RugerForum.com

This is a Ruger Firearms enthusiast's forum, but it is in no way affiliated with, nor does it represent Sturm Ruger & Company Inc. of Southport, CT.
It is currently Fri Jan 22, 2021 4:13 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:46 pm 
Bearcat
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 4:17 pm
Posts: 91
Location: Atlanta, GA
Anyone have or shot both in the 357 caliber? The 83 seems overkill for the round


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 2020 7:25 pm 
Single-Sixer

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 8:23 pm
Posts: 271
Location: Western Colorado
357 mag vs. 353 casull

_________________
Its not that life is too short, its that death is so long
When I die, I am afraid my wife will sell my guns for what she thinks they are worth!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:39 am 
Single-Sixer

Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2016 4:39 am
Posts: 124
Location: Low Country South Carolina
An 83 in 357 being overkill? Maybe so, but you can load the thing to a level where you'd better label the ammo boxes specifically for the 83.

I do have an 83 in 357 and it is one of my favorites. Accuracy is spectacular as expected and recoil is light even with heavy loads. I almost exclusively load 180 grain bullets for this revolver. Taffin mentioned in an article on the 83 that the weak link is the brass for this revolver. I bought 100 pieces of 360 DW Starline brass and shortened them to 357 length just for this revolver for that reason. That may have been unnecessary as the Starline 357 Magnum brass is strong stuff.

The original 83 in 357 was labeled the 353 Casull and more than a few thought that this was a cartiridge specific to the FA83 and in a manner of speaking maybe it is. As I stated in the above paragraph, if you plan to load ammo to the potential of the revolver, that ammo needs to be labeled FA83 357 or some such. If you are researching a 83 in 357, you already knew this though.

I do not have a 97 in 357 as I have a slicked up RBH in this caliber that shoots very well.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 2020 7:49 pm 
Bearcat
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 4:17 pm
Posts: 91
Location: Atlanta, GA
Great info DHD. Thanks


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2020 9:18 pm 
Newly Registered

Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2018 7:05 pm
Posts: 12
I have many 83's and 97's, but none in 357 unfortunately. That said, I'd prefer a Model 97 in 357 Mag- a six shooter too. The 83 is massive and unless you plan on loading super heavy 83 only loads, I'd prefer standard 357's in a frame that is scaled down. I have a 41 in the Model 97 6.5 inch and it is utterly perfect. I have no need to hotrod it, and save any of that for my 44 & 45 caliber Model 83's.

Best wishes....FYI a 357 Model 97 is probably the next one on my list. It would be absolute perfection.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Fri Dec 04, 2020 7:06 am 
Single-Sixer

Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 8:39 pm
Posts: 349
Location: MI Mostly!
I am also on the hunt for a 97 in .357. I got an 83 in .454 this year, finally after years of wanting one. Now I want a 97 to round out the collection.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Fri Dec 04, 2020 10:24 am 
Single-Sixer

Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 2:01 am
Posts: 141
Location: Dubuque IA USA
I have owned a 97 five and a half inch .45 Colt and found it to be too light for holding offhand in the windy cold and difficult December conditions when when we hunt deer in Iowa.
I have a six inch 83 in .41 magnum, now wearing a Simmons 2 to 6x scope which I will remove after load development.
They both show typical FA accuracy. I can get more consistent shot placement with lighter (not light) loads, as the grip tension affects the upward barrel movement and torque less than with maximum loads. Either can handle the recoil, but the heavier frame is easier to shoot. I would like to try a 7.5 in a 97 though which would add some weight and sighting radius.
We just sit and wait for deer, so weight is not an issue with either.

_________________
You can't hit 'em if you can't see 'em.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Fri Dec 04, 2020 11:05 am 
Hawkeye

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:40 pm
Posts: 8271
Location: Dallas, TX
I was going to ask which is the best barrel length of these revolvers. I see you can order a up to a 10" barrel.

I guess the model 83 in .22lr is overkill.

It would be interesting to see one of their 2008 single shot guns. They look like an overbuilt Thompson Contender.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2020 9:24 pm 
Hunter

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 7:34 am
Posts: 3220
The 97 in .22 LR is noticeably heavier than 97's in larger calibers.

More steel in the barrel and cylinders because of the smaller bore.

Monty


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Mon Dec 07, 2020 2:42 pm 
Single-Sixer

Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 4:03 pm
Posts: 386
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Montelores wrote:
The 97 in .22 LR is noticeably heavier than 97's in larger calibers.

More steel in the barrel and cylinders because of the smaller bore.

Monty



It's like the old Redhawks in 357 magnum, little bitty holes in big chunks of stainless steel. :D

_________________
--Joseph
I love my revolvers, because I hate chasing brass.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Mon Dec 07, 2020 5:26 pm 
Single-Sixer

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 8:23 pm
Posts: 271
Location: Western Colorado
My 83 in 357 has a 9" bbl. 7.5"-8" would have been plenty, but it still works fine for me.

_________________
Its not that life is too short, its that death is so long
When I die, I am afraid my wife will sell my guns for what she thinks they are worth!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Mon Dec 28, 2020 6:09 pm 
Single-Sixer

Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:51 pm
Posts: 114
Location: FL
I've owned many FA 83 but only one FA97, and it was in a 357Mag with 38Spl cylinder. I sold my FA97 because it was just too small for my hand and I found the Model 83 to be a much better fit. I never owned the Model 83 in 357Mag, though, but I did own it in a couple 44Mag, a couple 500WE, and a 454. I don't own any FA now since I no longer compete in IHMSA, but I do have a bunch of Ruger and a few S&W. I can buy two or three Ruger and fully customize them at the price of just one FA!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Tue Dec 29, 2020 8:18 am 
Buckeye

Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2000 2:01 am
Posts: 1144
seasterl wrote:
I've owned many FA 83 but only one FA97, and it was in a 357Mag with 38Spl cylinder. I sold my FA97 because it was just too small for my hand and I found the Model 83 to be a much better fit. I never owned the Model 83 in 357Mag, though, but I did own it in a couple 44Mag, a couple 500WE, and a 454. I don't own any FA now since I no longer compete in IHMSA, but I do have a bunch of Ruger and a few S&W. I can buy two or three Ruger and fully customize them at the price of just one FA!

I will take customized Ruger Bisley with #5 base pin latch from Bowens, Clements and other top smiths any time over FA. Absolutely nothing wrong with FA, fantastic revolver, I just think that customized Bisley is better.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Tue Dec 29, 2020 9:24 am 
Hunter
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:18 am
Posts: 2631
Location: SW. LOWER MICHIGAN
DHD wrote:
The original 83 in 357 was labeled the 353 Casull and more than a few thought that


Was this just a special ho loading for the .357? or was there a difference in the cartridge dimensions.

_________________
5ive

"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men".....PLATO

Amendment X:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: FA in 357...97 vs 83
PostPosted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 12:17 pm 
Blackhawk

Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 11:32 am
Posts: 988
5of7 wrote:
DHD wrote:
The original 83 in 357 was labeled the 353 Casull and more than a few thought that


Was this just a special ho loading for the .357? or was there a difference in the cartridge dimensions.


*****

The Freedom Arms Model 83 is Dick Casull’s .454 revolver as factory production. As you infer, to call the Casull revolver in .357 Mag “353” is bound to confuse. Why not assume it designates a different cartridge? I think of all Model permutations of Dick Casull’s revolver as Model 83.

To select the smaller M-97 for a .357 Mag, I would have to attach a Ronnie Wells grip frame configured for my hand. I just cannot shoot the factory M-97. A Ronnie Wells brass grip frame built along the lines of the
Bradshaw Bisley or Bisley +4 Degrees might perfectly tame that little animal.
David Bradshaw


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group