OP
OP
CoalTrain49
Member
Deleted.
Why no .357 mag auto rim carbine?
- Thread starter CoalTrain49
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
CoalTrain49
Member
from specialize magazines, like the 1022 or the lewis, yes. from regular box mags, no. that is the entire reason that browning first developed the semi-rimmed, then the rimless cases. Why bother contorting yourself around some problem that you can just avoid?
BCRider
Member
I looked up the history of the .351WSL and the slick looking and apparently successful Winchester model 1907. Seems like it was a pretty well known and well used platform. I'm surprised that it didn't have more of a military presence outside of WWI.
Politics often creates odd decisions. I know little of the history of the requirement that resulted in the M1A and the .30Carbine ammo. But from videos on You Tube showing the trim little Model 1907 shooting the .351 ammo it seems like it would have been tailor made to fit the light rifle competition. Or at least if it were given a slight facelift to suit a modern military use.
Or perhaps Winchester felt that it could not meet the ballistics performance specs set out in the light rifle requirements? From Wiki on the topic of the .30Carbine ammo....
For whatever reason they chose to base their new light rifle round off a slightly reduced size previous .32 rimless self loading cartridge rather than use either the .32SL or .351WSL. I doubt that they would have done this if there was not a reason that prohibited the use of these two existing cartridges.
EDITED TO ADD:
Looking at the Winchesters 1905 and 1907 a little closer I see that they were 7 to 8 lbs. The "light rifle" competition stated a weight of 5 lbs. So I guess it's no surprise that these previous designs were not eligible for submission to the competition.
Politics often creates odd decisions. I know little of the history of the requirement that resulted in the M1A and the .30Carbine ammo. But from videos on You Tube showing the trim little Model 1907 shooting the .351 ammo it seems like it would have been tailor made to fit the light rifle competition. Or at least if it were given a slight facelift to suit a modern military use.
Or perhaps Winchester felt that it could not meet the ballistics performance specs set out in the light rifle requirements? From Wiki on the topic of the .30Carbine ammo....
For whatever reason they chose to base their new light rifle round off a slightly reduced size previous .32 rimless self loading cartridge rather than use either the .32SL or .351WSL. I doubt that they would have done this if there was not a reason that prohibited the use of these two existing cartridges.
EDITED TO ADD:
Looking at the Winchesters 1905 and 1907 a little closer I see that they were 7 to 8 lbs. The "light rifle" competition stated a weight of 5 lbs. So I guess it's no surprise that these previous designs were not eligible for submission to the competition.
ECVMatt
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2004
- Messages
- 2,866
I would love a Ruger Deerfield in .357 or even a Timberwolf pump. In the meantime, I will guess I am pretty happy with my leverguns and my H&R Trapper.
I have seen things like this from Australia and UK:
This one uses DE mags, and the one from Oz used modified Ruger mags
I have seen things like this from Australia and UK:
This one uses DE mags, and the one from Oz used modified Ruger mags
MachIVshooter
Member
There was no snark, no sarcasm, not even mild facetiousness; just matter-of-fact statement, and pointing you toward one of the few (remarkably unsuccessful) rimmed cartridge firing, box magazine fed auto loading weapons with a capacity greater than 10 or 12 that was designed for use by a single infantryman. If having it pointed out to you that you're mistaken offends you, that is something you must reconcile on your own.
Your photograph confirms to me that what you refer to as the "AKA" is most definitely a "Samozaryadnyj Karabin sistemy Simonova", otherwise known as the SKS, which has ALWAYS been chambered in the 7.62x39mm RIMLESS cartridge. No number of google images or your own personal pictures will change that.
Secondly, I know what a Bren LMG is, and I know what the magazine looks like. I don't think a top-feeding, gravity-assisted magazine would have worked well for a rear echelon PDW; The Bren was meant for bipod use that kept it upright. Turn the thing upside-down, you got problems. Its magazine feed system wasn't markedly more advanced than the Gatling.
In addition to the fact that swapping parts between guns often rendered them non-functional, magazines falling out, etc. Yes, the entire design is a gigantic POS, and trying to do a large magazine with rimmed cartridges just added insult to injury with the Chauchat.
kBob
Member
M-1 carbines HAVE been modified to use a rimless version of the .357 based on .223 cases. They have been modified to shoot all sorts of cartridges they were not designed for. I have heard of one reworked to shoot .357 from DE magazines if you really want to do that. I believe you get seven rounds from a longer magazine than the 15 round carbine mag, but it it blows you skirts up and you have the scratch, go for it.
Meanwhile look back over this topic. The .30 Carbine round was developed to meet the requirements for ballistics in a rifle that made weight for what the Army wanted....period end of argument.
Someone mentioned the .357 Automag, You are not going to get many shots in an M-1 carbine using cut down .308 rifle brass necked to .357.....though we do seem to be getting into the realm of Col. Cooper's Thumper concept. I know the old Soviets had developed a 9 mm necked up version of the 7.62x39 cartridge for use in specialized weapons something like that from say a Mini 30 might be interesting using .357 bullets. Likely more do able than .357 in a M-1 Carbine or for that matter if the cases could stand expanding enough a .357 Max "rimless" based on .223 cases for the Mini 14.
BTW a picture was shown of a Lewis gun up stream with a comment that they held 90 or more rounds....the ground magazine shown held 47 rounds a more than twice as tall magazine for use only on aircraft (interfered with ground sights) held 90. Dispite all the who-ha about Lewis guns verses everything else the british retained their Hotchkis portables after WWI as the standard LMG a gun. We in the US called that the Benet-Marcie that was roundly trashed in the American press when compared to the Lewis. Both the British Army and the director of US machine gun research at the time felt that Awful Hotchkis was a better gun and one reason was the unreliability of gravity/ action fed Lewis gun mags.
Go figure.
BTW the Lewis gun action looks amazingly like the later German FG-42 rifle action on which the US developed the M-60 machine gun.
According to some sources the biggest problem in the development of the SVD Soviet Sniper/designated marksman rifle was the development of a magazine to feed the rimmed 7.62x54 R ammo that did not have to be hand fitted to individual guns and was fully interchangeable as the old Tok -40 were considered unreliable when inter changed by the Soviets.
kBob
Meanwhile look back over this topic. The .30 Carbine round was developed to meet the requirements for ballistics in a rifle that made weight for what the Army wanted....period end of argument.
Someone mentioned the .357 Automag, You are not going to get many shots in an M-1 carbine using cut down .308 rifle brass necked to .357.....though we do seem to be getting into the realm of Col. Cooper's Thumper concept. I know the old Soviets had developed a 9 mm necked up version of the 7.62x39 cartridge for use in specialized weapons something like that from say a Mini 30 might be interesting using .357 bullets. Likely more do able than .357 in a M-1 Carbine or for that matter if the cases could stand expanding enough a .357 Max "rimless" based on .223 cases for the Mini 14.
BTW a picture was shown of a Lewis gun up stream with a comment that they held 90 or more rounds....the ground magazine shown held 47 rounds a more than twice as tall magazine for use only on aircraft (interfered with ground sights) held 90. Dispite all the who-ha about Lewis guns verses everything else the british retained their Hotchkis portables after WWI as the standard LMG a gun. We in the US called that the Benet-Marcie that was roundly trashed in the American press when compared to the Lewis. Both the British Army and the director of US machine gun research at the time felt that Awful Hotchkis was a better gun and one reason was the unreliability of gravity/ action fed Lewis gun mags.
Go figure.
BTW the Lewis gun action looks amazingly like the later German FG-42 rifle action on which the US developed the M-60 machine gun.
According to some sources the biggest problem in the development of the SVD Soviet Sniper/designated marksman rifle was the development of a magazine to feed the rimmed 7.62x54 R ammo that did not have to be hand fitted to individual guns and was fully interchangeable as the old Tok -40 were considered unreliable when inter changed by the Soviets.
kBob
351 WINCHESTER
Member
I think Winchester already nailed it with the .351 Winchester self loading ctg. over 100 years ago.
Peter M. Eick
Member
Monte (up a ways) has it right. 357 Automag. A 44 automag (308 round cut in half) necked down to 357 caliber. It would be a fun round in a small rifle.
ECVMatt
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2004
- Messages
- 2,866
351-
One time I was way back in the Sierra mountains hiking from one side to the other and I found a .351 Win case. It was located in a nice spot to sit and wait for deer over a small meadow. I always wondered if they were just shooting for fun or shooting for food. I also found a 351 near an abandoned house in north Texas. It was rumored to have been a gambling and drinking house.
If only those cases could talk.
Finding those cases prompted me to read up a bit on the .351. It is a very neat cartridge and something I wish we still had in production.
One time I was way back in the Sierra mountains hiking from one side to the other and I found a .351 Win case. It was located in a nice spot to sit and wait for deer over a small meadow. I always wondered if they were just shooting for fun or shooting for food. I also found a 351 near an abandoned house in north Texas. It was rumored to have been a gambling and drinking house.
If only those cases could talk.
Finding those cases prompted me to read up a bit on the .351. It is a very neat cartridge and something I wish we still had in production.
Husker_Fan
Member
I'd be happy to take a tube fed .357 semi auto carbine. 
I've always been fond of the .30 cal M1 carbine despite it's light punch. My father carried one in WWII, so perhaps that's what got me started down that path in 1960.
If you need more punch, there was an interesting experiment by one of the gun scribes in the late sixties or early seventies that used .30-06 (or .308) cases shortened to carbine case length. The rim had to be rebated to make it work with the carbine bolt, but the .308 case would hold a .45 caliber bullet nicely. The result was a .45 caliber carbine with rebated rim. The 15 round magazine would only hold about 8 rounds IIRC, but the punch was about twice that of the M1 Carbine round. I always thought that was a good example of thinking outside the box, and I think the result would have been an outstanding wild pig gun.
One of my complaints about the carbine, as a reloader, was the way it scattered empty brass. If you had to manufacture your own brass out of .30-06 empties, this would be a particular nuisance. Imagine shooting a pig at 3:00 am and beating the bush for fired brass in the light of a head lamp.
If you need more punch, there was an interesting experiment by one of the gun scribes in the late sixties or early seventies that used .30-06 (or .308) cases shortened to carbine case length. The rim had to be rebated to make it work with the carbine bolt, but the .308 case would hold a .45 caliber bullet nicely. The result was a .45 caliber carbine with rebated rim. The 15 round magazine would only hold about 8 rounds IIRC, but the punch was about twice that of the M1 Carbine round. I always thought that was a good example of thinking outside the box, and I think the result would have been an outstanding wild pig gun.
One of my complaints about the carbine, as a reloader, was the way it scattered empty brass. If you had to manufacture your own brass out of .30-06 empties, this would be a particular nuisance. Imagine shooting a pig at 3:00 am and beating the bush for fired brass in the light of a head lamp.
- Status
