Minimum 357 barrel length?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't find the recoil of the 357mag to be nearly as bad as it is painted here.
My experience over the years has been with the Security Six, a 2.5" Model 19, a 4" 686, and the revolver next to me right now, a 3" GP100.
It is loaded with Critical Defense 125gn, which does 1300fps in my GP.

After you've fired full power 44mag in a light barrel TC Contender with wood saw handle grip, or hot Ruger-only 45 Colt loads in a Blackhawk, 357mag seems manageable indeed.
 
Howdy

Personally, a four inch Model 28 makes as much noise as I can stand in a 357 Mag, even with ear protection in place. I am not the slightest bit interested in shooting 357 Mag out of a gun with a shorter barrel, and certainly not out of a J frame.

Just me I guess.
 
I'm with you, Driftwood. My GP 100 will kick someone's rump from here to the middle of next week. (By that time, they're usually dead). No, the "minimum barrel length" for any of my .357 S&W Magnum chambered revolvers stands at 4 inchs as well. I'm not fond of "muzzle blast" from truly effective .357 Magnum loads.
 
My experience

When I went into law enforcement in the early 1990's, most of the officers carried a snubnosed S&W 66 or RUGER Security Six, then we switched to the S&W model 13 with a round butt grip and 3 inch heavy barrel. These were the FBI guns until they went with the 10m.m., then several different agencies were "GIFTED" with them. When we dumped them, the U.S. Marshal's got a load of them from us.

My agency had gone to the .357 magnum with the base load of a 110 grain jhp. Another division used the 125 jhp and when we were sent some of the 125 grain ammo, one of the model 13's cracked the forcing cone and we were restricted to only the 110 grain ammo. That was not a big deal as the 110 grain ammo was about the same as the 9m.m. +P+ we could carry in our personally owned 9m.m pistols.
I still use the 110 grain load when I shoot .357 magnum. It has relatively light recoil, noise, blast and flash compared to the 125 grain load which went about 150 fps faster, despite the heavier bullet.
I also carried a 4 inch L-frame which allowed me to carry the 125 grain load.
I found the 3 inch barrel made for a faster draw and the K-frame model 13 was much more comfortable to carry off duty than the L-frame which also had square butt grips compared to the model 13's round butt.

If you restrict yourself to the 110 grain load, then a 3 inch is fine, shorter costs too much velocity and the muzzle blast and flash get worse.
I found the recoil on the 110 grain to not be much worse than a heavy bulleted +P .38 Special load.

For the 125 grain, I would not use less than a 4 inch barrel. I noticed the difference and my agency's experience with the lightly built K-frames was one reason they switched over to the RUGER GP 100 before going to the BERETTA 96D.
If you are going hunting, I think you would benefit from a longer 6 inch barrel, especially with a heavy bullet.

Consider recoil carefully. One of the smaller officers I went through the academy actually developed fractures in the bones in her hand and had to be reassigned to a non gun position.
Everyone is different in their tolerance and ability.

Jim
 
Last edited:
Why bring back a thread that is over a year old when nothing good can come of it? People argued last year and bringing back this thread will only cause more of the same. I think this thread should be closed before that happens. Sometimes threads come back and new info is added, this one came back and really added nothing new.
 
Quite a good thread , not to be snub-bed

A man after my own heart.

I have a 2 1/2" 686, and full out .357 loads are pretty stout in it. The good news is you don't need all that power for two legged varmints. I also load 158s at leisurely velocities to enjoy my .357s at the range. The short 686 is surprisingly accurate at 100 yards.

Fortunately, I and a host of others will continue to gather very good factual information as well as vicarious experience from reading about the performance that other members are getting from their sub 3" 357 magnum revolvers. Personally, I choose to interpret the extreme velocity results that others have chronographed as valuable data about potential performance, such practices of "pushing the envelop" tend to advance firearms, technology which is another "good" benefit to this growing world wide shooting community. Just hearing about the accuracy that can be achieved from a 357 snubby at 100 yards is "good" encouragement. Although it is true that over a year ago the OP had inquired about the strengths/weakness of a 2' 357 mag. for CC, much "good' and reliable data has come forth , from several LEO with years of experience carrying a snub 357, at least one who proclaims that he reaches his targets more effectively in qualifying with his 2.25" revolver. Such evidence is of "good" report to read for civilians as well who are considering a snub 357 mag. for CC, IMHO. The overwhelming evidence accumulated over decades has demonstrated that the 357 mag. 125 gr. JHP self defense load has proven terminally effective and in such situations one tends to be aiming at a BG target at far less than 100 yards, most likely less than 10 yards and in a car jacking scenario, the BG is less than 10ft. { Since the esteemed moderator introduced his reply, with a phrase from literature, " a man after my own heart " I will apply the same literary license and describe a passage from "The Count De Monte Cristo" as he hands his custom flintlock dueling pistol to the mother of his youthful, inexperienced challenger. The mother has come to his estate to plead with the gentleman of arms not to kill her son which she knows will happen at 15 paces. The Count describes the rules of engagement how after each miss, the dueling parties advance 5 paces closer.The mother is asking the Count to intentionally miss at 10 paces after her novice son likely misses his opening shot at 15 paces. The Count then walks off 5 paces away from her, turns like Rhett Butler and says matter of factly to the woman awkwardly holding his firearm, " See, Mercedes at this distance even you can't miss !" Such is my advice as to the effective advantages of a 357 magnum snub nose as CC..... make the first shot !
This reply is not to be argumentative, just a sincere effort to continue to see more of this "good" stuff ...!
 

Attachments

  • 20160220_140634.jpg
    20160220_140634.jpg
    111.6 KB · Views: 12
Last edited:
I don't mind the snubby. I like it actually, but it winds up getting fed 38s most times. No reason really to get a 38 special if the same is offered in 357 imho. Might save a bit of weight or whatever, but I would take the 357 any day. If nothing else you can load light 357 loadings that do what you want AND have the option of using regular old 38s. Win win.

I used to have a 2 inch SP101. Loved that gun and carried it a lot. I now have the same gun in 3 inch barrel 357. I really like it and it gets shot A LOT fwiw.
 
Friend had a Smith 66 2.5"
It was wicked with 125gr JHP .357 mag.
Reminded me of a 629 4" with screaming 180 gr loads.

It did not however, shoot like crap or turn my hand into a bleeding mess.

In fact, I'm on the hunt for a 340PD (scandium J frame .357 mag).
Whole 'nuther level of wicked.

Corbons in that are nasty, but with some practice should be doable.

Performance costs. Just depends on how much you are willing to "pay".

4" might be a decent nightstand rig, but for general shooting, hunting......I'd go 6".
For CC I'd go 2.5".

A determined shooter should be able to handle it, if not for physical reasons.
Being .357..........if you can't, go 38+p in it.
 
I carry a snubnose .357 Magnum revolver, a Ruger LCR, on a regular basis. While it is true that its short barrel can't take full advantage of the .357 Magnum cartridge, the same is true of any cartridge - you have to go a rifle to get the most out of it. But that isn't really the point. Even a medium .357 load such as the Remington Golden Saber offers better performance than the equivalent .38 Special +P load in the same gun while recoil is still manageable and follow-up shots fast enough.

I don't carry full house loads in that gun. I did shoot a cylinder through it once just to see what it was like. Federal 357B out of an LCR is everything you'd expect - painful to the hands, eyes, and ears. I wouldn't necessarily recommend the experience, but it was educational.
 
I guess I am old old school,

If 38sp in a 2"barrel is not getting the job done,

Then maybe it is time to dust off the Colt new service 45 Fitz special...:evil:
 
Measured out of my 11+ oz 340 PD: Fed personal defense 130g 357 -1174 FPS = 398 ft/lb. 357 Fed HiShok C357E 158g 1046 fps=383 ft/lb. 357 Fed Personal Defense 135g JHP 1122 FPS=363 ft/lb. 38+P Underwood 125g GDHP 1061 FPS=312 ft/lb. 38+P Buffalo Bore heavy 158g LSWCHP FPS 926 = 301 ft/lb. Ouch, ouch, ouch,ouch, ouch.
Not measured: Underwood 9mm 124g +p GDHP from 17 oz Ruger LCR 9mm revolver (assumed to be as much as 1140, based on testing out of 3" Semi auto barrel)=357 ft/lb-no ouch..quicker followup shots.
I don't mind recoil, but it tends to slow followup shots. Big guns have recoil without the the pain. Get a heavy gun, and good luck on the follow-up shots. I know this is controversial, but I think if you could Magnaport a 9mm LCR, it would probably shoot like a 38.
 
I think I read about the first 10 words of each reply, and all of them were headed in the directions of monsterous recoil, deafening muzzle blast, and inefficient burn.

So, yes Ballistics By the Inch did a fair job on testing in a sealed tube. 95% (guess) of the .357 guns in the real world are not sealed tubes. The only ones that are are lever rifles, the few bolt rifles, the single shots, and Coonan 1911s. You get a significant drop in velocity when you add an unsealed port of any type, and a cylinder gap is one. The varying degree of loss depends on the amount of cylinder gap.

A 357 snub is a potent defense weapon. It is compact and powerful, typically has 5 shot capacity although there have been a few 6 shot snubs over the years which met the market with less success than the smaller framed 5 shot guns. I have seen barrels as short as 1.8 inches and I happen to own the longest barrel I have ever seen which is 15". The 357 was intended for the 4 and 6 inch barrels commonly found on "duty sized" revolvers, but can be made to excel just as well in a pocket sized gun. Balancing concealability with function and power pushes me towards something in the 3 inch range. Shorter than 3 inches in a magnum revolver does not give time for most powders to burn snd you end up with the large flash and loud report that people often pound on when talking about 357 and concealed carry. Longer than 3 inches becomes harder to conceal comfortably, and barrel length adds weight. So for a good 357 defense gun 3" gets you enough barrel to reasonably shoot most powders and/or factory loads, you still have a concealable gun, and you are avoiding a good chunk of the muzzle flash and blast associated with most short barreled guns. Like all things, what is best is subjective, but for me the shortest 357 I would buy for defense is a 3". I would try to find it in a k frame sized gun for the 6th shot.
 
Yes, you do lose velocity and increase muzzle blast and make a .357 snub pretty unpleasant to shoot. At least that's my opinion, but I also believe in just carrying .38 special ammunition if you otherwise like your .357 snub. Lots of people swear by the standard pressure, 158 grain "FBI load", still others like the Speer 135 grain load and others yet belong to the "anything that goes blam and isn't an FMJ" school of thought.

If I were starting over with the .38 special, which I'm not, I think I'd accumulate a nice stash of FBI loads for real carry and call it good, along with anything that's reasonable cost and is reloadable for practice.
 
If I were starting over with the .38 special, which I'm not, I think I'd accumulate a nice stash of FBI loads for real carry and call it good, along with anything that's reasonable cost and is reloadable for practice.

I am with you, although noting that the FBI long since gave up on that position.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top