Limitations of .357 Magnum

[FlSwampRat]

I would like hear more from guys who have experience using it from the rifles.

Well now, that does go back to the debate on what is a rifle. If you mean a .357 magnum long gun, I have a Rossi .357 lever action.
I've been harassing the ownership of my LGR to put in a chrono on one of their lanes just to see how the muzzle velocity differs, with the same ammo, between my Rossi and my 2" Taurus. So far, no luck. I've never hunted with it but packing its big brother, my Marlin .44 around is not a problem and I'd trust the .44 a bit more on foot vs a hog.

Incidentally, Henry ducks the whole rifle/carbine issue:

 

[FlSwampRat]

Disagree if you want, it's all well documented. A rifle with a shorter barrel is a short-rifle, which is what the Marlin is. Rifles have shotgun or crescent buttplates, forend caps, dovetailed hangers, round or octagon barrels. Carbines have barrel bands, saddle rings, carbine-specific buttplates and strictly round barrels.

There's little difference in overall length of a carbine or rifle with the same length barrel.

With all due respect to your definition above, why then is the M4 called a carbine? It has none of those features.
From Military.com:
"The M4/M4A1 5.56mm Carbine is a lightweight, gas operated, air cooled, magazine fed, selective rate, shoulder fired weapon with a collapsible stock. It is now the standard issue firearm for most units in the U.S. military.
A shortened variant of the M16A2 rifle, the M4 carbine provides the individual soldier operating in close quarters the capability to engage targets at extended range with accurate, lethal fire."

More definitions:
The M16 rifle, officially designated Rifle, Caliber 5.56 mm, M16, is a family of military rifles adapted from the ArmaLite AR-15 rifle for the United States military.
The M4 Carbine is a shorter and lighter variant of the M16A2 assault rifle.

This'll blow your mind. You can easily have a rifle with a barrel shorter than a carbine. This picture illustrates the difference between carbines and rifles.

That's one manufacturer's nomenclature. If some manufacturer somewhere started referring to their removable magazines as "clips" would you amend your terms?

 

[fxvr5]

I've been harassing the ownership of my LGR to put in a chrono on one of their lanes just to see how the muzzle velocity differs, with the same ammo, between my Rossi and my 2" Taurus.

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

 

[mcb]

357 Magnum going from moderate length revolver to carbine/rifle seems to gain a touch more velocity as a percentage than its bigger brothers.

 

[CraigC]

With all due respect to your definition above, why then is the M4 called a carbine? It has none of those features.
From Military.com:
"The M4/M4A1 5.56mm Carbine is a lightweight, gas operated, air cooled, magazine fed, selective rate, shoulder fired weapon with a collapsible stock. It is now the standard issue firearm for most units in the U.S. military.
A shortened variant of the M16A2 rifle, the M4 carbine provides the individual soldier operating in close quarters the capability to engage targets at extended range with accurate, lethal fire."

More definitions:
The M16 rifle, officially designated Rifle, Caliber 5.56 mm, M16, is a family of military rifles adapted from the ArmaLite AR-15 rifle for the United States military.
The M4 Carbine is a shorter and lighter variant of the M16A2 assault rifle.



That's one manufacturer's nomenclature. If some manufacturer somewhere started referring to their removable magazines as "clips" would you amend your terms?

Obviously an AR is not going to have a barrel band. As I said, those are levergun-specific features. Just as the short handguard and collapsible buttstock are features exclusive to the M4. The point being that the carbine versions have significant differences other than barrel length.

Winchester is just the only manufacturer where this is clear in their current catalog, along with the replica manufacturers. As I said, those levergun features were never exclusive to Winchester. Marlin was the same way. Sharps rifles and carbines followed the same parameters. As did Colt. I don't know why people want to be so argumentative about this. I didn't make it up and it's certainly nothing to get into an argument about. The "clip" comment isn't even relevant.

These two Marlins illustrate it perfectly.

 

[357 Terms]

These two Marlins illustrate it perfectly.

The bottom Marlin in that pic has a very close resemblance to my 1894CSS that was first referenced as a "carbine" not a "rifle" in this thread.
So I'm assuming that the refence that started all this was correct?

 

[tipoc]

I'm gonna post a link to Paco Kelly's Leverguns.com

https://www.levergunscommunity.org/search.php?keywords=definition+of+carbine

This is a good place to have in your web site folder or library. Also a good place to follow up aspects of this discussion.

I figure that Craig knows more than I do about leverguns and the evolution of the carbine and rifle when it comes to the lever gun format. I also figure that a good deal of that is commercial variations and design features that relate to the longer barrel and purpose of the rifle vs. the carbine that has varied some over time and the demands of shooters as features come and go due to market demands.

 

[CraigC]

The bottom Marlin in that pic has a very close resemblance to my 1894CSS that was first referenced as a "carbine" not a "rifle" in this thread.
So I'm assuming that the refence that started all this was correct?

Actually it was. I was going off what must be a foggy memory. I thought the C model had the same forend cap as my S model but it does not. In the case of Marlins of recent memory, long since the passing of the levergun from military and cavalry use, the features have been mixed and muddied. The 1894C has the carbine barrel/forend bands but a shotgun buttplate.

Either way, in the context of this discussion, it was unnecessary to make the distinction between a carbine and a rifle. When the "corrected" post was simply differentiating between handgun and long gun performance.

 

[whm1974]

Either way, in the context of this discussion, it was unnecessary to make the distinction between a carbine and a rifle. When the "corrected" post was simply differentiating between handgun and long gun performance.

Thank You!!! I only mention Rifles in the content of improved performance and reduction of any limitations of the .357 Magnum.

 

[don quixote]

Then there's brilliant, erudite definitions like this. Pass the aspirin please.

http://www.differencebetween.net/technology/difference-between-carbine-and-rifle/

This article actually implies that the carbine is not rifled. Wow. Who wrote this?

 

[whm1974]

This article actually implies that the carbine is not rifled. Wow. Who wrote this?

Probably by someone who doesn't know the difference between a musket and rifle. I'll read it again due to not catching that the first time.

 

[Kleanbore]

Probably by someone who doesn't know the difference between a musket and rifle.

Such as those who designed, marketed, manufactured, procured, issued, and trained and fought with the Winchester Model 1895 Russian Musket?

We are off topic. The thread was started in Handguns.

 

[el Godfather]

We are off topic. The thread was started in Handguns.

I think this thread has run its course as rifle/carbine discussion has hijacked the subject. Anyone looking for info on the intended subject line “357 Magnum” would not be able to easily follow the discussion.

So kindly close the thread or have the members move rifle/carbine/musket/rocks etc discussion to a new thread. Thank you

 

[Kleanbore]

This one need not continue.