Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Smith & Wesson Revolvers > S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961
Forum Register Expert Commentary Members List


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-10-2012, 08:00 AM
Bill_in_fl's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Hudson, Fl.
Posts: 173
Likes: 1
Liked 58 Times in 25 Posts
Default Wildcat cartridges in revolvers.

I was re-reading an old 35 or so year old book of mine called "Handloading for Handgunners" by former major George C. Nonte (deceased).

Under the "wildcat" cartridge section he was talking about and showing pics of the 38/45 Clerke wildcat cartridge. That is a .45 acp necked down to hold a .38 caliber projectile. He was talking about how it delivers about the same ballistics as the .38 super cartridge and how you could easily change a 1911 pistol over to it by simply changing out the barrel and recoil spring. Here's a couple of links.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.38/.45_Clerke
http://www.reloadbench.com/cartridges/w3845auto.html

and a pic, (the three on the left obviously, not sure what that far right one is)....


Which got me to wondering. Has anyone here had experience with putting a .38 caliber barrel in a .45 acp cylinder revolver and firing the 38/45 wildcat cartridge in it?

I was thinking that although it no doubt would increase velocity, it also likely would increase pressure in the barrel too wouldn't it? Which made me think about what if you necked down a .44 magnum to .38 caliber and did the same thing, or even necked a .44 mag down to 32 caliber?

Even if it would be safe pressure wise to neck down a .45 acp to .38 caliber, at what point would it be too much pressure and unsafe to neck any given cartridge down thus increasing barrel pressure? Would a .44 magnum necked down to .38 caliber be okay? What about a .44 mag necked down to 32 caliber?

Anyway, the old article made me curious about this and was wondering if anyone here had any experience with this.


.

Last edited by Bill_in_fl; 05-10-2012 at 08:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-10-2012, 10:24 AM
STCM(SW)'s Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: E. Washington State
Posts: 1,336
Likes: 177
Liked 1,001 Times in 398 Posts
Default

I tried that 38/45 when I did NRA bullseye shooting in my Colt Goldcup.
Too much trouble to reload for that kind of competition plus it did not shoot any better that the M19 I used for center fire.
Don't remember what happened to the dies & barrel, gone like the Goldcup...
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-10-2012, 11:07 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Roanoke, Va
Posts: 794
Likes: 112
Liked 275 Times in 171 Posts
Default

Sort of like the .30 and .35 Herrets for the Contenders years ago, yes they shot really well, but it was a lot of work forming brass,trimming cases etc., when for a lot less work there is a bunch of stuff that does about the same thing.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-10-2012, 11:59 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: utah
Posts: 12,403
Likes: 2,116
Liked 5,662 Times in 2,496 Posts
Default

Not too many of these fad cartridges get popular or stick with us. Yes they work but usualy isnt worth buying the dies and exspense. I have the .22 jet, the .256. The .357 maximum was a fad that dident last, the old .357/44 bain and davis, 45 gap etc. People wont pay for the unusual on used guns like had they not been altered etc.
Hey! I bought a beautiful first year winchester model 70 .22 hornet. Took it out and discovered it had been rechambered to .22 K-hornet. Had it not been messed with today that gun would be worth many times more than I could get for it as is. Actualy, the K-hornet is a better cartridge than the standard hornet. Thats what I mean when I say they arent worth messing with. Rarely will you get your money out. Might be okay as a project just to prove these things work. When I was young and dumber 40 years ago I converted a winchester model 73 to .38 special and a 92 to .357. Besides costing me the exspense of the work I instanly lost all collector value and probley sold them for less than a fraction of what they would bring now unmolested!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-10-2012, 12:16 PM
SWCA Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 5,852
Likes: 847
Liked 1,438 Times in 859 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill_in_fl View Post
Which made me think about what if you necked down a .44 magnum to .38 caliber...
"There is nothing new under the sun." That is the .357/44 Bain & Davis and it has been around since the '60s. As to your question about pressure, a qualified engineer could give you more info than I can, but I believe the factors that determine the pressure any cartridge operates at are not so much determined by its shape as how it is loaded. Even fairly radical shapes have been successfully loaded and used safely.

Years ago, someone developed a .22-.378 Weatherby cartridge with the idea of producing 6000 FPS in a conventional rifle. The project wasn't undertaken as a serious effort to produce a marketable product. It was just an experiment. I don't recall anyone getting hurt.

The conversions you are talking about a pretty tame compared to something like that. Bottom line with this stuff is, "How useful is it?" The .38 AMU was way more productive than the .38/.45 Clerke ever was, from what I can recall.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-10-2012, 01:09 PM
diamonback68's Avatar
SWCA Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Flawda
Posts: 6,603
Likes: 381
Liked 2,160 Times in 981 Posts
Default

Seems kind of mute now with the 610, 460 and 500.
__________________
Dick
SWCA #2292
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-10-2012, 01:30 PM
SWCA Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts
Default

I had a M27 with two cylinders, 357Mag and 357/44 Brian & Davis was fun to reload and see how it performed. After a while, I decided I really didn't need that kind of performance and if I ever did, I could buy a hand gun that is chambered for the 30 Carbine used for the M1.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-10-2012, 03:13 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,120
Likes: 1
Liked 315 Times in 95 Posts
Default

I always had an idea of converting a Ruger maximum to a long 357 b&d. Using 445 supermag brass instead 44 mag brass. even had the extra cyilinder and a s&w 4 position silhouette front site for the conversion on the Ruger. Like most of my ideas, it did not go anywhere because I spent the rest of my money on other guns.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-10-2012, 05:11 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 5,268
Likes: 525
Liked 966 Times in 550 Posts
Default

Quote:
He was talking about how it delivers about the same ballistics as the .38 super cartridge
And that's the rub with a lot of wildcat cartridges: after all the work and hoo-haw of trying something different, you may wind up balistically duplicating a commercially available cartridge.

An otherwise distinguished gunner (Charles Askins) spent his last years producing an endless embarassing parade of wildcat cartridges that proved nothing other than he had money to blow.
__________________
NRA/ OK CHL Instructor
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-10-2012, 05:52 PM
tops's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 2,220
Likes: 1,503
Liked 903 Times in 479 Posts
Default

[QUOTE=OKFC05;136509152]And that's the rub with a lot of wildcat cartridges: after all the work and hoo-haw of trying something different, you may wind up balistically duplicating a commercially available cartridge.

Correct. Larry
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-10-2012, 08:09 PM
DWalt's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: South Texas
Posts: 5,856
Likes: 1
Liked 1,097 Times in 810 Posts
Default

Very few wildcats offer much except the opportunity to waste a lot of time and money. There are the few old wildcats such as the .22-250 and the .25-'06 which have survived, but there is such a large variety of available commercial calibers out there now (way too many, I think) that all the bases have been long covered. But that does not keep people from trying.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-10-2012, 10:28 PM
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The SW Va Blue Ridge
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,130
Liked 1,466 Times in 698 Posts
Default

Most folks had LOTS of trouble with cartridge setback using bottleneck cartridges in revolvers. Ask Dick Burg about M53s.
__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-11-2012, 12:00 AM
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: New Iberia, Louisiana
Posts: 1,640
Likes: 2,802
Liked 320 Times in 229 Posts
Default

That one on the far left is for the rare eargsplitten loudenboomer cartriridge for the lower slobbovian army. It was supposed to be inserted from the muzzle and the firing pin detonated the cartridge and launched the bullet. Frank
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-11-2012, 04:39 AM
olskool's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: the woods of S.C.
Posts: 250
Likes: 1,042
Liked 129 Times in 59 Posts
Default

the one on the far right looks like it could be a 38 or 357 necked up to 45. crazy..........
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-11-2012, 09:49 AM
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Monroeville, Ohio,USA
Posts: 922
Likes: 63
Liked 326 Times in 129 Posts
Default .224 Harvey K-Chuk

Here's a wildcat that is of some significance to S&W collectors. It is the Harvey K-chucker which is before the Jet! It starts out a 22 Hornet and ends up fitting in the cylinder of a standard K frame with a 35gr Sisk(long gone) bullet! However, the new Hornady plastic tip pills work great! This cartridge had none of the sticking problems of the 22 Jet.



jcelect
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-11-2012, 10:02 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Florence, Alabama, USA
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Liked 73 Times in 62 Posts
Default

Ooh, I like the Kay-Chuk; have ever since the 1950s Gun Digest article.
Be a way to get some use out of a Jet, rechamber the LR cylinder... if the collectors wouldn't cry.

I also remember an old article about reboring and rechambering to .25 Hornet. Lots of speed, no bottleneck worries.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
1911, 44 magnum, 610, bullseye, carbine, cartridge, colt, commercial, hornady, k frame, m19, m27, model 19, model 27, nra, ruger, silhouette, smith & wesson, smith and wesson, weatherby, wildcat, winchester

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 Thread, Wildcat cartridges in revolvers. in Smith & Wesson Revolvers; I was re-reading an old 35 or so year old book of mine called "Handloading for Handgunners" by former major ...
LinkBacks (?)
LinkBack to this Thread: http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-hand-ejectors-1896-1961/248943-wildcat-cartridges-revolvers.html
Posted By For Type Date
Wildcat cartridge - forum talks | BoardReader This thread Refback 06-04-2012 02:26 AM

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Winchester Wildcat .22 cal. rifle ancient-one Firearms & Knives - Other Brands 3 10-18-2009 08:44 PM
Winchester Wildcat in your Model 41 another41 Smith & Wesson Semi-Auto Pistols 8 07-25-2009 03:44 PM
Winchester Wildcat and the 22A satch Ammo 7 04-10-2009 09:11 PM
Wildcat, what is it?? rundownfid Reloading 7 03-11-2009 02:28 PM
.357 wildcat cartridge IraIII Ammo 5 02-28-2009 07:38 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:41 AM.


S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2013
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)