Recommend a .357 Magnum concealed carry revolver!

[Fossil4Life]

It is built on the "K" frame, and therefore it should not be fired with high-speed loads using bullets under 125-130 grains because the faster bullets jumping and hitting the forcing cone have been known to crack the forcing cone of "K" frame 357s. Stick with 140 gr+ and you will be fine.

Thanks very much for that explanation! I was wondering why people were warning against using lighter grain rounds in these revolvers, and you just explained it perfectly. =)

[The_War_Wagon]

DAMN this thread... I went and put another Taurus 605 on lawaway this week because of this!

[LeadHead]

Thanks very much for that explanation! I was wondering why people were warning against using lighter grain rounds in these revolvers, and you just explained it perfectly. =)

WHAT??? Lighter bullets crack gun frames??? They all come out of the shell with tremendous force as there is no resistance from the barrel till it hits the barrel it's just heavier bullets hit harder when they hit the barrel. But Noah says a heavier bullet with more energy behind it is less apt to crack a frame then a lighter bullet with less hitting energy?

I'm having a little trouble following that reasoning. That would mean if I cant break up a concrete pad with a sledgehammer I should get a claw hammer and have at it.

Dude, go to your club and find as many revolvers like you want and fire them. If you're willing to drive to Pittsburgh you can fire my LCR to see what so many people recommend it. Understand, when you ask a forum which gun you should buy, everybody will recommend the gun they bought ad you'll not come to a conclusion in a million years. Nobody will ever admit they didn't buy the best gun and then there's the best gun for one may very well not be the best gun for you, that's why so many different guns are sold. There's no such thing as a recoil absorbing snub nosed .357 magnum unless it weighs 40#. Nowadays the myth "light firearms definitely give hard recoil" is a myth because of current technology and ergonomics. GO try stuff and quit buying someone else's line of thinking/justification.

[Noah_Zark]

WHAT??? Lighter bullets crack gun frames??? They all come out of the shell with tremendous force as there is no resistance from the barrel till it hits the barrel it's just heavier bullets hit harder when they hit the barrel. But Noah says a heavier bullet with more energy behind it is less apt to crack a frame then a lighter bullet with less hitting energy?

I'm having a little trouble following that reasoning. That would mean if I cant break up a concrete pad with a sledgehammer I should get a claw hammer and have at it.

The load with the heavier bullet is typically LOWER in energy than a load with a lighter bullet with higher velocity. That said, there are so many high performance loads for the 357 and 38 Special on the market today that anyone can find specific heavier loads with higher energy and vice-versa. 30-40 years ago when K-frame Model 19 forcing cones were cracking, the 125 gr loads were significantly higher in energy than the standard 158 gr loads. Here's why:

The energy equation is "one half the mass times velocity squared," or 1/2 M V^2.

The mass of the bullet varies only 33 grains from 158 gr to 125 gr, but the velocity changes between ~200 and 250 FPS as the bullet weight decreases for various published factory loads. Because the velocity is a square function in the energy equation, the effect of an increase in velocity of ~200 to 250 fps in change in energy is much greater than the effect of a 33 gr change in bullet mass.

Then figure in that the lighter bullets are shorter and have less bearing area w.r.t. the 158 gr bullets. The 125 gr bullets can and will tend to be a bit off center leaving the chamber and entering the forcing cone as compared to the longer 158 gr bullet. The combination of higher energy due to significantly higher velocity and the greater possibility of being off center when entering the forcing cone makes shooting 125 gr 357 loads in a K frame a bit risky to the revolver's long term well being.

Noah

[LeadHead]

The load with the heavier bullet is typically LOWER in energy than a load with a lighter bullet with higher velocity. That said, there are so many high performance loads for the 357 and 38 Special on the market today that anyone can find specific heavier loads with higher energy and vice-versa. 30-40 years ago when K-frame Model 19 forcing cones were cracking, the 125 gr loads were significantly higher in energy than the standard 158 gr loads. Here's why:

The energy equation is "one half the mass times velocity squared," or 1/2 M V^2.

The mass of the bullet varies only 33 grains from 158 gr to 125 gr, but the velocity changes between ~200 and 250 FPS as the bullet weight decreases for various published factory loads. Because the velocity is a square function in the energy equation, the effect of an increase in velocity of ~200 to 250 fps in change in energy is much greater than the effect of a 33 gr change in bullet mass.

Then figure in that the lighter bullets are shorter and have less bearing area w.r.t. the 158 gr bullets. The 125 gr bullets can and will tend to be a bit off center leaving the chamber and entering the forcing cone as compared to the longer 158 gr bullet. The combination of higher energy due to significantly higher velocity and the greater possibility of being off center when entering the forcing cone makes shooting 125 gr 357 loads in a K frame a bit risky to the revolver's long term well being.

Noah

That explanation doesn't change anything for me; you're comparing apples to oranges. Velocity at any distance beyond the muzzle has nothing to do with the velocity for the incredibly short distance between the bullet as it sits in the chamber and the forcing cone. So to take velocity and energy statistics from 25 years out and say that's what happens in the chamber is totally wrong.

Then bullets are seated to an overall length so there is virtually NO difference between a 115 grain and a 147 grain bullet, in fact but for the 147 grain bullet would be seated deeper causing more chamber pressure meaning more likely to crack a frame following your line of thinking. Bullets of any length don't wobble out of the chamber; take a close look to the shape of our cylinder walls. You're talking a bullet fresh out of the shell having traveled 1/16th to 1/8 of an inch (which means it's still in the shell while being directed by the tightening of the cylinder towards the forcing cone) through a narrowing hole designed to align the bullet to the forcing cone having such different ballistic numbers that gun damage is caused. Common.... I don't think so but I'm not going to continue to argue the issue.

[Noah_Zark]

That explanation doesn't change anything for me; you're comparing apples to oranges. Velocity at any distance beyond the muzzle has nothing to do with the velocity for the incredibly short distance between the bullet as it sits in the chamber and the forcing cone. So to take velocity and energy statistics from 25 years out and say that's what happens in the chamber is totally wrong . . . having such different ballistic numbers that gun damage is caused. Common.... I don't think so but I'm not going to continue to argue the issue.

I've never been good at explaining physics, so I will agree to disagree and let it rest from my side as well.

Noah

[dogngun]

I recently bought a Rossi 462, 2" stainless 6 shot .357 magnum for carry. Over the last 40 years I have owned and still own many S&W's, Rugers and occasionally Colts.

I really like this Rossi-replaced the hammer spring with one from Wolff, and it is a great, reliable shooter that fits into a pocket.

Mark