan on (and pray I will never) every being shot at but I carry at least one reload for my revolver and I practice doing that reload quickly and efficiently. But the real world also has competitive shooting sports. Some of those competitive shooting sports require fast reloads at part of the game. Not that is seem any of you guys do any of that with your revolvers... But it really is fun shooting the round gun against the bottom feeders. Even when you loose, and when you win the bragging rights and shame you can heap on the loathsome bottom feeder shooters is quite satisfying.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2017 5:32:08 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But the real world also has competitive shooting sports. Some of those competitive shooting sports require fast reloads at part of the game. Not that is seem any of you guys do any of that with your revolvers... But it really is fun shooting the round gun against the bottom feeders. Even when you loose, and when you win the bragging rights and shame you can heap on the loathsome bottom feeder shooters is quite satisfying.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/31815523/moonclips.jpg So many people think simple ownership and putting a bunch of rounds into paper on square range is going to give them all the skill they need, especially when it comes to carry and reloads. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2017 5:40:08 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It is also interesting shooting revolver in said sports because it shows off how little people know when they espouse the virtues of revolvers. So many people think simple ownership and putting a bunch of rounds into paper on square range is going to give them all the skill they need, especially when it comes to carry and reloads. I agree. I would, in general, not recommend a revolver for self defense. I carry one personally but I have come to grips with its limitation and have my own personal reasons for doing so. My funeral if I am wrong. Personally I think the square range helps your shooting skills and weapon manipulation a lot. But I agree it does not prepare you for all the other far more difficult issues that you encounter in a lethal situation. ETA: And sometimes competitive shooting is just competitive shooting. Something fun to do with your firearms and has no bearing on self defense at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2017 7:02:28 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I agree. I would, in general, not recommend a revolver for self defense. I carry one personally but I have come to grips with its limitation and have my own personal reasons for doing so. My funeral if I am wrong. Personally I think the square range helps your shooting skills and weapon manipulation a lot. But I agree it does not prepare you for all the other far more difficult issues that you encounter in a lethal situation. ETA: And sometimes competitive shooting is just competitive shooting. Something fun to do with your firearms and has no bearing on self defense at all. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It is also interesting shooting revolver in said sports because it shows off how little people know when they espouse the virtues of revolvers. So many people think simple ownership and putting a bunch of rounds into paper on square range is going to give them all the skill they need, especially when it comes to carry and reloads. I agree. I would, in general, not recommend a revolver for self defense. I carry one personally but I have come to grips with its limitation and have my own personal reasons for doing so. My funeral if I am wrong. Personally I think the square range helps your shooting skills and weapon manipulation a lot. But I agree it does not prepare you for all the other far more difficult issues that you encounter in a lethal situation. ETA: And sometimes competitive shooting is just competitive shooting. Something fun to do with your firearms and has no bearing on self defense at all. Also agree that square range shooting helps, since it's where the get core fundamentals down. All action shooting, or even self defense shooting is, is different means of applying fundamentals, and then moving to a different place and applying them again (sometimes while moving). That's also where I see a breakdown with older gents who still maintain that there is some distinct difference that is imposed between people who shoot revo's and semis, as if in this day and age the fundamentals of both are not intrinsically linked. Though I am glad to see that start dying off. When I first started here there was still a lot of dudes doing the whole "semi auto's are for people who can't aim" shtick. Part of why I got the m-13 was to shoot revo at the local IDPA match because my buddy was the only other one shooting it. The secondary benefit was to train hard as fuck and explore the limits of them so that way when I was doing any instruction or helping friends, I could give them feedback based on modern use and training, not decades old old wives tales. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2017 10:23:15 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
One would say then, that's it's a good idea to parse info from people who have been to get insight into what it takes to win said gunfights. Maybe there's a reason those people say it's all about volume of fire? I totally agree. But what seems to escape you is that not everyone that has BTDT agrees with everything you say. Whether I articulate those other viewpoints well enough for your liking doesn't matter to me. I also think you might not want to hear the other side of things. Because from where I'm sitting, you have your way of doing things and pretty much think those are the only ways it should be done. I really don't know Michael De Bettencourt's background. But he doesn't teach the same reload techniques as you. Maybe he's not someone I should listen to. I don't know. Maybe he's not as "up to date" as you. But he does seem to know how to run a revolver. I admit to being a fan of Stephen Camp's writings and teaching and he was an LEO quite a long time ago. So I get that sometimes the tactics are not the latest and greatest. I'm not sure that's always a bad thing though. I'm sure there are more. Not that any of that will matter to you. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2017 11:22:40 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I totally agree. But what seems to escape you is that not everyone that has BTDT agrees with everything you say. Whether I articulate those other viewpoints well enough for your liking doesn't matter to me. I also think you might not want to hear the other side of things. Because from where I'm sitting, you have your way of doing things and pretty much think those are the only ways it should be done. I really don't know Michael De Bettencourt's background. But he doesn't teach the same reload techniques as you. Maybe he's not someone I should listen to. I don't know. Maybe he's not as "up to date" as you. But he does seem to know how to run a revolver. I admit to being a fan of Stephen Camp's writings and teaching and he was an LEO quite a long time ago. So I get that sometimes the tactics are not the latest and greatest. I'm not sure that's always a bad thing though. I'm sure there are more. Not that any of that will matter to you. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
One would say then, that's it's a good idea to parse info from people who have been to get insight into what it takes to win said gunfights. Maybe there's a reason those people say it's all about volume of fire? I totally agree. But what seems to escape you is that not everyone that has BTDT agrees with everything you say. Whether I articulate those other viewpoints well enough for your liking doesn't matter to me. I also think you might not want to hear the other side of things. Because from where I'm sitting, you have your way of doing things and pretty much think those are the only ways it should be done. I really don't know Michael De Bettencourt's background. But he doesn't teach the same reload techniques as you. Maybe he's not someone I should listen to. I don't know. Maybe he's not as "up to date" as you. But he does seem to know how to run a revolver. I admit to being a fan of Stephen Camp's writings and teaching and he was an LEO quite a long time ago. So I get that sometimes the tactics are not the latest and greatest. I'm not sure that's always a bad thing though. I'm sure there are more. Not that any of that will matter to you. "I really don't know Michael De Bettencourt's background. But he doesn't teach the same reload techniques as you." Yet it's like 90% comparable to the way I reload, and the way he does it, and the way I do it, is not the way a lot of other people, especially older police instructors do it. He cites using safariland comp B's for the same reason I do. It's like the harder you try to be critical of things, the more it backfires. Michael De Bettencourt's youtube vids were one of the resources I used when finding the fastest ways to reload that capitalize on coming from semi autos to make use of the already ingrained muscle memory. "I'm sure there are more. Not that any of that will matter to you. " Your opinion doesn't, because you constantly ask questions with your "I don't know, I'm not sure" stuff, then question anything people say who try to answer you thinking your're saying you don't know stuff as if you want to. I only entertain your comments because I know there are people lurking reading tech threads who might have the same questions, but are interested in answers and getting ideas and terminology to search for to further their own education, to increase their skill. When it comes to revolvers, people deserve to know that they don't have to conform to ideals from 30-40 years ago. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2017 11:55:25 PM EDT
[#36]
Not sure where you two are going with all that rambling but no reload technique, Mall Ninja approved or not, is going to allow you to reload a 357 Mag revolver as fast as a revolver using a shorter and/or fatter cartridges. 357 Magnum still sucks...
That said it is sort of interesting that from the very early 1900's thru the 1980's, when the revolver was the duty weapon of choice by many LE agency, that the full moonclip never gain much acceptance. Moonclips didn't really seem to come into their own until after the decline of the revolver as duty weapons was pretty far along. Was this simple a set paradigm that could not accept the moonclip or was there some reason LE had for staying with loose rounds in dump pouches and speedloaders? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 12:03:54 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not sure where you two are going with all that rambling but no reload technique, Mall Ninja approved or not, is going to allow you to reload a 357 Mag revolver as fast as a revolver using a shorter and/or fatter cartridges. 357 Magnum still sucks...
That said it is sort of interesting that from the very early 1900's thru the 1980's, when the revolver was the duty weapon of choice by many LE agency, that the full moonclip never gain much acceptance. Moonclips didn't really seem to come into their own until after the decline of the revolver as duty weapons was pretty far along. Was this simple a set paradigm that could not accept the moonclip or was there some reason LE had for staying with loose rounds in dump pouches and speedloaders? (Which lead to SL variant, Comp's and so on).
Why worry about moonclips for speed when the state of the art at the time was pretty slow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 12:44:30 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
One would say then, that's it's a good idea to parse info from people who have been to get insight into what it takes to win said gunfights. Maybe there's a reason those people say it's all about volume of fire? I'm guessing that you have never used a revolver in that situation... NOT a knock on your experience, by the way, just an observation. Nick |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 12:59:23 AM EDT
[#39]
Madcap, this is an article I read a year or two ago about someone who attended his (Michael's) class. He talks about his techniques on how to load from speedloaders, loose rounds and speed strips. And the youtube video show him grabbing a speedloader from his pocket. You already stated that you thought that was stupid. At least I thought you alluded to that.
http://www.activeresponsetraining.net/secrets-of-the-concealed-carry-snub-aar I should know better to try to have a conversation with you about this stuff. It's like sticking my hand in a blender. LOL. You're right. All the time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 1:10:17 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm guessing that you have never used a revolver in that situation... NOT a knock on your experience, by the way, just an observation. Nick Only defended myself from one. Which did show off a shortcoming of revolvers, but that's unrelated to volume of fire.
eta- Mas has a great line about your question now that I think about it. "Personal experience means less than collective experience, simply because no one person is going to survive enough gunfights to become an oracle before the odds catch up with him. I’ve had a relatively easy life: Every human being I ever took at gunpoint either surrendered or fled, and the only times I’ve ever had to pull the trigger have been against animals." It's why I value basing things like what stops gun fight off of experience that people that fight with guns share, vs say, "The Armed citizen" in the American Hunter mag. (incidentally one of the main places the "most SD shootings use less than three rounds" number comes from). |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 10:05:56 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're going to post the video of you doing a reload in less than 2 sec with you 357 Magnum? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
That is just soooooo impressive!!!! 1st you don't have a clue how low you can load a 10mm and still maintain accuracy. Then you think hodgdon is the only powder company in the world. Again the reason you think the 357 sucks is because you ain't got a clue. You're going to post the video of you doing a reload in less than 2 sec with you 357 Magnum? You are missing the point, good sir. The reload is not necessary. Flesh. From. Bone.. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 11:03:43 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You are missing the point, good sir. The reload is not necessary. Flesh. From. Bone.. What? How is a reload not necessary?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 11:17:30 AM EDT
[#43]
Make those first 6 .357 count and you don't need to reload in a fight, if however you're shooting .38 Short Colts ie light bullets at low velocity then yeah you're going to need to reload to stop the threat.
CD |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 11:24:53 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Make those first 6 .357 count and you don't need to reload in a fight, if however you're shooting .38 Short Colts ie light bullets at low velocity then yeah you're going to need to reload to stop the threat.
CD What if there are more than 6 of them there bad guys. Mall Ninja's are frequently outnumber 10: 1 or worst odds!
I will have you know my 38 Short Colt may be short but not light. 160gr RN moving at ~880fps, got to make Minor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 11:34:01 AM EDT
[#45]
I've been interested in using .38 SC brass in my 642 for more positive ejection. I haven't found any .38 +P pressure load data.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 1:13:33 PM EDT
[#46]
My .357 is a single action and loads very slowly and I'm probably a slow loader as well. Who cares! I don't expect to ever be in a gun fight so it's a non-issue (and my blackhawk isn't what I'd carry if did expect trouble). It is a lot of fun to shoot and I reload various loads depending on what I want. Very versatile.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 3:03:59 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've been interested in using .38 SC brass in my 642 for more positive ejection. I haven't found any .38 +P pressure load data. Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've been interested in using .38 SC brass in my 642 for more positive ejection. I haven't found any .38 +P pressure load data. I don't think you would be happy with the performance of 38 Short Colt loaded to 38 Special +P pressures. I have not had my 38 Short Colt loads pressure measure but from putting my 38 Short Colt load into Quickloads I am pretty sure that 38 Short Colt 160gr @880fps loads are well above 38 Special +P probably a bit over 25,000 psi. I would not shoot my own 38 Short Colt loads in a 38 Special revolver. I only shoot them in a revolver rated for 357 Mag pressures. Quoted:
My .357 is a single action and loads very slowly and I'm probably a slow loader as well. Who cares! I don't expect to ever be in a gun fight so it's a non-issue (and my blackhawk isn't what I'd carry if did expect trouble). It is a lot of fun to shoot and I reload various loads depending on what I want. Very versatile. I care! I also don't expect to ever be in a gun fight, god willing. But I thoroughly enjoy competing in USPSA, IDPA, and similar pistol competition with my revolvers. Reload speed is part of the sport and directly effects your score.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 3:59:14 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't think you would be happy with the performance of 38 Short Colt loaded to 38 Special +P pressures. I have not had my 38 Short Colt loads pressure measure but from putting my 38 Short Colt load into Quickloads I am pretty sure that 38 Short Colt 160gr @880fps loads are well above 38 Special +P probably a bit over 25,000 psi. I would not shoot my own 38 Short Colt loads in a 38 Special revolver. I only shoot them in a revolver rated for 357 Mag pressures. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 4:21:24 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, that's all the load data I've seen. It's for competition .357s and too hot for .38s. It doesn't sound like .38+P pressure loads in SC would be too impressive. Have you ever played around with Long Colt cases? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2017 5:40:22 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I care! I also don't expect to ever be in a gun fight, god willing. But I thoroughly enjoy competing in USPSA, IDPA, and similar pistol competition with my revolvers. Reload speed is part of the sport and directly effects your score.I don't compete and slower reloading contributes to saving ammo :) If you compete then pick whatever works for you. I lost track of who is claiming what here, but if .357 sucks then by all means use something else. Personally, I enjoy shooting my .357 and it works for me. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
