Defensive Carry banner

141 - 160 of 170 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
"Barrel lengths on revolvers are determined by measuring from muzzle to cylinder face"

And barrel lengths on semi-autos are measured from breech to muzzle, which is apples and oranges. To compare apples to apples for actual bullet to bullet performance, you gotta do back of cartridge to muzzle. That is 3.15" for the Micro 9 vs 3.51" for the long window J-frame.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,298 Posts
"Barrel lengths on revolvers are determined by measuring from muzzle to cylinder face"

And barrel lengths on semi-autos are measured from breech to muzzle, which is apples and oranges. To compare apples to apples for actual bullet to bullet performance, you gotta do back of cartridge to muzzle. That is 3.15" for the Micro 9 vs 3.51" for the long window J-frame.
No, because to make it apples to apples, you have to take in consideration the cylinder gap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,532 Posts
No, because to make it apples to apples, you have to take in consideration the cylinder gap.
Exactly.

Or, port the auto’s barrel right in front of the chamber for a true comparison, velocity-wise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: msgt/ret and G-man*

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
"No, because to make it apples to apples, you have to take in consideration the cylinder gap".

And also losses to the specific recoil mechanisms of the semi-auto. Surprisingly, the gap losses can be relatively insignificant. Shooting the same round, the J-frame tends to chrono more energy than the Micro 9 and P938. All of them will get the job done.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,248 Posts
"Barrel lengths on revolvers are determined by measuring from muzzle to cylinder face"

And barrel lengths on semi-autos are measured from breech to muzzle, which is apples and oranges. To compare apples to apples for actual bullet to bullet performance, you gotta do back of cartridge to muzzle. That is 3.15" for the Micro 9 vs 3.51" for the long window J-frame.
Really?

So you would attempt to compel the industry, the shooting world to adopt your method of defining revolver barrel measurements?

The typical Smith & Wesson J-Frame snub revolver is 6.4 inches long, has a height of 4.3 inches, with a cylinder 1.25 inches wide, but it possesses a 2-inch barrel.

"I require that you compare the shooting characteristics of the micro-9 to the 3.15" J-Frame revolver."

Good luck with that.

If you can compel acceptance of muzzle-to-breach face measurements for the revolver then I am equally capable of compelling acceptance of muzzle-to (and not through)-chamber measurements for the automatic.

I won't bother though if you won't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
I've got an LCR in 38 special and one in 9mm. Maybe that would be the best way to compare the two cartridges. A red apple vs. a green apple.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
890 Posts
Sort of. The 9 is reinforced with steel and the 38 with alum. All would be fine I guess, until we shot the 38 loose first with hot handloads? Maybe use a .357 LCR in such a test?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
"So you would attempt to compel the industry, the shooting world to adopt your method of defining revolver barrel measurements?"

I got a chuckle there. I could care less about that - they can measure it in Angstroms for all I care - but I am interested in how far the bullet has available to accelerate before it leaves the muzzle.

If I understand you correctly, you are telling me the slug travels further in the Micro 9 that measures 3.15" from breech to muzzle than it does in the 637-2 that measures 3.51" from breech to muzzle. OK, if you say so, I will accept that (but I'm not sure that the slug itself will buy into it, and it is the one doing the actual traveling).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
"I require that you compare the shooting characteristics of the micro-9 to the 3.15" J-Frame revolver."

Require away, but that would be hard to do, since the 637-2 J-frame measures 3.51" from primer to muzzle, (not 3.15" - that's what the Micro 9 measures). I suppose I could saw 0.36" off the snout of the J-frame to make it match your call of 3.15", but I really don't want to do that.

As an aside, I shoot the same 147gr 9x19mm jhp factory loads in both guns.
I used to reload, but no longer have the time, and the factory stuff is cheap and convenient.

The reason for the 147gr is that lighter 9mm loads are prone to erode the face of the titanium cylinders I use in my J-frames. I don't mind replacing the titanium cylinders from time to time, but I see no need to accelerate the process since I prefer slow, heavy bullets anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,954 Posts
"So you would attempt to compel the industry, the shooting world to adopt your method of defining revolver barrel measurements?"

I got a chuckle there. I could care less about that - they can measure it in Angstroms for all I care - but I am interested in how far the bullet has available to accelerate before it leaves the muzzle.

If I understand you correctly, you are telling me the slug travels further in the Micro 9 that measures 3.15" from breech to muzzle than it does in the 637-2 that measures 3.51" from breech to muzzle. OK, if you say so, I will accept that (but I'm not sure that the slug itself will buy into it, and it is the one doing the actual traveling).
YES!
A bullet fired from a S&W 642 travels 1.875" inches until it leaves the barrel.

A 9mm with an advertised barrel length of 3.15" travels down the barrel exactly 2.4 inches.

Why is this so hard to understand. Length of cartridge is irrelevant. Breach face distance to end of barrel is also irrelevant. Length of rifled barrel plus forcing cone is the only real length of bullet travel and since a 9mm casing is approximately .75 inches it is a pretty simple comparison.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,488 Posts
I don’t really get into the arguments of ballistics of 38spl. Sure, you can argue the differences in ballistics between 9/45, between 357 in different barrel lengths, etc. But for 38spl out of a snub barrel? I’m not too worried about it. As long as you carry a round that will consistently penetrate deep, whether it expands or not, you are in the clear and have an effective man stopper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,863 Posts
Discussion Starter #152
I’m not sure I care too much about how far the bullet had to travel before it left the barrel... I’m usually more concerned with what it does after it leaves... in this case, it travelled about 10 yards before impacting the target I aimed it at. First couple of shots were fliers, but then I settled down and figured it out. Not too bad for my first-ever group out of a snub-nosed j frame...

9F99D535-9B2B-4DD6-9946-780E8BE3CFC2.jpeg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
"I don’t really get into the arguments of ballistics of 38spl. Sure, you can argue the differences in ballistics between 9/45, between 357 in different barrel lengths, etc. But for 38spl out of a snub barrel? I’m not too worried about it. As long as you carry a round that will consistently penetrate deep, whether it expands or not, you are in the clear and have an effective man stopper".

That is spot on. The same is true for 9mm out of the snub. If I want a lot of power, I shoot handloads out of my Super Blackhawk.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,966 Posts
"Please show where this "extra power" of the 9mm is derived".

Similar bullet weight, 35,000 psi for standard 9mm vs the rather anemic .38SP+P pressure of 20,000 psi. You can look the comparative chronograph results up on the internet - there are lots of them available.

As an aside, the breech to muzzle distance on my Micro 9 is 3.15 inches; the breech to muzzle distance on my 1-7/8 inch J-frames is 3.51 inches. Which one is short?

I'm not knocking .38Sp or .38Sp+P; I like both, and like them a lot better than I do .357 Mag. Just not as much as I do standard 147gr 9mm jhp. Muzzle energy of the standard pressure147gr 9mm out of a J-frame averages a moderate middle of the road 295 ft-lbs, which is adequate for my purposes. Due to the 11.5oz weight of the J-frame, 9mm recoil is 'perky', but has only broken one set of grips in my three converted J-frames.
My book shows a top pressure of 39,000 PSI. for a 38 SPL +P. Not 20,000. Could you have mistaken CUP. instead of PSI.? Some old books still list 38 SPL with the older pressure measurement. The two can not be interchanged. DR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,863 Posts
Discussion Starter #155
"I don’t really get into the arguments of ballistics of 38spl. Sure, you can argue the differences in ballistics between 9/45, between 357 in different barrel lengths, etc. But for 38spl out of a snub barrel? I’m not too worried about it. As long as you carry a round that will consistently penetrate deep, whether it expands or not, you are in the clear and have an effective man stopper".

That is spot on. The same is true for 9mm out of the snub. If I want a lot of power, I shoot handloads out of my Super Blackhawk.
If you agree with Chuck, why do you keep arguing the benefits of 9mm over .38 Spl in my Snubbie thread?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,966 Posts
Much as I like K-Frame Smiths, having owned 2 1/2", 4" and 6" versions, the J-frames are just much more practical for me to carry concealed. But I admit, I am old, weak and not Hi Speed, Low Drag,etc:redface: While I think major manufacturer 9MM is ballistically superior to major manufacturer 38+P, due to the 642's lighter weight I carry it more than the 940. Now with 158 grain bullets the best 38 +P, Especially boutique manufacturer offerings, are going to be ballistically superior to 9MM bullets of similar weight. For a heavier bullet 9mm, I tested some 147 Gold Dot NON +P in a 2" J-Frame. It averaged 946 FPS. Obviously 38 +P can exceed that.

I wondered about how 158 grain 9MM fired in 2" and 3" revolvers might do. I chronographed some IMI NON +P 158 grain 9MM in 2" and 3" revolvers. The 2" gun averaged 888 FPS, the 3" gun 921 FPS. Can't claim this proves anything, but I am ballistically curious...
Just a guess on my part, But with limited case space you at some point get to the point of diminishing returns. In order to push a heavier and heavier bullet out the barrel at a proper speed, You would need to go to faster powders. At some point the faster powders will cause pressure spikes that may become dangerous. If you tried to stick with slower powders the bullet would be out of the barrel before all the powder was burned.[ wasted energy]. I think most have settled that 147 gr bullets are about as heavy as a 9mm will go without some new powder developed that is fast without a pressure spike. The other thing about heavy bullets in 9mm is that case space would not allow a heavier powder charge of powder and still have the bullet chamber in a standard 9mm chamber. That doesn't mean it won't happen in the future, just not with what we have to work with now! DR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,298 Posts
I’m not sure I care too much about how far the bullet had to travel before it left the barrel... I’m usually more concerned with what it does after it leaves... in this case, it travelled about 10 yards before impacting the target I aimed it at. First couple of shots were fliers, but then I settled down and figured it out. Not too bad for my first-ever group out of a snub-nosed j frame...

View attachment 319344
Congratulations! It wont be long before you are seriously threatening that 10 ring!
That's good shooting for a first timer on a snub.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33,911 Posts
I’m not sure I care too much about how far the bullet had to travel before it left the barrel... I’m usually more concerned with what it does after it leaves... in this case, it travelled about 10 yards before impacting the target I aimed it at. First couple of shots were fliers, but then I settled down and figured it out. Not too bad for my first-ever group out of a snub-nosed j frame...

View attachment 319344
A work in progress. It can only get better.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,248 Posts
I’m not sure I care too much about how far the bullet had to travel before it left the barrel... I’m usually more concerned with what it does after it leaves... in this case, it travelled about 10 yards before impacting the target I aimed it at. First couple of shots were fliers, but then I settled down and figured it out. Not too bad for my first-ever group out of a snub-nosed j frame...

View attachment 319344
Not too bad at all. That'll give results needed at close range just as it's printed on target. You'll even do better as you build on having figured it out.

That's what I need to do is shoot my snubs. I'm sure I'm rusty lately.

Thanks for sharing and posting the photo!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Recon1342

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
... in this case, it travelled about 10 yards before impacting the target I aimed it at. First couple of shots were fliers, but then I settled down and figured it out. Not too bad for my first-ever group out of a snub-nosed j frame...

That's a good j-frame group from ten yards for your first time.

That's actually better than some of the groups I see at the range from some "revolver aficionados".
 

Attachments

141 - 160 of 170 Posts
Top