Minimum 357 barrel length?

riader13 - Looking for a good CC revolver.
Was reading that a 2" barrel isn't a good fit for the 357 cartridge?
2" barrel too short to take advantage of the amount of powered in a 357?
Can anyone elaborate on this?

Click to expand...

If your interest in 2" is because of expecting to carry in your pocket, you would be better off looking at 38-Special-only guns. The original .357 Magnum was a 6" N-frame (large frame), so there is only so far one can compromise for concealed carry and still have a gun that can handle the caliber for a well practiced owner.

I like mine at 4" and 5", thank you. For the lighter loads a 3" barrel, I am fortunate to own a Ruger SP101 and a S&W 60 Pro, the latter of which is my pick as the ultimate packable gun capable of firing .357 Magnum in a suitable load. I don't carry guns in my pocket.

I have always thought that the 5" Model 27 was the ideal barrel length in a .357. Probably a 4" barrel is the handiest while a Ruger Speed Six with the 2 3/4" barrel is the shortest I have ever owned.

With enough practice you can hit just about anything with just about any gun. The amount of practice necessary to become proficient with a J-Frame sized revolver leads most of us to do that practicing mostly with lighter .38 loads and only occasionally with full-on .357 loads. Easier on you and the gun. Are they moving faster out of a longer barrel? You bet. Are they more powerful than a .38 even out of a 2" barrel? Yup.
I practice with .38 special 148 grain hollow base wad cutters, and carry 125 grain jacketed hollow points in my 2" J -Frame. There is a bunch of muzzle flash and muzzle flip and recoil, and they hurt my hand, but they hit where they're aimed and they hit hard.

I get 1,250 fps with a 158gr xtp from a 2.75" barreled Ruger Sec. Six the same load in my friend's S&W 686 4" gives the same velocity

Click to expand...

In my experience, the heavier the bullet, the better it does in short barrels. I think this is the fact that the bullet accelerates slower down the bore and catches more of the pressure peak from the slowish powders.

I get best results from an SP101 from a 180 grain XTP load, 660 ft lbs, but the load is a bit of a challenge to shoot even in the heavish 27 ounce SP101. I haven't bothered to try it in my 19 ounce 605 Poly. The load was developed for hunting from my 6.5" Blackhawk where it gives 785 ft lbs. I don't think it'd be the greatest for self defense, prefer my 140 grain load for that.

One thing's for sure, after firing my 125 grain load with the SAME 2400 powder, just a heavier dose of it, I was quite unimpressed with the sub 400 ft lbs I got and the flash/bang was ridiculous. Buffalo Bore is using a better powder for short barrels, I guess, because they get much better results from a 125 grain load. I'm not sure how they do it, but don't really care as my 140 grain load is quite manageable and posts plenty good numbers and, more important to me, is very accurate.

Years ago I did quite a bit of range time with revolvers since that's all my Department allowed us to carry..... I've stood next to more than one officer using the model 19, short barrel, round butt. Great looking weapon but very hard to shoot properly with 357 ammo -much better with 38 loads. As a result I much preferred my model 64, round butt 38. When the day finally came whenwe were allowed to carry semi-auto pistols you rarely ever saw one of those short barrel 357revolvers ever again....

Why do these threads always end up arguing velocity? Velocity alone isn't the test of a good cartridge or handgun. If the bullet used reliably expands at the velocity generated by the platform, that's a good system. I don't need 1550 fps from a SD bullet when the bullet will expand @800 fps.

Click to expand...

I more or less agree. I think the best balance in a cartridge, and a specific loading is finding a barrel length where the bullet will still reach high enough velocities to expand when hitting an attacker. However, the distance you are shooting has an obvious effect as you lose velocity over distance.

I think that is mostly a moot point in a self defense situation and distance though. Personally, I like 3" for a minimum. It will be plenty effective with a good SD cartridge against a human attacker, but you still get the ballistics you need for a black bear sized animal, though a longer barrel would be better.

Honestly, I think for a walking around gun, a 2 inch barrel is plenty for two legged fools. If you're REALLY concerned about bigger critters, consider carrying a big bore or a longer barreled gun. JMO

I am rather fond of my 2-3/4" Security Six and 3" 686. I don't get too worked up over not having the full velocity at hand and don't really have a problem controlling them in any noticeable way. The flash would potentially be a big hindrance in low light I'd think, but with conventional irons I either better have a flashlight or I might be reduced to sighting down the barrel anyway. Maybe just rationalizing since I love them in that size, but it doesn't seem like the limitations are all that limiting from my (non combat) experience with them given the offset of greater velocity than a comparable length .38 Special. Would definitely want a longer barrel for hunting or general purpose carry on the back 40, if I owned a back 40.

Why do these threads always end up arguing velocity? Velocity alone isn't the test of a good cartridge or handgun. If the bullet used reliably expands at the velocity generated by the platform, that's a good system. I don't need 1550 fps from a SD bullet when the bullet will expand @800 fps.

Click to expand...

For me the concern would be penetration.

Wife has aN SP101 w/3 1/8" Shoots well with crafted 125 Gold dots at 12-1300 using an obsolete single base shotshell powder- loll flash. With 140 or 158 full throttle loads its not a pleasant thing to be around or handle. With factory 125SD hps it probably defies the Hague conventions due to the incendiary muzzle blast. The gold dots are bit more potent than the various 9 &38 +Ps and she can handle it well enough for follow ups.

In my experience, the heavier the bullet, the better it does in short barrels. I think this is the fact that the bullet accelerates slower down the bore and catches more of the pressure peak from the slowish powders.

Click to expand...

My experience is the same I think in addition to the slightly slower velocity it's the fact that you can only accelerate the bullet so fast in 3".

I get best results from an SP101 from a 180 grain XTP load, 660 ft lbs, but the load is a bit of a challenge to shoot even in the heavish 27 ounce SP101. I haven't bothered to try it in my 19 ounce 605 Poly. The load was developed for hunting from my 6.5" Blackhawk where it gives 785 ft lbs. I don't think it'd be the greatest for self defense, prefer my 140 grain load for that.

Click to expand...

I always thought the old 180gr partition gold load from Winchester would have made a great SD load from a snub IF you could handle it. But much the same as you I use the 145gr Silvertip in my 2 3/4" Speed Six and my 2 1/2" M19

Why do these threads always end up arguing velocity? Velocity alone isn't the test of a good cartridge or handgun.

Click to expand...

True but a cartridge like the .357, absolutely depends on expansion to work well and you need velocity for reliable expansion.

I've carried a S&W model 66 with 2.5" barrel for 15 years. I even qualified with it. I see no shortcomings of the short barrel at all. It is quite compact, very accurate and powerful.

I don't believe there is much of a velocity loss at all and I'd bet it beats a 9mm in velocity and stopping power.

A snubby in .357 Mag is just fine. The wide variety of loads available and wide variety of guns available means that it is fairly easy to match a gun to a load that you can shoot well and accurately at speed from a snubby in .357.

Yes you do loose velocity and power with the shorter barrel, but, so what? You're not looking for the full power of a .357 Mag out of a small carry piece anyways all you're looking for is more power that what a 38 Spl. from a snub gives you and you can clearly get that...and penetration.

Poke around here for a bit.

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/38special.html

and here

http://www.brassfetcher.com/357 Magnum/357 Magnum.htm

http://www.brassfetcher.com/38 Special/38 Special.htm

Hope this helps...

tipoc

Ideal barrel lengths.....

Id say the ideal barrel length is 3" for a CCW DA/DA only revolver.
A 3" tube gives you good ballistics, helps with muzzle flash/blast and with the extended ejector rod, the spent cases pop out faster, .
Snub nose or J/E frame revolvers may fire the 5 .38spl or .357 rounds then the case might get stuck, .
A gun fight or critical incicent isn't the time to mess around or be picky.
3" L frame .357magnums were common with federal LE agents in the 1980s/1990s.
Taurus USA really had progressive step when they started to include longer ejector rods along with improved cylinder release latches for their lines of CCW/defense revolvers.

True but a cartridge like the .357, absolutely depends on expansion to work well and you need velocity for reliable expansion.

Click to expand...

357 SWC seem to work pretty well without expansion and bullets aren't near as dependent on velocity for expansion now days.

They do work well but a good JHP that does what it's supposed to works better.

Sure, you can get expansion without a lot of velocity, if the bullet is designed for that. Then you give up penetration and tissue destruction. There are no free lunches. You can't have cataclysmic tissue destruction, low velocity, low recoil and deep penetration.

You can't have cataclysmic tissue destruction, low velocity, low recoil and deep penetration.

Click to expand...

Well the "cataclysmic" part is questionable under most circumstances with a handgun. It's also an issue what folks consider "low velocity".

The only part that isn't up for grabs is the penetration part. Ya need that.

But if a 38 Spl. is effective from a snubby then a .357 is as well. It's a question of matching the bullet to the task.

tipoc

Well the "cataclysmic" part is questionable under most circumstances with a handgun.

Click to expand...

A 125gr .357 diameter jacketed hollow point bullet moving at 1,450 fps will do it.

This threads needs some short barreled .357 pictures.

Quote:
Well the "cataclysmic" part is questionable under most circumstances with a handgun.
A 125gr .357 diameter jacketed hollow point bullet moving at 1,450 fps will do it.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry I thought the person meant "cataclysmic" on a human being and not a Cocker Spaniel. If by "cataclysmic" you meant that it could end someone's existence there are a lot of rounds that can do that. Likely our definitions of "cataclysmic" differ.

Anyway my point is that you don't need 1400 fps from a snubby for the gun to be an effective self defense tool. You just need a gun that the shooter can handle well in the most powerful load that they can handle well with the best bullet they can find for the job. That basic formula has worked well for over 150 years. Works well today.

tipoc

I carry a S&W 640-1 in .357 Mag occasionally, as a backup/second gun. It has a 2.125" barrel. I chronographed Buffalo Bore 158gr JHC from that gun.

Altitude: 3221 ft, Temperature: 48 degrees, Barometric pressure: 26.9 inHg
1242, 1231, 1226, 1260, 1255 : avg 1243 ft/s and 540 ft-lb energy

That's comparable to a warm .40 S&W 155gr round from a service pistol. Good self-defense performance.

Long, long ago, I learned to discount Internet woe about recoil. The recoil is quite manageable.

Cocked & Locked.... Nice pics. I often carry the SP101 myself, (though I prefer the hammer model). I prefer 3" over 2". My .44 Mag Trail Boss from S&W PC is the only 3" I've been able to get my hands on.

Pursuing A Thread of Snub Nose 357 Magnum Inspiration

harrygunner said:

I carry a S&W 640-1 in .357 Mag occasionally, as a backup/second gun. It has a 2.125" barrel. I chronographed Buffalo Bore 158gr JHC from that gun.

Altitude: 3221 ft, Temperature: 48 degrees, Barometric pressure: 26.9 inHg
1242, 1231, 1226, 1260, 1255 : avg 1243 ft/s and 540 ft-lb energy

That's comparable to a warm .40 S&W 155gr round from a service pistol. Good self-defense performance.

Long, long ago, I learned to discount Internet woe about recoil. The recoil is quite manageable.

Click to expand...

In reflection upon over 20 years of carrying a S&W 640 J frame in 357 mag, one tends to grow hardened against the recoil, IMHO. Although it is quite true that in the aftermath of the first woods "blasting" sessions, I remember distinctly wondering why my hand hurt in the following days. Not so much anymore, despite advancing in age and wisdom for 20 years.

Before the days of such worthy forums as THR, I gathered firearm information by reading and hands on (pun intended), in the field observation of results . I have been pursuing this thread to gain knowledge about my S&W J-frame durability to handle 200gr. loads, since penetration in defense from a wild animal charge is the most desired terminal factor !

My good friend did the most research and hands-on testing I have ever seen before he bought his first handgun. It was a 3" Ruger SP101 in 357. He is a very small guy but has no trouble shooting 357's out of it. I got to try it out too, and the recoil was peppy, but certainly not punishing. I would not hesitate to carry it or use it for HD.