Revolver cartridge carbines - A why don't they thread

[Arizona_Mike]

The 460 Rowland (1/16" longer than the 45 acp) is comparable to the 44 mag, in short barrels at least. Not a lot of case volume to take advantage of slower powders in longer barrels though.

The .460 Rowland is amazing in short barrels. If you poke around Ballistics by the Inch, you find that the 10mm Auto energy actually scales better with longer barrels, esp. the boutique manufacturers that come close to the original Norma/Dornaus & Dixon specs.

I chopped my 10mm MechTech to 13.5" and am building a 10mm 9" Roni.

Mike

 

[benzy2]

I find this question rather funny. Look at it from the manufacturer's point. The guys who bash the AR, call a semi-auto pistol a "bottom feeder", and only shoot rimmed cases now want to join the semi auto world? Really? It spits in the face of everything the dedicated rimmed shooter has stood for since rimless auto cases have been popularized. I simply don't see the demand in a semi auto platform. Maybe a bolt or lever gun, but not a semi-auto, the same feed system which has been mocked, hated, and trashed for countless decades by this same group of people.

If I were to guess, and it is only a guess, I'd say the manufacturers see the market as well too small. If a given mass of people were to desire a semi-auto carbine in a pistol round, it would feel like that mass would be those using that pistol round in a semi-auto pistol. Ignoring the headaches that come with a rimmed case, the guys who only shoot rimmed case guns tend to not be interested in auto loaders, or they would have moved to rimless cases long ago.

If you have a group that enjoys both revolvers/lever guns as well as semi-auto pistols/rifles, I'm guessing you've lost the issue where a pistol caliber carbine "HAS" to be chambered in a rimmed case. This group would seem to be more likely to shoot a cut down .223 case in something near .357 bullet diameter rather than fight the headaches often found with a rimmed case.

The last group would be the semi-auto only shooters, who don't shoot a rimmed case now, and have no desire to do so in a pistol caliber carbine.

That means your market for such a rifle, would be the guys who only shoot rimmed cases and want a semi-auto, even though they despise the idea of every other semi-auto. Good luck selling such a beast. My gut feeling is that the guys who only enjoy rimmed cases would find a high quality lever action rifle/carbine to be a better compromise than a semi-auto. It will feed fine, allow loads from powder puff to full house, and as has been shown it will be plenty fast for most any hunting or range situation. The die hard rimmed a case guys have been going over those benefits for year, and now in this thread those guys want to abandon them for a semi-auto. Seems odd.

 

[Laphroaig]

^ I've been keeping up with this post and thought pretty much the same thing as benzy.

I think that there are so many caliber adaptations in the AR platform, that most bases are covered. Up to the 458 SOCOM, which should satisfy the big bore shooters. Its not hard to realize that a manufacturer would not want to make an investment to try and compete with the hugely popular AR market.

I can't understand how anyone can hate AR's. Not like them, well that's your choice. Prefer lever actions, hard to dispute.

Laphroaig

 

[BCRider]

Well, by the lack of such firearm options it would seem that the majority of the shooting public along with the manufacturers agree with you. There were a couple of rimmed carbines in the past but as benzy points out with a bit of sarcasm and vinegar the offerings met with limited success. Which would be why we don't see a lot of options for this sort of gun out there.

It's interesting to note that Ruger is having yet another go at this idea with their models 77/357 and 77/44 bolt action rifles in .357 and .44Mag. Is this simply a case of them testing the waters again or will the public jump on board this time? Of course these options don't come cheap. So the cost of them might be their own death song.

 

[CraigC]

This very obviously is not about need, but to answer your question using an example my 300 Blackout and my Marlin 1894c have very similar muzzle velocities with similar weight bullets but even at 75 to 100 yards the Blackout retains quite a bit more velocity and momentum and will penatrate better.

Are you telling me that the .300 is a more effective cartridge???

 

[mavracer]

Are you telling me that the .300 is a more effective cartridge???

More effective than a .357 and with no more recoil.
Both starting at 2000fps a .308 125gr Nosler is going 250fps faster and has 240 more fl lbs than a .357 125gr XTP at just 100 yards. That's more that 25% more energy.
And if you want 44 mag or 45 Colt ballistics in an auto there's the 450 Bushmaster, 458 Socom and 50 Beowulf that'll all work in a AR15/Mini 14 length action and feed fine from a box mag.

 

[CoalTrain49]

In the ruger survey, they specifically ask if you would be interested in a mini-14 in another caliber than .223.

You should take that survey.

I did.

I want a carbine that uses a straight wall rimless case. If nothing shows up soon I'll buy one in 45 ACP. A hot 9 or 357 would be better though. 100 yard max is all I want. I don't want a bolt gun, or a lever gun, or an AR. A bolt gun is better suited for high power rifle cartridges. I have no use for those. A lever gun is better suited for rimmed cartridges. Nothing wrong with that but a lever gun is 1890's. I'm not a cowboy shooter. An AR is better suited for a rifle cartridge. They weren't designed to run pistol rounds. That leaves us with something like an M1 carbine with a bigger bore or a mini. A rifle designed around a rimless 38, 40, 44 or 45. The fun factor would be huge. If you have ever shot an M1 carbine you would know what I'm talking about. Lets just get it to run some hot pistol ammo from a 15 round mag. If nothing else gang bangers would buy them by the trunk load.

 

[benzy2]

Well, by the lack of such firearm options it would seem that the majority of the shooting public along with the manufacturers agree with you. There were a couple of rimmed carbines in the past but as benzy points out with a bit of sarcasm and vinegar the offerings met with limited success. Which would be why we don't see a lot of options for this sort of gun out there.

It's interesting to note that Ruger is having yet another go at this idea with their models 77/357 and 77/44 bolt action rifles in .357 and .44Mag. Is this simply a case of them testing the waters again or will the public jump on board this time? Of course these options don't come cheap. So the cost of them might be their own death song.

I'll be honest, I do like the idea and I'm not against it, but I'm not against any well built pistol caliber carbine. I think from a build perspective, a case built for auto loaders makes more sense, even if its sized and designed to duplicate performance of the typical rimmed case loads. I greatly enjoyed the M1 carbine I had and while its hard to admit in public, a gun forum no less, the hi point carbine I shot was a ton of fun. I'm just a skeptic that there is a market. If you only shoot cases designed for auto-loaders you probably won't have interest in an auto-loader designed to feed a rimmed case. If you shoot both, it may appeal to you but in the same breath it would have to be a gain over what a similar priced model could do with a common auto-loader round. And then there are the revolver/lever action guys who are set that a rimmed case is the only way to go, which sounds like a crowd not interested in an auto-loader regardless of if the case has a rim.

It simply feels like a complicated fix to a simple problem, and a problem that rimless cases have solved long ago. Now, if there was such a gun that was reliable, well priced, and fed/cycled both 38 special as well as 357 magnum, I'd be very interested. I'm not holding my breath and figure one of the non-AR based 9mm options will be my ending point.

 

[CraigC]

Both starting at 2000fps a .308 125gr Nosler is going 250fps faster and has 240 more fl lbs than a .357 125gr XTP at just 100 yards. That's more that 25% more energy.

That's a light varmint load for the .357. Yes, I surely would expect the .300 to outpenetrate it. A .357 carbine really needs at least a 158gr if not 180gr bullets.

And if you want 44 mag or 45 Colt ballistics in an auto there's the 450 Bushmaster, 458 Socom and 50 Beowulf that'll all work in a AR15/Mini 14 length action and feed fine from a box mag.

Those are rifle cartridges that require a rifle-length action and magazines with low capacity. They don't nullify the concept any more than the .35Rem, .444Marlin or .45-70 rifles nullify the .357, .44Mag or .45Colt carbine.

 

[mavracer]

That's a light varmint load for the .357. Yes, I surely would expect the .300 to outpenetrate it. A .357 carbine really needs at least a 158gr if not 180gr bullets.

300 blackout will match 357 velocity with heavier bullets too and still retain a 20-25% edge due to ballistic coefficient, don't try to muddy the water

Those are rifle cartridges that require a rifle-length action and magazines with low capacity.

They use box mags with whatever capacity you'd want to hang out the bottom

They don't nullify the concept any more than the .35Rem, .444Marlin or .45-70 rifles nullify the .357, .44Mag or .45Colt carbine.

The 357, 44mag and 45 Colt carbine concept is to have commonality, If you don't have commonality of ammo the concept is a far less enticing one.
Look I'm not saying the concept won't work, I'm saying it won't sell.

 

[CraigC]

...don't try to muddy the water...

You're the one comparing a deer load in a rifle round to a varmint load in a revolver round.

I'm sorry but comparing equal weights between the .300 (rifle round) to the .357 (revolver round) without any regard for diameter or application, is silly.

The 357, 44mag and 45 Colt carbine concept is to have commonality...

I disagree. That is but one attribute but far from the only. It's also the most overrated and the most easily ignored. IMHO, a shorter, lighter carbine with less recoil, less muzzle blast and greater magazine capacity are much higher on the priority list. I use several pistol cartridge leverguns and rarely is my sidearm the same chambering.

They use box mags with whatever capacity you'd want to hang out the bottom

They use magazines adapted from .223 magazines. Ever checked the capacity of a .450BM or .50Beowulf? A 30rd .223 magazine is equivalent to a 10rd .50 magazine. Like I said before, there are too many compromises made to adapt the AR to 'some' other chamberings and not everybody wants an AR.

 

[gotboostvr]

How about something like a slightly beefed up Marlin camp 45 carbine with an adjustable gasblock?

Lets you run 45acp for plinkin' and 460 Rowland for huntin' and all out of commonly available 1911 mags or Glock 21 if whomever decides for a higher capacity option.

People not interested in a a hunting carbine would probably love it just as much as the older camp carbines, but people who need the torque would be as enamored as some are with their Ruger Deerfield 44 mag semi-autos.

Almost as versatile as a 45lc lever action I think.

 

[ugaarguy]

I've long wondered why no one ever invented rimless versions of the .357 mag and .44 mag that would not only stack well in a magazine, but would still be usable in revolvers by way of moon clips.

Allow me to reiterate. Rimless .357 Mag is 9x23 Winchester. Rimless .41 Mag is 10mm Auto at original Norma / D&D levels. Rimless .44 Magnum is .460 Rowland.

I disagree. That is but one attribute but far from the only. It's also the most overrated and the most easily ignored. IMHO, a shorter, lighter carbine with less recoil, less muzzle blast and greater magazine capacity are much higher on the priority list. I use several pistol cartridge leverguns and rarely is my sidearm the same chambering.

If you're not worried about compatibility in chambering between the carbine and the handgun then why worry about usability in a revolver with moon clips?

 

[mavracer]

You're the one comparing a deer load in a rifle round to a varmint load in a revolver round.

ROTFLMAO
The 125gr 300 is a better varmint round too iffin you member it's going faster and shoots a bunch flatter making shooting itty-bitty varmints easier. The reason it works for deer is it's sectional density advantage. The same sectional density and ballistic coefiecient advantages exist regardless of what bullet weight you want to pick, If you want to use heavier bullets to make your 357 penatrate that's fine but the BO can do the same still retaining better velocity and momentum allowing for better penatration.

They use magazines adapted from .223 magazines. Ever checked the capacity of a .450BM or .50Beowulf? A 30rd .223 magazine is equivalent to a 10rd .50 magazine. Like I said before, there are too many compromises made to adapt the AR to 'some' other chamberings and not everybody wants an AR.

Well if we're building a new gun anyway:banghead:

 

[CoalTrain49]

Allow me to reiterate. Rimless .357 Mag is 9x23 Winchester. Rimless .41 Mag is 10mm Auto at original Norma / D&D levels. Rimless .44 Magnum is .460 Rowland.

Thank you. Now we're getting somewhere. Any of those will work. Actually, they would all be desirable because the cartridges exist now and there is no need to start messing with a revolver cartridge.

It seems to me that sales of Ruger Mini's have diminished mostly because AR sales have killed it. Want to know how to breath some new life into that carbine? Forget about the rifle cartridges and make it a PCC using the above cartridges. I'll take a 10 mm as soon as they build it.

 

[CraigC]

Allow me to reiterate. Rimless .357 Mag is 9x23 Winchester. Rimless .41 Mag is 10mm Auto at original Norma / D&D levels. Rimless .44 Magnum is .460 Rowland.

Not really. All these auto pistol cartridges run higher pressures but due to less powder capacity, will not match the revolver cartridges in a longer barrel or with heavier bullets that utilize more of the case.

The 9x23 falls short on powder capacity and existing 9mm bullets are pitiful for use in a carbine at that velocity range. The .351WSL .357AutoMag is a better solution.

The 10mm falls well short of the .41Mag with the same bullet problem. The .401WSL or the .44Automag necked to .41 is a better solution.

The .460 is only similar with 185-230gr bullets. The .44Mag is capable of much, much more and will launch a bullet 100gr heavier at the same velocity. The .44Automag or .45WinMag would be a better solution.

The 125gr 300 is a better varmint round too iffin you member it's going faster and shoots a bunch flatter making shooting itty-bitty varmints easier.

IT'S A RIFLE ROUND! IT HAS TO EXPAND TO DO ITS JOB! HOW MUCH IS A 180gr .30cal BULLET GOING TO EXPAND WHEN FIRED AT 1500FPS??? You're comparing apples to grapefruit.

 

[Jason_W]

The 125gr 300 is a better varmint round too iffin you member it's going faster

Not by all that much. Most factory loads for the .300 push a 125 grain bullet to 2200 f/s. I've clocked remington factory .357 mag 125 grain loads going 2100 f/s from an 18" barrel.

Yes, the .300 will hold velocity for longer due to the better BC, but that's irrelevant as both rounds really should be relegated to close range use on medium game. A 50-75 yard hit on a deer, all other factors being equal, will yield the same result. Varmint shooting is a whole other ball game and neither round is ideal for it.

 

[Jason_W]

Not really. All these auto pistol cartridges run higher pressures but due to less powder capacity, will not match the revolver cartridges in a longer barrel or with heavier bullets that utilize more of the case.

The 9x23 falls short on powder capacity and existing 9mm bullets are pitiful for use in a carbine at that velocity range. The .351WSL .357AutoMag is a better solution.

The 10mm falls well short of the .41Mag with the same bullet problem. The .401WSL or the .44Automag necked to .41 is a better solution.

The .460 is only similar with 185-230gr bullets. The .44Mag is capable of much, much more and will launch a bullet 100gr heavier at the same velocity. The .44Automag or .45WinMag would be a better solution.

This. Revolver rounds will always beat semi-auto pistol rounds when it comes to hunting due to the bullet weight restrictions of the latter. Also, auto pistol bullets tend to be designed to open up very quickly when slower, more controlled, expansion is better for hunting.

 

[CoalTrain49]

This. Revolver rounds will always beat semi-auto pistol rounds when it comes to hunting due to the bullet weight restrictions of the latter. Also, auto pistol bullets tend to be designed to open up very quickly when slower, more controlled, expansion is better for hunting.

Lever and bolt guns are already being built in 357 and 44 mag. Perfect for hunting as you don't need an auto loader for that anyway. There isn't a lot more to do there. There is however with PCC's. I would not invision hunting with one, I would use a bolt or lever gun for that. I'm talking about a patrol or SD rifle. Something you could use to take someone out with @ 100 yards without praying before every shot. The problem I see with an AR is too much range. Clear field of fire for 400 yards in an urban setting. Good luck with that.

 

[CraigC]

I would not invision hunting with one, I would use a bolt or lever gun for that. I'm talking about a patrol or SD rifle.

I'm thinking something more universally useful. With 10 or 20rd magazines, perfect for around the farm/ranch, riding the fence or late night critters in your feed. Equally perfect for those two-legged nocturnal varmints as well. Replace the 20rd with a 5rd and it's a 150-175yrd medium game rifle or virtually anything on the continent within 100yds. Depending on the chambering and how it's loaded.

 

[mavracer]

HOW MUCH IS A 180gr .30cal BULLET GOING TO EXPAND WHEN FIRED AT 1500FPS???

Actually many of the 30 cal bullets are now designed for long range hunting with bigger 30 cal rifles, Hornady SSTs mushroom quite nicely at 300 velocity at 100 yards.

Yes, the .300 will hold velocity for longer due to the better BC, but that's irrelevant

It's funny that when compared to a 9mm 200fps slower is the difference between bouncing off goblins and the hammer of Thor. but 200 fps faster is irrelevant. lol

 

[ugaarguy]

This. Revolver rounds will always beat semi-auto pistol rounds when it comes to hunting due to the bullet weight restrictions of the latter. Also, auto pistol bullets tend to be designed to open up very quickly when slower, more controlled, expansion is better for hunting.

Okay, there's always .338 Whisper #2 / .338 Thumper. Plenty of heavy construction .338" bullets, and it's a .223 Rem / .221 Fireball case with no shoulder. That's an 8.5x35mm case that can run at 55k psi with similar case capacity to the shorter but thinner .357 Mag case (9x33) that runs at 35k psi.

Keep in mind that 9x23 Win is the product of guys hot rodding .38 Super by using .223 Rem cases that had the necks inside reamed to hold a .355" bullet. One could do the same thing keeping the case at 35mm and using .357" bullets. Or use a 33mm case if you must make it compatible with a moon clipped revolver. Then any .223 rifle could be converted with a bbl swap.

In other words, a literal rimless .357 Mag cartridge would have a diameter and overall length so close to .223 Rem that it wouldn't be feasible for manufacturers to make a separate rifle action for that cartridge.

Similarly, .44 AMP (aka .44 Automag) uses .429" (.44 mag pistol) bullets loaded in .308 / .30-06 cases trimmed to the 33mm length as the rimmed .44 Mag case. .44 AMP is significantly shorter than a .308 Win though. So, you could probably make a similar cartridge based on 7.62x39 cases that could be used in existing 7.62x39 rifles with a bbl swap.

 

[ugaarguy]

The problem I see with an AR is too much range. Clear field of fire for 400 yards in an urban setting. Good luck with that.

Yet typical .223 Rem commercial loads have significantly, sometimes drastically, less barrier penetration than service pistol JHPs out of pistols.