9mm revolvers ? - Page 8

JimCunn · April 11, 2019, 03:17 AM

", so who knows whether it was a 125 grain or a 135 grain.".

I know.
It was 135gr. From memory, I think the velocity was reported as about 997 fps, but don't hold me to that. I have no doubt those results will turn up again after I quit looking for them. You know how that goes :-)

I have no interest in high speed, light weight loads because I can't shoot them in my titanium cylinders (to inhibit cylinder face erosion). I also don't shoot any 9mm lighter than 147gr. The rounds that I've seen that were of interest to me ranged from roughly 946 fps to about 1070 fps in a 1-7/8" barrel (generally about 290 to 340 ft-lbs). That would be about 3.5" breech to muzzle.

As an aside, I am probably going to cut one of my spare titanium cylinders for moon clips so I can share rounds with my Micro .380 while still retaining the ability to shoot .38Sp and .357 Magnum in it without using the moonclips. With the .380 ammo limited to a max weight of 95-100 gr, I would also be limited to very low velocity .380 because of the erosion potential.

74A95 · April 11, 2019, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimCunn

", so who knows whether it was a 125 grain or a 135 grain.".

I know.
It was 135gr. From memory, I think the velocity was reported as about 997 fps, but don't hold me to that. I have no doubt those results will turn up again after I quit looking for them. You know how that goes :-)

Jim,

Now you're saying the speed was 997 fps? But your post said the velocity was 1,109fps. Make up your mind.

You are new to this forum, and perhaps new to gun forums. Here's some advice: always cite your resources, you know, just like if you were writing a science paper. That way we can check the information and make sure the source is legitimate (some sources are shady at best) so it doesn't look like you're fabricating information from thin air, which is kind of how it looks now.

JimCunn · April 11, 2019, 10:11 AM

I have a science paper in peer review at the moment, so am familiar with that procedure.

I suspect that you and I were referring to different posts - because I didn't quote the velocity in every case, and I assumed you were thinking about one in which I didn't (135gr .357 Mag at 298 ft-lbs - and yes, I realize that should be written as lb-ft).

Frankly, it doesn't seem that this forum usually requires or typically sees the same reference requirements as the research journals. On an entertainment forum such as this, I have no intention of spending five or six hours for each post going back and researching original references for stuff that I have in memory. As far as your thinking I am making stuff up, be my guest - I encourage you to think whatever you wish. Don't worry about it, I'm neither sensitive, nor thin-skinned.

HighValleyRanch · April 11, 2019, 10:20 AM

Quote:

135gr .357 Mag at 298 ft-lbs

that wimpy .357 is more like in .38 special +P realm!

74A95 · April 11, 2019, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimCunn

I have a science paper in peer review at the moment, so am familiar with that procedure.

I suspect that you and I were referring to different posts - because I didn't quote the velocity in every case, and I assumed you were thinking about one in which I didn't (135gr .357 Mag at 298 ft-lbs - and yes, I realize that should be written as lb-ft).

Frankly, it doesn't seem that this forum usually requires or typically sees the same reference requirements as the research journals. On an entertainment forum such as this, I have no intention of spending five or six hours for each post going back and researching original references for stuff that I have in memory. As far as your thinking I am making stuff up, be my guest - I encourage you to think whatever you wish. Don't worry about it, I'm neither sensitive, nor thin-skinned.

See post 158.

Human memories suck. The details matter whenever discussing technical information. Certainly you've learned that? It applies here just like it does in science, because, like science, you're accountable for everything you write. And if you can't be counted on as a reliable source, no one will believe you in future posts.

I image that the founder and staff of this forum would disagree that this is a entertainment forum. Instead, they might argue that this forum is intended to exchange ideas and information.

By the way, ft-lb is acceptable. https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/A...ms-d_1622.html

TruthTellers · April 11, 2019, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HighValleyRanch

Round, round, round, here we go....

I already posted way back in this thread somewhere:
.357 BB 180 grain @ 1246, 1250 out of 1/7/8 LCR = 625 ft pounds muzzle energy.
No one yet has posted a 9mm that tops that.

Does it matter if the round is expensive or boutique or there is only one manufacturer that this hot a .357 is available? No, not really, because it means that is the highest potential out of a short barrel revolver with .357 blowing away the usual myth that .357 is neutered out of a short barrel. Will I shoot it all day, NO, but it is available and I have done it. I don't need to practice with it, I just need to know the difference in the point of impact. Am I worried about followup times? No, not with only five rounds I want to make every shot count. Anyways, the recoil is stout but the muzzle rise was not vertical, so the time difference is fractional.
If you really need to practice weekend after weekend with your carry loads, you better get some professional instruction on marksmanship! That's my answer to the excuse for cost of ammo!

This is my woods load, not my SD carry.

I suggest that instead of just googling, you get out to the range yourself with a chronograph. From your posts about your expertise, it sounds like you should be able to afford one.

No 9mm can top that, the question I have asked and no one seems capable of answering is how is 180 grain BB better for carrying in an LCR for EDC vs a 115 or 124 grain 9mm at 1100 fps?

Also, no one has produced any citations that firearm defense experts have recommended using .357 with bullets that weigh 158, 180, or 200 grains. When I read what guys like Mas Ayoob, Chuck Hawks, etc. say on .357, they say use 110-135 grain bullets and specifically to NOT use 158 or heavier bullets for self defense.

The question of whether .357 is more powerful than 9mm isn't in question as there are boutique loads that exceed 9mm, the question is what effect on target do those super .357 Mag do that 9mm doesn't in regards to self defense in a snub revolver in civilization. For a woods gun, the 180 grain BB is appropriate.

stinkeypete · April 11, 2019, 12:27 PM

Someone here tipped me off. They said “google ‘shooting with hobie .38” and I did.

First on the list. Boom. Go read it.

One of my prize possessions is the book “complete guide to hand loading, 3rd ed.” By Phillip b. Sharpe (1953).

The physics of “stuff goes bang, bullet goes whoosh” hasn’t changed since Sir Isaac Newton.

Sharpe lists loading data from various powder manufacturers.

An example for cross-reference is 158 g. Lead (6 inch barrel) with max loadings of
4.3 g bullseye 1010 FPS 20,000 pressure
6.6 g unique 1130 FPS 20,900 pressure.
Sharpe states “Do not load maximum charges recommended below for light frame revolvers in this caliber.”
There are published loads up to 35,000 for 2400 powder pushing a 146 g bullet at 1511 FPS from the powder manufacturer.

Heaviest bullet listed for 9mm Luger listed is 127 g bullet, 4.8 g bullseye 1120 FPS and “working pressure is around 30,000 pounds to the square inch. Light loads usually fail to operate the mechanism but can be used with excellent success as a single shot.”

The above is load data from 1953.

Fast forward to 2001.
158 grain lead .38 special max load
3.6 g bullseye 1550 psi (910 FPS test barrel not described)
4.3 g unique 1600 psi (920 FPS barrel unknown)

You can see that in 2001 data the amount of gunpowder for the same bullet recommended by the powder manufacturers (complied in “modern reloading” by Richard Lee) was reduced by .7 grains and 2.3 g for bullseye and unique respectively.

Closest I can find for 9mm is 125 g lead, 4.9 g bullseye 32100 psi.

The load for the 9mm has increased slightly from 1953 to 2000.

I remember 2000 like it was yesterday.

Alliant published online as of today:
38 special 158g bullet 3.5 g bullseye.
In 1953:4.3 g.
2000:3.6
2019:3.5

Unique is currently listed by alliant as 158g lswc at 4.7 g.
1953: 6.6 g
2000: 4.3 g
2019: 4.7 g
Huh. What the ... dag nabbit... no wonder people get confused by this stuff.

There isn’t data for 9mm cast bullets anymore, but 124 Jhp is now listed at 4.4 g bullseye.
4.8 to 4.9 to 4.4 but cast turned in to jacketed but...

I’ve got old reloading manuals. They confirm what Hobie reported on his blog about “accepted” 38 special velocities having decreased since “back in the day”.

Remember, back in the day the S&W model 19 was like the Glock 19 today. .38 was ubiquitous. (Everywhere, common)

Crap like this is why I am entertaining a ”.357 Magnum” kit gun. The max loads for .357 are higher than anything here.

I don’t see what magic gun makers could do to make two cylinders out of tempered steel of such vastly different strength that any of the loads for .38 would be unsafe in a revolver rated for .357 magnum.

I can definitely see that some frames would not do well at all under heavy loads.

This is why I like a .357 magnum revolver over a .38... I can reload ammunition from cat-sneeze up to pretty darned stout .38 ++p and not need to worry or justify discussing my loads in public as I put the powder in a bit of brass with a different headstamp and suddenly all is bright and legal.

I’m really skeptical that any cylinder strong enough to handle 9mm pressure can’t handle that pressure from brass with a different headstamp, but even further...

I do believe that the saami specs expect a 9mm cartridge to be fired in a semi auto barrel, not a cylinder.

Wondering about cylinder strength... but also noting that you can get cowboy loads of .38 (light) all the way up to Beefalo Boi hunting rounds (heavy) while purchased 9mm rounds are all designed to operated the recoil spring of a 9mm so choices are limited from “stout” to “heavy”

Thanks to all for this interesting thread. Without it, I would never have cracked my reloading manuals and investigated this historical trend in .38 loading.

Y’all know not to use any of my data for handloads without double checking them, triple checking, and working up slowly, right?

Right?

“Play safe, make good choices!” - my Mom

JimCunn · April 11, 2019, 01:02 PM

"By the way, ft-lb is acceptable".

As you know, one is a scalar, the other a vector. They measure different things.

What do you guys think about using .380 acp in a .357 Magnum?

reddog81 · April 11, 2019, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HighValleyRanch

This thread is like being on a Merry-go-round!

I think the Merry-go-round has left the tracks and is tumbling into oblivion.

At this point most police departments across country and the US Military recognize that 9mm is sufficient for use in their guns and should be considered am appropriate self defense round

IMO arguing that 9mm is more powerful than .357 seems silly, but apparently there are people who will try and make the case.

Choosing between them is a personal decision. Research the differences and choose what fits you the best. There are plenty of .38 Special rounds, 9mm rounds and/or .357 rounds that have been used in self defense situations successfully. No one on the internet is going to be able to tell you what the best option is in your situation.

For some people the $5 difference in ammo is of little concern. For some people the use of moonclips is a deal breaker. For some people the ability to shoot .38 Special or .357 is important.

JimCunn · April 11, 2019, 01:40 PM

"At this point most police departments across country and the US Military recognize that 9mm is sufficient for use in their guns and should be considered am appropriate self defense round"

And around the world too. Good post; all these rounds are satisfactory.

stinkeypete · April 11, 2019, 02:05 PM

Jim, you can maybe shoot .380 in a .357... but only for shooting at Sputnik.

Max diameter for .380 is .374” while chamber size is greater than .379. Its gonna rattle around a bit!

Don’t tell me you can fix it with duct tape

74A95 · April 11, 2019, 02:22 PM

And a 380 will fall into the cylinder - the 380 is rimless. You need a moonclip to hold it in place.

JimCunn · April 11, 2019, 02:44 PM

"You need a moonclip to hold it in place".

No kidding, Sherlock.
I noticed that about 60 years ago :-)

I just tried one for fit. Rattle's not all that bad (about three thousandths clearance, each side), though I wouldn't think you could resize the case all that many times before it split.

TruthTellers · April 12, 2019, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimCunn

"By the way, ft-lb is acceptable".

As you know, one is a scalar, the other a vector. They measure different things.

What do you guys think about using .380 acp in a .357 Magnum?

If you can find a .357 that uses moonclips and you modified the moon clip, I think it can be done and done safely.

Accuracy would likely be garbage, but I don't want to definitively say that as I've yet to see .380 shot from a .357 revolver other than the Phillips & Rodgers M47.

JimCunn · April 12, 2019, 07:04 AM

"If you can find a .357 that uses moonclips and you modified the moon clip, I think it can be done and done safely".

I already have an extra .357 titanium cylinder for my 637-2 (several actually) Would just need to cut it and the extractor for moonclips. I've a hunch that accuracy would be mediocre, but better than me.
This is something I'd do for a lark, not serious use (plus, it would also accept moonclips for rimmed .38/.357

wild cat mccane · April 12, 2019, 07:33 AM

As the person that first said commercial 9mm equals or outperform most commercial 357 and that meplat in 357 doesn't matter, documenting both...

I love we're on page 8.

Follow up.

Someone made an excellent point about lighter 357 110 and 125 gr being the standard self defense weights. This is accurate and shouldn't go unnoticed when people start talking about 357 can go heavier than 9mm. Okay. Now go look at the 125gr 357 tests. Those do perform well. Also note, the go to light weight round is the Remington 125gr SJHP. It is known to eat forcing cones--yep even on your improved 686 and impossible to destroy GP100.

Also, some of these BB and Underwood hot loads being thrown around as evidence of common 357 superiority are "Ruger only" loads. Someone correct me on this, but I believe that means for the frame of the GP100/Redhawk. It doesn't include SP101. It certainly isn't J frame material.

HighValleyRanch · April 12, 2019, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Also, some of these BB and Underwood hot loads being thrown around as evidence of common 357 superiority are "Ruger only" loads. Someone correct me on this, but I believe that means for the frame of the GP100/Redhawk. It doesn't include SP101. It certainly isn't J frame material.

No, this is not true. The BB 180 grain .357 outdoorsman can be shot in any good quality revolver including the LCR, Smith J frames,K, L frames, SP101, and many more. You might be thinking about the hotter .45 Colt loads. Go to their website and see this for yourself.

reddog81 · April 12, 2019, 10:02 AM

I don't understand how .357 can be considered excessive and at the same time argue that 9mm is better because it is more powerful.

People use the argument that the self defense experts recommend 110 to 125 grain .357 ammo for self defense, 9mm has bullets in that weight range, therefore 9mm is just as good as .357 ammo! When I look at the at the Lucky Gunner tables the results I see show that .357 from a 2” barrel outperforms 9mm from a 3.5” barrel when comparing similar weight bullets from the same manufacturers time and time again. There are a couple of weak rounds in .357 such as the Speer 135 GD Short Barrel and some of the Remington 125 grain options could be cherry picked and compared to 9mm ammo and then you can proclaim 9mm is the winner.

Something that shoots .38 Special and .357 is much more versatile than a 9mm but somehow that is discounted because .357 158 grain and heavier bullets are intended for hunting and not self defense. I don’t understand how having the option to use bullets for self defense in the woods or on the streets is somehow a bad thing. The BB 180 grain bullets have velocities listed from a 3” S&W J Frame at 1302 FPS and nowhere is it mentioned this a Ruger only load. Their 9mm +P 147 grain hard cast loads top out at 1100 FPS and this is from full size guns.

Lohman446 · April 12, 2019, 10:07 AM

Has anyone actually made the argument that there is a ballistic advantage to the 9MM or are "we" decimating a straw man?

reddog81 · April 12, 2019, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lohman446

Has anyone actually made the argument that there is a ballistic advantage to the 9MM or are "we" decimating a straw man?

Post #191 claims 9mm equals or "outpreforms" most .357 rounds.

Dave T · April 12, 2019, 10:46 AM

Quote:

"At this point most police departments across country and the US Military recognize that 9mm is sufficient for use in their guns and should be considered am appropriate self defense round"

And around the world too.

Ah yes! The coronation of the mighty 9mm. It has now been declared the equal to or better than the formally mighty 357 Magnum.

One can only wonder how long it will be before the power of the 44 Magnum is in question, superseded by the royal 9mm. After all, I have read in several of the "Bear Gun" threads that the 9mm is adequate as a carry gun in bear country.

With tongue firmly planted in cheek,
Dave

**44 AMP** · April 12, 2019, 11:13 AM

I do wonder, if 9mm from a revolver (snub nose only, apparently) is the bees knees, and the best thing since canned beer, sliced bread and girls who smell good, why did the 9mm Federal go bust???

JimCunn · April 12, 2019, 11:26 AM

Dunno if it''s the bee''s knees, but it is convenient, fast to reload, and allows ammo sharing with the vast majority of carry semi-autos.

Carmady · April 12, 2019, 12:03 PM

If you're a brass rat you'll probably find over a thousand 9mm casings for every .38 SPL.

Lohman446 · April 12, 2019, 12:13 PM

Quote:

If you're a brass rat you'll probably find over a thousand 9mm casings for every .38 SPL.

Because reloaders with revolvers don't have to chase their brass. They dump it into their collection container.

April 11, 2019, 03:17 AM	#176
JimCunn Senior Member Join Date: April 6, 2019 Posts: 125	", so who knows whether it was a 125 grain or a 135 grain.". I know. It was 135gr. From memory, I think the velocity was reported as about 997 fps, but don't hold me to that. I have no doubt those results will turn up again after I quit looking for them. You know how that goes :-) I have no interest in high speed, light weight loads because I can't shoot them in my titanium cylinders (to inhibit cylinder face erosion). I also don't shoot any 9mm lighter than 147gr. The rounds that I've seen that were of interest to me ranged from roughly 946 fps to about 1070 fps in a 1-7/8" barrel (generally about 290 to 340 ft-lbs). That would be about 3.5" breech to muzzle. As an aside, I am probably going to cut one of my spare titanium cylinders for moon clips so I can share rounds with my Micro .380 while still retaining the ability to shoot .38Sp and .357 Magnum in it without using the moonclips. With the .380 ammo limited to a max weight of 95-100 gr, I would also be limited to very low velocity .380 because of the erosion potential. Last edited by JimCunn; April 11, 2019 at 04:05 AM.

April 11, 2019, 12:27 PM	#182
stinkeypete Senior Member Join Date: July 22, 2010 Location: Madison, Wisconsin Posts: 1,292	I can’t find the post but... Someone here tipped me off. They said “google ‘shooting with hobie .38” and I did. First on the list. Boom. Go read it. One of my prize possessions is the book “complete guide to hand loading, 3rd ed.” By Phillip b. Sharpe (1953). The physics of “stuff goes bang, bullet goes whoosh” hasn’t changed since Sir Isaac Newton. Sharpe lists loading data from various powder manufacturers. An example for cross-reference is 158 g. Lead (6 inch barrel) with max loadings of 4.3 g bullseye 1010 FPS 20,000 pressure 6.6 g unique 1130 FPS 20,900 pressure. Sharpe states “Do not load maximum charges recommended below for light frame revolvers in this caliber.” There are published loads up to 35,000 for 2400 powder pushing a 146 g bullet at 1511 FPS from the powder manufacturer. Heaviest bullet listed for 9mm Luger listed is 127 g bullet, 4.8 g bullseye 1120 FPS and “working pressure is around 30,000 pounds to the square inch. Light loads usually fail to operate the mechanism but can be used with excellent success as a single shot.” The above is load data from 1953. Fast forward to 2001. 158 grain lead .38 special max load 3.6 g bullseye 1550 psi (910 FPS test barrel not described) 4.3 g unique 1600 psi (920 FPS barrel unknown) You can see that in 2001 data the amount of gunpowder for the same bullet recommended by the powder manufacturers (complied in “modern reloading” by Richard Lee) was reduced by .7 grains and 2.3 g for bullseye and unique respectively. Closest I can find for 9mm is 125 g lead, 4.9 g bullseye 32100 psi. The load for the 9mm has increased slightly from 1953 to 2000. I remember 2000 like it was yesterday. Alliant published online as of today: 38 special 158g bullet 3.5 g bullseye. In 1953:4.3 g. 2000:3.6 2019:3.5 Unique is currently listed by alliant as 158g lswc at 4.7 g. 1953: 6.6 g 2000: 4.3 g 2019: 4.7 g Huh. What the ... dag nabbit... no wonder people get confused by this stuff. There isn’t data for 9mm cast bullets anymore, but 124 Jhp is now listed at 4.4 g bullseye. 4.8 to 4.9 to 4.4 but cast turned in to jacketed but... I’ve got old reloading manuals. They confirm what Hobie reported on his blog about “accepted” 38 special velocities having decreased since “back in the day”. Remember, back in the day the S&W model 19 was like the Glock 19 today. .38 was ubiquitous. (Everywhere, common) Crap like this is why I am entertaining a ”.357 Magnum” kit gun. The max loads for .357 are higher than anything here. I don’t see what magic gun makers could do to make two cylinders out of tempered steel of such vastly different strength that any of the loads for .38 would be unsafe in a revolver rated for .357 magnum. I can definitely see that some frames would not do well at all under heavy loads. This is why I like a .357 magnum revolver over a .38... I can reload ammunition from cat-sneeze up to pretty darned stout .38 ++p and not need to worry or justify discussing my loads in public as I put the powder in a bit of brass with a different headstamp and suddenly all is bright and legal. I’m really skeptical that any cylinder strong enough to handle 9mm pressure can’t handle that pressure from brass with a different headstamp, but even further... I do believe that the saami specs expect a 9mm cartridge to be fired in a semi auto barrel, not a cylinder. Wondering about cylinder strength... but also noting that you can get cowboy loads of .38 (light) all the way up to Beefalo Boi hunting rounds (heavy) while purchased 9mm rounds are all designed to operated the recoil spring of a 9mm so choices are limited from “stout” to “heavy” Thanks to all for this interesting thread. Without it, I would never have cracked my reloading manuals and investigated this historical trend in .38 loading. Y’all know not to use any of my data for handloads without double checking them, triple checking, and working up slowly, right? Right? “Play safe, make good choices!” - my Mom Last edited by stinkeypete; April 11, 2019 at 01:45 PM.

April 11, 2019, 02:44 PM	#188
JimCunn Senior Member Join Date: April 6, 2019 Posts: 125	"You need a moonclip to hold it in place". No kidding, Sherlock. I noticed that about 60 years ago :-) I just tried one for fit. Rattle's not all that bad (about three thousandths clearance, each side), though I wouldn't think you could resize the case all that many times before it split. Last edited by JimCunn; April 11, 2019 at 04:44 PM.

April 12, 2019, 07:33 AM	#191
wild cat mccane Senior Member Join Date: May 22, 2011 Posts: 3,625	As the person that first said commercial 9mm equals or outperform most commercial 357 and that meplat in 357 doesn't matter, documenting both... I love we're on page 8. Follow up. Someone made an excellent point about lighter 357 110 and 125 gr being the standard self defense weights. This is accurate and shouldn't go unnoticed when people start talking about 357 can go heavier than 9mm. Okay. Now go look at the 125gr 357 tests. Those do perform well. Also note, the go to light weight round is the Remington 125gr SJHP. It is known to eat forcing cones--yep even on your improved 686 and impossible to destroy GP100. Also, some of these BB and Underwood hot loads being thrown around as evidence of common 357 superiority are "Ruger only" loads. Someone correct me on this, but I believe that means for the frame of the GP100/Redhawk. It doesn't include SP101. It certainly isn't J frame material. Last edited by wild cat mccane; April 12, 2019 at 07:41 AM.

April 12, 2019, 10:07 AM	#194
Lohman446 Senior Member Join Date: April 22, 2016 Posts: 2,192	Has anyone actually made the argument that there is a ballistic advantage to the 9MM or are "we" decimating a straw man? __________________ A coward believes he will ever live if he keep him safe from strife: but old age leaves him not long in peace though spears may spare his life. - The Havamal (Bray translation)

April 11, 2019, 10:11 AM	#178
JimCunn Senior Member Join Date: April 6, 2019 Posts: 125	I have a science paper in peer review at the moment, so am familiar with that procedure. I suspect that you and I were referring to different posts - because I didn't quote the velocity in every case, and I assumed you were thinking about one in which I didn't (135gr .357 Mag at 298 ft-lbs - and yes, I realize that should be written as lb-ft). Frankly, it doesn't seem that this forum usually requires or typically sees the same reference requirements as the research journals. On an entertainment forum such as this, I have no intention of spending five or six hours for each post going back and researching original references for stuff that I have in memory. As far as your thinking I am making stuff up, be my guest - I encourage you to think whatever you wish. Don't worry about it, I'm neither sensitive, nor thin-skinned.

April 11, 2019, 01:02 PM	#183
JimCunn Senior Member Join Date: April 6, 2019 Posts: 125	"By the way, ft-lb is acceptable". As you know, one is a scalar, the other a vector. They measure different things. What do you guys think about using .380 acp in a .357 Magnum?

April 11, 2019, 01:40 PM	#185
JimCunn Senior Member Join Date: April 6, 2019 Posts: 125	"At this point most police departments across country and the US Military recognize that 9mm is sufficient for use in their guns and should be considered am appropriate self defense round" And around the world too. Good post; all these rounds are satisfactory.

April 11, 2019, 02:05 PM	#186
stinkeypete Senior Member Join Date: July 22, 2010 Location: Madison, Wisconsin Posts: 1,292	Jim, you can maybe shoot .380 in a .357... but only for shooting at Sputnik. Max diameter for .380 is .374” while chamber size is greater than .379. Its gonna rattle around a bit! Don’t tell me you can fix it with duct tape

April 11, 2019, 02:22 PM	#187
74A95 Senior Member Join Date: November 26, 2016 Posts: 1,564	And a 380 will fall into the cylinder - the 380 is rimless. You need a moonclip to hold it in place.

April 12, 2019, 07:04 AM	#190
JimCunn Senior Member Join Date: April 6, 2019 Posts: 125	"If you can find a .357 that uses moonclips and you modified the moon clip, I think it can be done and done safely". I already have an extra .357 titanium cylinder for my 637-2 (several actually) Would just need to cut it and the extractor for moonclips. I've a hunch that accuracy would be mediocre, but better than me. This is something I'd do for a lark, not serious use (plus, it would also accept moonclips for rimmed .38/.357

April 12, 2019, 10:02 AM	#193
reddog81 Senior Member Join Date: October 16, 2014 Location: Iowa Posts: 1,634	I don't understand how .357 can be considered excessive and at the same time argue that 9mm is better because it is more powerful. People use the argument that the self defense experts recommend 110 to 125 grain .357 ammo for self defense, 9mm has bullets in that weight range, therefore 9mm is just as good as .357 ammo! When I look at the at the Lucky Gunner tables the results I see show that .357 from a 2” barrel outperforms 9mm from a 3.5” barrel when comparing similar weight bullets from the same manufacturers time and time again. There are a couple of weak rounds in .357 such as the Speer 135 GD Short Barrel and some of the Remington 125 grain options could be cherry picked and compared to 9mm ammo and then you can proclaim 9mm is the winner. Something that shoots .38 Special and .357 is much more versatile than a 9mm but somehow that is discounted because .357 158 grain and heavier bullets are intended for hunting and not self defense. I don’t understand how having the option to use bullets for self defense in the woods or on the streets is somehow a bad thing. The BB 180 grain bullets have velocities listed from a 3” S&W J Frame at 1302 FPS and nowhere is it mentioned this a Ruger only load. Their 9mm +P 147 grain hard cast loads top out at 1100 FPS and this is from full size guns.

April 12, 2019, 11:13 AM	#197
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,820	I do wonder, if 9mm from a revolver (snub nose only, apparently) is the bees knees, and the best thing since canned beer, sliced bread and girls who smell good, why did the 9mm Federal go bust??? __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

April 12, 2019, 11:26 AM	#198
JimCunn Senior Member Join Date: April 6, 2019 Posts: 125	Dunno if it''s the bee''s knees, but it is convenient, fast to reload, and allows ammo sharing with the vast majority of carry semi-autos.

April 12, 2019, 12:03 PM	#199
Carmady Senior Member Join Date: February 26, 2013 Location: on the lam Posts: 1,735	If you're a brass rat you'll probably find over a thousand 9mm casings for every .38 SPL.