G-ManBart Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 I don't know if this has ever been discussed here before, but something popped into my head today that was thought provoking. As we all know, the minimum bore size for major in Limited/Limited 10, is .40. The argument being that it's supposed to reward shooting a more powerful gun that's harder to control. That seems to make sense on the surface. But, if the conventional wisdom is that heavier bullets, with faster powders, going slower produce less recoil than lighter bullets with slower powders, going faster (and I'm not disputing that) doesn't it seem opposite of the argument against smaller calibers for major? If you were allowed to shoot, say .38 Super at major, the bore size would limit you to bullets lighter than what most people are using in .40 to make major. That would mean you'd have to run them faster, with a slower powder, to make major. The .38 Super load would have more energy than a comparable .40 S&W load at the same power factor...and that would seem to mean that the Super would have more recoil and be harder to shoot than the .40 S&W....right? Am I missing anything here? I'm guessing that there was more to it than that really...like financial concerns. Has anybody heard any of the rationale on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihatepickles Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Well, you're saying that major .355 bullets would be harder to shoot than major .40 bullets. I'm not sure that's true. The guys shooting Open guns have to make major and have enough pressure to run the comp. Heavier bullets can make major with the right powder but the compensator doesn't work as well. I'm not a fan of allowing .355 to make major in Limited because of the ensuing gear race. Basically I feel like we have a level playing field and upsetting this balance doesn't serve anyone other than manufacturers and gunsmiths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 And it wouldn't be long before 180gr .355 bullets sprouted everywhere, which would leave us where we are now, except with extra rounds in the mag and a bunch of less-competitive .40's hanging around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superdude Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 all hail the 180gr .355!! sorry, i couldn't resist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-ManBart Posted January 14, 2007 Author Share Posted January 14, 2007 (edited) Well, you're saying that major .355 bullets would be harder to shoot than major .40 bullets. I'm not sure that's true. The guys shooting Open guns have to make major and have enough pressure to run the comp. Heavier bullets can make major with the right powder but the compensator doesn't work as well.I'm not a fan of allowing .355 to make major in Limited because of the ensuing gear race. Basically I feel like we have a level playing field and upsetting this balance doesn't serve anyone other than manufacturers and gunsmiths. I probably should have said this initially, but I don't really have any reason to want the rules changed. Heck, I've got a bunch of guns in .40 S&W and larger and only one in .38 Super (Open gun). A change wouldn't do anything to help or hurt me really. I wondered whether major .355 bullets would be harder to shoot than major .40 bullets because it would be pretty hard to get 180gr bullets to make major in Super, 9x19, 9x21 etc. I just don't think there'd be enough case volume left to get the required powder charge, but I guess it's possible. That would mean you'd be forced to drive a lighter bullet faster to get the same power factor, which ups the energy and recoil (according to common beliefs anyway). I think your last paragraph is probably the biggest reason...a gear race which wouldn't help anyone, in the end, is likely the reason for the rules being the way they are. Thanks, Edited January 14, 2007 by G-ManBart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhurd Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 (edited) a gear race which wouldn't help anyone, in the end, is likely the reason for the rules being the way they are. Thanks, Heavens forbid a gear race!!!! Lets just shoot big bore single stacks......! Edited January 14, 2007 by johnhurd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singlestack Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Please try to keep your response on topic and constructive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Shred's spot on about the 180gr .355 bullet - there's already one running around out there that was developed for Production (but I suspect turns out to be too heavy to get a good recoil profile in most Production guns). Major in a .38 Super or something is going to have a different feel about it than Major in a .40 or a .45 - even with similar weight bullets. Its going to tend to be snappier, and may seem to feel a bit more harsh. But, its obviously shootable, and would do just fine. There's been an artificial limit for some time, now, on what calibers can shoot Major PF in non-Open divisions. The reason you see objections is that to alter that, now, and allow a cartridge of smaller diameter onto the field would necessarily result in a lot of equipment change over, as people reach for something with more capacity. That gives a lot of folks heartburn (understandably so). Do a search - there's been a couple of these threads on the forum already, and you might find some more viewpoints there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
38supPat Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 I think the bottom line is, even if it was harder to shoot, people would gladly accept it as long as they get more rounds in the gun. I've seen discussion on this in single stack, give up shooting major for two extra rounds in the mag by shooting 9mm or super. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 And although it seems that it was was long ago, in the mists of time, when Limited and Open were first split out of the one-division run-what-ya-brung we had before that, .355-major cartridges were already available and in use-- The Powers-That-Be explicitly decided that manly calibers must start with a 4 and engraved that into the rulebook, with a sole exception for revo .357 Mag which was then thought to be equally manly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 My wife and I were shooting major 9x19 in 1985..(am i really getting That old?) Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay1 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 With the recent rules changes that are up why not make it possible to make major with a .355 bullet. They are changing so many things about the game and rules stability is just a couple of words strung together. I feel a big rant coming on so, I will just let it go at that and say that the first sentence in this post was not a serious statement but a complaint about rule stability in the game. I'm trying to be nice. Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Having seen one rule change (years ago) render all of my guns useless and uncompetitive. I am not sure it would be real fair to do it again,..even small changes , may have unintended consequences. I hope any new changes are well thought out. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue edge Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 WHAT JIM SAID!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihatepickles Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 They are changing so many things about the game and rules stability is just a couple of words strung together. I know what you're saying but nothing has been changed yet. Get your opinion heard and perhaps we'll be able to avoid these changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay1 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 They are changing so many things about the game and rules stability is just a couple of words strung together. I know what you're saying but nothing has been changed yet. Get your opinion heard and perhaps we'll be able to avoid these changes. Your absolutely correct. I'm just frustrated. I remember when Billy Wilson changed some holster and mag pouch rules and my equipment that was a mere 10 days old became illegal. I see so many changes in this rule book that it has to cause problems for many different divisions of shooters. I'm amazed at the apathy of most shooters. I'll have to get my password off of my copy of "front sight" which is at work and chime in after I return to work next week. We have until March to make comments but I think many of the BOD are getting entrenched in their oppinions to solutions to problems that they preceive. It's best to respond early and often. Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJPoLo Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 (edited) ...it would be pretty hard to get 180gr bullets to make major in Super, 9x19, 9x21 etc. I just don't think there'd be enough case volume left to get the required powder charge... I think your reasoning here is actually backwards. It takes less powder to move a heavier bullet to the same Power Factor as a lighter bullet. -Chet Edited January 14, 2007 by DJPoLo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthMuffin Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 (edited) But, if the conventional wisdom is that heavier bullets, with faster powders, going slower produce less recoil than lighter bullets with slower powders, going faster (and I'm not disputing that) doesn't it seem opposite of the argument against smaller calibers for major? Your statement needs to be qualified with "while maintaining the same power factor". Physics lesson time (I knew that minor in physics would come in handy some day ) The reason we get this effect is because PF is based on the momentum (MV) of the bullet, the formula for which is mass * velocity. Recoil is mostly based on Kinetic Energy (KE), the formula for which is .5 * mass * velocity * velocity, or simplified (mv^2)/2 As a result of this if you double the mass and halve the velocity you get the same MV while getting 1/2 of the KE. This is also how the energy of a bullet is computed. To be fair, competitions should use KE rather than MV to measure a cartridge's effectiveness. I think it would be correlated closer to recoil than MV is. However, I'm not advocating changing IPSC rules. I have no issue with the rules now, as long as everyone plays by the same rules it's a level field. Plus the formula now is much simpler. I can imagine some people having trouble with (grains * fps^2) [you don't need to convert to metric units or use the /2 since we're just after numbers for a comparison] Edited January 14, 2007 by DarthMuffin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Well, you're saying that major .355 bullets would be harder to shoot than major .40 bullets. I'm not sure that's true. The guys shooting Open guns have to make major and have enough pressure to run the comp. Heavier bullets can make major with the right powder but the compensator doesn't work as well.I'm not a fan of allowing .355 to make major in Limited because of the ensuing gear race. Basically I feel like we have a level playing field and upsetting this balance doesn't serve anyone other than manufacturers and gunsmiths. Bore diameter is a significant part of .355's almost universal use in Open. For fun, a friend built a compensated 7.62mm Tokerev pistol. Used bullets of about 80 grns. With his comp, it was nearly recoiless and almost NO dot movement. Might be nice if they would let the FN 5.7mm in - and see what THAT one could do against a .38 super. But where does it end? I believe we should keep a minimum of 9mm for Open and .40 for Limited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay1 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Might be nice if they would let the FN 5.7mm in - and see what THAT one could do against a .38 super. But where does it end? I believe we should keep a minimum of 9mm for Open and .40 for Limited. The 5.7 would be poking holes in backstops indoors. Damn little thin goes through metal very well. Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-ManBart Posted January 14, 2007 Author Share Posted January 14, 2007 ...it would be pretty hard to get 180gr bullets to make major in Super, 9x19, 9x21 etc. I just don't think there'd be enough case volume left to get the required powder charge... I think your reasoning here is actually backwards. It takes less powder to move a heavier bullet to the same velocity as a lighter bullet. -Chet You're right if you're talking about a powder with similar burn rate. I was guessing that with such a heavy bullet for the bore size, you'd have to go to a slower powder to keep within pressure limits....maybe that's not the case. If you had to go to the slower powder you'd need more of it. I don't have any idea of how much case capacity would be left once you jumped up to such a big bullet. The heaviest I've ever loaded for Super were 150gr and my memory tells me they took up a fair amount of space. I'm sure someone has tried it, or will now:-)...I'd be interested to see how much powder you could get in something like a Super (most of the other cases would be less) with a 180gr bullet seated out to the maximum length. I'm not pretending to have thought it out in any great detail as it just sort of popped into my head, but it is interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxshooter Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 (edited) I would like to see 38 super allowed in SS as major. There are alot of old guns out there that could be put back in service by removing a comp or fitting a new barrel. Edited January 14, 2007 by Jaxshooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJPoLo Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 ...it would be pretty hard to get 180gr bullets to make major in Super, 9x19, 9x21 etc. I just don't think there'd be enough case volume left to get the required powder charge... I think your reasoning here is actually backwards. It takes less powder to move a heavier bullet to the same Power Factor as a lighter bullet. -Chet You're right if you're talking about a powder with similar burn rate. I was guessing that with such a heavy bullet for the bore size, you'd have to go to a slower powder to keep within pressure limits....maybe that's not the case. If you had to go to the slower powder you'd need more of it. I don't have any idea of how much case capacity would be left once you jumped up to such a big bullet. The heaviest I've ever loaded for Super were 150gr and my memory tells me they took up a fair amount of space. I'm sure someone has tried it, or will now:-)...I'd be interested to see how much powder you could get in something like a Super (most of the other cases would be less) with a 180gr bullet seated out to the maximum length. I'm not pretending to have thought it out in any great detail as it just sort of popped into my head, but it is interesting. Oops. I just re-read my post. I should have said "Power Factor" where I said "velocity". I have corrected my original post. -Chet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 (edited) .355-major cartridges were already available and in use-- If my history is correct, though, they were mainly used in compensated guns - seems like the .45 still was king until compensators became widely used, even though .38 Super and 9mm guns had capacity advantages... I don't know how much of that was ego, though, too... ETA - my point being that this might have something to say about the relative handling of Major .38 Super w/o a comp, vs. .45.. but then again, maybe not... Edited January 14, 2007 by XRe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 We ran 162 gr rn 7.2gr aa@7 wsrp for 178 or so pf. oal same as super.. 9x19 brass. This load showed some signs of pressure!!!!!!!! I dont think 9x19 could hold 180gr bullets. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now