Why no .357 mag auto rim carbine?

[CoalTrain49]

The 30 Carbine is slick but as I understand it, the .357 was alive and well when the 30 Carbine was designed by Winchester at the request of the military in 1941. The 38 Super also had a devoted following and was a worthy auto cartridge. A .357 Auto Rim should have been a no brainer. The .357 can produce the same velocity as the 30 carbine using a 125 gr bullet without much trouble and for sure would have been effective at 200 yards and a knock out at 100 yards.

I compared the case length and the two are almost identical. So why no .357 mag auto rim carbine? If I had the money I would build it.

 

[rcmodel]

Because semi-auto carbines do not co-exist with rimmed cartridges very well.
Especially extra-thick Auto-Rim type cartridges.

Maybe what you meant to ask is, why no .357 Rim-Less cartridge?

The probable reason was that during WWII, the Whole U.S. arms industry was geared up to make .30 cal rifles, and .30 cal bullets.

Also, copper, brass, and lead were scarce commodities.

The .30 carbine 110 grain bullet used about a third less metal then a comparable .357 158 grain rimless cartridge would have.

So they could make three .30 Carbine rounds with the same materials it would take to make two .357 Rimless rounds.

Plus, more space required for packing, shipping, and humping the ammo on the battle-field.
And less magazine capacity in the same compact space.

If that wasn't your question, and you really wanted a .357 Auto-Rim?

I don't have an answer.

rc

 

[Gordon]

There was the .351 Winchester and the 180 bullet at 2000 fps it could have generated would hit REAL hard to maybe 200 yards. Note it is not to dissimilar to the 5.56 in damage ! The reason was a stodgy old Ordinance dept leadership that was not ready for a different caliber plunge as all ready noted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEsakBjVubo
http://www.brassfetcher.com/index_files/30Carbineslowmotionvideo.htm

 

[Jim Watson]

The .30 carbine was itself derived from the .32 WSL, tapered to .30 cal and beefed up for heavier loads and higher velocity in a locked breech action.

I think it was the French who looked at a militarized .351 SL very early on; for some reason reduced to .346. That didn't go over.

 

[DM~]

My Ruger 44 mag. semi auto carbine co-exist just fine with the 44's "rimmed" case...

My guess it's not really a problem to build them in rimmed cartridges, IF the mfg. thought they would make some $$ at it.

DM

 

[rcmodel]

Yes, but your Ruger holds 5 rounds.

Try it with the .30 Carbines 15 or 30 round mags.

rc

 

[CoalTrain49]

Because semi-auto carbines do not co-exist with rimmed cartridges very well.
Especially extra-thick Auto-Rim type cartridges.

Maybe what you meant to ask is, why no .357 Rim-Less cartridge?

The probable reason was that during WWII, the Whole U.S. arms industry was geared up to make .30 cal rifles, and .30 cal bullets.

Also, copper, brass, and lead were scarce commodities.

The .30 carbine 110 grain bullet used about a third less metal then a comparable .357 158 grain rimless cartridge would have.

So they could make three .30 Carbine rounds with the same materials it would take to make two .357 Rimless rounds.

Plus, more space required for packing, shipping, and humping the ammo on the battle-field.
And less magazine capacity in the same compact space.

If that wasn't your question, and you really wanted a .357 Auto-Rim?

I don't have an answer.

rc

Yes, I was thinking rimless.:banghead:

I never considered the shortage of brass. With the popularity of 357 mag carbines you would think someone might see a market for a .357 rimless auto carbine. I just started loading 30 carbine and was looking at .357 and the light went on. Maybe it just went off.

 

[RPRNY]

Because semi-auto carbines do not co-exist with rimmed cartridges very well.
Especially extra-thick Auto-Rim type cartridges.

Maybe what you meant to ask is, why no .357 Rim-Less cartridge?


rc

You are an intelligent and valued contributor to this forum, so please take my sarcasm as light-hearted jest.

While you specified "semi auto carbines", I do have to point to both the AKA and AK 47 as having "co-existed with rimmed cartridges very well". And given the ability of the British infantryman to proficiently execute the "mad minute" with his SMLE, (yes, different feeding mechanism etc and a full sized battle rifle cartridge), again a rimmed cartridge doing rather well. You bend the mag.

But I agree, the question should be "why wasn't the 357 Sig Magnum invented in 1940m?l

 

[dprice3844444]

only semi in 357 is the coonan

 

[CoalTrain49]

You are an intelligent and valued contributor to this forum, so please take my sarcasm as light-hearted jest.

While you specified "semi auto carbines", I do have to point to both the AKA and AK 47 as having "co-existed with rimmed cartridges very well". And given the ability of the British infantryman to proficiently execute the "mad minute" with his SMLE, (yes, different feeding mechanism etc and a full sized battle rifle cartridge), again a rimmed cartridge doing rather well. You bend the mag.

But I agree, the question should be "why wasn't the 357 Sig Magnum invented in 1940m?l

Exactly. Sig works well from a magazine, also rimless. I'm pretty new to the carbine experience, just bought my first one about a month ago. It's really the way to go for handy 100 yrd SD. The nice thing about the .357 mag is it really shines using an 18" barrel. Hence my idea of a .357 mag rimless cartridge. Or maybe a better idea would be a .357 Sig carbine. I wonder if anyone has done any work with the Sig to know if it's performance is enhanced using an 18" barrel. Maybe the Sig never reached it's full potential because it was never offered in a carbine, or maybe it has and I don't know it. It really is a scaled down rifle cartridge with .357 mag performance. I don't know much about it but it looks like it head spaces on the shoulder like a rifle eliminating head spacing on the cartridge mouth.

My point is there is a void here in carbine land. Sure, you can have a 5.56 but the first thing anyone does to an AR is put optics on it so they can make the 300 yd shot. And I agree, if you are going to use one to it's full potential you might as well use optics. AR's are getting a lot of press lately as SD weapons from those who have them but I think mostly people buy them to shoot critters and targets. I didn't say there was anything wrong with that as I do it myself with something else and I'm not anti AR/AK. What I'm looking for is an auto loader, magazine fed, with a ghost ring and something that carries enough energy out to 100 yds to do something. The 30 carbine does this but it could be improved on. For instance, a carbine that uses the same magazine as a pistol, say a 357 Sig, LEO's should like that. One standard caliber for 90% of their work. Also with laws in some areas one has a better chance of staying under radar with a rifle, the traditional hunting firearm.

I'm researching the western states gun laws right now to see what my best option is for a SD firearm to be carried in my truck and RV. I have a CWP but it isn't honored in OR, CA, CO or NM. A carbine or shotgun may be a better option.

Just thinking out loud here.

 

[benEzra]

What I'm looking for is an auto loader, magazine fed, with a ghost ring and something that carries enough energy out to 100 yds to do something.

Have you considered something like a Ruger Mini Thirty in 7.62x39mm? About 50% more energy than .30 Carbine, though less than .30-30, but still above 1000 ft-lb out to 125 yards or so. The 154-grain softpoints are reportedly pretty good on deer, and 124gr JHP is pretty good for defensive purposes. I *think* a Mini Thirty is legal even if California as long as you only take magazines holding 10 rounds or less; factory magazines hold 5 or 20 rounds, and 10's and 30's are also readily available.

http://www.ruger.com/products/miniThirty/models.html

 

[CoalTrain49]

I've wanted one of those for awhile. I'm messing around with an old M1 carbine now to see what it can do. I don't know if they are legal in CA but i'm going to find out. I certainly like the cartridge and believe it would be handy in an RV or truck situation for SD. Not too many would want to argue with something like that. Actually the Ruger probably is pretty close to what I'm looking for. Ammo cost is another consideration because soon I will buying a membership to an outdoor rifle range and I will be shooting a lot more.

Thanks for the input.

Jim

 

[RPRNY]

http://www.hi-pointfirearms.com/carbines/carbines_45caliber.html

Marlin Camp Gun in 45 CAL as well. But the ability to handle 45+P in the High Point is nice.

 

[theotherwaldo]

-Another reason that gunmakers wouldn't want to make .357 military weapons would be that this would make the .357 magnum into a "military caliber" which would be henceforth banned to the civilians of about half of the countries that allow civilian firearm ownership. Better to create a new and proprietary round than to reduce the salability of a popular and current firearm.

 

[VA27]

...I wonder if anyone has done any work with the Sig to know if it's performance is enhanced using an 18" barrel...

I know it's not a semi, but I have a cowboy shooter friend who did. His thought was that since the 357 mag really seems to 'come alive' in a lever action carbine, maybe the 357SIG would also. He built, with much work and many problems, a Winchester '94/1866 improved Henry look-alike. He started with a brass plated '94 action. He fit a 24" octagon barrel, chambered in 357SIG. That was the easy part. The real work was making it feed reliably. When he got it working 'most' of the time, he started working with the chronograph and the loading bench, because he didn't get the results he wanted with factory ammo. Long story short, for whatever reason, he never got the SIG to equal the ballistics of the magnum round out of a longer barrel.

Sure, the SIG round does better out of a longer barrel than out of a pistol, but he didn't get the gains he wanted, which was the whole point of the build. I don't think he ever got it 100% reliable.

Years ago, in one of the gun rags, a fellow converted a Mini30 to a Mini35. It was basically a short action 35Remington. It was pretty neat.

 

[dprice3844444]

http://www.mechtechsys.com/glock.php uses glock lowers to make a semi carbine.check for 357 sig
G17; G17C; G34; G19; G19C; G20; G20C; G21; G21C; G22; G35; G22C; G23; G23C; G31; G32; G32C and the respective 'SF' models - (All Gens)

 

[rcmodel]

Long story short, for whatever reason, he never got the SIG to equal the ballistics of the magnum round out of a longer barrel.

That would be because the .357 SIG case is too small to hold big charges of slower burning Magnum class powder to equal the larger .357 Mag case.

It just can't and there is no way to make it so.

rc

 

[351 WINCHESTER]

Why not take the .351 Winchester and adapt it to the ar15 platform. It's real close and I'll bet it would sell.

 

[torqem]

What he should have said was that rimmed rds don't feed all; that well from box mags. The tubular mag is too limited in capacity and slow to reload for military combat arms. It's also fragile and hard to clean. Soldiers spend a lot of time on their bellies, in all sorts of crud. Tubular mags get dented when you slam prone real hard, trying to keep from getting shot.

 

[Monte Verde]

Anyone remember the .357 Auto Mag?

 

[gunnutery]

Desert Eagle in .357 mag, .44 mag
Coonan .357 mag
Bren gun .303 Brit
Lewis MG .303 Brit (diff mag I know)
SVD/dragonov clones 7.62x54r

All of the above mentioned calibers are rimmed cases that feed semi auto or full auto firearms. I'd say rimmed cases work just fine in autos, some of them in combat. Sure, rimmed cases aren't all the rage these days, so finding a profitable market might not be there, but it's not because it doesn't work.

 

[natman]

The 9mm Winchester Magnum is exactly what is called for. Unfortunately, when it was around nobody built a semi auto carbine for it.

 

[MachIVshooter]

All of the above mentioned calibers are rimmed cases that feed semi auto or full auto firearms. I'd say rimmed cases work just fine in autos, some of them in combat. Sure, rimmed cases aren't all the rage these days, so finding a profitable market might not be there, but it's not because it doesn't work.

Again, you're talking about firearms with limited magazine capacity. Making rimmed cartridge work in big 20 or 30 round box mags is a whole 'nother ball game.

I do have to point to both the AKA and AK 47 as having "co-existed with rimmed cartridges very well".

Presumably you mean SKS, as there never was an "AKA" designated military rifle. And 7.62x39mm is not rimmed. Heavily tapered, but rimless.

If you're thinking of the SVT38/40 or PSL in 7.62x54R, once again, you're talking limited magazine capacity. Same with the SMLE.

If you need a history lesson on how well rimmed cartridges work out with higher capacity magazines, look no further than the 8x50mmR French Chauchat.

 

[gunnutery]

Again, you're talking about firearms with limited magazine capacity. Making rimmed cartridge work in big 20 or 30 round box mags is a whole 'nother ball game.

Aside from the Bren gun magazine partially using gravity, it has a 20-30 round capacity.

 

[RPRNY]

I'll assume that your unjustifiably snarky response was just ill-applied sarcasm. So, here's a visual history lesson for you too







Bren Gun 30 round mag