Pistol Smith Forum banner
1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I figure by now there should be quite a few coverted S&W and maybe a few Ruger SP101's coverted and in the hands of shooters. Has anyone tried the 147's ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
I have managed to get 9mm Super Comp Starline brass to fit into the 38/357 subs. This is not easy. I have to mill off the top of the shell holder.

Anyway, it is not as good as an old fashoned 357.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
391 Posts
I have a Ruger Speed Six with a 2-3/4" barrel that was originally in 9mm parabellum caliber that I chambered to 9X21 and later to 9X23 Win. I load 147 gr XTP's to move on quite rapidly, and I can assure you that the terminal ballistics are in the same category as .357 hot commercial loads.
In the first place, the .357 is loaded with light bullets to allow max velocity without excessive pressure. 115 gr. bullets are a poor choice. The 147's are much better when it comes to terminal ballistics.
In the final analysis, I have gone through several Model 19 Smiths, due to heavy pressurees shaking things loose in the 19. The Ruger is strong, very well suited for heavy loads and going strong as ever. I use full moon clips without any problems.
I fail to see why anyone would go to all of this trouble to make up a revolver for 9X23 without a test objective in mind. If you can find .357 loads with 173 gr. swc bullets, you have the better gun. Longevity is another matter entirely.
The new Ramshot powders may prove suitable for getting velocities necessary without a lot of blast and flash. Still testing and the jury will be out for several months.
The object, when using a short barreled revolver, is to get sufficient velocity with the heaviest possible bullet to provide maximum terminal ballistics.
I have seen the claims for 115 gr. bullets from a .357, and considering the unreliable sources of information, I prefer the 147's in the wheel gun. Sub-sonic loads are very effective, despite what the opinionated writers say. You only need to exceed the sound barrier to open up a hollow point by hydraulic expansion; a swc does not require mach I velocity to operate as designed, and you might want to consider this: Semi wadcutter bullets have been doing an outstanding job of killing large game since the black powder days.
This is only my spin on the subject, but it will require some solid test data to refute
it. That's solid data, not random picks of unsubstantiated second-hand anecdotes.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top