Poll: Lever & revolver combo - which caliber?

[Boboclown]

Tbh, aside from the other "snub nose" revolvers in .460 and .500, which were hard to come by let alone try at the range, I've had an easier time shooting .460 and .500 in general compared to the ruger alaskan in .454. Not by a whole lot though, they were heavier so that helped a bit.

That being said, a BFR in .45-70 using standard ammo won't be much worse than .454, unless you step up to .45-70 magnum loads. The guy who had the BFR didn't have any of that though, probably for a reason.

 

[Flopsweat]

The .460 mag I had (S&W 460V with a comp) was not bad at all - but then it weighed twice as much as the 329, had nice grips and had that comp.

My Anaconda weighs 3 lbs., 5oz empty. I don't even use a belt holster for it. I wound up getting a chest rig.

 

[The Heretic]

My Anaconda weighs 3 lbs., 5oz empty. I don't even use a belt holster for it. I wound up getting a chest rig.

The 460V weighs 61 ounces or 3.8# empty - which is one of the reasons I sold/traded it. Now I have a 325TR instead - 31 ounces.

 

[Wombat of Doom]

Never tried that one. I have shot .30╱30 in their long cylinder version and .50Æ in the short. I don't remember the .30 being all that nasty. The lighter .50 was like what I imagine holding on to a lightning bolt may be like. Though less juice, it was noticeably less pleasant than the .500 Magnum I shoot on a fairly regular basis these days.

I shot an eight in T/C encore pistol in 50AE. I shot it twice. I do not believe I want to ever shoot it in that config again. I may also point out I am limited in what my grips can be. No rubber.

 

[whabamp]

Actually, .22 rimfire would be my favorite - by far. I didn't even think about that choice because it wasn't explicitly listed - so I changed my vote from .44 mag to "Other".

My revolver/rifle pair would be my Ruger LCRx and my Browning BL-22 (tube feed so it can feed any S/L/LR).

.22 rimfire is my favorite caliber over all the others - versatile, fun and inexpensive/easy to shoot.

While I have a couple 3030 levers, the only revolver/lever match is in 22, and I gotta say it is a great budget round that is also easy on the ears. The h&r 676 has a 12" barrel and is just a solid tack driving shooter. It's surprisingly balanced for its length. I do have a 16" rough rider that is way nose heavy and cheesy in comparison, but still shoots well.
The rifle is a Winchester model 250 and is a fun light duty range gun.
The big plus is they can be shot at the local indoor range, and again dirt cheap.

A buddy has a Rossi 92 and ruger sp101 in 357/38, and that is a great combo on about twice the investment.

 

[DunRanull]

I chose .44mag as it's what I have NOW- an older .44mag Uberti single-action revolver, and a Rossi .44 lever carbine.
Once had a Marlin/Python "system", but dropped the Marlin .357 carbine because the DROP of the 158gr copper-jacketed projectiles over 100+ yards was remarkable indeed.
Still very much like the .357 revolvers, but changed to the .44mag carbine w/ my handloads after a deer-hunting trip in the Ozarks. The .357 just wasnt cutting it, even with my hand-loads.
Since there are several .44mags in my stable, I choose the 5.5" Redhawk as a woods carry revolver. Strong, stainless, double action, and trust-worthy. The .44 carbine is for plinking, not for when it comes to serious hunting.

 

[TNThomas]

.357 mag. Low recoil (especially with 38 special). Cheaper ammo to buy. Cheaper ammo to reload, good enough for close to mid range. More practice due to cheaper and pleasant rounds. Better shooter. Also, it's technically not recommended, but you could run small rifle primers in .357 mag theoretically. There are a massive worldwide supply of those due to 5.56 nato. Not as much for the other callers. Also, 9mm projectiles could be used in a pinch. Bullet diameters are about 1-2 thousands too small, but could be done if you had too. Powdercoat to bring up to size. Just a little smarter from a reloading perspective supply wise.

 

[DunRanull]

.357 mag. Low recoil (especially with 38 special). Cheaper ammo to buy. Cheaper ammo to reload, good enough for close to mid range. More practice due to cheaper and pleasant rounds. Better shooter. Also, it's technically not recommended, but you could run small rifle primers in .357 mag theoretically. There are a massive worldwide supply of those due to 5.56 nato. Not as much for the other callers. Also, 9mm projectiles could be used in a pinch. Bullet diameters are about 1-2 thousands too small, but could be done if you had too. Powdercoat to bring up to size. Just a little smarter from a reloading perspective supply wise.

Well said.

 

[The Heretic]

https://www.reddit.com/r/GunMemes/comments/1djawtj/proceeds_to_talk_about_4570_passionately

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/GunMemes/comments/1djawtj/proceeds_to_talk_about_4570_passionately/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

 

[smkjrose]

.357
Lets me use cheap .38 in both and a .357 out of a 16" is on a whole new level.

 

[DeanMk]

I voted .357, because the caliber is easy to find, decently powerful and is available in guns that could be described as "handy"...and who doesn't like a gun that's "handy".

...however...

I'm as bad of a "romantic" as anyone else and in my mind, some guns just go with some calibers. Winchester 94 and .30-30, Colt SAA and .45 Colt, are a couple of examples.
I'm not sure why or how this got stuck in my head, but in my mind the Winchester 92 and the .32-20 are synonomous and I've also wanted one of those with Colt double action (like an Official Police) in the same caliber.
However, there's recently been some headway in the field of .32 caliber technology and these days, I'd like to do a similar combo with the .327 Federal Magnum.
It's like the little brother to the .357 and if you have a big enough handgun, you get a free bonus shot, too!
SO, I guess that's my REAL choice...the .327 in a lever gun (even if its a Rossi ) and a revolver (probably a Ruger).

 

[RVTECH]

Well said.

Yes it is - and I am in the .357 group as well.

However not just in a 'pinch' but I routinely load .38 special and light .357 with 9 mill bullets for a bit cheaper 'plinkers' and have always gotten surprisingly good accuracy.

Typically I load light .357s as my Henry cycles .357 better than .38 but I shoot both out of it.

Also much easier on my S&W mid 66!

 

[Wombat of Doom]

I voted .357, because the caliber is easy to find, decently powerful and is available in guns that could be described as "handy"...and who doesn't like a gun that's "handy".

...however...

I'm as bad of a "romantic" as anyone else and in my mind, some guns just go with some calibers. Winchester 94 and .30-30, Colt SAA and .45 Colt, are a couple of examples.
I'm not sure why or how this got stuck in my head, but in my mind the Winchester 92 and the .32-20 are synonomous and I've also wanted one of those with Colt double action (like an Official Police) in the same caliber.
However, there's recently been some headway in the field of .32 caliber technology and these days, I'd like to do a similar combo with the .327 Federal Magnum.
It's like the little brother to the .357 and if you have a big enough handgun, you get a free bonus shot, too!
SO, I guess that's my REAL choice...the .327 in a lever gun (even if its a Rossi ) and a revolver (probably a Ruger).

I am a huge fan of the 327 revolver and my rifle in that caliber is a tc encore. It's a cool round in a rifle

 

[Spitpatch]

However, there's recently been some headway in the field of .32 caliber technology

Do tell.

Attraction to the .32-20 was on the right track.

The Federal and HRM are certainly NO "headway in the field", other than offering lazy handloaders a chance to skip lubricating cases before sizing.

Skeeter Skelton saw right through it, and quite vociferously launched into something similar to,

"There is absolutely no need. The .32-20 has been filling this niche perfectly for over a hundred years."

A good parallel is to imagine if someone came out with a straight-walled .30-30, claiming it was "headway in technology", and somehow better for the misdirected effort.

First impressions are often the best. Yours was.

 

[Spitpatch]

.357 mag. Low recoil (especially with 38 special). Cheaper ammo to buy. Cheaper ammo to reload, good enough for close to mid range. More practice due to cheaper and pleasant rounds. Better shooter. Also, it's technically not recommended, but you could run small rifle primers in .357 mag theoretically. There are a massive worldwide supply of those due to 5.56 nato. Not as much for the other callers. Also, 9mm projectiles could be used in a pinch. Bullet diameters are about 1-2 thousands too small, but could be done if you had too. Powdercoat to bring up to size. Just a little smarter from a reloading perspective supply wise.

ALL of which (aside from the "value" of shooting off-diameter bullets, or retail ammo prices) is accomplished with a .32-20 WCF...and in the qualities described above, is accomplished even better toward each feature noted. (and no "theoretical" use of small rifle primers...it already uses 'em).

Just a LOT smarter, from an overall perspective.

 

[DLS]

In revolvers, straight-walled cartridges are far superior to those with a shoulder, so the .327 simply performs better in this application than the .32-20. (Less case stretch, less recoil shield drag, to name a couple of reasons). In lever guns the case dimensions don't make much of a difference due to the differing lock-up. (Assuming the firearm will properly feed from the magazine).

The .32-20 case life is shorter than the .327 due to its thinner profile up front and at the shoulder.

The .32-20 shoulder is fairly "fragile", this can lead to collapse or off-center warping during sizing. The cartridge is finicky regarding shoulder setback measurement as well. This is one of the reasons for shorter case life. I see these as performance issues for the reloader, not a matter of laziness.

It's easier to assure the bullet hits the chamber mouths "squarely" with a straight walled cartridge, allowing a more accurate bullet position as it enters the forcing cone.

I've never loaded the .32-20 for a revolver, so the following in hearsay, but from what I've read it's difficult to get a single loading to perform at peak in both the rifle/carbine application and the revolver. To reach peak performance you need tailored loads. The .327 is easier to accomplish this in a single load.

I've probably read everything Skeeter has written. He had a great deal of wisdom in his writing, but some of his thinking is dated and is solidly mired in the 1950s.

For what it's worth ...

Cheers

 

[Spitpatch]

In revolvers, sraight-walled cartridges are far superior than those with a shoulder, so the .327 simply performs better in this application than the .32-20. (Less case stretch, less recoil shield drag to name a couple of reasons). In lever guns the case dimensions don't make much of a difference due to the differing lock-up. (Assuming the firearm will properly feed from the magazine).

The .32-20 case life is shorter than the .327 due to its thinner profile up front and the shoulder.

The .32-20 shoulder is fairly "fragile", this can lead to collasp or off center warping during sizing. The cartridge is finicky regarding shoulder setback measurement as well. This is one of the reasons for shorter case life. I see these as a performance issues for the reloader, not a matter of laziness.

It's easier to assure the bullet hits the chamber mouths "squarely" with a straight walled cartridge, allowing a more accurate bullet position as it enters the forcing cone.

I've never loaded the .32-20 for a revolver, so the following in hearsay, but from what I've read it's difficult to get a single loading to perform at peak in both the rifle/carbine application and the revolver. To reach peak performance you need tailored loads. The .327 is easier to accomplish this in a single load.

I've probably read everything Skeeter has written. He had a great deal of wisdom in his writing, but some of his thinking is dated and is solidify mired in the 1950s.

For what it's worth ...

Cheers

50 years of loading for the .32-20 in revolvers and rifles. I cannot speak to case life as compared to the Fed/HRM cartridges other than NEVER having a .32-20 case failure, or any difficulty ("performance issues") in the sizing process. If one is prone to engage in false economy, loading cases enough times that they begin to fail, I would grant the Fed/HRM's just might win that torture test. Case failure is something I have learned to make concerted effort to avoid in any cartridge.

"Finicky regarding shoulder setback measurement"? If we are loading cartridges to operate reliably in a revolver and a lever gun (or my Colt's Lightnings) interchangeably, we are ALWAYS full-length resizing. Even more justification/necessity for this if a third (or more) gun is loaded for. The shoulder ends up in the same exact place every time it is sized. Shoulder setback measurements are more of a highpower rifle concern, I would think. Certainly never heard it applied to a .32-20.

If one makes a claim that the Fed/HRM's are "easier to accomplish" compatible loads that perform in the handgun and the rifle, one must have had some experience loading for both with the .32-20. Once again, I have not seen any such difficulty. I have once loaded to the very top end for an Antelope hunt with a strong rifle, but it makes perfect sense I would not believe that to be a very prudent revolver load.

But, with those "reloader performance issues" dispensed with, we still have the "better" design of a straight-walled cartridge, allowing skipping a step in loading it.

We're back to lazy.

I like being lazy too. I see the attraction. But not when handloading for my guns. And I certainly would not allow it to interfere with cartridge selection.

I'm surprised that no one has touted the Fed/HRM's most probable easier functioning in a progressive press. I'd have to fold on that one.

...and we're back to lazy.

 

[oremike]

I vote one of each including "other" it's good to open the gun safe and have choices.

 

[Spitpatch]

I vote one of each including "other" it's good to open the gun safe and have choices.

Every day, it's the same thing:
Variety.

 

[357 MAX]

I have S&W 686 and Winchester 1894 in 357. i like both. but if i was all covered up in money i would buy a Henry 360 Buckhammer and a BFR in 360. that would be everything i need.