.357 Super Mag (Maximum)

**saleen322** · July 30th, 2013, 07:31 PM

You hear very little about the .357 Maximum (or Super Mag) these days. I remember how well my old .357 Maximum shot taking my thoughts back to the days of shooting silhouette with mine. Memories sometimes slant toward embellishing the good but glossing over the bad so I was wondering if I was guilty of that in this case as I remember mine shooting quite well. Okay so I drag out my Dan Wesson Super Mag, take the barrel off for the first time in 15+ years, and look it over. The Dan Wessons came with two barrels but I never installed the second barrel. Some Super Mag revolvers got a bad rap for eroding the forcing cone prematurely but I believe that happened to those who shot light bullets out of them. I defined light as anything less than 180 grains. After years of silhouette and the related practice, the barrel still looked great! It has had light duty for the last 20 or so years as I target shoot with it some and hunt with it a little. Back in the day, 1980s, these Super Mags were the guns to beat in the revolver silhouette class. A good load in these things would give a contender a run. I had shot some .22 rounds at a target while trying out different ammo that I was not satisfied with so I hung the target at the 25 and shot 5 shots from the DW at the target with iron sights just for old time sake. The group looked pretty good but I could not find any more of the 210 Cast GC bullet loads laying around from days past but did find some 180 HPs. With iron sights, the DW printed a 2” 5-shot group @ 50 yards. That is pretty good for my old eyes. Even compared to today’s revolvers, the Super Mags are still pretty shiny shooters! YMMV

**Thomas Paine** · July 30th, 2013, 08:44 PM

really nice pistol. whatever was the demise of the maximum?

**knight0334** · July 30th, 2013, 09:04 PM

Originally Posted by Thomas Paine

really nice pistol. whatever was the demise of the maximum?

It was primarily intended for silhouette shooting and hunting, and never really caught on out of those circles.

Muzzle blast is downright unpleasant in a handgun, but not that bad in a rifle or carbine. The Super Mag and Maximum(they are 2 different cartridges) revolvers suffered from flame cutting something bad.

Ammo was, and is today, expensive if you don't reload. The energy levels were around mid to warm .44mags, but more muzzleblast than the .44mag.

**saleen322** · July 30th, 2013, 10:47 PM

The flame cutting was a result of shooting light bullets and was most pronounced with the Ruger .357 Maximum as it had a shorter cylinder which limited how heavy a bullet you could go. My gun was purchased in the early 80s, shot in matches for years with no problems and it still has a great cone BUT I never went below 180 grain bullets. The theory was that the lighter bullet with the greater powder charge burned longer and eroded the forcing cone quicker.

The term Super Mag I think was credited to Elgin Gates and he worked with Dan Wesson making the revolver and they put Super Mag on the barrel shroud as that is what Elgin called his cartridge. However when Remington standardized the round it was named .357 Maximum which the Dan Wesson actually has in small letters on the opposite side of the revolver. (See Below)

The caliber is very accurate and it had good velocity which helped in silhouette as you needed less elevation change at the 150 and 200 meter lines.

**knight0334** · July 31st, 2013, 09:26 AM

With Remington's standardization of the Super Mag, they shortened it .005" into the Maximum. While that it is a rather small change in length, it still is technically two different cartridges.

Remington's standardization of the cartridge helped breath new life into Gates' design.

There are guns chambered specifically for Super Mag and for Maximum. Super Mag guns have no problem handling Max's, and some Max chambered guns are slightly over lengthened to handle Super Mags, but not all Maximum guns are chambered to handle Super Mags. Working pressures are interchangeable for the two, so that isn't a problem. But the .005" length difference can be a problem. My H&R Handi chambered in Max will not accept Super Mag's safely. When the breech closes it forces the mouth of the case into the throat. The throat then starts crimping the casing into the bullet - which will cause an unsafe overpressure. The gun will handle it, but the brass wont.

**saleen322** · July 31st, 2013, 10:02 AM

I see what you are saying. I looked in my old Shooting Steel book and Gates notes from 12/75 stated he worked with two prototypes; one 1.520" and one 1.610" which testing favored. When Remington standardized the Maximum, I think it was 1.605" or 0.005" less than the favored prototype. Years ago (I will have to see if I still have some) I had some Federal cases with just the Ram headstamp but no caliber stated as I recall. I never measured them but they may be the longer version. The majority I have now are Remington cases. My Dan Wesson has both Super Mag and .357 Maximum on it. My contender and Handi Rifle just have .357 Maximum. Thank you for the info. I learned something.

**knight0334** · July 31st, 2013, 10:42 AM

You might want to check/cast your Handi's chamber. Some folk are lucky and have a gun that will accept the Super Mag length cartridges. I wouldn't fire SuperMags in it until you know for sure.

I love the .357 caliber series. One day I'm going to rent a reamer and lengthen my chamber the little it needs to fit them all..

.38Long Colt, .38Special, .357Mag, .360DW, .357Max, .357SuperMag.

I read somewhere that Ruger had a major say in the Maximum development with Remington. Ruger didn't want to lengthen their frames, so the .005" was lopped off from the Super Mag to make the Maximum fit within their revolvers.