Why does Ruger twist .357 Mags differently?

[BluRidgDav]

Happened to notice that Ruger uses different twist rates in their .357 Mag guns.

These guns use 1-in-16" rifling: LCR, LCRx, SP101, Blackhawk, Vaquero, and 77/357.

While the GP100 and Redhawk use a 1-in-18.75" twist.

Wonder why ???

[T. O'Heir]

Explained here below the list.
http://guntoters.com/blog/2016/07/24...ut-the-barrel/

[Radny97]

Very helpful link. Guess I’ll be looking for lighter bullets to get the best accuracy from my larger 1-18 3/4 twist revolvers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UncleEd]

At practical handgun distances and velocities
does it really matter?

I suppose for long distance shooting by hunters,
or perhaps long range (for handguns that is)
competition shooters, it might.

But I've never cared despite the historic
differences between Colt and Smith and
now Ruger barrel twist rates.

And the good angels did invent adjustable
sights.

[dhom]

My GP100 loves 158 JHP noslers, actually those are the most accurate bullets in that revolver. Next in line for accuracy are 170 gr Keith style SWC consistently going 4" @ 100 yds. I am using a 6" GP100 with a 3 minute red dot sight.

[johnwilliamson062]

I've spoken to several gunsmiths concerning rifle accuracy and barrel work. Their consensus was almost any quality barrel blank was sufficient. The key was work at chamber and crown. In fact it was claimed one could eliminate the rifling over most of the length of the barrel without much effect.

Many black powder rifles have pitted barrels and eroded rifling towards chamber, but shoot great.

[FrankenMauser]

I have no idea why Ruger does it.

In fact it was claimed one could eliminate the rifling over most of the length of the barrel without much effect.

Many black powder rifles have pitted barrels and eroded rifling towards chamber, but shoot great.

My own experience with a few "fast twist" barrels has lead me to believe that such might be beneficial.
Progressive twist, gradient twist, increasing twist, gain twist -- whatever one wants to call it -- would likely be easier on bullets in certain applications.

The most prominent offenders in my testing were 1:20" twist .444 Marlin barrels. At one time, I had about 35 recovered bullets from those barrels that very clearly showed that they were 'skidding' across the rifling before finally biting and spinning properly. (Copper or brass jacketed, as well as cast bullets -- all sized for the barrels.) The heavier the bullet, the more pronounced the markings.

Yet, recovered bullets from the exact same loads showed no sign of the 'skidding' in two 1:38" twist barrels.

I've seen similar, albeit less pronounced markings on bullets from several other barrels, including: 1:7" twist .22 caliber, and 1:9" twist 6mm.

At least for .444 Marlin, that was the icing on the cake to convince me that 1:20" is too fast of a twist for the cartridge. The math (stability calculations) had already shown me that it was excessive, since a bullet in excess of 450 gr should be stable at velocities as low as 1,200 fps; but such a bullet could not even be loaded, cycled through the action, or chambered in the rifles with those 1:20" twist barrels.


With 'standard' twist rates, conventional rates seem to be fine. But if one wants to really spin something around, I think gain twist is definitely the better option.