New Cartridge 357 Ring Of Fire
- Thread starter Davelliott
- Start date
stagpanther
New member
I'm not worried cause a block that resistant could only be used in something like a semi-rig on up--overly expensive and heavy. Somewhere on u-tube I thought I saw ballistics tests where they were shooting into simulated engine blocks made of jello
Davelliott
New member
All
Hey guys,
I knew there would be folks who ridicule those who try things differently than the norm. It's an easy target to use science you didn't create, to break down innovations you don't understand. I can imagine the scoffs which innovators throughout history have endured.
Maybe we are somewhat dillusional to attempt to improve something everyone else thinks is fine. That still doesn't stop us though. We have brought forth things like rock in hand, rock on stick, pointy stick and so forth while the other hominids screamed and pounded the ground over the impossibilities of future improvements. Maybe that's why changes were so long coming? Expert peer pressure?
It seems I'm not the only one whom has forgotten some things, or maybe they happened before so many experts were born...like armor piercing rounds in pistols as well as rifles. Maybe these experts never served to defend this nation or are unaware of options available outside the box.
I thank all the serious info offered from the constructively minded.
The humor here is great too! I bet the Glock 45-70 is a bitch to clean...where do you get recoil springs for that? A 63 Buick?
I'm going to leave this discussion for a while and concentrate on testing.
Thanks Guys,
Dave
Hey guys,
I knew there would be folks who ridicule those who try things differently than the norm. It's an easy target to use science you didn't create, to break down innovations you don't understand. I can imagine the scoffs which innovators throughout history have endured.
Maybe we are somewhat dillusional to attempt to improve something everyone else thinks is fine. That still doesn't stop us though. We have brought forth things like rock in hand, rock on stick, pointy stick and so forth while the other hominids screamed and pounded the ground over the impossibilities of future improvements. Maybe that's why changes were so long coming? Expert peer pressure?
It seems I'm not the only one whom has forgotten some things, or maybe they happened before so many experts were born...like armor piercing rounds in pistols as well as rifles. Maybe these experts never served to defend this nation or are unaware of options available outside the box.
I thank all the serious info offered from the constructively minded.
The humor here is great too! I bet the Glock 45-70 is a bitch to clean...where do you get recoil springs for that? A 63 Buick?
I'm going to leave this discussion for a while and concentrate on testing.
Thanks Guys,
Dave
Dave, there have been some very valid questions raised. You cant simply say anyone that doesnt agree with your idea is a Luddite or uninformed, thats disingenuous. That doesnt answer the valid questions. What case/length(limited by the available guns)/pressure are the loads running? Some basic info would allow quickload calculations to be run, but the 9x23 already is spec'ed to max length in 1911 frames. The 9x23 is about max practical (if not more than practical) pressure at 55,000 psi, which you say your loads beat in performance. That comes at a price. Velocity isnt free, unless theres been a new development in powder technology we havent been aware of yet. Its science, not troglodytes afraid of anything new.
There are no armor piercing handgun rounds that will shoot through an engine. If there are, I'm open to learning. I'm also doubtful that a 7.62 Nato AP round would reliably completely penetrate an engine.
And maybe they have. That has little application to the conversation. There arent any secret bullets that allow a handgun or even common rifle round to shoot through engines.
ETA: Wait, a 5 round function test? 5 rounds? How many total rounds have you fired so far with the new cartridge? Have you tried the 2000 rd challenge with it for basic reliability? Thats 2000 rds fired with no cleaning or lubing for that time, all malfunctions of any kind have to be reported, with pics if possible. No excuses for ammo or whatever. Just honest reporting of results.
There are no armor piercing handgun rounds that will shoot through an engine. If there are, I'm open to learning. I'm also doubtful that a 7.62 Nato AP round would reliably completely penetrate an engine.
And maybe they have. That has little application to the conversation. There arent any secret bullets that allow a handgun or even common rifle round to shoot through engines.
ETA: Wait, a 5 round function test? 5 rounds? How many total rounds have you fired so far with the new cartridge? Have you tried the 2000 rd challenge with it for basic reliability? Thats 2000 rds fired with no cleaning or lubing for that time, all malfunctions of any kind have to be reported, with pics if possible. No excuses for ammo or whatever. Just honest reporting of results.
Last edited:
All this talk about engine blocks brought to mind the fact that engine blocks are, or at least were, made from cast iron. Having said that, way back in the 70s my friends and I were out shooting in the Everglades and stumbled upon an abandoned (probably stolen) 1961 Ford with a V-8 engine still in it.
One shot from my friend's Mauser pistol put a hole in the side of the engine block. Obviously, this was below the cylinder heads, and I doubt it did any damage at all to the internals, but it was surprising to us all. It was then that I realized that cast iron engines weren't that strong , at least at the lower end.
Based on that experience, I don't see where it's that big of a deal to put a hole in an engine, unless they're made a lot tougher now.
One shot from my friend's Mauser pistol put a hole in the side of the engine block. Obviously, this was below the cylinder heads, and I doubt it did any damage at all to the internals, but it was surprising to us all. It was then that I realized that cast iron engines weren't that strong , at least at the lower end.
Based on that experience, I don't see where it's that big of a deal to put a hole in an engine, unless they're made a lot tougher now.
Dragline45
New member
Cracking a cast iron exterior of an engine block and putting a hole in that exterior is alot different than penetrating the engine block and punching completely through the other side.
This ^ ^
I've shot engine blocks with several different guns/loads. A 45-70 with black powder lead bullets will break through the outer part into a water jacket cavity, but shooting through cylinder walls, pistons, rods, and through it all again out the other side is entirely different. Cast iron heads? they are pretty dense. Lead smears with a 400 gr bullet at about 1350 fps.
I recall reading ages ago that the FBI used to show holes in engines from 357 magnums, but I'd bet a pizza it was through the water jacker side, or whatever was nearest, not entirely through the engine. Hitting hard stuff was very differnt than hitting it in a thin spot where the wall was thin. A number boss is pretty tough.
Mike Irwin
Staff
"The origin of the 9mm is European."
Correct.
"Georg Luger of Germany for WW1."
Incorrect. He developed the cartridge a decade before World War 1.
"9mm Parabellum means prepare for war."
Incorrect.
9mm Parabellum means... 9mm Parabellum. It's the name of a cartridge.
Parabellum is a trade name, a recognized international trademark.
para bellum comes from the Latin phrase "Si vis pacem, para bellum."
Note that para (verb form) bellum (noun) are separate words in Latin. Georg Luger combined them. So he could name his cartridge, and his company.
"He took the 9mm Kurz and lengthened it to add more powder to make it more powerful."
VERY incorrect. John Browning and Colt developed the 9mm Kurz in 1908, 6 years AFTER Georg Luger introduced the 9mm round.
"I'd like to see our troops equiped with American developed equipment...better equipment."
I, too, want to see our troops equipped with the very best. But that often requires dropping the quasi-patriot homerboy 'MURICA!!, CAUSE! thinking.
Just because we're 'MURICHNS! doesn't mean that our -CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED-'s the very best all of the time.
Correct.
"Georg Luger of Germany for WW1."
Incorrect. He developed the cartridge a decade before World War 1.
"9mm Parabellum means prepare for war."
Incorrect.
9mm Parabellum means... 9mm Parabellum. It's the name of a cartridge.
Parabellum is a trade name, a recognized international trademark.
para bellum comes from the Latin phrase "Si vis pacem, para bellum."
Note that para (verb form) bellum (noun) are separate words in Latin. Georg Luger combined them. So he could name his cartridge, and his company.
"He took the 9mm Kurz and lengthened it to add more powder to make it more powerful."
VERY incorrect. John Browning and Colt developed the 9mm Kurz in 1908, 6 years AFTER Georg Luger introduced the 9mm round.
"I'd like to see our troops equiped with American developed equipment...better equipment."
I, too, want to see our troops equipped with the very best. But that often requires dropping the quasi-patriot homerboy 'MURICA!!, CAUSE! thinking.
Just because we're 'MURICHNS! doesn't mean that our -CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED-'s the very best all of the time.
Shooting through an engine block is a pretty wide open statement anymore. Is it a front wheel drive 4 cylinder or V6 or a V6, V8 rear wheel drive. To many variables to predict, con rods and crankshafts would be pretty tough. A side shot on an aluminum 4 cyl not so much.
Stagpanther, a hole with some metal debris through an intercooler could have a pretty detrimental effect on a supercharged or turbocharged engine. It would more than likely cause the rotors in the supercharger to seize and stop airflow to the engine completely.
A lucky shot in the ECU would probably be the most effective location to stop the vehicle.
I wouldn't bet against a 308 not doing some pretty significant damage though.
Stagpanther, a hole with some metal debris through an intercooler could have a pretty detrimental effect on a supercharged or turbocharged engine. It would more than likely cause the rotors in the supercharger to seize and stop airflow to the engine completely.
A lucky shot in the ECU would probably be the most effective location to stop the vehicle.
I wouldn't bet against a 308 not doing some pretty significant damage though.
Shadi Khalil
New member
Luckyinkentucy strikes again! Good show old man!
stagpanther
New member
very good points--I guess what this reinforces is that placement of the shot is more important than anything when it comes to stopping an engine. It also points out the importance of realistic training in order to be prepared for the day when you really need it. I wonder how many shooters really spend enough time in the junkyards these days.
A few months ago I bought a used refrigerator online. Turned out I got ripped off and the fridge didn't work. So I took it out to the gravel pit a few miles from my house for some fun range time and to send a picture of it to the guy I bought it from since he wouldn't give me a refund.
I brought several weapons and had the opportunity to shoot through the sheet metal on the side of the refrigerator the stainless steel on the front of the refrigerator and the compressor engine in the back bottom of the refrigerator.
22LR from handguns would not penetrate either the sheet metal sides or the stainless steel front of the refrigerator.
25 ACP would penetrate the sheet metal sides but not the stainless steel front.
Everything else I shot went through including 9 mm 38 special and 357 mag.
Then I started shooting the compressor engine. I shot 9 mm as well as 38 special 357 mag through both a 6 inch revolver and a 20 inch lever action rifle. My friend brought his 44 mag super RedHawks. All fmj. I also shot the compressor engine with my Winchester model 70 in 270 Winchester. With several square hits nothing but the 270 Winchester would penetrate the exterior of the compressor engine. This includes the 357 mag fired from both the revolver and the rifle and the 44 mag.
Long story short I doubt anything other than an armor piercing round from a high-powered rifle will penetrate an engine block. And even then I have my doubts.
The OP has shown an unwillingness to share critical information like pressure and has demonstrated a lack of willingness to listen to reasonable suggestions regarding both his cartridge development and his own personal safety. Stay safe!
I brought several weapons and had the opportunity to shoot through the sheet metal on the side of the refrigerator the stainless steel on the front of the refrigerator and the compressor engine in the back bottom of the refrigerator.
22LR from handguns would not penetrate either the sheet metal sides or the stainless steel front of the refrigerator.
25 ACP would penetrate the sheet metal sides but not the stainless steel front.
Everything else I shot went through including 9 mm 38 special and 357 mag.
Then I started shooting the compressor engine. I shot 9 mm as well as 38 special 357 mag through both a 6 inch revolver and a 20 inch lever action rifle. My friend brought his 44 mag super RedHawks. All fmj. I also shot the compressor engine with my Winchester model 70 in 270 Winchester. With several square hits nothing but the 270 Winchester would penetrate the exterior of the compressor engine. This includes the 357 mag fired from both the revolver and the rifle and the 44 mag.
Long story short I doubt anything other than an armor piercing round from a high-powered rifle will penetrate an engine block. And even then I have my doubts.
The OP has shown an unwillingness to share critical information like pressure and has demonstrated a lack of willingness to listen to reasonable suggestions regarding both his cartridge development and his own personal safety. Stay safe!
Last edited:
My brother in law and I took turns with various handguns, 357 and 44 mag included shooting a very old fridge compressor. The couple of autos (9mm, 45) were FMJ's the magnums soft points, none penetrated. We had 2 rifles, a 30-06 and a 444 both soft points, both punched holes in the compressor. The 45 230 "Hardball" looked like a ball peen hammer hit, not very impressive!
So what does this all prove, nothing unless an old "American Motors Kelvinator" compressor is after you make sure you use a high powered rifle!
Back to the main topic;
As others have asked earlier, can we get some specs on the cartridge, pictures?
So what does this all prove, nothing unless an old "American Motors Kelvinator" compressor is after you make sure you use a high powered rifle!
Back to the main topic;
As others have asked earlier, can we get some specs on the cartridge, pictures?
stagpanther
New member
In all seriousness--I once took a shot at a fridge/washing machine at about 20 yds with a 357 mag revolver. I don't know what it hit or how exactly it happened--but that bullet came right back at me missing my head by what must have been just a few inches. Homey don't do that no more.
johnwilliamson062
Moderator
960 Rowland looks like it beat him to the punch. Interesting ballistics with pressure data, extensive testing, factory support. If I wanted a carry round I could only manage to fire once every ten seconds and which required physical therapy after a full mag; I'd consider it.
Mike Irwin
Staff
Boy I don't know what kind of applicances you guys are shooting but years ago I put a 158-gr. JSP through both sides of an old Maytag from about 5 yards. No muss, no fuss, just through and through.
"First off the vaunted 125gn 357mag load was a beast to shoot. Lots of recoil. Super bright muzzle flash and a ton of blast in confined spaces. With all that it was still not a death ray....NO handgun is"
I've never found full-bore 125's at all difficult to shoot from a recoil standpoint. Blast, yes, LOTS of blast; flash was more a function of whose load it was. The old Remingtons were quite flashy, the Winchesters less so. Golden Sabers were even less flash than the Winchesters.
"First off the vaunted 125gn 357mag load was a beast to shoot. Lots of recoil. Super bright muzzle flash and a ton of blast in confined spaces. With all that it was still not a death ray....NO handgun is"
I've never found full-bore 125's at all difficult to shoot from a recoil standpoint. Blast, yes, LOTS of blast; flash was more a function of whose load it was. The old Remingtons were quite flashy, the Winchesters less so. Golden Sabers were even less flash than the Winchesters.