Minimum 357 barrel length?
- Thread starter riader13
- Start date
- Status
Onward Allusion
Member
Well, according to these guys http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html
things start dropping off dramatically between 3" and 4"
Keep in mind that those numbers are from a Thompson. So, for a revolver, a 2" barrel will get you similar numbers to the 3".
things start dropping off dramatically between 3" and 4"
Keep in mind that those numbers are from a Thompson. So, for a revolver, a 2" barrel will get you similar numbers to the 3".
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
Anything below 4" and velocity starts dropping and muzzle blast & flash become offensive to me for accurate shooting.
A 2" .357 would make Chuck Norris develop a bad flench sooner or later!
rc
A 2" .357 would make Chuck Norris develop a bad flench sooner or later!
rc
Panzerschwein
member
There are loads from Buffalo Bore and Double Tap that bring 2" barrels up almost to the velocity of classic 125 grain 357 speeds in a 4" barrel.
Much more powerful than any .38 load from the same bbl length, but, you will have some recoil to deal with. Might be better of using a Speer 135 grain short barrel 357 load.
Much more powerful than any .38 load from the same bbl length, but, you will have some recoil to deal with. Might be better of using a Speer 135 grain short barrel 357 load.
You'll get more velocity from a 3" or longer. If you want a 2" 357 magnum, go ahead and get one. There are short barrel 357 loads available, and you can use any 38 special loads you want.
If you buy a 38 special +p revolver, you'll be reading that 38 +p is too hot, and wasteful in a short barrel.
If you buy a 38 special +p revolver, you'll be reading that 38 +p is too hot, and wasteful in a short barrel.
Macchina
Member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 998
A snub 357 is where it's at. I love my KLCR because it's so easy to carry yet still extremely powerful. It's fun to sour with Remington 125gr Golden Sabers (doing 1120 fps) and I have shot loads that put a 158g XTP at around 1150 fps which is plenty of power for anything I may need to shoot in the woods or anywhere else.
I only lose about 150 FPS from my 4.2" SP101 to my 1.875" LCR. That's not too bad when you go from a large revolver to a pocket revolver.
I only lose about 150 FPS from my 4.2" SP101 to my 1.875" LCR. That's not too bad when you go from a large revolver to a pocket revolver.
ColtPythonElite
Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2011
- Messages
- 10,471
Been carrying a 2.25 SP101 nearly 20 years. I can shoot a LE qualification course better with it than my duty weapon.
7mmb
Member
A two inch barrelled 357 does lose quite a bit of velocity over a longer barrel, there is no doubt about it. However, it still gives higher velocity than a 38 Special with a six inch barrel. I don't think the comparison should be how much velocity you are losing over a four or six inch 357 Magnum. It should be how much you are gaining over a two inch 38 Special, which is a substantial gain.
Those that are too timid to master its increased blast and recoil should stick with their 38s. If you can handle it a snub nosed 357 gives a marked advantage over the weaker round.
Those that are too timid to master its increased blast and recoil should stick with their 38s. If you can handle it a snub nosed 357 gives a marked advantage over the weaker round.
gamestalker
member
Deleted
Last edited:
Depends on what you want. Anything shorter than 4" and you will get more bullet speed from a 9mm pistol of the same overall length with 124/125 gr bullets. In fact a 4" 357 will only beat the best 124 gr 9mm loads by 50-75 fps. You really need 6" or more from a 357 to come close to ballistics taken from 8" test barrels.
But the 2-3" 357 do offer the option of shooting much heavier bullets not possible in 9mm. And some just want a revolver. If you are willing to put up with tremendous recoil and blast to get close to 9mm performance they are an option.
After buying a chronograph I sold all of my snubby revolvers and just bought a compact 9mm pistol. Same or better ballistics, much less recoil and a lighter, more compact gun.
But the 2-3" 357 do offer the option of shooting much heavier bullets not possible in 9mm. And some just want a revolver. If you are willing to put up with tremendous recoil and blast to get close to 9mm performance they are an option.
After buying a chronograph I sold all of my snubby revolvers and just bought a compact 9mm pistol. Same or better ballistics, much less recoil and a lighter, more compact gun.
Posted by rcmodel:
Not only that, but the recoil would prevent anyone from scoring sufficiently rapid hits in a self defense situation.
Add to that the cumulative effects, which will ultimately result in permanent injury to joints, nerves, and tendons if one shoots it enough.
Blacksmoke
Member
4 inch barrel is my minimum for any handgun.
My Great Uncle, Marine veteran of WWI and NYPD Officer and later Captain from 1919 to the early 1950s swore by a Colt Army with a six inch barrel. His off duty gun was a Police Positive with a four inch tube. He thought snubbies were for pimps.
J. Edgar Hoover required his SAs to carry 4 inch barreled revolvers and specifically prohibited them from carrying snubbies. This was told to me at the FBI building in D.C. in the mid 1960s. I was there with my GU getting the tour and semi-VIP treatment as a courtesy. Naturally, I was real interested in the firearms.
Some of this might have had to do with the ammunition in service at that time. The longer barrel lengths improved ballistics and accuracy. Being a sure shot was very much expected and a four inch or plus barrel makes that possible.
This history probably does not mean much in todays world with improved ammo choices- better bullets, faster powders and heavier guns.
My Great Uncle, Marine veteran of WWI and NYPD Officer and later Captain from 1919 to the early 1950s swore by a Colt Army with a six inch barrel. His off duty gun was a Police Positive with a four inch tube. He thought snubbies were for pimps.
J. Edgar Hoover required his SAs to carry 4 inch barreled revolvers and specifically prohibited them from carrying snubbies. This was told to me at the FBI building in D.C. in the mid 1960s. I was there with my GU getting the tour and semi-VIP treatment as a courtesy. Naturally, I was real interested in the firearms.
Some of this might have had to do with the ammunition in service at that time. The longer barrel lengths improved ballistics and accuracy. Being a sure shot was very much expected and a four inch or plus barrel makes that possible.
This history probably does not mean much in todays world with improved ammo choices- better bullets, faster powders and heavier guns.
Nom de Forum
Member
Regardless of the disadvantage in velocity loss between 4" and 3" guns, I find the 3" gun to be much better for behind the hip OWB/IWB carry, and the balance point in my hand and my wife's hand is ideal. We love the 4" M66 she just received as a gift from her Dad but she still likes the balance of her 3" M10 better. I seem to recall the 3" barreled .357 was very popular with the F.B.I. until the adoption of semiautomatics. I think the velocity difference is much more noticeable on paper than in terminal ballistic effect.
Last edited:
Panzerschwein
member
Um, no.
Buffalo Bore, which arguably produces the fastest velocities of any factory made ammunition shows these velocities:
From a 4" S&W L-frame mountain gun:
d. Item 19D/20-125gr. Jacketed Hollow Point (.357 magnum) = 1603 fps for 714 ft-lbs of muzzle energy.
From a Glock 19 w/ 4" bbl:
Item 24B/20 (+p+) 124gr. Jacketed Hollow Point (9mm) = 1296 fps for 462 ft-lbs of muzzle energy.
Even the hottest factory 124 grain +P+ 9mm can't touch the same hottest .357 magnum 125 grain load from a 4" barrel. .357 magnum also has the major advantage of being able to fire bullets up to 200 grains for deep penetration in hunting or wilderness defense scenarios.
Posted by Cooldill:
That raises two questions:
- What advantage does that extra energy provide in a self defense situation?
- How well can the shooter of that L-Frame revolver "touch" the vital parts of a charging assailant, when fast repeat shots may be necessary to accomplish that?
Very true.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
I don't know, a 125gr at that velocity will create a really nasty wound!
Panzerschwein
member
1. That wasn't my point. I was simply pointing out to jmr40 that he was wrong, and explaining why. To answer your question, that full house 125 grain .357 load has a 65% energy advantage over that full house 124 grain 9mm +P+ load, both form a 4" bbl (yes I know, revolver bbls are measured differently than auto bbls but the guns are relatively similar in length). With the proper bullet, that dramatic increase in energy can literally rend more flesh. More tissue disruption, more blood loss, etc. etc.
2. Of course one can expect worse recoil to be sure, and one would have to weight the pros and cons vs using that over a more manageable 9mm load or other caliber. However, I would not be surprised if there were shooters out there who could in fact manage that load in an L-frame well enough to make good follow up shots. I'm not saying it would be me, but I'm sure they're out there.
Deaf Smith
Member
The 'proper' barrel length of a .357 depends on what are using in it and what it's for.
2 - 3 inch, well if you are wanting max performance Buffalo Bore gives 140 gr DPX .357 at 1430 fps from a 3 inch. Might sting a bit but it will give real .357 magnum performance. Dang good SD load if you can hang on to it.
Or use the Buffalo Bore 180s out of a 4 - 6 inch and you will get REAL performance! Excellent for deer.
Personally, for snub .357s I just use Buffalo Bore 158gr LSWHP gas checked loads. 2 1/2 inch you get that 158 at 1030 fps and that is plenty for SD.
For my 4 inch heavy .357s I use Buffalo Bore 170-180s if deer is the target.
But folks, if paper is the target I just use handloaded 158gr SWCs at 800-900, no matter what the barrel length.
Deaf
2 - 3 inch, well if you are wanting max performance Buffalo Bore gives 140 gr DPX .357 at 1430 fps from a 3 inch. Might sting a bit but it will give real .357 magnum performance. Dang good SD load if you can hang on to it.
Or use the Buffalo Bore 180s out of a 4 - 6 inch and you will get REAL performance! Excellent for deer.
Personally, for snub .357s I just use Buffalo Bore 158gr LSWHP gas checked loads. 2 1/2 inch you get that 158 at 1030 fps and that is plenty for SD.
For my 4 inch heavy .357s I use Buffalo Bore 170-180s if deer is the target.
But folks, if paper is the target I just use handloaded 158gr SWCs at 800-900, no matter what the barrel length.
Deaf
A man after my own heart.
I have a 2 1/2" 686, and full out .357 loads are pretty stout in it. The good news is you don't need all that power for two legged varmints. I also load 158s at leisurely velocities to enjoy my .357s at the range. The short 686 is surprisingly accurate at 100 yards.
I have a 2 1/2" 686, and full out .357 loads are pretty stout in it. The good news is you don't need all that power for two legged varmints. I also load 158s at leisurely velocities to enjoy my .357s at the range. The short 686 is surprisingly accurate at 100 yards.
MCgunner
Member
I get 1330 fps/550 ft lbs from a 2" .357 with a hot 140 grain Speer handload. I think that's pretty respectable. I cannot match Buffalo Bore's short barrel figures with the 125 grain bullet, but 140 and up have quite a bit more pop from the short barrel than any 9 or .38. I own 2, 3, 4, and 6.5" .357s and a chronograph.
I know I can do it, but, frankly, I'm a damned good, experienced revolver shooter, no Jerry Miculek, but I've beaten quite a few good shooters around. YMMV. All it really takes is technique and practice.
I know I can do it, but, frankly, I'm a damned good, experienced revolver shooter, no Jerry Miculek, but I've beaten quite a few good shooters around. YMMV. All it really takes is technique and practice.
WestKentucky
Member
3 inch j frame round butt. Very Very sweet revolvers, and they do carry IWB very easily and comfortably. I'm still waiting for my shoulder rig but I guarantee it will be equally wonderful. Mine is in 32swl so its a baby by comparison to the .357 but I have shot a few with a variety of loads from 38 plinkers to "magnum dammit"s and all but the strongest magnums were manageable in 3 inch. 4 inch is hard to conceal. 2 inch packs a serious punch on both ends and only 38s and the lighter 357s were manageable. 3 inch sounds like a tradeoff between 2 and 4 but it isn't. It is the maximum size for conceal ability. For a concealable revolver it is the softest shooting with the highest velocity and the longest sight radius to aim with.
gamestalker
member
I wouldn't be too quick to berate the velocity just because the barrel may be short. I get very good velocities from my 2.5" .357's, much better than any similar weight 9mm can produce. Even 158's will easily get me high 1200's, and that's not all I can get from them, I've pushed them over 1300 fps..
GS
GS
ArchAngelCD
Member.
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.
There is also no need to always have someone come to these threads telling everyone how foolish they are shooting a revolver with .38 Special or .357 Magnum ammo when the 9mm is so much better!
There is also no need to always have someone come to these threads telling everyone how foolish they are shooting a revolver with .38 Special or .357 Magnum ammo when the 9mm is so much better!
- Status
