The Good old Walker

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

I think that many (some) of you are using a chronograph to check the speed of the round and are relying strictly upon that as opposed to figuring in bullet mass and...never mind.

I figured in bullet mass and I'm afraid that with my limited experience, I simply don't see how those numbers line up. Your numbers above clearly state that the velocity and the ME of the Walker 1200 fps and 450 ft/lbs respectively. (Actually, it works out to 441 ft/lbs for a 138gr.) Even if you were able to keep the same velocity with a 200gr round, you would only be at 640 ft/lbs.

However, if we look at some reloading information, we see that a .357 magnum with a 140gr bullet hits 1323 fps out of a 6" barrel. This results in 544 ft/lbs, 100 more than your example Walker load above.

When we look at .44 magnum loads, a 200gr at 1590 fps has a muzzle energy of 1123 ft/lbs.The 240gr load hitting 1350 has a massive 1451 ft/lbs. Even factory loadings are over 1000 ft/lbs for the .44 magnum.

I'm afraid I just don't understand how you can consider a Walker with 450 ft/lbs of energy to be "up there with the best of the modern .44 Magnums" which have easily over 1000 ft/lbs of energy or "more powerful than the .357 Magnum" which seems to outclass the Walker by 100 ft/lbs.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

That Bison Photo

Gads, I wish I had a copy of that bison photo.

Some time back (as I may have mentioned) it was my privilege to view a photo of a bison, a hunter, and his 4-inch S&W 686, after having knocked said bison down from 70 yards (well, 71, really).

With hardcast ball ammo.

No scope.

Offhand, standing.

You've never seen a grin any bigger than that guy had.

I think I'll stick with my wimpy, semi-accurate, almost-as-good S&W 586.

I know, I know, "the plural of anecdote is not data."

But, man, if a .357 can make a guy grin like that, it's okay by me.

 

[Gewehr98]

Jorg, show me the numbers, please.

I'm afraid I just don't understand how you can consider a Walker with 450 ft/lbs of energy to be "up there with the best of the modern .44 Magnums" which have easily over 1000 ft/lbs of energy or "more powerful than the .357 Magnum" which seems to outclass the Walker by 100 ft/lbs.

Which .357 Magnum factory load would that be? One can cherry-pick load data all day long, I'm sure.

I count more than a few .357 Magnum loads that don't meet the Walker's 450ft/lb muzzle energy figure, just using a quick Google search. Imagine if I went to Remington's or Winchester's website.

It's been stated by many folks, including the late Jeff Cooper, that the big Colt Walker was the king of the hill until the .357 Magnum hit the scene. I for one, don't doubt it.

 

[Joe Demko]

What do factory loads have to do with it? Jorg said in his post that it was reloading data. Since there aren't any factory loads, to the best of my knowledge, for the Walker (every cylinder being handloaded by the shooter) it seems fair to compare .357 reload data to figures on various possible loads for the Walker.

What does Jeff Cooper saying something have to do with it, either? That's called "appeal to authority" and it is a well known logical fallacy.
But let's assume he said that the Walker was most powerful until the .357 came along and that he was right. How has what Jorg said been in opposition to that?

 

[Jamie C.]

I myself have read several articles on this computer...

I think I see the problem...

...proved to have much more knock down power and stopping power...

And there's the second.



And here I was thinking the "9mm vs. .45acp" arguments were bad....


J.C.

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

Which .357 Magnum factory load would that be? One can cherry-pick load data all day long, I'm sure.

I count more than a few .357 Magnum loads that don't meet the Walker's 450ft/lb muzzle energy figure, just using a quick Google search. Imagine if I went to Remington's or Winchester's website.

Please, feel free to check those sites. I think you'll find that the numbers there are pretty much overwhelming in favor of most .357 factory loads exceeding 450 ft/lbs.


From Remington's site:

Energy (ft-lbs)
Cartridge Type                        Bullet    Muzzle 
R357M7 Remington® Express™             110       410 
R357M1 Remington® Express™             125       583 
GS357MA Golden Saber™                       125       413 
LL357M1 UMC® Leadless™                    125       583 
L357M12 UMC®                                   125       583 
R357M2 Remington® Express™              158       535 
R357M3 Remington® Express™              158       535 
R357M5 Remington® Express™              158       535 
RH357MA Core-Lokt® Hunting                 165      610 
R357M10 Remington® Express™              180       524

As you can see 8 of 10 of Remington's factory loads exceed 450 ft/lbs. Keep in mind that those numbers are also for a 4" barrel (except the last two, which are from an 8 3/8").

And from Winchester (not as link friendly, but you can find the data from here):

Bullet - ft/lbs
110 gr. USA JHP - 410
180 gr. Supreme® Partition Gold® - 557
105 gr. Super Clean NT® (Tin) Super Clean - 397 (Tin target round)
125 gr. WinClean® Jacketed Soft Point - 521
158 gr. Super-X® JHP  - 535 
158 gr. Super-X® Jacketed Soft Point  - 535
125 gr. Super-X® JHP - 583
145 gr. Super-X® Silvertip® Hollow Point -535

So, that's 6 of 8 of Winchester's offerings.

And, for the hell of it, Federal's choices.

Round - Ft/lbs
P357HS1 357 MAGNUM  HYDRA-SHOK JHP 158gr - 539
PD357HS2H 357 MAGNUM  HYDRA-SHOK JHP 130gr - 574
P357XB1 357 MAGNUM  BARNES EXPANDER 140gr -509
P357J 357 MAGNUM  CASTCORE 180gr - 449
C357B 357 MAGNUM  JHP 125gr - 575
C357E 357 MAGNUM  JHP 158gr -539
C357G 357 MAGNUM  JHP 180gr -466
AE357A 357 MAGNUM  JACKETED SOFT POINT 158gr - 539

Federal's cartridges exceeding 450 ft/lbs: 7 of 8.

I wouldn't call using 31 out of 36 factory loadings cherry picking. If we call the actual energy as calulated for the Walker as 441 ft/lbs, you can see that the majority of factory loadings exceed it by at least 80 ft/lbs, if not more. I suppose if you wanted to nitpick, there are only 7 of those loadings were a full 100 ft/lbs more, with another 9 in the 90-100 ft/lb range.


A few other factory loadings that exceed 450 ft/lbs:
http://www.pmcammo.com/ballistics/handgun_ballistics_357mag.php
(4 of 5, with the exception being the non-toxic frangible.)
http://www.black-hills.com/factorynew.htm
(2 of 2 (I didn't count their cowboy loading, make it 2 of 3 if you want to include that.))
http://www.dakotaammo.net/
(8 of 8)
http://www.magtechammunition.com
(8 of 10)
http://www.fiocchiusa.com/cat_centerfire.php
(4 of 4)


Finally, my point was not to dismiss the power of the Walker. I just simply don't understand how glen walker figures it is more powerful than a .357 magnum and on par with a modern .44 magnum. Even Cooper's quote supports my position. If the .357 was a weaker caliber, why would he have said the Walker was the most powerful until the .357? Wouldn't he have then said the .44?

I will confess, all my data is from secondary sources at best. However, I am all about conducting primary research in the search for the truth. I will gladly evenly split the cost of a .357 magnum, a box of each kind of ammunition, a Walker pistol, and a chronograph with any members who would like to settle this once and for all, provided I get to keep the hardware for my efforts. Don't worry about blackpowder and balls for the Walker, those are on me.

 

[Gewehr98]

I'm not Glen Walker.

So I don't know why he'd say it's more powerful than the .44 Magnum. I'm of the opinion he was quoting Phillip Schreier's now-famous History Channel blooper.

The factory .357 ammo I Googled showed MagTech 158gr loads at 413ft/lbs, and the lightweight Remington loads are in that range, too. There are many .357 factory loads that exceed the 450ft/lbs generated by the Colt Walker, I don't dispute that at all. But my numbers point to the Colt Walker and its 60-grain chambers still being the big kid on the block until the hot-rodded N-Frame .38-44 HVs in 1930 and its .357 Magnum offspring in 1935. That's pretty darned impressive considering the Walker was a muzzleloading revolver designed in the 1840s. Gawd only knows how the Walker would perform if we had the same formulation of black powder they did in the mid/late 1800s again.

 

[Tommygunn]

Gawd only knows how the Walker would perform if we had the same formulation of black powder they did in the mid/late 1800s again.

Not to hijack the thread, but what has changed about BP formulations? It's charcoal, sulpher, and Potassium Nitrate, IIRC????

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

Ok, now you've thoroughly confused me. I'll say it again, I'm not disputing that the Walker was a powerful handgun. I was disputing the glen walker's claim that it is "far more powerful than the .357 Magnum."

You may notice that my position does not and has not, in any way, contradict the claim that the Walker was the "big kid on the block until the hot-rodded N-Frame .38-44 HVs in 1930 and its .357 Magnum offspring "

Again, I do not understand why you seem to think that this is the case.

There are many .357 factory loads that exceed the 450ft/lbs generated by the Colt Walker, I don't dispute that at all.

Sure sounds like you wanted to dispute it based on this post:

Jorg, show me the numbers, please.
Which .357 Magnum factory load would that be? One can cherry-pick load data all day long, I'm sure.

I count more than a few .357 Magnum loads that don't meet the Walker's 450ft/lb muzzle energy figure, just using a quick Google search. Imagine if I went to Remington's or Winchester's website.

I suppose it is possible that I misunderstood your intent and you were merely clarifying that not all .357 mag factory loads acheive such energy rather than attempting to confound my assertions. If that was the case, perhaps that is the cause for confusion. It seemed to me that you disagreed with my position and were refuting it by claiming that factory rounds were not that powerful. Unfortunately, intent and tone can be rather hard to discern via text so I may have made an assumption about your that was simply not the case.

However, I believe thread has wandered far from the orginal topic. Please feel free to PM me if you would like to continue this confusion.

 

[mec]

the .357 as loaded in 1935 featured a 158 grain semi wadcutter bullet desinged by Phillip Sharp over a non-canister version of Hercules 2400 powder. The velocity claimed from an 8 3/8" ( actually the first was 8.5") was 1520 feet per second for an energy deliver of 811 ft/lbs. I have duplicated the performance of the original load in a Smith model 27 with the 8 3/8" barrel.
The load delivered somewhat less velocity from shorter barrels and was later reduced by the factories to abut 1450 fps. Current top fop factory and handloads with the 158 grain bullet range between 1250 and 1300+ feet per second depending upon barrel length and other factors. Energy for a 1300 fps load would be 593 ft/lbs. It is common to drive 125 grain .357 bullets from 5.5-6" revolver barrels to 1450-1500 fps rendering a near-identical 584 ft lbs of energy. The full loaded .357 is hard on revolvers- particularly the smaller framed ones now in general use and this accounts for the more sedate maximum loads now in use.

The 44 magnum came along in 1955-56 with original performance driving a 240 grain lead gaschecked semi wadcutter at 1450 fps. The energy can be found in numerous loading manuals or by use of the formula Velocity squared X bullet weight in grains / 450240- a conversion factor)= ft/lbs energy.
The speer number 12 loading manual lists a 240 grain jacketed hollow point over a heavy charge of H110 at 1451 fps. By the formula ( and the table in the back of the book) energy delivery is 1122 ft.lbs.

In the Walker, the round balls weigh from 138-141 grains depending upon diameter which ranges from .451-.457" . Under a round ball, the maximun charge that will allow the ball to seat below the chamber mouth is 60 grains of FFFG or the equivalent volume of substitute powder.
Dense Swiss FFFg black powder and Pyrodex P provide the highest velocities we have chronographed:
60 Goex FFFg 1115 fps 46fps extreme spread
60 Gr./Vol. Pyrodex P 1221 44
60 Gr./Vol. A Pioneer 974 80
60 Gr/Vol Swiss FFFg 1278 53= 508 ft./lbs energy

It is possible to seat a 200 grain Lee conical cast bullet over 45 grains or the volume equivalent. More powder than that and the bullet will stick out and lock up the cylinder velocity Extreme spread 6 rounds
45 Swiss FFFg 1074 33
45Gr/Vol Pyrodex P 1087 47=525 ft./lbs energy

The .357, .44 and the 44 walker can be quite accurate. The longer bullets and greater velocity of the two magnum loads will allow them to retain energy and shoot flatter to longer range than the Walker

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

Interesting information, mec. I think yours far surpasses mine in value to this discussion. I suppose that pretty much wraps up the power discussion.

Well done, mec. Nice looking guns as well.

However, I'm not 100% sold on your results. I think I need to verify them first hand for the good of the board. The offer to split costs to do the testing stands.

 

[mec]

" I think yours far surpasses mine in value to this discussion. I suppose ...."

not really. It's more like a footnote to yours with some information from handloading manuals

"I'm of the opinion he was quoting Phillip Schreier's now-famous History Channel blooper. "

I think I remember that one. The History Channel-Tales of the Gun, etc are very entertaining and informative. Frequently though, they lay down a huge blooper. I remember one scene where Bat Masterson is industriously filing away on the hammer spur of his Colt to "sweeten" the trigger. They seem to have gotten that from an order he placed to Colt for a revolver with an ejector length barrel, extra tall front sight and " sweeten" the trigger. If you have a little background knowlege, you can dismiss the occasional goof up and enjoy the programs. The producers do a good job but many of them are not gun peopl.

 

[Gewehr98]

Jorg, you hit it on the nose.

And MEC's data reinforces my view a bit. A 500 ft/lb Colt Walker is no slouch, even in today's world.

BP manufacturing is indeed different than days gone by. I've got an original Harper's magazine article from 1895 illustrating DuPont's processes. The efforts into making the perfect grade of charcoal for BP are very interesting. It appears alder and willow wood produced the best-performing BP, but that's not economically viable for today's Goex brand of BP.

 

[buzz_knox]

Special operation teams, also the U.S. Army Special Forces, (Green Berets) U.S. Marine Corps Force Recon, the U.S. Navy Seals, and some other U.S. Governmental Agencies that would make the 'Soccer Moms' urinate all over themselves with fear just simply knowing that we have people like that, have each ran test after test. They have arrived at several indisputable facts...To wit::The .357 is a very inaccurate round.

I wonder if someone could invite Pat Rogers over. He could probably give some insight into Recon's testing of the .357 Magnum. And we could probably get Frogman here to discuss why the SEALs historically deployed (and still have in the arsenal) the .357 Magnum.

 

[mec]

Without a time machine, we can't know much about 19th century black powder. There was a bewildering array of makers all of whom seemed to have their own notions about what screen sizes constituted ff,fff ffff G granulations. I've shot 2f from the 1924 dupont cans, 3f from the rectangular Dupont cans and some stuff I pulled from some 1913 <> .44 special black powder cartridges. The tendency is for them to have the same shot to shot and extreme spread consistency as new Goex but with 30 to 50 fps less velocity. In some loads, the older stuff actually goes a bit faster than goex.

Swiss powder has been around since the 1850s and has always been considered good stuff. Somebody was trying to come up with cartridge loads for his english black powder double rifle and found that swiss 1.5 fg would bring the barrels together with chargers that would fit in his cases but no other modern powder would do so. A wild guess would be that 150 year old black powder was at least as variable as the brands that have been available in the last 50 years or so. A lot would depend on the purity of available Nitre, sulpher and charcoal wood and upon the density produced by individual processes. there may also have been tendency among some suppliers to cut the powder to save money- much like modern dope dealers and food processor do.

 

[Correia]

Special operation teams, also the U.S. Army Special Forces, (Green Berets) U.S. Marine Corps Force Recon, the U.S. Navy Seals, and some other U.S. Governmental Agencies that would make the 'Soccer Moms' urinate all over themselves with fear just simply knowing that we have people like that, have each ran test after test. They have arrived at several indisputable facts...To wit::The .357 is a very inaccurate round.

Huh?

Okay, so top secret counter terrorist units spend their time testing modern revolvers against obsolecent blackpower handcannons, for what reason exactly?

Man, my tax dollars are being wasted.

Strange enough, I know the guy who was in charge of the largest .gov agency handgun procurement in US history. I don't recall them doing much with .44 mags.

And all of that scientifc testing to find out that .357 is inaccurate? They could have just bench rested it. I'll have to tell THR member Ben Shepherd to quit busting clay pigeons at 100 meters with his Ruger .357, because Force Recon SEAL Commando Ninja Force Alpha tested them and said they were inaccurate.

As for .357 having more oomph than the Walker, well, that is just basic math. And I'm not even a member of a super dooper top secret unit.

I am friends with some guys on one of those units. Interestingly enough, they carry whatever they are issued.

Thanks for the info though. I read it off of my computer, and now I'm smarter.

 

[O.S.O.K.]

lol

This is one of the silliest "argument" threads that I've read.

 

[glen walker]

THAT's what I was trying to say. Try loading that big assed Walker with 60 (or hell, 62 grains) grains of powder behind the .457 ball. THEN try loading the .451 in front of 62 grains of powder. Your speed (velocity) will change, as will your knock down power. Just like that other person said in this post (although I think they were trying to be sarcastic, which is alright. I don't mind) about the 9mm and the .45.. Hell yes, the .45 has a lot more knock down power than that little 9mm...And when ya'll try the .451 and the .457 in front of 62 grains of powder, make sure you run the test TWICE. One test with 2 f (FFG) and the second test with 3f (FFFG)..The famous M-16 that everyone loves to bring up all of the time. It's a small round with high velocity. Get shot in the leg with it. Depending on whether it hit's a bone and goes to flipping or not, it might knock you down and it might not. Get shot in the leg at half a mile or better with the M-14 (.308) or the M-1 Garand (30-06). It will blow your leg clean off, PLUS it will knock you piss winding...I am NOT saying that a fully charged Walker is every bit as powerful as a fully charged .44 Magnum, but it is right up there with it. I WILL stand by what I said about the Walker being stronger than the 'average' and 'normal' load for a .357 Magnum. (I'm sure one could 'hot load' the .357 and greatly enhance it's capabilities) AND I WILL DAMNED SURE STAND BY MY STATEMENT THAT THE .357 MAGNUM IS AN INHEIRANTLY INACCURATE ROUND. WHEW!! I thought I (little ol' me) was the one that didn't know anything about modern firearms, and I don't, so you know where that put's some of ya'll..Do ya'll think that the adjustable sight on a handgun are there just for windage and elevation? Well, DO YOU? Do you want to know one reason I continued to stick with black powder and round ball all of my life? Because they are extremely accurate, that's why. Pick up you 'regular' .45 Colt revolver. (It dosen't have to be made by Colt. It can be made by The Man in The Moon, for all I give a damn) Get a paper target, a big one. Aim at (benchrest is fine. hell, lock it into a vice if it make's you feel better) the very exact dead center of that target, firing from exactly 100 yards away. Go check your point of impact. (We are assuming that you are firing from 100 yards away, and that it is a still, calm day with no wind blowing) Look how far to the right that the .45 'walked'. Usually at least a foot to the right and in many cases well more than a foot. (and THAT is a heavy, slow assed moving round) I state to all of you for the last time that the U.S. Government tests have proven beyond a shadow of doubt that the .357 Magnum round is an inaccurate round....Yes, Correia, I said clean off. There may be a little meat and muscle and skin holding it on, but for all practical purposes, yes, clean off...Goodbye. I have never seen so many people in one spot in my whole life who spend so much time reading books and think they know so much, to actually know so little. I signed on to this site because I thought I was going to learn something and have some fun. Hell, that guy that posts on here named ALFY who dosen't even know which end of a Walker the ball come's out of, is worth more than the rest of ya'll put together. You don't have to worry about me signing back on to this pile of crap...

 

[Correia]

Get shot in the leg at half a mile or better with the M-14 (.308) or the M-1 Garand (30-06). It will blow your leg clean off, PLUS it will knock you piss winding...

Clean off, huh? At half a mile...

 

[buzz_knox]

glen walker, I'd appreciate the information requested in another thread about the Mini-14 being a competitor in the trials that led to adoption of the M-16.

Also, do you have any first hand knowledge of the effects of the M-14 at "half a mile" or at any distance, since most anecdotal evidence, an understanding of physics or human anatomy, (or a basic reading of a ballistics table) says this is a very suspect claim, not even worthy of an elite Counterstrike Commando (one of those who may soccer moms soil themselves).

 

[Jamie C.]

I swear, I dunno whether to laugh or cry, after reading some of the stuff here...

Considering how many people I've heard of that took a burst of M.G. fire during various wars, and survived without losing a limb ( James Doohan - "Scotty" from the original Star Trek - lost a finger to such an incident, during WWII ), I have more than a little trouble with " Get shot in the leg at half a mile or better with the M-14 (.308) or the M-1 Garand (30-06). It will blow your leg clean off".


A Walker is a big, powerful, revolver. It's NOT a hand-held super-cannon, however.

Oh, and one more... I've had several .357 mags, over the years. Wouldn't call the first one of 'em "inaccurate", since even the ones with short ( 1-1/2" ) barrels would generally shoot better than I could hold. Under 2 inches at 25 yards was the norm, not the exception.



J.C.

 

[buzz_knox]

It's funny that an M-14 will blow apart a leg at half a mile, but a .308 will just punch a hole in a deer at 100 yards.

 

[Plink]

I WILL DAMNED SURE STAND BY MY STATEMENT THAT THE .357 MAGNUM IS AN INHEIRANTLY INACCURATE ROUND.

That's going to come as a surprise to the thousands who compete with this round and find it to be every bit as accurate as other cartridges.

Get shot in the leg at half a mile or better with the M-14 (.308) or the M-1 Garand (30-06). It will blow your leg clean off, PLUS it will knock you piss winding

And that's going to come as a surprise to all the medical personel who have treated many such wounds of that nature and found the leg still attached, just with a hole in it.

I am NOT saying that a fully charged Walker is every bit as powerful as a fully charged .44 Magnum, but it is right up there with it. I WILL stand by what I said about the Walker being stronger than the 'average' and 'normal' load for a .357 Magnum.

At max charge, the Walker is about half as powerful as the .44 magnum with average factory loads, and far less than half with hot factory loads or handloads. And the average factory load for a .357 magnum runs about 100 ft. lbs. more than the Walker. There are hot +P .38 special loads that edge into the Walker's power range, as well as some hot loaded 9mm's.

Upping the charge in the Walker doesn't result in a great velocity boost. The barrel can only effectively burn so much in it's given length. You get a little more at max charge, but nothing spectacular. It mostly just gives more recoil.

The Walker is a great gun for what it is, and an amazing piece of technology for it's era. It isn't a modern magnum by any standard though.

 

[buzz_knox]

AND I WILL DAMNED SURE STAND BY MY STATEMENT THAT THE .357 MAGNUM IS AN INHEIRANTLY INACCURATE ROUND. WHEW!!

Do you stand by your assertion that testing by Force Recon, the Special Forces, and the SEALs (who use this round) establish this fact?

 

[glen walker]

Well, this Is the last time ..Yes, you may contact Sturm and Ruger. I'm not certain, but I BELIEVE their address is, or was, at Lacey Place. (Probably located in Conn.) Anyway, if you will call them, you will certainly find that they were in the running hot and heavy for the contract offered by the U.S. Goverment. I am positive that they will tell you far more about it than I can. Anyway, when Ruger lost the contract, he continued producing the Mini-14's, and started selling and equipping police departments and various governmental agencies all around the world SO LONG as they were friendly with the U.S.....I did not say that I had seen anyone deliberately shot in the leg at 1/2 mile with the M-14. But, yes sir (or Ma'am) I have seen people who were hit (about 2 individuals, not all at the same time but on the same morning) with the M-14 at a good 1/2 mile. The NVA were carrying them and it was us (Iwas one of the 'us') they were shooting at. They were extremely lucky in hitting anyone, but I wasn't talking about deliberate shots; I was speaking of the round's power.
The reason we know they were carrying M-14's is because we always kept guns in the back, ready to fire for us. We called in Lima Company's guns, (Leaping Lima's Thundering Guns of Death) and gave our G.C.'s , got one spotter round, and then 6 rounds on fire for effect. (177's) Then we hiked our little recon asses over there and tried for a body count, and to see what else we might could find. One of the M-14 rounds had struck 'Billy Boy' in the chest. (regular ball ammo, I guess) We found out later that the round had broken his breast bone, completely blew away one lung, collasped the other lund, took out about a coffee cup full of his liver,(which is lower, which is why I'vd always wondered about the ball ammo part. It sure as hell wasn't armor piercing, or a tracer.) and WHEN IT PASSED COMPLETELY THROUGH HIM it took about three inches of his backbone with it. The other Marine was hit in the left leg, just a hair below his knee, and when the corpsman (we had one with us because we knew we were being inserted into a 'hot' area) got to him, there was just a bit of meat and some skin holding his leg on. (just in case you're interested, Moderator, both of them died) Goodbye to you, sir...One more thing I will tell you, sir. Being in recon, we could carry whatever weapon we chose, but we were still issued the M-16. (A1 at that time) Sometimes one of us (never me) would carry an M-60 on a shoulder strap, and another one of us (sometimes me) would carry an extra belt or to. Occasionally one of us would carry a shotgun. I tried it one time, and while recon is supposed to 'snoop and poop' and stay hidden, sometimes it didn't work out that way. That one time I carried the shotgun I almost got killed because I got excited and pulled the trigger 3 or 4 times after my first shot. I forgot I had to pump it. I always carried an M-14 that had been assigned to me, and a .38 special with a 6 inch barrel that my sister sent over there to me, and she always made sure I had a good supply of .38 Special hollow point. WHAT'S THAT YOU SAY? OH, my GODDDD! You mean I wasn't supposed to fire hollow point because of the Geneva Convention?... Oh, well. tough s***...Oh!, Moderator, here's something else for ya'll to try and pick apart. DID YOU KNOW, SIRRR, that the .38 special, firing hollow points through a 6 inch barrel will give you greater (as in better) accuracy and more stopping power than the M1911A1 firing the regular issue military ammo? Well, it damned sure will. As opposed to it's son, the much ballyhooed .357 Magnum, the .38 special is an extremely accurate round, bested only by the .44 Special...Anyway, the point of all of this, is that a buddy of mine (over there) carried a Mini-14. He had his magazines taped bottom to bottom, so he had 40 rounds at his instant command, using only a quick flip of his wrist so to speak. At 'fire in the hole' (checking weapons before a patrol) or in the bush, there was NEVER a problem with his mini. The M-16's were jamming constantly...goodbye...