Talk:.357 Magnum

Template:0.7 nom

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the .357 Magnum article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / North America / United States C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Firearms Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

generally accept

A .357 Magnum revolver will generally accept both .357 Magnum and .38 Special ammunition, ...

I removed "generally." I don't see how a 357 Magnum could not fire a 38 Special, but the firearms world has some strange stuff in it. Please correct if necessary. -- Mike Wilson 01:40, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The only instance where it would not be recommended to fire a 38 spec in a 357 is the 38 tends to leave lead rings in the cylinder. — KaiserB 04:28, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have used a revolver that used both a .38 and a .357 Magnum. Dudtz 6/25/06 11:29 PM EST

A .357 magnum may not accept .357 loads after several .38 loads have been fired through it due to the accumulation of debris left by the shorter .38 cartridge. The slightly longer .357 will be met with resistance when trying to load them into the cylinder. --Professor London 05:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't have debris problems with the .357/.38 revolver that I used. Dudtz 9/25/06 7:10 PM EST

Questionable statement

This statement: The .357 Magnum was a direct competitor with the .38 Super which was designed for semi-automatic pistols. The .38 Super can still give the .357 serious competition in barrels of equal length, but the .357 is more powerful especially as revolvers can have a long barrel that would be too clumsy for semi-auto designs. Is questionable at best. Why is the 357 Magnum (revolver round) a direct competitor with 38 Super (semi auto round)? This does not make sense. — KaiserB 04:30, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The .357 Magnum is one of the cartridges for the Desert Eagle(semi auto pistols) family. Dudtz 11/29/06 6:30 PM EST

Intro not really accurate

The first sentence: "The .357 Magnum revolver cartridge was created by Elmer Keith and the firearms manufacturer Smith & Wesson" is not not quite accurate. According to John Taffin's Big Bore Sixguns, Doug Wesson recruited Keith and another famous "experimenter," Phil Sharpe, to test the limits of a heavy-framed .38 revolver. According to Taffin, Sharpe "was probably most influential in bringing about the new cartridge."

Also, though S&W developed the .357 revolver, Winchester developed the .357 cartridge.

Contribution of Doug Wesson should be noted

Doug Wesson provoked the development of the .357, and played a large role in promotion of the .357, particularly as a hunting round.

Resident Evil

is that one available in Resident Evil as well? I don't quite remember... (131.130.121.106 20:18, 5 June 2006 (UTC))[reply]

WPMILHIST

The WPMILHIST tag has been removed due to this article not being military related.--Oldwildbill 08:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

357 vs. 45 LC

It has much more stopping power on game than the .45 Long Colt.

I'd have to say, only compared to "standard" 45 LC loads intended to be safe in older revolvers. Careful handloaders have long been able to create heavy 45 LC loads for stronger, modern handguns that are better than the 357 on large game, and now there is factory +P ammunition such as that from Buffalo Bore.

But - I'm a 357 fan regardless.

Rossab 22:45, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I altered it to say that they're very similar, based on looking up results for both cartridges. Energy is almost identical for bullets of standard weight in each cartridge. The larger cross-section of the .45 would give it the edge in punch, the .357 has the edge on penetration based on the sectional density. I can provide data for anyone interested, but I thought it a bit much to add the comparison to the article, it would give too much weight to the .45, which after all isn't what the article is about. Arthurrh 00:15, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Include noteworthy guns in See Also?

Before I go ahead to add them into See Also, I wanted to ask if it was appropriate to perhaps list a small number of prominent guns that use this cartridge. I was thinking of three examples:

S&W Model 27, the first gun to use the round.
Colt Python, probably one of the most famous guns to use the round.
Desert Eagle, noteworthy as a semi-automatic that can use the round.

What do you think? —WhosAsking 12:36, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it,especially the .357 Desert Eagle. Dudtz 11/29/06 6:33 PM ET

Major cleanup

I just did a major cleanup. I removed a lot of the excess wikilinks that were repeated. Also added references. I took out the Marshall & Sanow data because it was unreferenced and from what I can find it's highly disputed.The Marshall & Sanow "Data" - Statistical Analysis Tells the Ugly Story

Marshall & Sanow's terminal ballistics research indicates a high likelihood of a "one-shot stop" with the .357 Magnum. However the .357 Magnum may produce muzzle blast beyond the tolerance levels of some shooters, especially from shorter-barreled revolvers.

I removed the claim to Winchester as being part of the design, unless someone has a ref to back it up. I couldn't find one. I also cleaned some unlikely claims, as well as generally trying to tighten the language. I'm sure someone can still polish it up quite a bit. Arthurrh 00:07, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This story at About.com states that Winchester created the specifications for the cartridge, so I added it as a reference. Bloodshedder 00:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. I also find it in my COTW. Arthurrh 04:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Magnum

Do I understand correctly that the magnum refers to the cartridge being longer than usual? I always assumed that the epithet referred to the caliber. Thanks. Maikel (talk) 02:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On all the magnum cartridges I know of, the caliber of the bullet remains the same as the previous cartridge it was based on (assuming it was based on a previous cartridge, I don't think all "magnum" cartridges are). The .38 in .38 Special actually refers to the diameter of the case, not the bullet. The bullet is approx. 9 millimeters (0.358 inches) like the .357 Magnum. The cartridges were made longer, obviously, and this served two functions: to be able to hold more powder, and to prevent the cartridges from being used in older revolvers that would not hold up. Bloodshedder (talk) 09:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

.357 Magnum THV

I saw this on a page with photos of many cartridges, but haven't found any info on what's different about it. The portion of the bullet visible is very odd shaped. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.178.123 (talk) 05:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

Article reassessed and graded as start class. Referencingand appropriate inline citation guidelines not met. --dashiellx (talk) 11:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]