357 Ring Of Fire Update

The OP wants the cartridge to be similar enough in diameter to the 9mm that it won't cost the capacity penalty of going to a .40 caliber cartridge casing. That (and direct statements by the OP) is how we know it is not a bottlenecked case.
Click to expand...
What capacity penalty? I don't get it. Sorry--do you mean magazine capacity or case capacity (or both)?
 
Last edited:
Magazine capacity. The design requirements are 9mm magazine capacity with true .357Mag performance out of a 1911/10mm frame.
 
The one thing I still don't understand is why, as part of this process, there hasn't been a visit to a lab that could confirm the pressures.

The fact that the OP feels, because of circumstantial evidence, that the pressures are below X or not above Y is irrelevant.

If this development is supposed to have some commercial value, the OP will need to find a company that will give it backing. If it's a gun maker, they will want to know that they can sell it to the public. If it's an ammo company, they'll want to know that they can sell it to gun makers, to sell to the public.

In both those cases, they will not touch it if they don't also know another aspect is addressed: the risk of lawsuits.

The onus is on the OP to show investors that this cartridge is safe for the operator and dangerous for the target.

The former needs actual pressure values to prove that current gun designs can have a chamber made that will handle it again and again and again. And it seems to me knowing those values sooner will save a lot of R&D money for the OP. If ROF is running at excessively higher pressures, then it's dead in the water as a handgun cartridge. Better to know now....

I mean, I'm all for another interesting cartridge, but it's got to be more than just some chrono' readings.

That is my view.
 
Pre-orders are available for those interested.
Click to expand...
Of what? pistols?

Magazine capacity. The design requirements are 9mm magazine capacity with true .357Mag performance out of a 1911/10mm frame.
Click to expand...
My 20 sf I believe holds 16 of either 10 or 9 x 25 dillon--so I guess the real issue is size of the pistol itself depending on how many caps you want to pop.:confused:

This cartridge has a plus 3 advantage over the 9x25, and it uses 357 bullets.
This was the first test load for this bullet weight. There is room to improve.
More to come.
Thanks guys.
Dave
Click to expand...
You asked about how the dillon compares to yours at the 147 gr and I would say about the same with a stout but safe load in the dillon. However, performance falls off rapidly after that--but so does your's apparently compared to alternatives like the 10.
 
davelliot said:
JonSka,
All your conclusions are based on supposition, therefore are actually assumptions.
If any one of them were correct, I would've had trouble long ago.
Click to expand...

There is one reason that you have not had trouble yet: those engineers that you so enjoy making fun of were smart enough to design a safety factor into their guns.

It's just a matter of time until statistics catch up with you and you end up on the wrong end of the bell curve (same thing that makes casinos so profitable), suing the poor sucker that manufactured the brass and gun you blew up for the loss of your fingers and/or eyes while claiming you were shooting factory ammo.
 
All

Stag,
One advantage is simply additional rounds in the 20 sf...+3 in factory mags, with a substantial power factor.
Yes Stag, so far it is similar to the 9x25, but with a higher magazine capacity.
The conversion units and brass.
The load data will be sent when I have finished proofing...
The 200 grain LRN seem mild because I won't push them too hard to produce leading.
45 auto,
I will never pull such a trifling liberal stunt as you mention. I've already contacted Glock and told them what I'm doing. I'm a man of honor.
Pond,
If you're offering to help, I'd welcome it, but money is the drawback at this time.
Jon,
For some of this information to be placed here, would be like lifting my kilt...sorry, you're gonna have to wait for the stone toss like everybody else.
Has anyone looked at the latest videos on youtube?
Thanks guys
 
The only thing your YouTube videos show is excessive recoil which equates to too much time for an accurate follow up shot. Don't matter how powerful your cartridge is if it can't be shot accurately.
 
Davelliott said:
So far:
125@1500+fps
140@1385+fps
147@1365+fps
158@1300+fps
170@1150+fps
200@1000+fps
Click to expand...

Allow me to just mention that those who are concerned about terminal performance are more interested in muzzle energy than in pure velocity. So, to extrapolate from your numbers, I've calculated the muzzle energies associated with each or your loadings:

125@1500+fps ==> 624 ft-lbs
140@1385+fps ==> 596 ft-lbs
147@1365+fps ==> 608 ft-lbs
158@1300+fps ==> 593 ft-lbs
170@1150+fps ==> 499 ft-lbs
200@1000+fps ==> 537 ft-lbs


Turning now to some representative, commercially-available .38 Super loadings, we get the following:

90 gr JHP @ 1,557 fps ==> 485 ft-lb
100 gr FMJ @ 1,450 fps ==> 467 ft-lb
115 gr FMJ @ 1,395 fps ==> 497 ft-lb
130 gr FMJ @ 1,305 fps ==> 492 ft-lb
150 gr FMJ @ 1,148 fps ==> 439 ft-lb

So you are generating more muzzle energy than commercial .38 Super ammunition. So now let's take a look at 9x23 commercial ammo:

124 gr JSP @ 1,460 fps ==> 587 ft-lb
125 gr JHP @ 1,450 fps ==> 583 ft-lb

The .38 Super runs at 36,500 psi. As JohnKSa has noted, the 9x23 Winchester runs at 55,000 psi. The external case dimensions of .38 Super and 9x23 are the same, but the 9x23 is a thicker case, meaning less interior volume. So .38 Super loads in 9x23 cases would automaticaslly generate higher pressures -- which the case was designed to accomodate.

But if we look at your data for similar weight bullets, in 9x23 there's only 124-grain and 125-grain data available. At 1,450 fps, these generate approximately 585 ft-lbs of muzzle energy. You have a 125-grain bullet pushing 1,500 fps (3 percent faster) but producing almost 7 percent more muzzle energy. There is only one way that can be done ... higher pressure. Since the 9x23 is running at 55,000 psi, your pressures must be greater than 55,000 psi. That's a given ... even your cartridge is subject to the laws of physics.

The early 1900s 9x23 Bergmann-Bayard also seems to have been limited to bullets up to 125 grains in weight. I found some loading data for that cartridge, indicating 1,350 fps and 506 ft-lbs of energy. Again, the ROF is generating higher velocities, and thereby higher muzzle energies. The only way to send a bullet out of the barrel with more energy being carried is to impart more energy to the bullet by the firing cycle. More energy ==> more pressure.

The other thing I don't understand is why this is being promoted as a new cartridge. So it uses heavier bullets -- so what? I can take .45 ACP brass and load it with 255-grain or 300-grain Long Colt bullets. Does that make it a new cartridge, or is it still .45 ACP loaded with heavier bullets?
 
TMD

So, you haven't seen the latest...nor have you acknowledged my arthritis...nice.
I sincerely hope you never have to deal with these things...but if it happened, I hope you don't have to be subjected to the same attitude I've found by some here...
Thank you for being so observant.
 
Eagle,All

You would be SO right IF I were using a 23mm cartridge, but I'm not, so your statement is moot...as well as wrong.
Sorry, but I will not be goaded into lifting my kilt.
What kind of people are you folks associating with anyway? Charlatans? Con artists? Liberals???
I'm not offering anything to hurt good people. I'm only offering something I see as better in some way, than what's already there, to protect you and yours.
With the excessive usage of semiautos in the world today, no one seems to know what a real magnum revolver feels like or looks like when fired.
Of course it's gonna reel more than the 9...but try to explain to a 9er how the 10 or 45 feels...
And using those "physics" examples, there is no way a 460 or 960 could possibly exist.
Believe me, if I could, I'd show all about it...and end the peanut gallery.
All, no need to fear this...it's a simple offering...heavier bullets, higher capacity, better stopping power.
As noted in my owners manual, hot loads in these revolvers from Colt and S&W will shorten the life of the revolver and not recommended for a steady diet...so no, I'm not hell bent on reaching 1600+fps with a 170 grain bullet...ain't happening in this cartridge...it ain't a bear gun. It's intent, as noted is midrange 357 performance. So please don't dump your sweet 357 revolvers. They have their place. I just needed something which physically performs better than the 9mm and 38 spl. with heavier, penetrating bullets.
A question...how long does a 9x23 last in a Glock? 9x25?
Aren't there magazine issues with the 9x23 in the 10mm mags?
Do the 9x23 or 9x25 shorten the life or void warranties of the Glock?
It seems everyone will void the warranty if you handload.
 
For some of this information to be placed here, would be like lifting my kilt...sorry
Click to expand...
So you're saying that all of my assumptions and conclusions are wrong but you're not going correct even one of them because it would reveal proprietary information?

That's absolutely ridiculous.

Even your statement indicates that only "some" of the information would be proprietary. So use what's not proprietary and point out the some of what you say is in error.
You would be SO right IF I were using a 23mm cartridge...
Click to expand...
You and I both know (well, I know and I hope you know) that the length of the empty cartridge case is meaningless. It's not the length of the empty cartridge case, it's the case capacity and the COAL that makes the difference--basically it's how much space there is left for powder when the bullet is seated. Since you've stated repeatedly that the case is not bottlenecked and gives the same magazine capacity as a 9mm, and since the cartridge COAL is limited by the magazines of the guns you're working with, it's not difficult to put an upper bound on both COAL and case capacity.

Practical case capacity (the amount of empty space left in the cartridge when a bullet is seated) is going to determine the pressure at a given performance level. If the ROF has the same practical case capacity as the 9x23 (regardless of the length of the unloaded cartridge casing) then it's going to have to operate at higher pressures to achieve better performance.

Again, you've posted a lot of words but provided nothing at all that disproves or even calls into question any of the conclusions made.

This is getting to be a pattern. People point out issues and provide technical information to support their concerns and you respond by saying they are wrong and then rant about attitudes and persecution but without addressing any of the concerns or commenting on the technical issues raised.

Clearly you want to be taken seriously and you want to sell your product, but your current strategy is not going to achieve either goal.
...why would we need engineers, techs...
Click to expand...
The irony is that before I got my MS in engineering, I had a Bachelor of Science in engineering technology and worked as a tech. Obviously I heartily agree we need engineers and techs. They can provide a lot of useful and practical information.
 
JohnSKa

So, you're still trying to goad me?
Ain't hapnin.
Your pressure assumptions in a semiauto are based on what chamber design? What throat? What groove depth? What twist rate? What powder? What primer? What crimp? What bullet?
What's ridiculous, is asking half a question, then getting snotty when I can't give an answer to an improper question. As a matter of fact, this line of question is inappropriate and I'll not entertain it.
Honestly...as freaky as some are about this issue, I know they'll never pull a trigger.
Fixate on one thing, and you miss the rest of the parade. Relax...enjoy the ride.
 
I got a good idea at what he's making and it may be feasible.

He was using Glock 20 and 29 for his tests. The pistols are capable of chambering 25mm cartridges and that he had a barrel made for his 357rof. My guess is it's the 9x25 straight walled cartridge.
 
An overloaded Mauser Export?
Overloaded is the operative word.
If he doesn't lift his kilt and show us some psi, approval ain't happening.

Pressure testing is not cheap. The bare minimum would be a Contender barrel with a strain gauge rig. Low kilobuck range. The industry standard would be a real PV barrel for a Universal Receiver, multi-kilobuck range.

But the designer has Youtube.
 
My guess is it's the 9x25 straight walled cartridge.
Click to expand...
You can make the empty cartridge as long as you want (as long as it will fit into the magazine) but the critical variable is how much empty space is left for powder when the bullet is seated out as far as it can be to still fit in the magazine.

In other words, you can take the 9x23 case and turn it into a 9x30 case, but there still won't be any more space for powder. That's because you can't seat the bullets out any farther than before--if you do the loaded cases won't fit in the magazine. Therefore getting more performance will require more pressure because you're trying to get more performance out of the same powder space and that equals greater pressure.

The OP has stated that the outside diameter of the case is more or less the same as the 9mm and that the round is supposed to operate in 1911/10mm platforms. That places outside bounds on the case capacity and therefore on the performance possible at a given pressure.

The bottom line is that the 9x23 has as much case capacity as is reasonably possible for a 9mm/.357 cartridge that will fit in a 1911/10mm platform. That means getting more performance out of the ROF than the 9x23 provides will require more pressure.
So, you're still trying to goad me?
Click to expand...
No, Dave, it's never been about trying to get you to "lift your kilt" as you keep saying. It should be very obvious by now that, I don't think that there's anything under there worth seeing and that my main concern is that you're experimenting with unsafe pressures.
Your pressure assumptions in a semiauto are based on what chamber design? What throat? What groove depth? What twist rate? What powder? What primer? What crimp? What bullet?
Click to expand...
Dave, you know very well that all those things are red herrings. Yes, varying those things will all have some minor effects on pressure, but in practical terms (i.e. varying them within the practical limits), none of those things are going to make a hill of beans difference if you don't have enough usable case capacity to work with.
As a matter of fact, this line of question is inappropriate and I'll not entertain it.
Click to expand...
Anyone who's been following this discussion would expect nothing less at this point. After all, in the post immediately above yours, someone pointed out that "you...rant about attitudes and persecution but without addressing any of the concerns or commenting on the technical issues raised."
 
All

Jim,
Don't need your approval...don't care if you like it or not...it's done as a working model.
If ya want one fine...if ya don't, fine. I don't need to sell any to be satisfied...but I do have several in the wings.
I'll not be discouraged by liberal's distractions.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top