357 Ring Of Fire Update

[mavracer]

I wonder how many developers of the cartridges in the pic above had to listen to the same rhetoric from the naysayers.

The rhetoric isn't coming from the naysayers here and for that matter most of the cartridges developed over the last 50 years, it has come from the developers who reinvent the wheel.

Bottom line 357 ring of fire = 9X23 Winchester ish case loaded with .357 diameter bullets to unknown pressure (probably near saami spec proof loads for 9X23).

As people have pointed out.
Guns will survive proof loads at least for a few rounds.

[45_auto]

Original Ring of Foolishness thread is here:

https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=566062

Mavracer summed it up best:

Bottom line 357 ring of fire = 9X23 Winchester ish case loaded with .357 diameter bullets to unknown pressure (probably near saami spec proof loads for 9X23).

As people have pointed out.
Guns will survive proof loads at least for a few rounds.

[JohnKSa]

I wonder how many developers of the cartridges in the pic above had to listen to the same rhetoric from the naysayers.

You need to read the original thread for context.

https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=566062

By the way, some of what you're calling "naysaying" is more of an attempt to correct misconceptions/errors by the OP and to insure that the OP isn't going to blow up his gun and fingers.

For example, the OP provides ballistics for a 200gr bullet loading while at the same time stating that the new cartridge is supposed to compete with .357Mag loadings from major manufacturers. The facts are that: 1. The 200gr loading he provides does not compete with .357Mag loadings in that bullet weight because they exceed his ballistics by up to 300fps. and 2. The only 200gr .357Mag loadings are not from major manufacturers, they are from the boutique ammo makers.

If you read the original thread, it rapidly becomes obvious that nearly all the reasons that the OP provides as rationale for the development of the cartridge were based on incorrect information.

Also, in the original thread the OP discusses using standard pressure signs to insure pressures are safe. Problem is that pressure signs in straight-wall pistol cartridges often do not show up before the gun blows.

Here's a comment from John Linebaugh.

http://www.customsixguns.com/writing...ht_bullets.htm

“Straight cases handle pressure differently than bottle-neck cartridges and often show no excessive pressure signs. We have blown a few guns up here, on purpose, and in all instances upon recovery of the cylinder fragments and case remains, the primer has shown normal pressure. Pressures in these instances have run from 70,000 to over 100,000 psi in our estimation. Do not depend on case pressure signs for danger signs in a sixgun. In most cases the first sign of high pressure you will have, other than excessive recoil and blast, is a bulged cylinder or cracked bolt notch.”

[Jim Watson]

I wonder how many developers of the cartridges in the pic above had to listen to the same rhetoric from the naysayers.

I daresay the developers of those cartridges were not using Youtube as their ballistics laboratory.

[Davelliott]

Thanks guys,
As I've noted before, I'm disabled...arthritis is wreaking havoc ohms...so I'm trying to do this while I still can...
The recoil is exaggerated somewhat due to pain...but being a Marine, I'll fight through it best I can.
I thought the 40 is a good fit between the 9 and 45...but I'd like something that fits better between the 9 and 10mm...with higher capacity than the 10mm.
As far as recoil goes, I shot the 29 with factory 180 JHP also...and my cartridges don't feel any stiffer...but all that's based on the individual.
I do have a US Patent pending, but I do not have an international patent yet...and being a world wide web...I will not just throw it out there.
As far as pressures, if you don't have a program that accounts for bore differences, bullet differences and powder from lot to lot, you will have no idea to pressures...that's one reason all reloading manuals give you a max charge and a suggested minimum to start...it still comes down to you, the reloader, to take proper precautions.
Some videos you will never see are when the charges aren't enough to cycle the slide...the ones you do see are after I have worked up the charges to function properly.
Because of the barrel modification, velocities have increased without primers flow, or flattening...sometimes the brass doesn't even expand fully...
Those who have shot it range in age from 59 down to 10 years old...and all have been surprised and pleased with it.
Maybe one day, you'll get one, or find someone who has one and you'll see for yourself...afterall, the 9x23, 9x25 Dillon and every other cartridge on the market today was once a wildcat concept.
Oh, by the way, I did get 1385 fps with 147 JHP I tried for grins and giggles. Maybe I'll do it again later with more power...there's room for it...

[Oysterboy]

The chart I posted was to show how many pistol cartridges are out there and that there can't be anything new.

I just found a complete list and there ain't gonna be anything new for sure. It surprised me at how many 355 to 357 calibers are out there.

Stop before you blow it up.

http://www.ballistics101.com/handgun_calibers_list.php

[Model12Win]

I'll be looking forward to the new Glock chambered in .357 ROF.

NOT!

Just too many choices in 9mm/.357/.356/.355 to ever make this worthwhile and from the sound of it, you're no ballistician and you need to call it quits before your test gun does and explodes on you.

[Sequins]

Regardless of how good an idea it is I was interested in the last thread and in this one. I'll be interested to see the specs once the patent clears in particular!

"The same but better" is extremely appealing, but it's also why I think we all doubt this project. If it could just be better at no cost it seems like the original would just he better to me.

I hope you never kaboom Dave, work hard and work safe!

[9x19]

960 Rowland by any other name?

[Radny97]

Why all the haters? This group should be encouraging wildcat cartridge development, not discouraging it. I'm on the original thread too and I am fully aware of all the very legitimate and serious concerns that were raised about properly ensuring that the pressure of the cartridge is appropriately measured and that any risks taken are not reckless. That's a valuable service rendered by this group, to help the OP proceed in his efforts with better info and caution.

There's been no indication by the OP hasn't taken those criticisms to heart and that he had taken measures to minimize the pressure issues. And we should continue to warn and caution as he is kind enough to report to us on his progress. He has been polite and non-confrontational to all the doubters.

For those who think that this type of cartridge has been tried before, that's true. And those prior cartridges didn't catch on. Will this one be a commercial success? Unlikely but there is a slim possibility. When the iPad first came out I thought it was the stupidest idea I had ever seen. There were lots of satires about it being useless. (The Onion did a hilarious video) and tablet computers had been tried several times before and flopped every time. But we were all wrong and now most of us, including myself, have one. Entrepreneurship and experimentation are part of what made America great.

So IMHO we should be encouraging this project while at the same time helping to warn about the risks of experimentation and help the OP make plans within his means to mitigate those risks. We should also warn of the unlikeliness if success but still encourage his efforts. You never know what might catch on.

[mavracer]

Why all the haters?

So discouraging some one from doing something stupid and keeping them from hurting themselves or others is hate? It would seem to me quite the opposite that encouraging Dave to keep on when he doesn't have a clue as to what kind of pressure he's operating at is pure hate.

There's been no indication by the OP hasn't taken those criticisms to heart and that he had taken measures to minimize the pressure issues.

He's made more than enough comments to show his ignorance as to pressure concerns.

He has been polite and non-confrontational to all the doubters.

There's been a lot of passive aggressive comments.

Look it's not really difficult to understand even without exact diminutions. We know OAL is short enough to work in a large frame Glock and we know it's not bottlenecked so it's pretty easy to guess as to a maximum case capacity there is to work with. Given that and a good knowledge of pressure associated with rounds of similar capacity it's not hard to extrapolate what kind of pressure it takes to do what OP is doing.

Ignoring that fact is well.... Ignorant

[Oysterboy]

Did he say it was a 9x23 casing? There's only so much you can do with a 9x23 casing.

Look at the 9x23 Winchester which is a hot round.

[Radny97]

Discouraging someone from taking unwise risks is not hate. But calling their project 'stupid' is. See the difference?

[JohnKSa]

But calling their project 'stupid' is.

He didn't say that the project is stupid. His comment was about trying to discourage someone from doing something stupid, i.e. blowing up a gun and possibly causing injury.

Trying to come up with a new cartridge isn't a stupid project. But running hot loads without any established load data and without knowing what the pressure is definitely isn't wise.

[mavracer]

Did he say it was a 9x23 casing?

No, he's just stated that it's not bottlenecked and he's using a Glock 10mm so OAL can't be much over 1.275.
Case length isn't going to matter as 9x19 and 9x23 have similar capacity if they are loaded to the same OAL.

[rock185]

mavracer, you are correct. If the cases are not bottlenecked, and OAL cannot be more that about .275" or so as to fit in large frame Glocks and 1911s,etc., case length doesn't matter. Seated to the same overall length and using the same bullet weight and powder charge, pressure will be the same whether the case is 19mm, 21mm, 21.5mm, 23mm,or whatever. IIRC Major George Nonte experimented with, and others since have commented on, chambering 9mm semi-autos in 38 Super, then seating the bullets deeply to achieve the same overall length as the 9X19mm so as to fit in the 9mm magazine and function in the 9mm size actions. This, believing that because the case says 38 Super they are somehow achieving ballistic performance exceeding 9X19mm. Not so of course.

Anyway, Mr. Elliot and I have corresponded reference some experimenting I did with Col. Cooper's "Super 9" cartridge years ago. I confess that while still skeptical, I remain interested as to where Mr. Elliot's efforts may lead. I sure can't predict. After all, I'm the guy who back in the mid '80s was sure that some weird plastic pistol, Glock I think it was called, would never be a success

[stagpanther]

I converted a 20 sf to 9 x 25 dillon and have actually grown to prefer it over the 10--bit less recoil and I seem to be able to get better accuracy out of it.It sends those .355 bullets out screaming fast and I actually like the funky neck-down case.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Radny97

Why all the haters? This group should be encouraging wildcat cartridge development, not discouraging it.

But a wildcat cartridge is supposed to fill a need (or a niche) that hasn't already been filled. I'm still having a very hard time seeing how this "new" cartridge fills any spot that hasn't already been occupied by .38 Super or 9x23. Since there are already so many cartridges that this overlaps, I find myself wondering how Dave expects to get a patent on it.

Everyone should pursue their dream, but some dreams don't invite others along for the ride.

[Oysterboy]

The impression I got here was that he took an existing cartridge and overload it.

[Jim Watson]

But he has a .357" bullet instead of an ordinary 9mm.

[JohnKSa]

Based on this thread and the OP's statements in the original ROF thread, the design goals are:

1. Cartridge must operate via a conversion barrel in currently available autopistol platforms sized for the .45ACP/10mm.
2. Cartridge should be suitable for concealed carry.
3. Cartridge must duplicate the ballistics of factory .357Mag loadings from major manufacturers in bullet weights from 140gr to 170gr. (OP specifically states it is to be more powerful than .357SIG, .38Super or 9x23)
4. Cartridge must use .357", not .355" bullets.
5. Cartridge must use a straight-walled (not bottlenecked) cartridge so that the nominal capacity of the resulting firearm is the same as it would be in a 9mm pistol of roughly the same size.

Requirement 1 limits the ROF overall length to about 1.3" which is, not coincidentally, the maximum COAL of the 9x23. Not coincidentally because the 9x23 was designed to operate in 1911/10mm platforms.

Requirement 3 demands (among other things) that the ROF must outperform 9x23. Since the 9x23 is operating at up to 55,000psi with bullet diameters within a couple of thousandths of the ROF and a COAL that is the same, or longer than the ROF, the only way for the ROF to outperform the 9x23 would be to operate above 55,000psi. Currently the only handgun rounds operating above that pressure level are the .221 Remington Fireball, the .454 Casull, the .460S&W Magnum and the .500S&W Magnum. Note that none of those cartridges are designed for or used in autopistols, nor are they sized to fit in any handgun remotely suitable for concealed carry (Requirement 2).

Conclusion 1: The ROF must operate at pressures above 55,000psi to achieve the design goals.

Conclusion 2: If the ROF operates at safe pressures it can not improve on 9x23 performance.

Conclusion 3: The ROF design requirements can not be achieved at safe pressures.

[TMD]

Conclusion 4: Greatest troll ever.

[Davelliott]

Thanks guys for your support.
Just wanted to make another report concerning signs of pressure...
The last set of 250 rounds fired...the cartridge brass didn't even expand enough not to slide back into the chamber.
When most other cartridges like 40, 10, and 45 are fired, they expand slightly and usually require full length resizing before reloading...so I don't think I am at top end yet...

[Oysterboy]

And what brass are you using?

[JohnKSa]

Just wanted to make another report concerning signs of pressure...

There's no need for that kind of report. It's clear what the pressure must be from your other statements.

Given two cases with essentially equivalent capacities and shooting essentially the same diameter and weight bullets, if one of them outperforms the other, then the one that performs better must be running at higher pressure.

We know that the 9x23 and the ROF have to be essentially equivalent in terms of case capacity because they're both more or less straight-walled cartridges of the same COAL and shooting the same bullet sizes and weights. Therefore if the ROF outperforms the 9x23 (one of your stated design requirements) it must be running at higher pressure than the 9x23. Since we know the pressure of the 9x23 is 55,000psi, we know that the ROF must be running higher than 55,000psi to meet the design requirements.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but anyone who needs that explained to them has no business reloading, let alone trying to develop new cartridges.