Muzzle Energy and Terminal Ballistics, .357 & .30 Carbine

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'll tell you this much, for home defense I'll take my M1 Carbine loaded up with 15 or 30 rounds of SP bullets, any day over a .357 revolver or lever carbine.

The M1 shoulders and is on target quicker than any rifle/carbine I've ever tried. No thoughts here of using the little M1 on Bison at any distance or zombies out past 150yrds.....I have other rifles for that. Up close and personal, it's my go to weapon and any goblins who think my soft points are gonna just bounce off, we'll just see how that works out for 'em. ;)

100_2135.gif
 
Last edited:
M1 Carbine Energy at muzzle and >100 yards http://www.shootingtimes.com/ballistics/30_carbine.html
.357 rifle Energy at muzzle and >100 yards http://www.shootingtimes.com/ballistics/357_magnum_rifle.html
.357 4" revolver Energy at muzzle and 50 yards http://www.shootingtimes.com/ballistics/357_magnum.html

Out of a .357 carbine you can get the same or a bit more energy on target at 100 yards than with an M1 Carbine, but a revolver won't provide anything near the energy of either at the same distance.
 
Last edited:
Fastcast--i am of the same way of thinking.

i reload for 357 and m-1
m-1 are hard lead with a MV of 1800 fps and do not lead the bbl.
it took some time to find the right bullet/powder combo to achieve this and it is in my 'going to retire' pile of firearms. the 357 is not.

".30 Carbine weak, .357 mag strong"
Click to expand...
Toyota Matrix weak, Toyota Supra strong.
both are cars, weigh the same and at 70mph get the same mpg's. but get to speed differently. we can cross compare many pairs of related items that achieve similar numbers in a specific catagory; but what the intended use of the item will be is my determining factor.
 
The M1 carbine was designed to replace a pistol with an intermediate, i.e., more effective round at closer than rifle ranges and farther than pistol range. It does that pretty well. Given a choice I would chose a M1 Carbine over any pistol.

Given a choice of a M1 Carbine or a real rifle caliber rifle, I would chose the rifle caliber.
 
This is an apples to oranges comparison. If .357 loads came with a 110 grain full metal jacketed round nose bullet it would have a reputation as a poor stopper also. If the military had been allowed to use an expanding hunting style bullet in the M-1 Carbine it would have done a much better job in Korea.

If both rounds are loaded with the same weight bullet and fired from the same length barrel the muzzle energy figures are about the same. it is the performance of the bullet on game that makes the difference and FMJ round nose bullets in ANY common hunting caliber are ill suited for hunting.
 
I had to carry a M2 Carbine as a CIDG advisor for a few months until we got upgraded.

I was not happy as I had owned surplus catbines and had some experience with their effectiveness.

The weakest point was the FMJ bullet which was required by law/regs/ whatever.
I saw a lot of non fatal wounds-the bad guys had lots of carbines as well.
Buddy of mine took a through and through to his shoulder standing about three feet from me.
He initially dropped his rifle and could not figure out why.
Said he never felt a thing.

The 5.56 was a whole different story.
 
The M-1 Carbine got its reputation as a poor stopper because of the BULLET it fired, nothing is wrong with the rifle.
 
Hard Lead

Fastcast, you buy those hard lead rounds or cast them yourself?

I don't reload yet, but it would be interesting to have the load data you've worked up.

I'm a fan of whatever will make my old Rockola more versatile.

:)

 
ArfinGreebly said:
Fastcast, you buy those hard lead rounds or cast them yourself?

I don't reload yet, but it would be interesting to have the load data you've worked up.

I'm a fan of whatever will make my old Rockola more versatile.

:)

Click to expand...

That's not me loading the hard lead but Claude.....I am ramping up right now though to load my own, since the SP's can be hard to find and expensive. Just picked up some Redding dies and Sierra 110gr RNSP bullets. :)

Rockola huh, sweet!...Mine's a NPM w/original Marlin barrel....She's a good shooter!
 
Owen Sparks said:
This is an apples to oranges comparison. If .357 loads came with a 110 grain full metal jacketed round nose bullet it would have a reputation as a poor stopper also. If the military had been allowed to use an expanding hunting style bullet in the M-1 Carbine it would have done a much better job in Korea.

If both rounds are loaded with the same weight bullet and fired from the same length barrel the muzzle energy figures are about the same. it is the performance of the bullet on game that makes the difference and FMJ round nose bullets in ANY common hunting caliber are ill suited for hunting.
Click to expand...
You are not thinking your position through.

The M1 garand is a full metal jacket bullet of the same caliber. No one has criticized the 30-06 for being a weak man stopper.
 
Oops . . .

ArfinGreebly said:
Fastcast, you buy those hard lead rounds or cast them yourself?

I don't reload yet, but it would be interesting to have the load data you've worked up.

I'm a fan of whatever will make my old Rockola more versatile.

:)
Click to expand...

That's not me loading the hard lead but Claude.....I am ramping up right now though to load my own, since the SP's can be hard to find and expensive. Just picked up some Redding dies and Sierra 110gr RNSP bullets. :)

Rockola huh, sweet!...Mine's a NPM w/original Marlin barrel....She's a good shooter!
Click to expand...

:eek:

<ahem>

So, Claude, same question as above to you.

What can you tell me?

 
The M-1 Carbine got its reputation as a poor stopper because of the BULLET it fired, nothing is wrong with the rifle.


Jim Cirillo has much more gunfighting experience than most people. He said that the FMJ M1 Carbine was kind of wimpy but a SP or HP made it a totally different weapon. He liked the M1 carbine as a stakeout gun.
 
Yes the 7.62X39 is the same caliber - definitely not the same bullet though. From what I've read about the 7.62x39 in FMJ, it penetrates to far before yawing and tends to generate through & through wounds. I'm sure that is a function of the engagement range though. A spitzer bullet should exhibit greater instability in flesh than a short round nose bullet. I think comparing the .30 carbine to the 7.62x39 is apples & oranges.

The .45-70 and .458 Win Mag are the same caliber as the .45 ACP. I don't think anyone would argue which has greater stopping potential.
 
Hello friends and neighbors // I have the greatest respect for both, a little more for the M1 past 100yards. In my case, I have to credit this to the M1s sights.

I have and carry both the M1 carbine (Underwood) and an Interarms (Rossi) Model 92 .357 lever when walking the property after hunting season.

The M1 edges out the M92 in accuracy (YMMV) at 100yards but in felt recoil they are very close. I'm shooting 110gr.FMJ from the M1 and 158gr.JHP from the M92.

I also carry a sidearm to match caliber.
For the M1 a . Ruger BlackHawk, 7 1/2 inch, 30carbine cal.
For the M92 a S&W M586, 6 inch, .357.
Again the .30 cal edges out the .357 at 25yards, SA and in felt recoil they are very close. It could be the slightly longer 7 1/2" compared to 6" barrel.

If someone in the Charlotte N.C. --Rock Hill S.C. area would like to make exact loads for each caliber and has a chrono I can offer this option.
Unless someone wants to contribute a 7 1/2 BlackHawk in .357. I would be glad to set up a Dan Wesson M15 with an 8 inch barrel and also provide the M1, M92 and 7 1/2 inch BlackHawk in .30cal.
.
**I'll be Turkey hunting most of this week.***With a shotgun.:D

As far as being capable of taking Bison with either caliber at 50-70 yards, ---------Yep You Bettcha.
Would I rather have my scoped .30-06 at that yardage for that size game? --------Yep You Bettcha.
 
Last edited:
Out of curiosity I just checked my Speer reloading manual for an actual apples to apples comparison.

I found load data for both the .30 carbine and .357 Magnum (rifle).
Both listed loads with 110 grain bullets.
Both listed loads for that weight with H-110 powder
Both were fired from guns with non-vented 18 inch barrels, the M-1 Carbine and a Model 94 Winchester. This is about as equal testing peramiter possible.

Firing the same weight 110 grain bullet,

the .357 burned 23 grains of H110 in the top load.

The .30 Carbine only used 14 grains of H110.

The .357 had a muzzel velocity of 2,431 FPS.

The .30 Carbine had a muzzle velocity of only 1,885.

The .357 is roughly 15% larger in diamiter.

The .30 Carbine bullet has a better balistic coeficient, meaning that it retains velocity better over distiance than the .357’s stubby pistol bullet, though it is still not very good by rifle standards.

Even out of a vented 6 inch revolver the .357 is able to achieve over 1,700 FPS with a 110 grain bullet which, when you account for the increase in diamiter should be at least as effective as a game/man stopper as the M-1 Carbine if fired at close range.

So here is the definitive answer, out of a rifle the .357 wins hands down at close range.

Out of a pistol, the .357 virtually ties the .30 M-1 carbine at close range though obviously, the rifle has an edge with long shots.

A more equal comparison would be the .30 Carbine Vs. the new .327 Magnum if someone ever chambers a rifle for it.
 
Last edited:
Shot for shot, I would agree that a .357 magnum from a carbine would yield more energy at the muzzle than the .30 carbine from an M1.

That's shot for shot... focusing solely on the ballistics of each individual round and not taking into account the overall "package", with the .357 magnum being a tube-fed lever gun and the M1 carbine a magazine-fed semi automatic.

I believe what the OP was originally referring to is something that has long irked me as well: the askew view of the .30 carbine from the M1 Carbine as an "anemic" cartridge in terms of ballistics while viewing the .357 magnum from a revolver as a powerhouse. The .30 carbine is anemic as a rifle cartridge, though still offering half a ton of energy... something not commonly offered by handguns, including the .357 magnum.

These views also, for whatever reason, almost always preclude the use of JHPs or JSPs from the M1 carbine, further muddling the argument.

The M1 carbine was developed from the ground-up as an implement of war and thus has features incorporated into its design that, IMHO, allow it to possess a significant edge as a "fighting tool" over anything .357 magnum, revolver or otherwise.
 
However, in a defensive situation, I know how fast I can crank 15 carbine shells through that piece. Or five. Faster and more accurately than I can work the lever on a saddle gun.

This is why my primary is a shotgun, and my wife's primary is the M-1. It's in the closet with two magazines on the butt stock right now.
 
I own a .30 Carbine carbine and a .357 Magnum revolver and carbine and have only range experience with them.

.30 Carbine v .357 Magnum

M1 Carbine generates about 1/2 the muzzle energy (foot-pounds) of the .30-30 Winchester and about 1/3 the muzzle energy of the .30-06 Springfield. Compared to most deer rifle or military rifle rounds, that's weak tea, comparing apples to apples.

.357 Magnum generates two or three times the muzzle energy of the .38 Special or 9mm Luger, especially when .38 Special or 9mm Luger are downloaded by the factories for collectible antiques. Compared to most handgun rounds, .357 is expresso, comparing oranges to oranges.

Supposedly the forensic ballistics data collected by Fackler from shootings show that the .30 Carbine with full metal jacket military bullets has an effectiveness comparable to the .38 Special and the .30 Carbine with softnose hunting bullets has an effectiveness like the .357 Magnum. Another ballistics expert, I believe it was Wolberg, said his home defense weapon of choice was an M1 carbine and Winchester softnose hollowpoint ammo.*

.30 Carbine in a carbine is more effective than .357 in a handgun with the right bullets. The .357 magnum in a carbine however is impressive: it gains 400 or 500 ft per sec velocity and almost doubles its energy (most pistol cartridges like .45 or 9mm only gain 50 to 100 fps when used in carbines).

.30 Carbine in a revolver is better compared to the .32-20 Winchester when used in revolver than to the .357 in a revolver.

*IIRC the Winchester ammo box for their .30 carbine hunting round is coded with a logo of a large varmint animal rather than a deer or bear.
 
Last edited:
...At the engagement ranges the 556 is intended for, the round becomes unstable once it hits flesh and tumbles (not always, but that's what it is supposed to do). This causes terrific damage....
Click to expand...

Sounds like the "M-16" as Stoner developed it ... before the US military changed his propellant & rifling specifications.

IIRC, the original design sported a 1in14(?) twist barrel that left the 55gr bullet just barely stablized ... and the result was often fearsome wounds from tumbling.

For those interested in the kind of damage that the wimpy round will do, Google info on the murder of Bugsy Siegel.

I have always thought that the Wimpy vs Powerful argument was primarily the result of (for a)Rifle vs (for a)Pistol ... but I find the information about the sub-zero temperature effect on the propellant during the Korean War very interesting.
 
Carl N. Brown said:
Supposedly the forensic ballistics data collected by Fackler from shootings show that the .30 Carbine with full metal jacket military bullets has an effectiveness comparable to the .38 Special
Click to expand...

Overall, nice write up Carl but I believe this part is non-sense. I realize these aren't your words. The military designed the cartridge/carbine to be more effective than the 45acp 1911......Not to mention the numbers on paper for .30 carbine and .38sp are in a completely different universe.

Others beat me to it but yes the .357 (round for round) out of a carbine may have a slight "ballistic" advantage but that's it.......With the M1 one can lay down a whole lot more firepower with both speed and accuracy, than any .357 revolver or carbine.

If I had to defend my home or go to war tomorrow, the M1 Carbine wins hands down, as compared to anything firing the .357 round.
 
Luckly civilians can use expanding bullets (unless they live in The Peoples Republic of New Jersey) so the terminal effects of the M-1 Carbine can be greatly improved.
 
I have used the carbine loaded with 100 grain half jackets on deer with good results. 4 dead deer is a small sample but it did take 4 rounds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
.30 Carbine vs .357 magnum
2
Replies
26
Views
49K
DFW1911
D
CoalTrain49
  • Locked
Why no .357 mag auto rim carbine?
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
epoletna
E
Dr T
Contender Carbine in 30-30
2 3
Replies
71
Views
5K
gemihur
gemihur
M
  • Locked
Thoughts on .30 Carbine and .223/5.56x45
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
Deaf Smith
Deaf Smith
W
357 Magnum vs 5.56x45 in carbines
2 3 4 5
Replies
124
Views
4K
35 Whelen
35 Whelen
Back
Top