Why are Revolver Casings so Long?
- Thread starter Brownstone322
- Start date
disseminator
New member
In addition to what has already been said, there is also the obvious fact that in general revolver rounds are a lot more powerful than there Semi-Auto brethren.
357 > 9mm
45C > 45 Auto
500 S&W > 50 AE
etc.
357 > 9mm
45C > 45 Auto
500 S&W > 50 AE
etc.
They are definite beasts. And, the Desert Eagle has the largest (and least comfortable in my hands) grip of the magnum autos. The Wildey is second, being only very slightly shorter, front to back, but very "round" feeling. The Auto Mag is very good in my hands, while long it feels "slim" side to side. and then best is the LAR Grizzly with pachmayr grips. A bit long but just right so it "locks" into my hand. Won't be the same for someone with smaller hands, though.
In general, yes. I can think of one exception, in .357, but the semi auto .357 AMP is essentially a wildcat proposition these days.
Another exception would be the .44AMP being slightly more than the .44 Mag and the .45 Win Mag beating the .45 Colt.
Of course, these rounds aren't "duty class" and won't fit in "service" size semi autos.
When Hot Rodding, there is no substitute for displacement. All 3 of the revolver rounds you mentioned are, in their current maximum loadings, "Hot Rods": Impressive in the moment, but hell on the equipment and impractical for general use.
The 357 Magnum was, what? The third? fourth? fifth? iteration of ever more powerful loadings/lengthenings of the 38S&W case? And then in the 1980's when "Too Much was Never Enough!", somebody rolled out the 357 Maximum .......
It is a circular clip holding the rounds. Originally metal, most still are, some today are plastic. (I'm sure someone has a pic)
Works like a speedloader, except the rounds all stay clipped together. Requires the gun to be made or remade with clearance for the clip. Will NOT work in a gun not modified to use them.
The majority of moon & half moon clips are for using .45acp in a Colt & S&W 1917 revolvers. They will also work in converted Webleys. There are, today, some made for other calibers, for use in specially made competition revolvers.
Also originally called a "full moon clip", because the earlier 3rnd clips were called "half moon" due to their shape.
Hope this helps
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Good example ... since I load for both, I can offer a bit of a comparison.44_AMP said:
First, we have to remember that when the .45 ACP cartridge was developed, the goal was to replicate the ballistics of the older .45 Colt round. With modern, smokeless powders .45 Colt can be souped up quite a bit hotter than the original black powder loading, but the intent of the Ordnance Department for .45 ACP was to have a semi-automatic pistol with the same power as the .45 Colt revolvers that would be replaced by the new pistol.
For .45 ACP, I load using Winchester 231 (or Hodgdon HP-38) powder. My standard load is 5.3 grains of powder, which fills a .45 ACP case a little less than halfway. A double charge doesn't spill over, but it's close enough that seating a bullet would compress the powder.
To reach the same velocity with the same weight bullet in .45 Colt, I need 6 grains in Win 231. And even 6 grains in that larger case doesn't fill it more than maybe a quarter of the way. I really have to look carefully to see if the charge dropped, and it would probably take a triple charge or more to overflow the case. But with black powder, the rule-of-thumb is no empty case volume -- the bullet should seat against the powder and compress it slightly.
In fact, there's so much excess case volume using Winchester 231 in .45 Colt that it's not possible to get consistent velocities, because the powder moves around in the case. For that reason, I just bought some Trail Boss powder, which is a much fluffier, bulkier powder that's designed for use in the older, larger, black powder descended cases. I haven't tried it yet, but a friend who shoots cowboy action told me that's all he uses, and his advice was to "just fill it up and cram the bullet on top of it." I don't think I'll go to that extreme, but the point I'm trying to make is that those older, larger cases aren't ideally suited for smokeless powders because of the excess volume issue. And that's why Trail Boss was developed.
Andy Blozinski
New member
So would it be OK to load a .38 special casing with modern powder to .357 magnum loading and fire it in a .357 magnum?
Aguila Blanca
Staff
That depends on what you consider a .357 Magnum loading. Depending on which powder you choose, you might or might not be able to fit enough powder into the smaller/shorter case to match .357 velocities with the same weight bullets and without exceeding .3557 Magnum pressures. But it should be possible with some experimentation.Andy Blozinski said:
However, if you mean taking the powder charge for a .357 Magnum load and cramming that into a .38 Special case, then you're creating a significantly higher-power load than the corresponding .357 Magnum, and you're treading into uncharted and unsafe territory.
I remember Skeeter Skelton used to write about loading 38 brass to 357 or at least near 357 velocity for use in 357 guns ONLY. Seems he had a ton of 38 brass and 357 brass was hard to get in those long ago days. I don't think he even gave any load data, just said he did it. Of course Skeeter and his cronies did a lot of stuff that would make our hair stand up today.
At the time I thought it would a good idea for the same reason. I had an old fashioned paper grocery bag full of 38 brass. Ummmm let's try this. Fortunately my better sense prevailed for one of the very few times in my life.
At the time I thought it would a good idea for the same reason. I had an old fashioned paper grocery bag full of 38 brass. Ummmm let's try this. Fortunately my better sense prevailed for one of the very few times in my life.
Nickel Plated
New member
Another thing is you wouldn't be able to take advantage of the shorter length cartridge in a revolver.
In order to get the most benefit from the shorter cartridge, you would shorten the front of the cylinder and move the barrel back on the frame to make an overall shorter revolver. The problem is, that would put the cylinder gap directly over your hand. Not good. Especially if you hold it two handed and have fingers resting everywhere in that area.
The longer cylinder of current revolver designs puts that gap safely ahead of the trigger-guard. And if you have to have the extra space anyway, might as well use it.
Although you could have various shields on the frame to protect the hand from the gasses. Revolving carbines often have those.
In order to get the most benefit from the shorter cartridge, you would shorten the front of the cylinder and move the barrel back on the frame to make an overall shorter revolver. The problem is, that would put the cylinder gap directly over your hand. Not good. Especially if you hold it two handed and have fingers resting everywhere in that area.
The longer cylinder of current revolver designs puts that gap safely ahead of the trigger-guard. And if you have to have the extra space anyway, might as well use it.
Although you could have various shields on the frame to protect the hand from the gasses. Revolving carbines often have those.
TruthTellers
New member
.45 Auto Rim over .45 ACP too.JohnKSa said:
FWIW, I never use moonclips with my S&W 625 revolver (45acp). I just tap the butt against the shooting bench and the brass falls out of the open cylinder. Sometimes a piece will only fall out halfway, so I just pluck it out with my fingers. Maybe mine has slightly larger cylinders than most, but for casual shooting with my particular revolver, moonclips seem unnecessary.
I shoot 45acp with one of my Blackhawks a lot. It has an extra cylinder for that purpose. They eject with the rod just the same as 45 colt.
I recently got a Charter Arms revolver in 45acp. It has little curved leaf spring thingies that hold the rounds in place in the cylinder. They eject easily, too.
It wasn't designed for revolvers, but 45acp is a fun round to use with them.
I shoot 45acp with one of my Blackhawks a lot. It has an extra cylinder for that purpose. They eject with the rod just the same as 45 colt.
I recently got a Charter Arms revolver in 45acp. It has little curved leaf spring thingies that hold the rounds in place in the cylinder. They eject easily, too.
It wasn't designed for revolvers, but 45acp is a fun round to use with them.
Mike Irwin
Staff
"It was going to be a great idea until someone realized those high pressured 9mm Federal rounds fit perfectly into the low pressure 38 S&W Top Break revolvers that are still around....Lawyers nixed that little project real fast ."
What nixed the 9mm Federal project was the fact that Charter Arms, which worked with Federal to develop the cartridge and accompanying revolver, crashed and burned into bankruptcy.
No other manufacturer was interested in the project AND the aforementioned cartridge interchangeability caused the entire project to be dropped.
'9mm Federal was also loaded a good bit hotter than standard 9mm Luger."
No, it wasn't.
Federal factory ballistics were for a 115-gr. HP at a nominal 1280 fps, which was right in the ballpark with other 115-gr. loadings from Federal, Winchester, and others.
What nixed the 9mm Federal project was the fact that Charter Arms, which worked with Federal to develop the cartridge and accompanying revolver, crashed and burned into bankruptcy.
No other manufacturer was interested in the project AND the aforementioned cartridge interchangeability caused the entire project to be dropped.
'9mm Federal was also loaded a good bit hotter than standard 9mm Luger."
No, it wasn't.
Federal factory ballistics were for a 115-gr. HP at a nominal 1280 fps, which was right in the ballpark with other 115-gr. loadings from Federal, Winchester, and others.
Mike Irwin
Staff
"So would it be OK to load a .38 special casing with modern powder to .357 magnum loading and fire it in a .357 magnum?"
That can be a dicey proposition.
.38 Special cases are generally not quite as thick through the case head and web.
There's also the problem that once you approach .357 Mag ballistics in the short case you can spike pressures VERY rapidly, sometimes to the point where you could damage the brass, gun, or even yourself if you're not careful.
That can be a dicey proposition.
.38 Special cases are generally not quite as thick through the case head and web.
There's also the problem that once you approach .357 Mag ballistics in the short case you can spike pressures VERY rapidly, sometimes to the point where you could damage the brass, gun, or even yourself if you're not careful.
Mike Irwin
Staff
".45 Auto Rim over .45 ACP too."
That's always been the story, but nothing I've ever found has really backed that up.
The Peters 1926 catalog (the first one I could find after the 1919 introduction of the Auto Rim) shows identical ballistics for the 230 FMJ loadings of the .45 ACP and .45 Auto Rim -- 809 fps, or right at what the standard military loading was for the .45 ACP at the time.
The lead bullet loading is an interesting one... its got a 255 gr. bullet at 740 fps.
The first mention of the .45 AR I can find in Remington's ammo catalog that comes with ballistics is from 1933, and again, stated ballistics with a 230-gr. bullet are identical -- 810 fps.
I can find no evidence that any of the ammo companies ever loaded the .45 Auto Rim hotter than the .45 ACP.
I suspect, as time rolled on and more became known about the WW I revolvers, especially the S&W revolvers (let's just stay that corners were cut to get guns into the hands of the troops), that ballistics for the .45 Auto Rim were actually tamed down and switched mostly to lead bullets.
Interestingly, I just found this statement on Wikipedia (gah!)
"Loads offered were similar to the standard military loads for the .45ACP, but with fully lead bullets rather than the full metal jacket bullets used for .45ACP."
That's not the case. Original loads for the .45 AR, as I've noted above, mirrored military FMJ loads and with jacketed bullets. It was only later that the AR tended to be loaded with lead bullets, and general warnings about avoiding shooting the 1917 revolvers with jacketed bullets started to come out.
That's always been the story, but nothing I've ever found has really backed that up.
The Peters 1926 catalog (the first one I could find after the 1919 introduction of the Auto Rim) shows identical ballistics for the 230 FMJ loadings of the .45 ACP and .45 Auto Rim -- 809 fps, or right at what the standard military loading was for the .45 ACP at the time.
The lead bullet loading is an interesting one... its got a 255 gr. bullet at 740 fps.
The first mention of the .45 AR I can find in Remington's ammo catalog that comes with ballistics is from 1933, and again, stated ballistics with a 230-gr. bullet are identical -- 810 fps.
I can find no evidence that any of the ammo companies ever loaded the .45 Auto Rim hotter than the .45 ACP.
I suspect, as time rolled on and more became known about the WW I revolvers, especially the S&W revolvers (let's just stay that corners were cut to get guns into the hands of the troops), that ballistics for the .45 Auto Rim were actually tamed down and switched mostly to lead bullets.
Interestingly, I just found this statement on Wikipedia (gah!)
"Loads offered were similar to the standard military loads for the .45ACP, but with fully lead bullets rather than the full metal jacket bullets used for .45ACP."
That's not the case. Original loads for the .45 AR, as I've noted above, mirrored military FMJ loads and with jacketed bullets. It was only later that the AR tended to be loaded with lead bullets, and general warnings about avoiding shooting the 1917 revolvers with jacketed bullets started to come out.