357 Maximum
Came across this in a auction and the guy said they are stamped 357 Max but they don't look like any 357 Max I have seen.
Here is his response:Sorry about the quality of my photos. These cartridges are definitely rimmed.
Using my cheap-o plastic caliper, the rim has a diameter of approx. 10mm and the remainder of the brass shell has a diameter of approx. 9.1mm
The shell has the following headstamp "R-P 357 REM MAX"
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=205672802
Here is his response:Sorry about the quality of my photos. These cartridges are definitely rimmed.
Using my cheap-o plastic caliper, the rim has a diameter of approx. 10mm and the remainder of the brass shell has a diameter of approx. 9.1mm
The shell has the following headstamp "R-P 357 REM MAX"
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=205672802
0
-
Recently I took a T/C Contender with a 357 Maximum bbl. on trade can any one tell me anything about this round? I do not have any info about it. The previous owner said it has ballistics close to a 44 mag. is this true? Was $380.00 a good deal for this gun 99 loaded shells and 36 empties, he also said the 36 empties are all this gun was shot. Thanks for any replies 0 -
Grizzy is the only company I know of currently putting out ammo, though its possible that some other ammo makers do occasionally put some out in limited runs.
357 maximum has pretty much always been a reloaders cartridge.
If you want to shoot it, you should strongly consider reloading for it, I think. Remington has brass; you could find some here:
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=755699&cm_mmc=Froogle-_-Reloading - Brass - Handgun-_-PriceCompListing-_-7556990 -
Reed's Ammunition & Research in Oklahoma City has it
www.shop.reedsammo.com0 -
Check with Wisconson cartridge co lcc. I think they sell ammo.
I load for it and think it is a great caliber.0 -
I haven't reloaded in quite awhile, but I do have a set of dies somewhere. I remember Reeds now that you mentioned it, I bought a box from them several years ago. Wonder why it never caught on very well? Thanks. 0 -
The gun writers bad-mouthed it and so Bill Ruger killed it. The "problem" was gas-cutting of the frame and rumor had it that the forcing cone eroded leading to loss of accuracy. I bought one of the long-barrelled Blackhawks when they first came out; I still have it. The gas-cutting consists of a tiny line about the thickness of a hair in the underside of the top-strap in line with the barrel/cylinder gap. It only goes a few thousandths of an inch and then cuts no deeper. The line is almost invisible. Mine has been fired a good bit and I have noticed no accuracy difference. Even standard .357 Magnum loads are very fast out of that 10 1/2 inch barrel! I think the biggest reasons for it not catching on was bad press and Bill Ruger's bad temper. 0 -
quote:Ambrose
Member
940 Posts
Posted - 07/24/2011 : 4:27:45 PM Show Profile Reply with Quote
The gun writers bad-mouthed it and so Bill Ruger killed it. The "problem" was gas-cutting of the frame and rumor had it that the forcing cone eroded leading to loss of accuracy. I bought one of the long-barrelled Blackhawks when they first came out; I still have it. The gas-cutting consists of a tiny line about the thickness of a hair in the underside of the top-strap in line with the barrel/cylinder gap. It only goes a few thousandths of an inch and then cuts no deeper. The line is almost invisible. Mine has been fired a good bit and I have noticed no accuracy difference. Even standard .357 Magnum loads are very fast out of that 10 1/2 inch barrel! I think the biggest reasons for it not catching on was bad press and Bill Ruger's bad temper.
Dan Wesson sold the .357 maximums as well and included an extra barrel with the guns as well as a coupon for X amount of dollars off if you needed still another. The Dan Wesson's didn't have as much of a flame cutting problem as the Ruger's did. It was not a problem at all in the Thompson Contender.0 -
From what I remember about the Max was the limited market it was advertised to; mainly silhouette shooters in the production revolver category. "Less recoil than a .44, enough power to topple a 200 meter ram" etc.. That limited ad campaign, plus the cost of ammo, the bad press from "flame cutting", and the quick pulling of the Ruger from the market took it from the masses.
I only saw one DW with the "silhouette-weight legal" slotted barrel shroud that was seized from a crook many moons ago. It was a nice gun, too bad it's probably a piece of rebar now..0 -
I have a T/C Custom Shop .357 max. barrel for my Contender.The customers I have that have Contenders all want to buy it but,it's not for sale. [8D] 0 -
I know a deer hunter that swears by the max in a contender. It would be a good lever action chambering for brush hunting.
Too bad the goon er.. gun writers killed it.0 -
I once suggested to Ruger that they could save face with the Max by re-introducing it in a resurrected Hawkeye. No flame cutting to worry about and we'd have a nice "single shot revolver" back.
Oh well.[:D]
That said, I agree with the others who say that the flame cutting was a non-issue. As for the Hawkeye and XP-100 Remington, neither one could keep up with the Contenders though REmington at least made a try for serving a special niche with the single shot bolt.0 -
Another .357 cartridge that worked well in the Contender but not so well in revolvers was the .357/.44 Bain & Davis. It was never very popular, though, and what popularity it had faded quickly. It should also have made a good chambering for a short action lever gun like a 92 or Marlin 94.
The contender had the virtue of interchangeable barrels while the Hawkeye and the XP were pretty much "what you see is what you get". I think that was a big factor in their desireability over the other single shots.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
12 comments