American Rifleman .357 Mag Gel Tests

[Tokarev]

https://www.americanrifleman.org/art...mag-cartridge/

Hmm. I guess I was expecting dramatic improvement over the .38 Special. I suppose most people automatically equate felt recoil to terminal performance...

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[pinzgauer]

Maybe I missed something but he did not show the penetration of the 4-inch barrel roll, nor comparison relative to the shorter barrel.

Really found this not to be a very useful article.

What most people don't realize is the weight of the powder contributes to felt recoil as it's converted to gas that exits at muzzle velocity.

so a load that achieves the same muzzle velocity in a given barrel length with less powder way will recoil less.

Many 357 loadings shot in Stubbies have a very large amount of unburned powder when the bullet exits, so don't really out perform a better tuned 38 loading yet have higher recoil

This is very apparent in rifle caliber pistols for hunting and IHMSA shooting. And why 7br is so popular vs 7mm08, etc. Achieves similar velocities much more efficiently. And thus with less recoil. And some accuracy improvements.

[Tokarev]

Maybe I missed something but he did not show the penetration of the 4-inch barrel roll, nor comparison relative to the shorter barrel.

Really found this not to be a very useful article.

What most people don't realize is the weight of the powder contributes to felt recoil as it's converted to gas that exits at muzzle velocity.

so a load that achieves the same muzzle velocity in a given barrel length with less powder way will recoil less.

Many 357 loadings shot in Stubbies have a very large amount of unburned powder when the bullet exits, so don't really out perform a better tuned 38 loading yet have higher recoil

This is very apparent in rifle caliber pistols for hunting and IHMSA shooting. And why 7br is so popular vs 7mm08, etc. Achieves similar velocities much more efficiently. And thus with less recoil. And some accuracy improvements.

Well, that's true for the most part but don't forget the weight of the pistol also plays an important role. Of course a GP100 or SP101 is going to be more pleasant than an LCR or S&W Airweight when fired with the same load(s).

Articles of this type aren't ever going to be the do-all end-all. The simple fact is there are just too many loads in 357 to ever do a complete and thorough test. Lucky Gunner has similar testing that includes 4in barrel data but they also don't cover all the choices out there.

The real benefit is to get people to seriously think about what they carry and why. Just assuming you have a 357 snub in your possession gives you some kind of magic death ray is flawed thinking. This ties in with how many people still look at muzzle energy as a way to judge terminal performance.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[shadowrider]

I wish they would test actual .357 magnum level loads. Just because it says .357 on the box doesn't mean it's a magnum load, it only means it's in a magnum case. Most of those in the article are just a little hotter than .38. The one exception I saw was the Federal 125 JHP at 1435 and even that's a little bit on the light side. The .357 Magnum used to push a 158 grain bullet to 1500 FPS. They downloaded that slightly to make the guns last longer and proceeded to use it quite successfully in LE for about 60 years.

I have a handload that launches a 158 grain XTP from my 2.5" Model 66 at 1250 FPS and that's the starting powder charge right out of the VV manual. That same load runs 1389 out of my 6" 686 and I've never seen a reason to go higher since it's a 158 grain bullet and it shoots well.

It's getting to the point that if we wheel gunners want true magnum performance we are going to have to load our own or buy from Buffalo Bore or Underwood, because the factories aren't loading to the cartridge potential or design parameters in most cases. Instead they choose to load to whatever flavor the current penetration standard happens to be and call it a day.

[Tokarev]

I wish they would test actual .357 magnum level loads. Just because it says .357 on the box doesn't mean it's a magnum load, it only means it's in a magnum case. Most of those in the article are just a little hotter than .38.

Did you not see the 140gr Buffalo Bore load?





Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[shadowrider]

Did you not see the 140gr Buffalo Bore load?





Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

I guess I did overlook that one. But my comment wasn't really pertaining to them either because they actually do load full power rounds and then some.

[jaholder]

I wish they would test actual .357 magnum level loads. Just because it says .357 on the box doesn't mean it's a magnum load, it only means it's in a magnum case. Most of those in the article are just a little hotter than .38. The one exception I saw was the Federal 125 JHP at 1435 and even that's a little bit on the light side. The .357 Magnum used to push a 158 grain bullet to 1500 FPS. They downloaded that slightly to make the guns last longer and proceeded to use it quite successfully in LE for about 60 years.

I have a handload that launches a 158 grain XTP from my 2.5" Model 66 at 1250 FPS and that's the starting powder charge right out of the VV manual. That same load runs 1389 out of my 6" 686 and I've never seen a reason to go higher since it's a 158 grain bullet and it shoots well.

It's getting to the point that if we wheel gunners want true magnum performance we are going to have to load our own or buy from Buffalo Bore or Underwood, because the factories aren't loading to the cartridge potential or design parameters in most cases. Instead they choose to load to whatever flavor the current penetration standard happens to be and call it a day.

.357 pushing a 158 grain bullet to 1500fps? B.S, no one has loaded factory ammo that hot for .357 in 60 years as Skeeter Skelton was writing about how the ammo makers had downloaded factory .357 back in the mid 60's. Even then they were only getting that velocity using lead bullets and 8 inch barrels at pressures that would wear out a heavy N frame with repeated use.

[shadowrider]

.357 pushing a 158 grain bullet to 1500fps? B.S, no one has loaded factory ammo that hot for .357 in 60 years as Skeeter Skelton was writing about how the ammo makers had downloaded factory .357 back in the mid 60's. Even then they were only getting that velocity using lead bullets and 8 inch barrels at pressures that would wear out a heavy N frame with repeated use.

Yes that's precisely what I was alluding to. And I'd bet a beer that Elmer Keith ran them harder than that, because that's just the sort of thing he did for fun.


I could probably pull about 12 more references but this'll have to do. From Wiki:

The original 357 load was a 158 grain bullet with an advertised muzzle velocity of 1510 fps. (Muzzle velocity was taken using a revolver with a fairly long barrel.) Most of today's loads are fairly mild when compared to the original load.

[WillBrink]

Maybe I missed something but he did not show the penetration of the 4-inch barrel roll, nor comparison relative to the shorter barrel.

Really found this not to be a very useful article.

What most people don't realize is the weight of the powder contributes to felt recoil as it's converted to gas that exits at muzzle velocity.

so a load that achieves the same muzzle velocity in a given barrel length with less powder way will recoil less.

Many 357 loadings shot in Stubbies have a very large amount of unburned powder when the bullet exits, so don't really out perform a better tuned 38 loading yet have higher recoil

This is very apparent in rifle caliber pistols for hunting and IHMSA shooting. And why 7br is so popular vs 7mm08, etc. Achieves similar velocities much more efficiently. And thus with less recoil. And some accuracy improvements.

Which seemed the point of the article. I kept looking for that info too.

[Tokarev]

Which seemed the point of the article. I kept looking for that info too.

Do people routinely EDC 4" revolvers nowadays? I'd guess the majority of revolvers sold for concealed carry are of the 2" variety.