Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
I have a 1892 short rifle (1913) with a .357 Mag barrel on it. The magazine tube is measuring out .53 in. Diameter, Which would be the smaller receiver and tube. The 38 sp. runs through it fine, but the 357 round gets jammed after the first round is put in from the loading gate.
It actually has taken several rounds of 357 and cycled ok, but the loading process is now jamming the second round in and I’ve got to push it out from the magazine through the opened tube end. Since the magazine tube measures out like the smaller caliber, I suspect it is the loading port size of the smaller receiver.
Before I start breaking everything down, what are my options with a 357 barrel on an apparent 25/32 receiver and mag tube ?
I’d like to get to the 357/38sp format, but need some guidance, which I probably won’t be happy to hear based on what I’m thinking.
Bill
Bill,
The 38 Spl and .357 Mag cartridges are identical except for the cartridge OAL. Your problem is not the case diameter… instead, it is the length of the loaded cartridge that is causing the hang-up. The solution to your problem is very easy… if you want to shoot a hotter round than the standard 38 Spl, shoot the P ammo, or load your own (which is what I do). I load my 38 Spl cases with 5.7 grains of Bullseye under a 158 gr semi-wadcutter and shoot them in my Ruger GP100. I do not recommend that load for any firearm designed for 38 Spl only.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert, that is a good solution to get a hotter round in a 38, but I read in Pirkles book that the two different receivers , being 22/32 and 38/44 , have different loading port sizes. In my problem, it does seem to exist in the entry portion of the magazine tube. Just from a 1/4 to 1/2 inch into the tube. The 357 cartridge is the problem load. Why would the length of the cartridge cause a problem within the first few cartridges inserted into the magazine tube ? It seems more probable the smaller tube size on the 25/32 would be more likely the problem than cartridge length. Could the magazine spring or the magazine spring follower be the issue ? Also, how can I definitively tell which receiver I have: just the loading port size ?
Finially, are all 357 mag. rounds longer than 38 sp rounds ? Are 38 sp plus p rounds longer the 38sp rounds ?
This 1892 short rifle has beautiful wood and excellent receiver, barrel and magazine blue. I’d really like to get the 357 running through it.
Any help, observations or ideas appreciated.
Bill
Bill,
You still are not understanding the situation…
Yes, the Model 1892 in 25 & 32 calibers used a smaller diameter magazine tube than the 38 & 44 calibers did. However, the 38 Spl and the .357 Mag cartridges are identical in diameter, and if as you state, you have no problem loading and cycling a magazine tube full of 38 Spl cartridges through your Model 1892, then it can not be a cartridge diameter issue causing the hang-up when you try loading it with .357 Mag cartridges. If a 38 Spl fits in the magazine tube, then so will a .357 Mag! Again, the only difference between the two cartridges is the length. Stand a 38 Spl up alongside of a .357 Mag, it is will very clearly be evident what the difference is. If a 38 Spl goes through the loading gate and into the magazine tube with no issues, but the .357 Mag will not, it is the extra length (not the diameter) that is causing it to hang-up. Pure physics my friend!
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Not having actually experimented with this issue I’m going to go out on a limb and say that Bert is about 80% right on this issue. After looking at bullet diagrams and specs I believe the problem is with the 357 Magnum being a larger diameter than the 32-20 and not being bottlenecked. The specks are as follows:
Overall Length Case Length Rim Diameter
32-20 1.592″ 1.315″ .408″
357 Mag 1.590″ 1.290″ .440″
38 Special 1.425″ – 1.550″ 1.155″ .440″
Additionally, the 32-20 starts to bottleneck down to .327 at about .881″ down the cartridge. With the larger rim diameter of the 38/357 vs. the 32-20 plus the larger mouth diameter of the case opening, the physics of the 357 does not allow for enough play for the 357 Magnum to glide in smoothly from the loading gate. It seems to me this conversion should have been done on a large caliber Model 1892.
"This is the West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
Folks,
I do believe that Bert is on track here. I suspect the situation is much like the 1886 with the .45-90 or the .50 EX. The innards of the receiver for those cartridges had modifications to allow the longer cartridges to load into the magazine tube and to then feed well. I think it will be found that the longer magnum versions need a touch of elbow room to turn and line up well with the magazine tube. Generally I doubt the receiver or such can be lengthened, so perhaps a judicious altering of the EDGE of the magazine tube opposite the loading port may allow the longer magnum to then turn the corner and go into the magazine tube.
Without the rifle in hand, I am only guessing as are most of the rest of us. But seems the length of the cartridge causes the issues, and the way to allow it to align and go straight into the magazine tube likely requires a modification the special version does not require.
Tim
Thanks all for the input so far.
I have been using Pirkle’s book so far for information.
The 25/32 receiver and the 38/44 receiver are different. The loading gate is slightly different than the other. The loading port is different. The short rifle I have has a 357 barrel and a new magazine added. The person who did it wrongly used a 25/32 receiver. The loading port barely accepts the 357/38sp rim. I have found some ammo brands do work. The port is .43 inches at best, and that is just about exactly what the 357/38 are. The ammo I was using were reloads (Winchester) and were crimped (?) close to the top of the cartridge. 3 other factory new brands fit in the port and passed through. The loading gate difference is minor and can be ok when knowing what to do. The loading port issue will take some trials. I have not put the rifle back together, so I can’t address the length issue yet. I did fire last week and the 38’s worked ( and had the same diameter rim as the 357’s). Some times the 357 loaded, but mostly not. So, the difference so far is length, because the rim seems to barely fit the port. Not always. All three new factory rounds fit through the port, as I said. As long as the port delivers, all else is fine. Loading new rounds tomorrow and will see if the new ammo works better than the reloads did. They were odd with that high crimp. One last observation: the spring hangs out 8 1/2” when cap is removed. Pickle says 4 to 6 “ depending on rifle or carbine. I have the 20” barrel, so is that of any problem ? Thanks for any input !
Bill
Wincacher said
Not having actually experimented with this issue I’m going to go out on a limb and say that Bert is about 80% right on this issue. After looking at bullet diagrams and specs I believe the problem is with the 357 Magnum being a larger diameter than the 32-20 and not being bottlenecked. The specks are as follows:Overall Length Case Length Rim Diameter
32-20 1.592″ 1.315″ .408″
357 Mag 1.590″ 1.290″ .440″
38 Special 1.425″ – 1.550″ 1.155″ .440″
Additionally, the 32-20 starts to bottleneck down to .327 at about .881″ down the cartridge. With the larger rim diameter of the 38/357 vs. the 32-20 plus the larger mouth diameter of the case opening, the physics of the 357 does not allow for enough play for the 357 Magnum to glide in smoothly from the loading gate. It seems to me this conversion should have been done on a large caliber Model 1892.
Looking at Wincacher’s specs, and knowing the 38’s work ok with their larger rim diameter, and looking at the 32-20 specs, both lengths are larger than the 357. The bottleneck issue could be it, but also Tim’s observation of the loading angle could be it too.
Pirkle says, on page 150, there are two types of loading gates for the two types of receivers, and goes on with specs. Although “not interchangeable without modification” . This was possible to accommodate the larger rims of 38-40 & 44-40. Maybe it could help with the length issue of a 357. The 32-20 overall length is larger than a 357. Perhaps this would be a lower cost modification ( loading gate change ) to the rifle ?
The length issue may be debunked by the 32-20 length vs 357. but Wincacher’s point on the bottleneck issue may be the primary point of failure.
Bottom line: A way to keep 357/38sp configuration on the rifle without expensive receiver change-outs. ( that messes up the original fit with the stock ).
I selfishly belabor the point, but think it’s a good learning issue for others too.
Thanks for help.
Bill
The pictures show a round in the loading port and a round stuck in the loading port after being pushed in by another cartridge. Also, cartridges show what reload I was using ( notice crimp high up con casing ) and three different factory rounds that went through loading port when put in by hand. Will assemble gun today to test with everything together and see about length issue, ( and maybe too long a spring in the magazine )..
I believe that Bert is at least 99% on Track here….I too own a 92′ That was converted to .38/.357..It also had some feeding problems, so I went down this same road years ago…mine was originally a .25 as were several others I have examined. I believe this is the most common caliber used for the conversion, as most were re bored and re chambered, rather than installing a new barrel..In my gun the feed tube and loading gate are not an issue at all..If the .38 feeds fine, then just as in mine I think you will find that it is not so much physics,but rather simple geometry..The 38/357 being straight walled cases rather than bottlenecked means that the case mouth must enter the chamber very precisely. The carrier [commonly called a lifter] lifts the cartridge up at a pronounced angle with the case mouth being much higher than the base…Geometry tells us that the longer case mouth will be higher than the shorter .38. carefull examination of mine showed that they had altered the carrier and cartridge guides to get it to feed and had tried to sort of split the difference between the two cartridge lengths.which caused some feeding problems with both… In mine I had to tig some added metal and then refile and dremal these parts. it was a very slow and tedious project but I was able to get it to feed the .357 perfectly, but now will often hang up with .38.I handload and now use .357 exclusively..If you choose to attempt this the best option may be to purchase new cartridge guides and carrier/carrier stop and pin and start there or have a trusted smith do this..since the cartridge starts to feed at a fairly steep angle the bullet used can make a large difference in feeding, start with a roundnose and experiment with several types to see what feeds best, a semiwadcutter type bullet with a shoulder can catch on the chamber mouth..[a fairly firm crimp may help too] while I wish that mine was original caliber, I got it for $150 years ago and it is an incredibly fun gun to shoot,and hunt with. I have chronographed several of my loads through it and the longer barrel gives some impressive results. Its a very potent round when shot through 24″ of barrel and I love it..I hope this helps in some way. brian
Brian,
Thanks very much for sharing your experience and observations. Very valuable.
I’ll start looking at different loads and size configurations. Then, get some measuring tools and see what I have.
I will consider your solutions and see where I am. I too love shooting this rifle, and besides being a good looker, it’s very accurate.
I’ll probably run it by my local gunsmith and get his fix on it first.
Once again, thanks,
Bill
Bill, my apologies for not reading your post carefully, after doing so I now see that your problem seems to be in the mag tube portion of the feeding cycle, rather than feeding into the chamber. I have looked at my .357 as well as a.25 and .38 cal I have and will give you my thoughts, even though they are based mostly on this one gun…My .357 has the original mag. tube of a small Cal. ’92 . it matches my original .25 cal exactly. In my gun this lower portion of the feeding cycle works well with both .38 and .357, so I will start on the assumption that mag tube diam. is not the problem..Without seeing exactly whats occurring in your gun it is hard to diagnose, But I will give you my very strong feeling as to where the problem most likely is…I believe it will be with your cartridge stop/pin and spring located on the forward end of your left cartridge guide. clearly visible in your photos.. first off, if you open the action and depress this with a small tool, does it spring back easily, or can it hang up in the depressed position? if it does it can allow the cartridges in the mag. to release causing a double feed jam. The longer .357 nose can push the stop back as you are inserting them Through the loading gate..The stop should only depress when cycling the action forward and spring back into position to hold the rest of the shells in the mag. tube for the rest of the cycle. After looking closely at one of your photos of the internals, and examining 3 of my model ’92 here is what I see..The cartridge stop on your gun appears to be quite prominant..extending well past the edge of the rim and towards the primer.. on my gun it appears as if the stop was filed back to allow for the larger rim diam. In fact on mine the upper portion was filed back extensively leaving only the botton 1/8″ or so protruding to hold the rim.. Perhaps this was done to let the longer .357 clear the stop and enter the magazine? Again I may have misinterpreted your problem, but I hope this is helpfull in your diagnose. If you get this lower end feeding problem solved and still have problems feeding into the chamber let me know, As I can more accurately describe what needs to be done to fine tune this portion…Good luck, Brian
Bill, Here is an afterthought that I had, If it appears as if this is the problem on your gun you could P.M. me with your email and I could send you a photo of the internals of my .357 showing the relationship of the cartridge stop to the rim of shell inserted into mag. just as in your photo. This may help you to see the extent of the filing/ modification..Which on my gun at least seems to be working correctly…Brian
1 Guest(s)
