Dear S&W folks, I really think an X frame chambered for the 357 max would sell well. Make it a 6 shooter please. I know that, "No Hole" isn't realistic so I won't ask for that.
X Frame in 357 Max 6 shot
- Thread starter meistermash
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
^^^ yes,I like !!!
I've read that the 357 Max ate revolver forcing cones. I have no personal data, but that is what I have read in a few articles, back when the Max was recently obsolete. Contenders were apparently OK, it was cutting at the cylinder gap that did them in. Maybe new powders and new metals could solve this today. Maybe it is a rumor, but that story is out there and would need to be dealt with for acceptance by the public and by a manufacturer.
The problem with the Max was Remington's choice of bullet weight (158 gr. I believe.) It was too light for the specific application it was developed for - the Ruger Blackhawk. As the bullet jumped the B/C gap the burning powder caused unacceptable flame cutting in the top strap. Supposedly Elmer Keith told Bill Ruger "You outta just scrap the thing Bill. It ain't gonna work." And so he did before the problem could be resolved by using a heavier weight bullet. 180 gr bullets solved the problem but by then it was too late - the plug had been pulled on the 357 Maximum Blackhawk and the notion that the cartridge eats top straps has stuck around to this day. Lots of happy 357 Max owners shooting away with 180 gr. bullets and having no issues whatsoever. And the Dan Wesson DA revolver in 357 Max is another example of a platform having success with the cartridge.
As a side note here are the guns that Ruger developed in conjunction with Remington and consultant/marksman David Bradshaw. New Model Blackhawks in 7.5" and 10.5" barrels were the two models but unique to the Max was the steel dragoon grip frame and SBH hammer, something normally found only on the Super Blackhawk. The story goes that after Ruger abruptly ceased production over 5,000 Maxi Blackhawk frames were scrapped at the factory. Having a longer frame window these frames had no other application and were considered trash.
Only in production for 2 years there is a collectability interest in these guns as total numbers produced are not large.
I'm not so sure it would take an X frame to handle the 357 Maximum - the N frame might do the job with a lot less weight. The Maxi Blackhawk is the same size as a standard Blackhawk except the cylinder and frame window is longer. Interestingly Ruger did not feel the need to chamber the Max in the Super Blackhawk. I like my X frame 460XVR but it may be overkill here.
As a side note here are the guns that Ruger developed in conjunction with Remington and consultant/marksman David Bradshaw. New Model Blackhawks in 7.5" and 10.5" barrels were the two models but unique to the Max was the steel dragoon grip frame and SBH hammer, something normally found only on the Super Blackhawk. The story goes that after Ruger abruptly ceased production over 5,000 Maxi Blackhawk frames were scrapped at the factory. Having a longer frame window these frames had no other application and were considered trash.
Only in production for 2 years there is a collectability interest in these guns as total numbers produced are not large.
I'm not so sure it would take an X frame to handle the 357 Maximum - the N frame might do the job with a lot less weight. The Maxi Blackhawk is the same size as a standard Blackhawk except the cylinder and frame window is longer. Interestingly Ruger did not feel the need to chamber the Max in the Super Blackhawk. I like my X frame 460XVR but it may be overkill here.
OP
Well ok then. Max not big enough or the X frame? Introducing the 357 S&W super maximum. 
Stretch the 357 max case out. They did the 500 and 460 I'm sure a stretched max wouldn't be too hard.
And thanks for the neat info Waveform.
Stretch the 357 max case out. They did the 500 and 460 I'm sure a stretched max wouldn't be too hard. And thanks for the neat info Waveform.
Similar threads
