.38 = .357 How Possible?

O

Old Fud

New member
How is it possible that the .38 and the .357 fit into the same barrel?
And which is right?

There's 23 thousands of an inch difference.
You can see that with a nekkid eyeball.
The engineers of the 1800's were top-notch people with good instruments.
They did NOT make mistakes like that.
So I have to believe .38 is correct.

Yet "folk" calmly talk about 9mm and .38 being equal and 9mm = .354"

Yes, I've heard the story of the invention of the "magnum". But that doesn't explain the not-even-CLOSE statement of bullet diameter.

This has been like a piece of popcorn shell stuck in my teeth for some time now. Will somebody please help me out here?

Befuddled Fud
 
The case for both the 357 and 38 special is .379, with a rim of .440. Exactly the same.
The bullet diameter for the 38 special is .359 lead or .358 jacketed. The .357 magnum is either .357 or if loaded to SAAMI specifications, it would be .359.
 
In the caliber designation ".38 special" the ".38" is nominal, as is the .32 revolver. Neither gun shoots .38" or .32" diameter bullets.

Think of other products that are refered to by a nominal reference (2x4 lumber, automibile engine size expressed in liters, etc.).

When they invented the .357 Magnum caliber they were looking for a name that would distinguish it from the .38 special. They use the same exact bullets. They are the same diameter. They have different case lengths.

Do some reading on the subject.
 
Thirties, please don't be rude. I HAVE read.
The first thing I read is that caliber is bullet diameter, or BORE diameter of the barrel. It may be rounded, or it may even be artificially expanded to indicate a slight difference while still the same, (e.g. .22 vs .223, vs others like it) but it is always a reflection of the hole in the barrel.

As I recall, the .38 round was invented in the days of smokeless powder. It was criticized as being a non-stopper during the Spanish-American war, so the charge was increased and the bullet re-named to the ".38 special".

During prohibition, the gov't wanted an even more powerful round so they could penetrate vehicles. S&W increased the charge again. The folk tale was that the name "Magnum" (after champagne) was invented to provide the marketing differentiation. I also believe S&W had been able to deliver the power in the exact same cartridge but knew the pistol itself had to be beefed up to take the pressures, so whether they needed to or not, the purposely lengthened the cartridge to insure nobody would be able to put the hi-pressure round into a standard revolver.

But my question was why it had been named a .38 in the first place.
REPEAT -- "caliber is bore size".
I KNOW Smith, Wesson, Colt, were competent engineers -- it is not possible for them to have made a .023 inch error.
I Know "rounded" numbers would have been to the nearest 1/100th. So a .358 or a .359 bullet should have been called a .36. Why wasn't it?

Caegal -- you provided me with a hint of the answer and for that I thank you.
Are you suggesting the round was named after the cartridge diameter -- i.e. the cylinder holes???? If so, was that a S&W oddity, or is the colt .45 not a .45?

Still looking for answers, people.
 
Although the caliber may be the bore size, the caliber is not always the name of the cartridge. Maybe .38 had a better "ring" to it than .358 for marketing purposes.
Another example of caliber not matching cartridge name:
.44 Magnum-caliber is .429-.430
 
Read these threads, and all will be revealed...

The short of it is, though, that the name has a lot to do with history, and how things USED to be, when the earliest .38 and .44 caliber rounds actually used bullets of .38 and .44 caliber.

A lot of it later had to do with marketing. Cartridge nomenclature is less science and more advertising art.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=146501&highlight=heeled+bullet

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98783&highlight=heeled+bullet

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75805&highlight=heeled+bullet

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61758&highlight=heeled+bullet

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7460&highlight=heeled+bullet

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21694&highlight=heeled+bullet
 
Smith and Wesson bores

You might be confused by the fact that the .38 S&W has a larger bore than the .38 S&W special. The magnum is just the special in a longer case, named the .357 to equal the bore size, and avoid confusion with the .38's. I suppose .38 was somehow referring to the case diameter or something. It is a leftover from the 1800's and is not accurate in description. Sometimes makers of cartridges or guns change the numbers slightly to differentiate them from the competition. Like maybe useing the land diameter or the groove diameter or just to be different.
If you want exact facts look in a loading manual. They always show dimensions of the cartridge in question.
 
When 38 originally appeared on the scene did they not use outside lubed heel based bullets? If so that could have used the extreme outside dimensions of the bullet instead of the bore.
 
The reason the .38 is called a .38 is because when they first came out (going all the way back to the .38 Long Colt) the bullets were the same diameter as the case with a heel going down into the case (like the .22 Long rifle still does). When they started to load smokeless rounds, they made the bullets the diameter of the INSIDE of the case. They decided not to change the name of the .38 special to .357 special, they did, however do so when they brought out the .357 Magnum.
 
Fud,
Nobody's engineers made any mistakes, there are a number of cartridges & calibers that differ from bore diameters, or are not "correctly" rounded off.
The old percussion .36 revolvers typically shot .375-inch balls, I have a replica that shoots a .380-inch ball. They're all called .36 caliber guns. Percussion reproduction .44 caliber revolvers shoot .454-.457-inch balls, which makes them .45s, actually.
.45-70 rifles usually take a .457-.459-inch bullet. And so on. Why wasn't it rounded off to be a .46 caliber? Who knows? Who cares?
The .303 British actually shoots a .311 bullet. Why is it called a .303? The AK 47 is a 7.62X39 caliber, but again it uses .311 bullets. Why? Why are there 34 shades of silver paint on new cars that have different color names but look exactly the same? Who knows? It's nothing to lose sleep over.
There's frequently very little rhyme or reason for a caliber's name, and it's nothing to worry about.
.38s and .357s typically use a .357-.358-inch bore, bullets of the same diameter in both calibers (.357-.359) fit quite easily. Where do you perceive a problem?
The nominal bore diameter for the 9mm is .355-inches. You can shoot 9mm bullets (I said BULLETS, that doesn't mean cartridges are interchangeable) down the bore of a .38/.357 and .357-inch bullets down the bore of a 9mm. Pressures will fluctuate a little and accuracy may be variable depending on the true bore diameters and true bullet diameters, but it can be done. The 9mm was a European development, they used the metric system to designate calibers, so they didn't call it a 35 1/2 or a .35 or a .36.
Not sure what your concern is, you're a little vague on the nature of the problem. The road to madness lies in the direction of trying to figure out why calibers are named the way they are.
Denis
 
Some 7.62 x 39 have .308 bores - later Rugers I think - and don't some .32 H&R Magnums use .308 bores - Contenders I think - instead of .312? Hope this cuts thru the haze a bit. :D Engineering meets marketing and is trumped by the accounting department.
 
Last edited:
size vs. designation

As previously noted, there are verious reasons for caliber designation. In days of old a cartrige and arms manufacturers often didn't want to credit a competitors cartridge for their rifle so they changed the name. Occasionally this was accomplished by using the dimension to the top of the rifling lands. In other cases they used the measurement to the bottom of the grooves. Sometimes they apparently threw darts at a spinning wheel.
 
Wow! And thank you, all.

I asked. I was answered. Wow!

Mike -- I read the threads. Only retained about 20% of what I read, but Now I know a lot more history than I did before.

DPris -- I never had a problem. I had curiosity. I expected it all to make sense. As you said, "the road to madness is expecting things to make sense."

If I made a mistake in reasoning, it was in believing the inventors of the 1800s and early 1900s were immune to "marketing". I thought "Marketing" was an evil invention of the mid-to-late 20th century and a disease we really should eradicate one of these days -- like lawyers and people who voted for Barbara Boxer. Sigh.

Thank you all for your informative responses.
Happy Fud.
 
"If I made a mistake in reasoning, it was in believing the inventors of the 1800s and early 1900s were immune to "marketing". I thought "Marketing" was an evil invention of the mid-to-late 20th century and a disease we really should eradicate one of these days..."


BBBBBBBBWWWWWWWWWWWWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH!

Smith & Wesson and Colt both had their own proprietary .32 and .38 caliber revolver rounds for a variety of small pistols.

In the case of the .38s, it was the .38 Smith & Wesson and the .38 Short Colt. S&W's round handily beat Colt in popularity, to the point where eventually Colt HAD to offer the S&W round to compete.

Only, they didn't want to stamp their arch rival's designation (.38 S&W) on the barrels of their guns. So, they simply reconfigured the bullet, and called it the .38 Colt New Police, and so marked the guns and boxes of ammo. Later, they added a heavier bullet, and called it the .38 Colt Super Police.

Same with the .32 S&W Long. Colt called their version the .32 Colt New Police.

Savage Arms (.303 Savage) and Marling Firearms (.25-36) both developed cartridges that their lever actions that were VERY similar, and kind of hard to tell apart, from the Winchester .30-30 and .25-35 rounds. They marketed them as being "superior" in all ways to the Winchester rounds, when in fact they were so identical as to be, well, identical.

Winchester wasn't above marketing against themselves.

Around 1887 they brought out the .38-56, which was supposedly hotter, better, and spiffier than Ballard's .38-55. Wasn't the case, though. They were pretty much identical in power.

The .38-56 didn't sell well, though, so in 1894 Winchester co-opted the Ballard round for its new Model 1894. Only they renamed it the .38-55 Winchester.

They also co-opted the .32-40, which was also a Ballard round.

Marketing and product placement has been alive and well for a long time.
 
along those lines... if a 9mm and .380 have the same bore, why the heck do they call the 9mm short a .380????? if it is indeed a .355" bullet and a 9x17mm case, why the confusion? They have a .22 short, a .22 long, and a .22lr (among others), why not call the .380 a 9mm short? or how about calling it a .355? For marketing purposes and the idea of avoiding confusion, they could have came up with a NAME for the different length cartridges that carry the same diameter bullet.... but instead they used NUMBERS that were an incorrect and mis-represented yet very detailed measurement of the bullet. If it is not a .380" diameter bullet, where the heck did they come up with that particular number, maybe some guy pulled it out of his butt? and why the 0 on the end? why not just .38" (which is the same number as .380" last I checked). I see your point Fud....and it bothers me too. They should have used the logic that the guy who named the different .22 caliber cartridges used.... which is, using the correct number for all cartridges that have the same diameter, then adding a notation to the end that denotes a specific length or different load. Would it not have been just as easy and non-confusing to call a .357mag, a .38 magnum? oh well, the world is crazy
 
John,

This is another origin problem. Browning invented .380, but as McDonalds discovered, they use the Metric system over there, so 9mm Kurz became the common European name. 9mm is German, and we never had the bright idea of renaming it .380 Much Longer, since we have a love/hate relationship with the Metric system.
 
"Thirties, please don't be rude. I HAVE read."

Old Fud, please realize I wasn't being rude. I should have typed more. Here is what I meant:

Read up on the subject, you will learn the fascinating history of handguns and their calibers. The .38special, and other caliber "families" have an interesting history indeed.

Sorry that you took offense -- none was intended.
 
"why not call the .380 a 9mm short?"

Why?

Because when Colt introduced the guns in the United States, the round was already called the 9mm Kurz, Corto, and/or Short (often with Browning before the word) in Europe.

Colt wanted to name it something that people here would be familiar with, so they trotted out .38. There were LOTS of nominally .38 caliber cartridges around at the time.

But, Colt couldn't simply call it the .38 ACP, because there already was one, which Browning had introduced some years before.

They also didn't want to call it the .35, as that was a caliber that wasn't really familiar to Americans. Also, I'm not sure, but by the time the .380 came out, S&W MAY have already introduced its .35 S&W auto for their Clement designed semi-auto, which in reality was nothing more than a .32 ACP with slightly different dimensions (and which flopped like a brick).

Use the metric designation? Other than the 6mm Lee Navy (which never made much of a splash at all), Americans were almost completely unfamiliar with cartridges named metrically.
 
Oh, and FYI?

I've seen two references in print, VERY old print, prior to 1930, to the .38 Luger round.

You only get 1 guess to figure out what that cartridge is...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top