Manufacturing question regarding .357 Magnum.

"The bottom line is that if you pick any common factory loading of the .357Mag you can safely exceed its performance in the 10mm with similar weight bullets."

Well, heck. That's all I need to hear! Where is a good place to get reloading equipment for 10mm? I haven't seen dies or even brass around here for it.
 
I think any company that sells reloading dies should have 10mm dies.

By the way, the key to my statement is the part about "common factory loading". In other words, if you try to beat a Buffalobore or DoubleTap .357Mag loading with the 10mm you're probably going to blow up a gun. On the other hand, if you look at anything in .357Mag loaded by Federal, Winchester, Remington, etc. you should be able to exceed it with a 10mm reload.

Or you could just buy DoubleTap or BuffaloBore 10mm ammunition. They've already done the R&D for you.
 
hhhmmm...reloading stuff :confused:

might wanna try Midway USA, Brownell's, Sportsman's Guide, or order the stuff through a trusted local gun shop; ask around your local sportsmans' club where you can get stuff at a good price...sometimes you'll run into someone who knows someone who is selling their reloading stuff; good luck!!!

about the 'which caliber makes the bigger boom for the buck' discussion...I basically have 3 power levels with my handguns; .38 spl & .38 spl +p...if I want bigger boom then .357 mag...if I want even bigger boom then .44 mag; my only semiauto is a Ruger 9mm parabellum, but that might soon be going away (family illness, bigger bills, gotta cut the 'bang bang' herd a bit to stay ahead...oh well, life sucks sometimes!!!
 
Yep, a problem looking for an answer.

Glock 20 15 round mag, with a 6" Dillon barrel conversion.

Caliber : 9X25

Bullet : 95gr. FMJ

Ballistics : 2000fps / 844 ft. lbs. - 6" Lone Wolf bbl



Caliber : 9X25

Bullet : 90gr. Bonded Defense JHP

Ballistics : 2100fps / 881 ft. lbs. 6" Lone Wolf bbl


Caliber : 9X25

Bullet : 125gr. Bonded Defense JHP

Ballistics : 1700fps / 803 ft.lbs
 
More than anything else, its the grip

The .357 Mag is long. 1.290" case length. This compares with the 1.285" of the .44 Mag. A fraction under 33mm case length. Compare this to "service" class auto pistol rounds, and its huge.

Rounds close to the .357 Mag have been done for the auto pistol, the 9mm Win mag being one. The Automag IV was chambered in 9mm and .45 Win mag. The problem is the guns are big, have large to huge grips, and are not even remotely in the service pistol category.

Only a few people like magnum autos. The are too big for many uses. Too expensive, don't hold enough rounds for some folks, don't offer "advantages" over revolvers, etc.

I have all the first gen magnum autos made during the 70s-80s, and the smallest of them is the Coonan. And it is still significantly larger (and heavier) than a full size 1911A1.
Next would be the LAR Grizzly, which is bigger yet.

Magnum autos are specialty pieces. Like ALL autos, you can't run mild and wild loads without modification (the exception is the Wildey, with an adjustable gas system), like you can in all revolvers. This turns some folks off. You can't make double stack mags, and still get you hand around them (unless you are Andre the Giant), this "lack" of firepower turns some folks off (these same folks see revolvers as hopelessly short of firepower as well).

Magnum autos can't be all things to all people. In the real world, they haven't been enough things to enough people to claim a significant share of the retail market. Only the Wildey and the Desert Eagle are still in production, and Wildey is only made in very small numbers, compared to the DE.

You could build a double stack polymer frame rimless .357 magnum auto pistol, but damn few people would buy one, except for collectors :D, and fewer of them would actually be able to shoot it! One advantage of the big heavy magnum autos is the weight damps the recoil, some. A polymer frame magnum would be a real bear to shoot, even with a (single stack) grip that you could hold on to!

As to the .357 Auto Mag (.357AMP), it is the .44AMP case necked down, and will shoot bullets of equal weight nearly 500fps faster than the .357magnum revolver round! Small numbers of the Grizzly were chambered for the .357 GrizzlyWinMag, a dimensionally identical round to the .357AMP, using the .45 Win Mag as its parent case.
 
Now, I know it is unrealistic because rimmed cartridges are just not a good mix with magazines as they don't feed reliably. But, I was wondering what keep us from being able to take the .357 mag cartridge and just changing the rear to that of an auto cartridge?
Click to expand...

This part of the question has been answered.

I know that someone is thinking of the .357 Sig being the answer to my question, but it isn't. Reloading for the .357 Sig doesn't offer the same versatility as the mag. So, why can't we make a .357 mag with an auto rear?
Click to expand...

It's hard to match the versatility of the .357 Magnum. One advantage of wheelguns is the versatility of their ammo. When you add leverguns to the picture it gets harder still.

The .357 Sig is not a particularly versatile round. The .38 Super, 9x23 Winchester, .40 S&W and the 10mm are all more versatile, especially for reloaders. The .357 Sig has attracted some attention due to 2 things;1.) it can be chambered in guns the same size as the 9mm and the .40 S&W which is handy on a number of levels. 2.) It can be marketed as duplicating the effectiveness and ballistics of the 125 gr. load of the .357 Magnum which promotes sales (it's true that it does this. It's also true that the effectiveness of the 125 gr. load has alot of hype involved).

The closest we can get to the .357 Magnum in terms of versatility is the 10mm. Let's look at three commercial loads for the 10mm and compare them to two hot commercial load for the .357 Sig.

>357 Sig from a 4" barrel:
Cor-Bon 125 gr. JHP: at muzzle 1425 fps and 564 ft.lbs. of energy.
Hornady 147 gr. JHP: at muzzle 1225 fps and 490 ft.lbs. of energy

10mm from a 5" barrel:
Cor-Bon 135gr. JHP: at muzzle 1400 fps and 588 ft.lbs. of energy.
Cor-Bon 150 gr. JHP: at muzzle 1325 fps and 585 ft.lbs. of energy.
Federal 155gr. JHP: at muzzle 1330 fps and 605 ft. lbs. of energy.

Upside of the 10mm is that you can get the same velocity as the Sig with a heavier bullet which always helps. The 10mm is just warming up with a 155 gr. load. The 10mm compares favorable with the .357 Magnum with heavier loads. Downside for the 10mm is that generally the guns are a bit heavier and the round count lower compared to the .357 Sig.

The 38 Super can get you 1300 fps from a 4 3/4" barrel Colt Commander. The .357 Sig will get you from 1300 to 1400 fps from a 4" barreled gun. Whether anything you hit will know the difference is dancing on the head of a pin.

tipoc
 
When you get into matching a cartridge design to an autopistol, things start getting complicated. Especially for high pressure cartridges like 357mag, 44mag, etc. The problem is that you need to delay the breech opening until the pressure in the barrel reduces to a save level. IF you have a fairly narrow range of bullet weights and velocities you're dealing with, it's not to hard and you can use cam locking barrel designs like sig, Beretta, and a slew of others use on 357sig and 40SW pistols. But, when you look at cartridges like the 357mag and 44mag that can use a much wider range of bullet weights and a much greater range of velocities, it becomes much harder to design such a mechanism that will time and lock/ unlock with all the different loads out there for that caliber. You can get around that by using a gas system like on AR's, older HK,s, Desert Eagles and the like. But, that is heavy and expensive and not really practical for a carry gun (except the old HK, why did they ever kill their delayed gas blowback design?). Gas systems also have to be kept clean to function reliably. That is why you don't see many auto pistols designed for cartridges like the 357mag and 44mag. The practicality of designing a breech locking system to work with all the bullet weights available for those calibers, and work reliably, is just too expensive. I think the Magnum Research Desert Eagles are a case in point here. How many people want to pay $1000 for a semi auto, especially one that big with limited utility for carry. You see a lot of guns for the 357sig and 40SW because the velocity range and bullet weights available for those are more limited.
 
Pocketfisherman has made some good points.

When first introduced, and widely accepted for leo work, the .40S&W had a number of teething problems. Most of these were due to one recoil spring weight being used in the guns while a variety of bullet weights were (and still are) available. The weight of recoil springs are critical to reliable functioning in many semis when moving from a light weight to a heavier load.

tipoc
 
This discussion prompts two thoughts:

One: the length of the .357 Magnum case has virtually nothing to do with ballistic performance. In fact, the .357 Magnum's immediate parent was the so-called .38 Hi-Vel, sometimes a/k/a .38-44, which used cases with external dimensions identical to the .38 Special case. What enabled magnum velocities in the 1930s was advances in propellant chemistry, not a longer case into which more powder could be stuffed. Rather, the lengthening of the .38 Special case by 0.135" was done specifically (and, I believe, solely) to make it more difficult for some idiot to chamber a magnum round in a .38 Special revolver of a vintage not up to the higher pressure. Ergo, you can design your ".357 Auto Mag" cartridge without having to duplicate the .357 Magnum case length.

Two: Once you do, you will have re-invented the .38 Super, no?
 
Micahweeks

Well, I understand what you're both saying, and I know the .41 and .44 auto mag were attempts to create auto counterparts to popular pistol rounds. But, what I wonder is why we made the .357 Sig out of a .40 case? Why couldn't we just take the .357 mag as it is and just change the rear of it? I would figure that the length of the cartridge should not be a problem as many people have no problems with the Glock 20, and the 10mm is as long an auto cartridge as I can think of.
Click to expand...

.357 magnum OAL = 1.590"
10mm auto OAL = 1.260"
The 357 mag is 0.33" longer.

40S&W OAL = 1.135" this is 0.13 less than the 10mm auto.
The OAL length of the .357 mag compared to the 40 S&W is 0.46" greater.

Why do I point out these differences?
Because the shorter length of just 0.13" allows a significantly smaller grip in firearms designed to shoot the 40 S&W compared to the 10mm.

I would assume the even though the 357 mag. case is 0.379" in diameter and the rim .440" in diameter, that a double stack of .357 mag would require a significantly larger grip circumference than those that contain a double stack of 10mm auto to 45acp.

For the 10mm auto 0.427" is the greatest diameter of the case at the rim.
 
OP,
This is a great and fun discussion, but in the end you will come full circle to the 10mm. It does everything you want to do. If you want to get into handloading, by all means jump right in, be carefull with the 10mm though. I would suggest getting a wheelgun, the .357 is a very forgiving and rewarding cartridge to load for.
I've been down this road. When it comes to wildcat cartridges, there truly is nothing new under the sun. :)
 
20nickels,

I believe you're right. Since John's info on the 10mm/.357 comparison, I have decided to try my hand at reloading for 10mm instead of just dreaming to get .357 mag power in my auto.

I guess the next question is whether or not my EAA can handle those loads? ::man, where's a maniacly laughing smiley when you need one?::
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top