.357/.44
Ambrose
Member Posts: 3,208 ✭✭✭✭
Several years ago, there was a fad to neck .44 magnum brass to .357 and chamber a revolver cylinder for it in an effort to get greater velocity. One of those cartridges was called the .357/.44 Bain & Davis. I liked the idea so I sent in the 9mm cylinder from my Blackhawk, had it re-chambered, and bought dies. The problem was that by the time standard .357 velocities were reached, cartridge set-back started and cylinder lock-up began. IOW, it didn't work very well!
Another of those cartridges was called the .357 Bobcat. The Bobcat had the cylinder bored straight in .44 caliber (no shoulder), i.e., it would accept an empty .44 magnum case. The formed case had a sharper shoulder than the B & D and took a shaped plastic (celcon) collar. I'm kind of a slow learner and I have a thing for Blackhawks, so when one chambered for the Bobcat showed up on an auction, I naturally had to have it. It came with a 2X Leupold in Buehler mounts, with dies and cases, and, more importantly, the celcon collars.
Now, the strange thing: Unlike the B & D, another 150 fps beyond .357 velocities is attainable without cylinder set-back. I am having difficulty understanding why. Any theories?
Comments
By not having the shoulder contacting the chamber there is less tendency for the set back to occur. The expansion of the case when it is fired is only directed to the chamber walls and not against the shoulder like in the B&D. Having a shoulder in the chamber is like having a rocket nozzle and the thrust is directed back. I chuckled about your several years comment because it is more like several decades since the B&D came out.
If it was me, I would forget about either cartridge and go with this to get all the 357 performance you could ever want.
One piece of advice about the Maximum is to use bullets for the 35 Remington because regular pistol bullets aren't built for the Maximums velocity. Bob
I have a Contender barrel in 357 Max.
Shoots quite well and hits almost as hard as Mark C's hammer.
Bobjudy: The bobcat and the B & D cartridges are very similar with both having shoulders. The only real difference is the celcon collar filling the space in the chamber. I don't understand why that should prevent set-back but it seems to.
And I mentioned that I have a thing for Blackhawks so, of course I ordered a 10.5" maximum as soon as I heard about 'em. Even standard .357 magnum loads run pretty fast from that long barrel. But the B & D pre-dated the maximum so, with the B & D, while I wasn't actually plowing new ground, I was walking on it.
In effect the collar turns that bottleneck cartridge into a straight walled cartridge as far as the chamber is concerned. If you look up the history of the 22 jet it will explain how non straight wall cartridges set back upon firing. I am surprised you can still get the collars because I have not heard anything about that cartridge in eons. I did see a B&D a while back and the owner complained of the same problems you are having. He said with some loads it would work OK but he also said he was shooting with an absolutely dry chamber. I think he said he was degreasing it with acetone before shooting. Bob
Two things occur to me reading this thread; the .256 Hawkeye and the M-1 Garand with the "Navy" insert collar. The Hawkeye was done as a single-shot because of the setback problem. It was the same concept as the T/C Contender in a different format. The "Navy" collar was an insert that could be placed in the chamber if the Garand to allow the use of 7.62X51 in the '06 chamber. Both were less than stellar fixes. When loading for my S&W M-53 .22 Jet one of the absolutes was getting every bit of case lube off the rounds before trying to fire them or they would lock everything up tight with the set-back.
There was a third .357 - .44.
It seated a .357 bullet in a bushing IN the unaltered .44 case for an unaltered .44 cylinder, behind a .357 barrel. The bushing slammed against the barrel, closing the cylinder gap and the bullet went down the barrel. I think the bushings were brass and were supposed to slide across the barrel breech after firing and not drag on cylinder rotation.
That and the Bobcat, I would not want any .44 ammo anywhere near, a mixup would be destructive and dangerous.
years back I almost destroyed my blackhawk by loading shells beyond max just because I could
I learned bigger isnt always better and bought a 44 mag for that purpose
Hawk Carse: After your remark about ",44 ammo anywhere near", I tried some .44 Special cartridges that I had loaded with the old Lyman #42798 cast bullet and they drop right in the Bobcat cylinder. So you are right. I'm sure factory .44 special as well as .44 Russian would fit, too. So, while I never thought of it before, that is a hazardous situation. Newer generations are not familiar with the old ways and, even then, "if it fits, shoot it."! So I probably should remove the cylinder from the gun so that when it's sold from my estate, it goes with no cylinder.