9mm revolvers ?

JimCunn said:
"Congratulations on re-inventing the SPEEDLOADER"

Yeah, a FREE speedloader :-)

Chrono results from snubnose :
135 gr .357Mag shortbarrel 298 ft-lb
147 gr 9mm 292 ft-lb

Not enough difference to worry me.
The reason I carry a 9mm 637-2 is for ammo commonality with my Hi-power and my Micro 9.
Click to expand...

Which ammo from which gun?
 
This whole thread is making me itchy.

Rimless ammo is for auto loaders, rimmed ammo is for revolvers.

Helmets are for motorcycles, seatbelts are for cars.

Pineapple is for breakfast, pepperoni is for pizza.

Cowboys shoot .45s and lever actions, Chicago gangsters shoot Thompsons, and Tactical Tommy shoots 9mm.

If you start mixing things like this up, pretty soon Corporations will be People and General Electric and General Dynamics will get married in a full dress ceremony instead of doing a corporate merger. Think of the children!

What next? Glock comes out with the G117... the 41 magnum Glock?

I didn’t make up these rules, they were just taught to me by my dad, his dad, and Hal, the neighbor.
 
Something that gets lost here when comparing velocity/ME is that both calibers have to be fired from the same barrel length and gun type (i.e. Revolver).

I don't have 9mm revolver data available, but I'm sure it's around someplace on the internet.

Here are some of my snubby revolver numbers:

From a 2" Colt Magnum Carry, I get Remington 357 Magnum 125 grain SJHP clocking at 1255 fps, which produces 437 ft. lbs. of ME.

Buffalo Bore's 357 Magnum 125 GDHP clocked at 1328 fps producing 489 ft. lbs. ME.

The low-speed Remington 357 Magnum 125 Golden Saber ran 1086 fps for 327 ft. lbs. ME.

At least try to make 'fair' comparisons. Cherry picking results only proves one's biases.
 
congratulations on re-inventing the SPEEDLOADER
Click to expand...

To be fair, it is a different animal when dealing with a clipped batch of ammo. The idea of having your rounds clipped together is interesting to me. I actually have a revolver in .357 magnum that is cut for moon clips. I've just never gotten around to trying them! :o
 
74A95 said:
Buffalo Bore's 357 Magnum 125 GDHP clocked at 1328 fps producing 489 ft. lbs. ME.
Click to expand...

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=122

Just for comparison and curiosities sake I ran over to Buffalo Bore's sight, picked out a +P round close in weight (124), and looked at what they were showing. Out of a 4" auto barrel they are showing 1296 FPS. Since the overall length of a 9MM is 1.169 inches we would still be dealing with close to the equivalent of a 3" revolver barrel and we still have not accounted for any ground lost due to cylinder gap. I would say its pretty safe to say that on the upper end of the loads the 357 has more power than the 9MM. I would also note the .357 is likely to be readily available with different bullet profiles because there was "never" a concern about loading .357 in an auto-loader.

Does energy (power) matter? I haven't shot a 9MM snub-nosed revolver and comparing recoil with an auto-pistol is not really fair (auto-pistols no doubt require and use some recoil to operate). For me .357 in a snub nose revolver has always been HARSH. I'm not sure how close hot +P 9MM would be in recoil. For me the biggest advantage of .357 (or .38) would be in the different bullet profiles that would be likely to be used for different things (for instance if in bear territory and HP round designed to expand is likely not a great thing)

As I no longer have any interest in touching off HOT .357 in a lightweight snub nose revolver the discussion is purely academic other than wondering if 9MM is just as aggressive in regards to recoil.
 
Last edited:
9mm recoil in my 12.5 oz snubs is brisker than .38+P and milder than .357Mag.
It really isn't bad at all.

Keep in mind that semi barrel length is measured breech to snout (3.15" in my Micro 9)
Breech to snout length in my 1-7/8" 637-2 is 3.5".
The revolver loses a bit of velocity due to the cylinder gap.
The semi loses a bit of velocity due to operating the slide.
Velocities out of the 9mm 637-2 are about 45-50 fps greater than the Micro 9.
 
Lohman446 said:
As I no longer have any interest in touching off HOT .357 in a lightweight snub nose revolver the discussion is purely academic other than wondering if 9MM is just as aggressive in regards to recoil.
Click to expand...

Recoil estimates in gun of same weight (2 lb for purposes of calculations);

9mm Luger 124 at 1150 fps. 6 gr powder = 3.71 ft lbs recoil

9 Major* 125 at 1394 fps. 8.5 gr powder = 5.85 ft lbs recoil

357 Magnum 125 at 1450 fps. 20 gr powder = 8.01 ft lbs recoil


* 9 Major is a really fast 9mm luger loaded for IPSC/USPSA competition. Velocity and powder charge based on my chronographed speed from a 5" barrel and 3N38 powder.

The generic 9mm and 357 mag are based on nominal speeds for those calibers from a 4" barrel.
 
"Never heard this before. Can you please explain? Thanks"
It takes power to operate the slide. That power isn't going into accelerating the bullet.
 
JimCunn said:
It takes power to operate the slide.
That power isn't going into accelerating the bullet.
Click to expand...

But it's the power that accelerates the bullet that moves the slide. For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction.

Let's get a physics person in here to work this out.
 
I am a physics person :-)
(though I confess that I spend most of my time on the flapping flight mechanics of articulated, tension battened membrane wings, and not this complicated stuff)
 
JimCunn said:
I am a physics person :-)
(though I confess that I spend most of my time on the flapping flight mechanics of articulated, tension battened membrane wings, and not this complicated stuff)
Click to expand...

So what does physics say about the power that accelerates the bullet in a slide that moves 1-2mm before the bullet exits and the other case where the slide does not move at all during or after the bullet exits?

If bullet velocity is reduced in the moving slide example, there must be a measurement of how much velocity is lost. Would that be some function of the recoil velocity based on the weight of the slide/gun and resistance of the recoil spring? Surely there is math to figure this out.
 
Wouldn’t the power that operates the slide be part of the recoil. I get there is no such thing as free energy but in the case of a firearm there is a lot of energy generated beyond that used to accelerate the bullet
 
Lohman446 said:
there is a lot of energy generated beyond that used to accelerate the bullet
Click to expand...

The burning gunpowder accelerates the bullet.

The burning gunpowder (and the explosion of the primer) is the only energy source when a gun goes bang.

Is there some other source of energy that I'm missing?
 
"Surely there is math to figure this out".

Of course there is - but, it would be far easier and faster to just chrono a few rounds with and without the slide clamped.

I'd rather spend my time looking at the effect of differential aktinofibril displacement on membrane camber distribution :-)
 
Last edited:
"I would say its pretty safe to say that on the upper end of the loads the 357 has more power than the 9MM"

Probably so. I assume we are talking about 9x19 at 35,000 psi here, and not 9x23 at 55,000 psi. Only one of my J-frames is chambered for 9x23 - the other two are chambered for 9x19. All three are also chambered for .357 Mag. All three weigh 12.5 oz. BTW, because of the titanium cylinders, I only fire 147gr 9mm in them. And frankly, I don't plan to fire any 9x23 through them ever.
 
Last edited:
JimCunn said:
"Surely there is math to figure this out".

Of course there is - but, it would be far easier and faster to just chrono a few rounds with and without the slide clamped.

I'd rather spend my time looking at the effect of differential aktinofibril displacement on membrane camber distribution :-)
Click to expand...

Okay. Go for it. Be sure to use a large enough sample and a powder with a narrow SD and ES to have confidence that if the velocity spreads overlap, you can statistically distinguish them. Say, 50 rounds under each condition.

Then, of course, one would want to do the physics math to see if the empirical velocity results are consistent with what physics predicts. You know, to confirm the physics theory is consistent with reality.

Let us know what the results are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top