Snubbies: .38 Specials vs. .357 Magnums

[Bassics]

Interesting graph. If that is the site i am familiar with, those velocities are compiled from TCs, so there is no questions regarding revolver vs auto barrels.

[Jose]

checkout the pictures I posted in the 1911 problem thread.

Wow! Checked that out last night and did some Google searching afterwards and it was eye opening. Guess I happened to get a "good" Taurus I guess I was looking at another Taurus because I've had good luck with this one and the price was reasonable. Guess whenever I decide to get another revolver I might explore a used one, probably a Ruger Sp101 3" .357 Magnum.

For the most part, a .357 snubbie will be a tad larger than it's .38 counterpart.

That is due to the gun having to be stronger, but if money is no object, you can get the high end guns like the S&W 340 PD.

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_764938_-1_757767_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

I've shot one, and shooting .357 Magnum out of a tiny 11.4 ounce gun is NOT fun. It's like Adam's .454 Casul's little brother. Oh, and I'd like to take this opporotunity to remind Adam "fuck you". That .454 is a beautiful gun, but it is not something I'd shoot but once a year.

The .357 out of a snubbie will have a larger muzzle flash and not be as fast as it would out of a 6" barrel because the powder does not have time to burn before the round leaves the barrel. The round will be considerably faster than a .38, but not as fast as it is in CJ's 8" Python.

Energy is also adversely effected by barrel length. The shorter the barrel, the less energy can be obtained by combustion. Check out this graph:



Check out this as well:

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-184612.html

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/38vs357snub.htm

Either the .357 Mag or the .38+P can be effective on bear, depending on your shot placement, and the determination of the bear.

But, I would reccommend nothing smaller than a .44 Magnum against bear.

Good info Matt and something to consider about upgrading to a .357 Magnum (flash, recoil, weight). If anything, CJ's comments have me thinking about another revolver solely for reliability and safety. Not looking exclusively for a bear protection sidearm, I was just curious. I'll have to read the links once I get home as they are blocked here at work.

[Nash B.]

I'd like to see a barrel length vs energy graph with loads maxed out for each barrel length, using increasingly faster powders as the barrels get shorter. I wonder if something like Longshot or HS6 would (safely) beat H110 in .357 out of a 2" barrel.

[CJ]

I'd like to see a barrel length vs energy graph with loads maxed out for each barrel length, using increasingly faster powders as the barrels get shorter. I wonder if something like Longshot or HS6 would (safely) beat H110 in .357 out of a 2" barrel.

Hmm.. that's an interesting study. I have .357's in 2.25", 6", and 8" and could chrono these to find out one day.

[momo]

Hmm.. that's an interesting study. I have .357's in 2.25", 6", and 8" and could chrono these to find out one day.

don't be too impressed he stole that idea from me today at lunch.

[Nash B.]

Borrowed. I borrowed it.

[03trubluGT]

I'd like to see a barrel length vs energy graph with loads maxed out for each barrel length, using increasingly faster powders as the barrels get shorter. I wonder if something like Longshot or HS6 would (safely) beat H110 in .357 out of a 2" barrel.

I really don't think how fast a powder burns will have much of an effect. The problem is the lack of time to build pressure. Also, some energy will be lost in a revolver due the gap between the cylinder and forcing cone.

[Nash B.]

I really don't think how fast a powder burns will have much of an effect. The problem is the lack of time to build pressure.

Yeah, they don't have time to build pressure because the powders typically used in magnum cartridges burn much slower than the powders typically used in their non-magnum counterparts. They're still burning and building pressure (slowly, relatively speaking) as the bullet exits the barrel. The key to maximizing exit velocity is hitting peak pressure for a charge early and maintaining it as the bullet leaves the barrel (force increases, but volume also increases, so pressure ideally remains constant at peak). Slow powders can't do that in a short barrel, fast powders can't do it in a long barrel.

[CJ]

I really don't think how fast a powder burns will have much of an effect. The problem is the lack of time to build pressure. Also, some energy will be lost in a revolver due the gap between the cylinder and forcing cone.

The faster they burn, the faster they achieve optimal pressure. So a faster burning powder would increase velocity in a shorter barrel, whereas the same load would have less velocity in a longer barrel.

[03trubluGT]

Yeah, they don't have time to build pressure because the powders typically used in magnum cartridges burn much slower than the powders typically used in their non-magnum counterparts. They're still burning and building pressure (slowly, relatively speaking) as the bullet exits the barrel. The key to maximizing exit velocity is hitting peak pressure for a charge early and maintaining it as the bullet leaves the barrel (force increases, but volume also increases, so pressure ideally remains constant at peak). Slow powders can't do that in a short barrel, fast powders can't do it in a long barrel.

The faster they burn, the faster they achieve optimal pressure. So a faster burning powder would increase velocity in a shorter barrel, whereas the same load would have less velocity in a longer barrel.

In my mind, I don't see the impact of milliseconds of burn having as big an impact as does the time the round is in a barrel. I tried to do some online research, and can't find much as it relates to pistols.

Found this, but it really doesn't answer the question at hand:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=337051

[03trubluGT]

http://www.frfrogspad.com/intballi.htm

This is a good read.

[Nash B.]

In my mind, I don't see the impact of milliseconds of burn having as big an impact as does the time the round is in a barrel. I tried to do some online research, and can't find much as it relates to pistols.

Found this, but it really doesn't answer the question at hand:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=337051

This one does:

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-146770.html

We're talking about something that accelerates from rest to 1000 fps in less than one third of a millisecond, so the impact of "milliseconds" of burn is pretty significant.

[03trubluGT]

This one does:

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-146770.html

We're talking about something that accelerates from rest to 1000 fps in less than one third of a millisecond, so the impact of "milliseconds" of burn is pretty significant.

That thread seems to support barrel length has more of an effect than does the speed of the powder.

[Bassics]

I'd like to see a barrel length vs energy graph with loads maxed out for each barrel length, using increasingly faster powders as the barrels get shorter. I wonder if something like Longshot or HS6 would (safely) beat H110 in .357 out of a 2" barrel.

That is similar to the data that graph is derived from, although it would be nice to see a powder curve vs weight of projectile.

Reloader 7 is about as slow as you ever want to use in a magnum, and even then it is probably too slow for most bullets.

[CJ]

That thread seems to support barrel length has more of an effect than does the speed of the powder.

It's all about how quickly you can generate the pressure for the velocity you want. Some powders can generate 2x the velocity in the same barrel length as a slower powder, for example.

With a powder change you can make a 3" .357 shoot the same velocity as a 6" .357, problem is peak pressure. Too much and you look like Wile E. Coyote.