Why 357 ammo is "watered down"

[Palladan44]

For example, I see posted data on another forum showing 15.2 grains of modern 2400 and a 158 grain Speer JSP got 1263 fps from a 4" Smith (in another source 15.0 grains of modern 2400 and a 158 gr cast exceeded 1500 fps from an 8-3/8 Smith, so 2400 still seems to produce as much velocity as the old days)..

Interesting thought. I used up some decades old Hercules 2400. A friend thinks its from the 90s but I believe its from the 70s or older. White metal can.
Powder still was fine though. I also have my trustee 8lb jug of Alliant 2400 which i compared it to. Let me just say that there was enough difference between them that you could have convinced me they were different powders altogether. The old stuff acted more like WW-296 without the flash. My new stuff is milder, and can be downloaded about 10% more. The old stuff left the yellow grains left behind no matter what loading, but the new stuff actually burns clean at the higher range (ex. 20 grains in 44 mag, 240gr. LSWC) But all in all, the older 2400 was hotter, enough to tell just by the senses. I like the new 2400 better for my purposes. NOW was the old hercules 2400 that much different than the new stuff, or did the old powder change over time, or is this just the nature of batch to batch powders changing. Some of each perhaps?

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Pendulum technology should most definitely NOT be considered crude, antique, or otherwise inaccurate. The understand, and application, of the physics of the pendulum has lead to great advancements in technology and engineering, far beyond that of clocks and watches.

Fracture Mechanics, for example, is the study of crack propagation and failure modes of materials, especially metals. Why is this important?

One might ask the crew of the S.S. Schenechtady the night of January 16, 1943 while she was tied up pierside. She was a brand new ship, just launched New Years Eve...523 feet long, 68 feet wide. Her hull suddenly, and without warning, cracked through and the ship literally broke in half. And the crack was through hull plates, not welds.

Back to the pendulum:

The Charpy V-Notch test is one test used to determine "fracture toughness" of a metal. It determines the amount of energy a test sample absorbs from a weighted pendulum at different test sample temperatures. And here's how the test is performed:

A sample specimen is fabricated which is 55 mm long, 10 mm square, and having a 2 mm deep notch with a tip radius of 0.25 mm machined on one face. (The notch represents a "crack" or "pre-existing flaw" where the stress forces of the test will be concentrated.)

The sample piece is supported on each end and struck in the area directly behind the machined notch by a pendulum. As the pendulum swings through the test sample, the height of the swing is measured and from this the amount of energy absorbed by the metal sample can be calculated, which gives an indication of the fracture toughness of the metal. (In very simple terms, fracture toughness is the ability of a metal to resist crack propagation. If you know the fracture toughness of a metal, then you can figure out the maximum stress the metal can take without breaking.)

Without understanding fracture mechanics, it's not possible to reliably and safely build a great many products we take for granted today.

Here are a couple pictures. One is the S.S. Schenechtady, broken pierside, the other is a diagram of a Charpy V-Notch test setup.

 

[murf]

here is a cup/psi chart i ginned up a while back:

as you can see, saami only reduced the 357 magnum map by a thousand cup. the 44 magnum reduction (3500 cup) is another story.

fyi,

murf

 

[mcb]

As interesting as that Speer data is they are not the regulatory body, SAAMI is. Speer can publish anything it wants and it should hold little weight to the wider firearms market if it exceeds SAAMI. I would also argue that the 46,000 CUP is as likely a miss read of the SAAMI tables published incorrectly by Speer, as anything, since in the SAAMI spec the MAP (Maximum Average Pressure) is 45,000 CUP and in the column right next to MAP is the MPLM (Maximum Probably Lot Mean) and its value is 46,500 CUP.

The SAAMI spec is the bible for the firearms industry. The only change I have seen going from one SAAMI publication to the next revision (new revisions are published every 3-4 years for each volume typically) is a correction on 38 Special +P (only in the piezo transducer spec, the CUP spec did not change) from the first publication it was in to the next. I have never seen a actual SAAMI publication that shows a spec different the 45,000CUP/35,000PSI for 357 Magnum. I would love to get my hand on a copy of the SAAMI spec from the 40's or 50's to confirm but historic copies of the SAAMI spec seem really really hard to find. I have burnt a fair amount of time in the effort even twisting the arm of a current SAAMI board member with no luck.

 

[murf]

so the speer #11 is still the only clue as to max pressures before the 1993 saami specs. i wonder why all the secrecy? i can't think of anything worth hiding.

murf

 

[mikwa]

Lets look at you shave grain weight you make more amo you make more money. A bag of coffee was 16 oz now 12 oz. a 2x4 was 2x4 now maybe 13/8 x 3 3/8 some still at 1.5x 3.5. who cares if it is slower we make more for less. all about $$$$$$$$

 

[Mr. Zorg]

And yet CIP is not only the standard but also holds power of law in countries using CIP standards, widespread outside the USA specifically and North America in general. Europe, Asia, and South America have countries that are CIP member states. And now even Wikipedia lists the CIP standards for .357 Magnum cartridges, not the SAAMI standards. Which are 3,000 bar = 43,511 psi.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.357_Magnum

The revolvers I currently own were manufactured in Europe in a CIP member state at peacetime in the 1990's (Spain). Note that countries that use the CIP standard have a barrel proof test requirement of 390 bar = 56,565 CIP piezo PSI.

Here's a bit more specific detail of CIP standards for the 357 Magnum cartridge.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAIegQILRAB&usg=AOvVaw1dGLlIgP_9pn8ZMC5g9IK-

Some make a great deal of the fact that the CIP pressure testing and SAAMI pressure testing is somewhat different and so there's no formally recognized direct conversion of CIP measured pressure to SAAMI measured pressure but both are directionally congruent so a difference of this magnitude isn't insignificant.

We know that there's a strong correlation between CIP piezo pressure expressed as PSI (converted from bar) & CUP. While not directly numerically equal, a formula with an R-squared value of 0.997 between the two shows very high consistency between the two test method values. SAAMI on the other hand shows much poorer correlation between SAAMI PSI and CUP having an R-squared value of 0.925.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw3qqvjixjE2ru8YdWWe5M9J

As discussed in a couple of reasonably recent THR threads, SAAMI made some rather capricious decisions with respect to SAAMI pressure standards for several cartridges including the 8X57mmJS and 7X57mm Mauser, among others, when SAAMI established the piezo pressure standards vs CUP as discussed in a reasonably recent THR thread that included input from member @denton who authored the article linked here.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/saami-question.876277

And this in fact leads to an even poorer correlation between CIP piezo pressure vs SAAMI piezo pressure correlation only having an R-squared value of 0.885 (at best).

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/why-stretch-the-limits.876152/page-3#post-11669228

It would be interesting to at least myself if anyone on THR with access to additional SAAMI information WRT the 357 Magnum cartridge could find any special notes on the SAAMI rationale for establishing the SAAMI piezo PSI standard at 35,000. Perhaps there's more than just numbers involved as is the case with some other cartridges' SAAMI piezo pressure standards?

 

[Hal]

Perhaps there's more than just numbers involved as is the case with some other cartridges' SAAMI piezo pressure standards?

Considering the fact that SAAMI is a consortium of manufactures in the arms and ammunition business & not an independent such as Underwriters Laboratory - I'd consider it a safe bet to say there's something else going on.
Anyhow - I doubt if there's anything sinister about it either. SAAMI says in their About-->history :
"The 1970s was the start of three decades of transformation and modernization of the firearms and ammunition industry. SAAMI started the transition of the decades-old copper crusher chamber pressure measurement system (CUP) to the modern piezoelectric transducer chamber pressure measurement system (PSI). In addition, there was the formation of a product standards development task force responsible for the creation of the five American National Standards standards, which have been repeatedly reaffirmed or revised through the American National Standards Institute’s (ANSI) consensus process. SAAMI also published several pamphlets relating to the safe handling and storage of firearms and ammunition."

 

[Mr. Zorg]

Considering the fact that SAAMI is a consortium of manufactures in the arms and ammunition business & not an independent such as Underwriters Laboratory - I'd consider it a safe bet to say there's something else going on.
Anyhow - I doubt if there's anything sinister about it either. SAAMI says in their About-->history :
"The 1970s was the start of three decades of transformation and modernization of the firearms and ammunition industry. SAAMI started the transition of the decades-old copper crusher chamber pressure measurement system (CUP) to the modern piezoelectric transducer chamber pressure measurement system (PSI). In addition, there was the formation of a product standards development task force responsible for the creation of the five American National Standards standards, which have been repeatedly reaffirmed or revised through the American National Standards Institute’s (ANSI) consensus process. SAAMI also published several pamphlets relating to the safe handling and storage of firearms and ammunition."

Curiously, it appears you haven't read anything in the linked threads included in my post you quoted in yours. If you had, you would have seen a search for the term "sinister" in any of my posts will come up with zero hits, as well as in the cited cases SAAMI philosophy that a shooter in the USA has much lower competence than CIP grants a shooter outside the USA - such as trying to fire cartridges with .323" nominal 8mm diameter projectiles in a rifle whose bore was manufactured to use .318" nominal 8mm projectiles.

You may find it worthwhile to actually read that info rather than speculate about anything sinister.

CIP history goes back well before the 1970's. Here's the Wikipedia link to remove any perceived "sinister" shadows from the content of my posts as an independent information source relative to anything I've written.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_internationale_permanente_pour_l'épreuve_des_armes_à_feu_portatives#Member_states

Here's two photos from the Accurate Arms manual #2 that are part of my posts in the linked material that saves you the effort from even clicking on a link in my post you copied into your own.



Here's the Wikipedia link for SAAMI

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sporting_Arms_and_Ammunition_Manufacturers'_Institute#History

 

[mistermills357]

I like mild ammo as much as anyone, but I prefer something that produces at least 500 ft lbs of ME.

Whether it is a .357 or a .40 or a .45 .

 

[Kleanbore]

I like mild ammo as much as anyone, but I prefer something that produces at least 500 ft lbs of ME.

Whether it is a .357 or a .40 or a .45 .

What do you shoot at?

Why is ME your measure of merit for a handgun?

 

[Hal]

Curiously, it appears you haven't read anything in the linked threads included in my post you quoted in yours.

Welp - sorry if you took it to think that I thought you personally thought the data had any ulterior motives - some of which were & are less than altruistic.

HOWEVER - There are plenty of people that think everything is somehow rigged or "fixed" & you did speculate that there might be something else didn't you?
Maybe you can be a bit more clear on what you think that something else might be?

I also clearly remember the 1970s (I was far too poor to be into drugs as a single custodial parent of two toddlers) & the whole upheaval in every industry over "Truth in _____" that the OPEC embargo & Nixon helped fuel.
Everybody scrambled to make sure every single claim that made (other than political) was either truthful or one where covering your backside was easily doable.
That stood out in my mind when I read that part on the SAMMI website about how things started to change in the 1970's.

And now even Wikipedia lists the CIP standards for .357 Magnum cartridges, not the SAAMI standards. Which are 3,000 bar = 43,511 psi.

Really?
I see it listed in PSI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.357_Magnum
Don't know what to say there - other than - you Wiki page doesn't look like my Wiki page & it has a different web address - .www.en.m.wikipedia for your vs www.en.wikipedia for mine.

For some reason - yours has an "m" in the domain name that mine doesn't.

 

[mcb]

Really?
I see it listed in PSI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.357_Magnum
Don't know what to say there - other than - you Wiki page doesn't look like my Wiki page & it has a different web address - .www.en.m.wikipedia for your vs www.en.wikipedia for mine.

For some reason - yours has an "m" in the domain name that mine doesn't.

The "m" is simply that he is on a mobile device and getting the mobile formatted version of the Wiki Page.

But why go to Wiki go direct to CIP:
https://bobp.cip-bobp.org/uploads/tdcc/tab-iv/357-magnum-en.pdf

Max Pressure for the CIP spec and their particular way of measuring pressure is 3000 bar (43511 psi), we also know that SAAMI spec is 45,000 CUP using the Copper Crusher method or 35,000 PSI for the Piezo Transducer method. The problem is all three of these measurement systems are different enough in the way they measure pressure that a direct comparison is not wise. Certainly SAAMI transducer spec and CIP spec are a bit more comparable but are still not directly comparable. In post #12 of this thread I go into some details on the difference between SAAMI CUP/LUD, SAAMI piezo force transducer, CIP piezo pressure transducer and NATO EPVAT testing hardware. https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/saami-question.876277/#post-11669016

 

[Mr. Zorg]

Welp - sorry if you took it to think that I thought you personally thought the data had any ulterior motives - some of which were & are less than altruistic.

HOWEVER - There are plenty of people that think everything is somehow rigged or "fixed" & you did speculate that there might be something else didn't you?
Maybe you can be a bit more clear on what you think that something else might be?

I also clearly remember the 1970s (I was far too poor to be into drugs as a single custodial parent of two toddlers) & the whole upheaval in every industry over "Truth in _____" that the OPEC embargo & Nixon helped fuel.
Everybody scrambled to make sure every single claim that made (other than political) was either truthful or one where covering your backside was easily doable.
That stood out in my mind when I read that part on the SAMMI website about how things started to change in the 1970's.

Really?
I see it listed in PSI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.357_Magnum
Don't know what to say there - other than - you Wiki page doesn't look like my Wiki page & it has a different web address - .www.en.m.wikipedia for your vs www.en.wikipedia for mine.

For some reason - yours has an "m" in the domain name that mine doesn't.

And what exactly (using the Quote feature) suggested "something else" must be sinister, especially considering the material at the links you incorporated into your own post?

A simple fact: "capriciously" doesn't ring up as a synonym anywhere for "sinister".

Now let's look at a widely popular handgun cartridge, again of European origin, the 9X19mm "Luger".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/9×19mm_Parabellum

SAAMI standard = 35,000 psi

CIP standard = 235 bar = 34,084 psi

Different methodology but not the widely divergent numerical values as can bee seen with some other cartridges. So there's a pretty decent basis for "something else might be going on" with the 357 Magnum SAAMI vs CIP piezo PSI values.

The posted link to the numerical analyses performed by @denton - again - shows a far stronger correlation between CIP PSI standards and prior cup standards. If you read it, that is.

In the 70's, much like the 60's, and to the current day & time I still take allergy medicine, some of which is now behind the counter instead of prescriptions, but you aren't the only individual who didn't indulge in recreational drugs in the 1970's. I was spending my time actively formally and informally learning, especially things relating to Chemistry and Physics to prepare for my future, and I certainly didn't have any sort of "disposable income" back then.

Now the "m" in a web link I posted is somehow sinister from my mobile device???

 

[Mr. Zorg]

Here's a good working link to that article, where I first ran across it on the web.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw3qqvjixjE2ru8YdWWe5M9J

Along with another THR discussion on it, with no direct participation from me in this one.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/converting-cup-to-psi.847461/

And a truly, to the point, plain language statement there.

"All other factors equal, when powder charge goes up, CUP goes up in an orderly way.

Also, as powder charge goes up, PSI goes up in an orderly way.

It follows that as CUP goes up (or down), PSI goes up (or down) too. That's correlation, and the formula linking the two is easily found."

 

[mcb]

And what exactly (using the Quote feature) suggested "something else" must be sinister, especially considering the material at the links you incorporated into your own post?

A simple fact: "capriciously" doesn't ring up as a synonym anywhere for "sinister".

Now let's look at a widely popular handgun cartridge, again of European origin, the 9X19mm "Luger".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/9×19mm_Parabellum

SAAMI standard = 35,000 psi

CIP standard = 235 bar = 34,084 psi

Different methodology but not the widely divergent numerical values as can bee seen with some other cartridges. So there's a pretty decent basis for "something else might be going on" with the 357 Magnum SAAMI vs CIP piezo PSI values.

The posted link to the numerical analyses performed by @denton - again - shows a far stronger correlation between CIP PSI standards and prior cup standards. If you read it, that is.

In the 70's, much like the 60's, and to the current day & time I still take allergy medicine, some of which is now behind the counter instead of prescriptions, but you aren't the only individual who didn't indulge in recreational drugs in the 1970's. I was spending my time actively formally and informally learning, especially things relating to Chemistry and Physics to prepare for my future, and I certainly didn't have any sort of "disposable income" back then.

Now the "m" in a web link I posted is somehow sinister from my mobile device???

The simple answer is have a test barrel made that incorporates all three pressure measurement systems into it and you can create an precise correlation between the three measurement systems for that cartridge. Baring that have a few different batches of ammo loaded and then tested by all three methods in separate test barrels using the three methods would be the next best thing.

Denton's attempts to correlate the three methods across all cartridge is flawed. It runs afoul of basic math and how linear fits work (set aside the physical difference in the how and what is being measured). Within the SAAMI data set there are sub-groups of cartridges that all have the same CUP spec but different Transducer Specs (and vice versa). This fact alone means you can never create a linear fit that will work with those sub-sets of the total data set thus means a linear fit to the larger data set is also mathematically flawed.

221 Rem Fireball 52 60
6mm Remington 52 65
7mm Rem Mag 52 61
7mm-08 Rem 52 61
17 Rem 52 63
221 Rem Fireball 52 60
223 Rem 52 55
243 Win 52 60
270 Win 52 65
308 Win 52 62
35 Whelen 52 62

This is the largest of these sub-sets the first number is kCUP second number is kPSI (trans) put this sub-set of data into Excel and have it try ask it to do a linear regression, it will fail. The correlations between measurement methods are interesting but always flawed and not useful for anything other than internet arguments.

 

[Mr. Zorg]

The simple answer is have a test barrel made that incorporates all three pressure measurement systems into it and you can create an precise correlation between the three measurement systems for that cartridge. Baring that have a few different batches of ammo loaded and then tested by all three methods in separate test barrels using the three methods would be the next best thing.

Denton's attempts to correlate the three methods across all cartridge is flawed. It runs afoul of basic math and how linear fits work (set aside the physical difference in the how and what is being measured). Within the SAAMI data set there are sub-groups of cartridges that all have the same CUP spec but different Transducer Specs (and vice versa). This fact alone means you can never create a linear fit that will work with those sub-sets of the total data set thus means a linear fit to the larger data set is also mathematically flawed.

221 Rem Fireball 52 60
6mm Remington 52 65
7mm Rem Mag 52 61
7mm-08 Rem 52 61
17 Rem 52 63
221 Rem Fireball 52 60
223 Rem 52 55
243 Win 52 60
270 Win 52 65
308 Win 52 62
35 Whelen 52 62

This is the largest of these sub-sets the first number is kCUP second number is kPSI (trans) put this sub-set of data into Excel and have it try ask it to do a linear regression, it will fail. The correlations between measurement methods are interesting but always flawed and not useful for anything other than internet arguments.

Did you notice, at all, discussion on how the data for the 357 Magnum was specifically discussed in that thread from 2019 (that you participated in)?

A simpler solution is to be consistent when setting standards, which the CIP bar (or converted to PSI) to CUP correlation indicates.

 

[mistermills357]

What do you shoot at?

Why is ME your measure of merit for a handgun?

My reason for having a gun is self defense and I have had enough encounters with punks, so that I will always be a hard case.

I have found that 500 foot pounds, will put them down. I used to be fine with 400 foot pounds, but I have notched it up.

I aided a man whose arm was broken by a baseball bat, and I was close enough to hear the strike. It was an outright attack.

There are other instances that I could relate, and keep in mind, 500 ft lbs is only a preference. I am using FMJ in a .40 & a .45 right now.

 

[Mr. Zorg]

My reason for having a gun is self defense and I have had enough encounters with punks, so that I will always be a hard case.

I have found that 500 foot pounds, will put them down. I used to be fine with 400 foot pounds, but I have notched it up.

I aided a man whose arm was broken by a baseball bat, and I was close enough to hear the strike. It was an outright attack.

There are other instances that I could relate, and keep in mind, 500 ft lbs is only a preference. I am using FMJ in a .40 & a .45 right now.

And this thread was about 357 Magnum ammunition, and by extension, 357 Magnum standards.

 

[mistermills357]

And this thread was about 357 Magnum load data.

Fair enough.

 

[Kleanbore]

My reason for having a gun is self defense and I have had enough encounters with punks, so that I will always be a hard case.

I have found that 500 foot pounds, will put them down. I used to be fine with 400 foot pounds, but I have notched it up.

I aided a man whose arm was broken by a baseball bat, and I was close enough to hear the strike. It was an outright attack.

There are other instances that I could relate, and keep in mind, 500 ft lbs is only a preference. I am using FMJ in a .40 & a .45 right now.

Gosh.

Ya think so?

This tells us you are barking up the wrong tree:

https://archive.org/stream/fbi-hand...n-wounding-factors-and-effectiveness_djvu.txt

Read it carefully.

It tells us that kinetic energy does not wound.

It tells us that what mattes are what is hit and how; penetration; and to some extent, expanded bullet diameter.

"What is hit and how" is largely a matter of luck, and will depend in large part upon how quickly one can fire controlled shots at a moving target.

 

[mistermills357]

Gosh.

Ya think so?

This tells us you are barking up the wrong tree:

https://archive.org/stream/fbi-hand...n-wounding-factors-and-effectiveness_djvu.txt

Read it carefully.

It tells us that kinetic energy does not wound.

It tells us that what mattes are what is hit and how; penetration; and to some extent, expanded bullet diameter.

"What is hit and how" is largely a matter of luck, and will depend in large part upon how quickly one can fire controlled shots at a moving target.

I have scanned it, it seems to twist itself into a knot, and concludes that the 9 mm is best. Because women can shoot it.

This guy concludes that the .357 messes them up, no matter who they are.

Terminal Ballistics as Viewed in a Morgue

The .357 is gloriously effective. It's just that semi-autos are much more common than they used to be, so we see far more 9mm and .380 rounds on the autopsy table than we do the .38 and .357.

Particularly among the gangbangers, the 9mm and .380 are the weapons of choice. The .357 is a wonderfully effective round for self-defense from what I've seen, but it's rare that we get them in anymore.

http://www.gunthorp.com/Terminal Ballistics as viewed in a morgue.htm

He speaks well of the .45 too, and I have one, along with a .357 mag.

I said that I was using a .45 and a .40 with FMJ. I don't think that I am being adamant. I just have 3 guns with good reputation as fight stoppers.

I can't afford a .44 mag, or I would have one of those too.

 

[JohnKSa]

Terminal Ballistics as Viewed in a Morgue

It only sounds good if you don't read it very carefully.

Here's an old THR thread that discusses it. https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/maybe-the-9mm-isnt-very-effective.207527/

 

[Hal]

"What is hit and how" is largely a matter of luck, and will depend in large part upon how quickly one can fire controlled shots at a moving target.

I like to think my ability has more to do with it than luck.

The "m" is simply that he is on a mobile device and getting the mobile formatted version of the Wiki Page.

Learn something new every day I guess. I got out of the computer/network/cloud/internet stuff 9.5 years ago & vowed that I would try my hardest to forget one thing per day related to that field. It makes sense that the "M" would be for mobile & the formatting different.

I thought at first it might be some Euro version of Wiki & it gave CIP instead of SAAMI.

 

[Kleanbore]

I like to think my ability has more to do with it than luck.

It starts with the ability to hit the upper body very rapidly.

But the vital body elements are mostly small, concealed, and moving around in various directions within a three dimensional body space that may well be moving at five meters per second.

That's where luck, and therefore rate of controlled fire, take over..