Ring of Fire in the Zines

[Jim Watson]

Ol Dave has made the big time.
There is a column on the .357 Ring of Fire in the October Shooting Illustrated.
He sent Richard Mann, the Ammo Editor, a G20 with 5.5" ported barrel and a selection of ammo. Velocity was good, in the Magnum range, looks like the 140 gr bullet is the sweet spot for speed and energy.

No mention of feeding, Mann said he could get 18 rounds in the G20 magazine, but did not say how well they came out. Maybe no news is good news.
No accuracy trials reported.

Mann reported Quickload computed pressures as though they were a direct comparison to measured chamber pressures of other cartridges.

[9x19]

Aside from the one the NRA sends me every month, I haven't held a magazine in at least 10 years, so I didn't know there were any gun rags still being published. I sure hope they have improved since then, but from your report, it doesn't sound like it.

[DaleA]

Thanks for the information. I was one of the lurkers during the 'Ring of Fire' threads we had here.

For a couple of reasons, none of them about the contents of the magazines, I let my subscriptions to 'Guns and Ammo' and 'Shooting Times' expire and when times changed just never renewed them. (Skeeter Skelton was gone by then.) So I appreciate the reference, I would not have found it on my own.

Here's a link to the magazine's article about the 'Ring of Fire'.

https://www.shootingillustrated.com/...-ring-of-fire/

[Jim Watson]

Well, I don't subscribe, but there was one on the counter at the range.

[rock185]

J.W., Thanks for posting this. I'd wondered what became of the ROF cartridge. I've done a bit of 9mm, 38 Super/Super Comp, 9X23 Win. experimentation over the years, and was interested in what might be achieved with the similar ROF cartridge. I'd sure be interested in actual pressures generated. If cartridge, bullet diameter and overall length are near identical to similar cartridges, there's no free lunch as to pressure just because the case has been made longer. Kind of like 9X19mm compared with the 9X21 and .356 TSW cartridges. Some folks believe that these rule beater cartridges are more powerful than 9X19mm at a given pressure just because the case is longer.

That 140 grain load does look like the sweet spot, if pressure is actually<45.000 PSI. I was especially interested in the 125 grain, since 124/125 grains is so common in current 9mm, 38 Super, 9X23 Win. cartridges. The article causes me to recall some tests I did with factory CorBon 125 grain 9mm and .38 Super ammo some years ago. In 5" barrels, the 9mm averaged 1329 fps, the 38 Super 1314 fps. Not all that different than the .357 ROF load listed......

[shurshot]

So it was real... the ROF??? I remember reading those threads and I thought we were all being trolled! It sounded like a hot round.

[JohnKSa]

Originally Posted by Shooting Illustrated Article

Elliot decided to cut some 9 mm Win. Mag. cases to the length of the 10 mm Auto and load them with .357—not .355 (9 mm)—diameter, 140-, 158- and 170-grain bullets.

Shorter case means less case capacity than the parent case--the 9mm Win. Mag.

Originally Posted by Shooting Illustrated Article

Yet, the 9 mm Win. Mag. edges 45,000 psi and 9x23 Win. Mag. bumps 55,000 psi when at peak performance. The .357 Ring of Fire outperforms both, with heavier bullets and less pressure.

That can't be true.

If the ROF outperforms the 9mm Win Mag with the same or less case capacity and out of identical barrel lengths, then it must be operating at higher pressures.

If the ROF is operating at lower pressures than the parent case (9mm Win Mag) it will not perform as well out of identical barrel lengths.

Moreover, when case capacity is reduced and pressure is held constant or reduced, performance will suffer most with bullets at the heavier end of the spectrum since the longer bullets sit deeper in the case for a given OAL and therefore reduce the usable case capacity even more.

The math is simple.

Less case capacity than the parent cartridge with the same or better performance = higher pressure

Heavier bullets than the parent case with the same or better performance = higher pressure

And when we combine the two...

Less case capacity than the parent cartridge + heavier bullets + better performance than the parent cartridge = much higher pressure

[Jim Watson]

But, but, but, it has .357" bullets, not piddling 9mms.
That makes the difference. He said.

[KyJim]

If the ROF outperforms the 9mm Win Mag with the same or less case capacity and out of identical barrel lengths, then it must be operating at higher pressures.

Maybe not. The pressure measured is the peak pressure. The ROF could have less peak pressure but sustained for the entire length of the barrel. That could theoretically result in greater velocity at less peak pressure. However, I think that would be mostly a function of the type of powder and primer.

Disclaimer: I don't have practical experience in this. Just floating an idea.

[briandg]

A lot of hyperbole and a lot of unproven statements. It's possible that the guy managed to cheat death at the hands of an unmerciful god by coming up with a perfect powder and charge that allowed him to perform necromancy. I'd like to see the thing sent through the actual lab rather than just sold based on quickload data. Sure, it seems like a great thing, but I'm keeping my skeptical hat and my BS flag handy.

but I see the question as a simpler one. Can he do it? did it work? does he have a round that will give the performance that he touted and still work reliably in any semiatomatic base on the heavier frame? It appears that he was successful, unless those chronograph reports were lies. It looks like a great pistol, but unless it is actually useful, nobody will use it. It looks to me like it will be a niche gun. Maybe it will sit and moulder like the ten mm did for years, maybe some specialized LE agencies will pick it up.

Everything that is aimed at men if if involves man things is sold with a whole lot of prevarication, exaggeration, hyperbole, and just bad logic. We can go from knowing that something is impossible one minute to calling our mothers with the great news that reality has been re-written a minute later.

[briandg]

It's kind of hard for me to decide between the 140 and 158, given the many conditions. Not going with the 125. I'm curious as to whether the twist rate actually works from 125 to 200, and what will happen when someone inevitably loads it with 110 grain bullets and 296?

[74A95]

Originally Posted by KyJim

Maybe not. The pressure measured is the peak pressure. The ROF could have less peak pressure but sustained for the entire length of the barrel. That could theoretically result in greater velocity at less peak pressure. However, I think that would be mostly a function of the type of powder and primer.

Disclaimer: I don't have practical experience in this. Just floating an idea.

Powder, yes. Primer, not so much.

Slow powders are key for this role, though the best 'slow' powder depends a bit on bullet weight. But selecting the right powder can do wonders for your ballistics by keeping pressure low while maximizing velocity.

FYI, pressure peaks after the bullet has moved only a fraction of an inch. Pressure drops dramatically and quickly as the bullet moves down the bore which significantly increases the space the gas fills.

[Jim Watson]

I'm curious as to whether the twist rate actually works from 125 to 200, and what will happen when someone inevitably loads it with 110 grain bullets and 296?

I don't know his twist rate, but the real .357 Magnum handles that range of bullet weights with no problem.

[Aguila Blanca]

Interesting web site.

Dave announced this project with intentions of putting it into 1911s. The sample gun he sent to the magazine was a Glock. And the guns featured on his site are SCCYs. No 1911s in sight.

He says he'll send interested parties sample ammunition to try in their pistols. I have a 1911 in .38 Super, but I'm totally in the dark as to how my pistol is supposed to chamber sample rounds of this stuff.

There's a link at the upper right of the home page for "New Products." Clicking on that doesn't take you to any information about any products. It leads to a gallery of photos of SCCY guns in ugly paint jobs.

I have to credit Dave with dedication and perseverance, but I remain of the opinion that this concept is not yet ready for prime time.

[74A95]

Originally Posted by briandg

What will happen when someone inevitably loads it with 110 grain bullets and 296?

my guess would be - not much. it's pretty slow powder and i'm not sure you could get enough in to produce a high speed load. Faster powders would probably work better.

[74A95]

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca

He says he'll send interested parties sample ammunition to try in their pistols. I have a 1911 in .38 Super, but I'm totally in the dark as to how my pistol is supposed to chamber sample rounds of this stuff.

A new barrel is required cut for the longer 357 ROF cases. I forget how long they are, but they won't fit in a 38 Super chamber.

[briandg]

It does bother me some that this may confuse some people who may decide to cram .357 magnum loads into it, but in reality, anyone who gets one should be a little better informed and not prone to just winging things.

140 grain xtp with 7.3 grains of power pistol gives 1430 in that data for the ring of fire

140 grain speer with 9.5 will produce 1288 fps. for .357 by alliant.

case lengths are .98 and 1.29 (rof is about .75 of the length of the magnum.)

Do both of those sets of data actually work for quckload? it looks like it might be right. sort of.

[5whiskey]

I'm still skeptical... interesting idea but still skeptical.

[JohnKSa]

Maybe not. The pressure measured is the peak pressure. The ROF could have less peak pressure but sustained for the entire length of the barrel. That could theoretically result in greater velocity at less peak pressure.

True performance comparisons must be based on similar parameters—apples to apples. Obviously even two identical cartridges could perform very differently if tested in differing barrel lengths, or if tested with differing propellants.

It is certainly possible to play around with propellant pressure curves and get a performance boost—although significant boosts of this type are more likely to be seen in rifle length barrels vs. much shorter pistol barrels. However, even if that were the case, a cartridge that benefits from that type of boost is not actually outperforming another similar cartridge UNLESS the second cartridge still can’t match the performance of the boosted cartridge when it gets the benefit of being tested with the same propellant.

The article states that the ROF is a shortened version of the 9mm Win Mag and we know that the COAL of the cartridge is less than the 9mm Win Mag since it will fit in a 10mm magazine. Therefore we know it has less case capacity than the 9mm Win Mag.

Apples to apples, it will NOT outperform the 9mm Win Mag at lower pressure as the article claims. In fact, apples to apples, it will not outperform the 9mm Win Mag at identical pressures. For the ROF with its reduced case capacity to outperform the 9mm Win Mag in an apples to apples comparison it will have to operate at higher pressures.

If it is run at lower pressures as the article claims, then the more capacious parent cartridge will easily outperform it at all bullet weights in apples to apples comparisons. And, in contrast to the claim in the article, the performance deficit will be worst at the heavy bullet end of the scale as that is where the smaller case capacity becomes even more of a handicap.

but I see the question as a simpler one.

The simple question is this:

Given that a shortened version of the 9mm Win Mag has been available since 1996, what does this one provide that isn’t already available?

We know that the claims about lower pressure can’t be true without paying a performance penalty.

We know that higher performance will require higher pressure which is something of a red flag given the already high pressure levels of the parent cartridge.

We know that the claims about heavier bullets don’t make sense.

That leaves the only benefit claim that doesn’t contradict the basic principles of internal ballistics is the one stating that the cartridge is designed to use 0.357” bullets instead of 0.355” bullets.

I expect the rationale for this being a benefit is that .357" bullets might be more likely to be designed to tolerate the higher velocities better. That could be true with the heavier 9mm bullets since they are not designed for high velocities although ironically, heavier bullets tend to be less likely to fail in a given caliber. With the lighter bullets, since this cartridge generally duplicates .357SIG performance, it seems likely that there are already light 9mm bullets that should hold up to these velocities.

[briandg]

John, of course the numbers don't add up. But if the pistol works that is what matters. Does it function and produce enough energy to make the change worth it? Seems really ridiculous to pursue it when sig and 10 mm are available. I know, it does fill an empty spot, a 9 mm magnum that can fit a shorter action and adds another round to magazine capacity, but an empty spot doesn't mean that it need something to fill it. not at all. So far, I have not seen the new camaro for sale in fuschia, that's one empty spot that doesn't need to be filled.

We have several fully capable rounds. highly available. No conversion costs, no changeover costs, no burdens. It leaves the question again," hey, why in heck would I want to spend almost $1,000 and a maybe buck a round for it?"

Any gun magazine writer who has spent decades looking for nice things to say about garbage can make it look great. season shot was announced in 2006 and it was an absolute fraud. it still was praised in the press, even gun magazine sites.

http://www.seasonshot.com/Home.cfm

a

[KyJim]

It is certainly possible to play around with propellant pressure curves ...

That is precisely my point. It may an instance where the statement is literally true but is still deceptive (probably unwittingly).

[JohnKSa]

I know, it does fill an empty spot, a 9 mm magnum that can fit a shorter action and adds another round to magazine capacity, but an empty spot doesn't mean that it need something to fill it. not at all.

That’s just it. There isn’t even an empty spot. The 9x23 Win is squarely in the spot that the ROF is supposed to fill. It was designed to fit the 1911 package and provide higher performance than the 9mm Win Mag.

The guy who set out to design the 9x23 Winchester had a very similar idea—he wanted the capacity of a 9mm with major power factor (back then that was 175 which corresponds to a 125gr bullet at 1400fps) and a round that would fit into commonly sized pistols. He started with the 9mm Win Mag like the ROF designer did. His size constraints drove him to a COAL of about 1.3”—very similar to the ROF.

However, because he understood basic internal ballistics, he knew that shortening a case and then asking for more performance from it would result in higher pressure. Therefore he strengthened the case as part of his design process. So he ended up with a cartridge that would more or less duplicate 9mm Winchester Magnum ballistics in a 1911 sized cartridge—but that had to operate at about 10KPsi higher pressure to achieve that goal.

That means that anyone who wants a non-bottlenecked 9mm that will fit in a 1911 and more or less duplicate .357Mag performance is in luck. That cartridge already exists in the form of the 9x23 Winchester. They may also find some comfort in the fact that the case is specifically designed to handle the inevitably higher pressures required to provide the performance of the parent cartridge in a shorter case.

People who are interested in this topic would probably enjoy reading through the discussions about the ROF on TFL—they go back as far as 2015.

It may an instance where the statement is literally true but is still deceptive (probably unwittingly).

It is a possibility, but quite unlikely. Both because that kind of effect would be pretty minimal in a pistol length barrel, and because the load data provided in the article doesn't suggest anything unusual or proprietary about the propellant.

Of course, even if that turns out to be the case, it wouldn't actually mean that the ROF outperforms the parent cartridges, because with the same propellant the parent cartridge would still retain the advantage. It must because of the limitations of internal ballistics.

[Sharkbite]

But, if the powder is infused with magical fire-fairy dust......

[briandg]

here is something that I just realized. The 9x23 case is obviously supposed to be 23 mm long. the 10mm is supposed to be 25 mm long. Wait a minute. what? He cut them to a longer length?

Elliot decided to cut some 9 mm Win. Mag. cases to the length of the 10 mm Auto and load them with .357—not .355 (9 mm)—

Now we have the idea that the case has a slightly higher capacity. But, does that case capacity increase matter at all? If the OAL isn't adjusted outward, your actual firebox isn't changed at all. Then we are also stuffing 200 grain rounds in where there were only 125s used.

What the heck? what are the oal figures for those things? If they are even longer than the 9x23, won't that make it a bit hard to work with, and maybe, just maybe, cause occasional misfeeds? It just passed confusing and went right into acid trip.

[74A95]

Originally Posted by briandg

here is something that I just realized. The 9x23 case is obviously supposed to be 23 mm long. the 10mm is supposed to be 25 mm long. Wait a minute. what? He cut them to a longer length?

Now we have the idea that the case has a slightly higher capacity. But, does that case capacity increase matter at all? If the OAL isn't adjusted outward, your actual firebox isn't changed at all. Then we are also stuffing 200 grain rounds in where there were only 125s used.

What the heck? what are the oal figures for those things? If they are even longer than the 9x23, won't that make it a bit hard to work with, and maybe, just maybe, cause occasional misfeeds? It just passed confusing and went right into acid trip.

Overall length is limited by what will fit in the magazine. With these cartridges, 357 ROF and 9X23 Winchester, designed to fit in a 10mm or 38 Super magazine, OAL is not going to exceed 1.300" (the OAL of the 9X23), and in some instances that will be too long. 1.300" rounds won't fit properly in my 38 Super magazines without rubbing the front wall.

A more realistic OAL will be 1.280" or perhaps shorter, depending on the bullet nose profile. I'm not sure how long the round can be and still fit in the Glock magazine. In either case, magazine fit limits how long they can be loaded.