.357 mag rifle loads

ArchAngelCD said:

You didn't tell us about accuracy for each.

Click to expand...

No, I didn't for two reasons. One, I'm far from the greatest rifle shot so no one would be impressed with my group size. Second, what shoots well in my rifle may not shoot well in another rifle.

The group size I obtained is sufficient to cleanly kill a deer out to what I believe to be the prudent distance of 100 yards.

My sole purpose of my post was to convey the chronographed velocities I obtained without exceeding the published limits for the powders I used.

MEHavey said:

If Lil'Gun is used, make sure to work up w/ a chronograph -- not blind.

I like Lil'Gun a lot in the 30 Carbine, but it spikes fast once it reaches the inflection point in the curve . . , FAST.

Click to expand...

I did use one. Never saw the need to go past the data with that powder since the velocities were unbelievable anyway.

Thomas Mayberry said:

No, I didn't for two reasons. One, I'm far from the greatest rifle shot so no one would be impressed with my group size. Second, what shoots well in my rifle may not shoot well in another rifle.

The group size I obtained is sufficient to cleanly kill a deer out to what I believe to be the prudent distance of 100 yards.

My sole purpose of my post was to convey the chronographed velocities I obtained without exceeding the published limits for the powders I used.

Click to expand...

I did not ask you about group size, I asked about accuracy. You touted a second load that produced higher velocity, I was curious if it's was at the expense of accuracy.

I was also not asking about accuracy for my rifles, only yours. I have good loads which work for me I and my guns. I'm not sure why you felt you needed to lecture me on guns being different?

ArchAngelCD said:

I did not ask you about group size, I asked about accuracy. You touted a second load that produced higher velocity, I was curious if it's was at the expense of accuracy.

I was also not asking about accuracy for my rifles, only yours. I have good loads which work for me I and my guns. I'm not sure why you felt you needed to lecture me on guns being different?

Click to expand...

I simply acknowledged that I did not give information on accuracy and my reasons why. I did not "lecture" you but if that's the way you chose to take it, so be it.

Thomas Mayberry said:

I simply acknowledged that I did not give information on accuracy and my reasons why. I did not "lecture" you but if that's the way you chose to take it, so be it.

Click to expand...

Please don't act like you did nothing. You said a load that is good in your rifle may not shotshell in another like I had no idea that is so. You made many assumptions in your answer, none were correct.

Sorry for asking about accuracy. (but not groups) I just wanted to know if the additional velocity was at the expense of accuracy like I said above.

Random 8 said:

Part 2... If I do go the route of .357 max re-chambering (will be after the current hunting season)...what about 180-200 grain RN bullets intended for the .35 Rem? Has anybody done this, or gone up to 200 gr in a single shot .357mag such as the Henry or a TC? I would question the terminal performance at speeds I could reach safely in the .357 mag, but would the Max get me there? Might depend on the allowable freebore I know. As a veteran of shooting Swiss rifles, I am familiar with determining max allowable COL (zero freebore).

Click to expand...

There are 170-180 loads for .357 magnum, idk about 200 in maximum, but a 180 with the proper powder out of the rifle barrel ought to brazenly reach out a bit and touch something.

Random 8 said:

Thanks for the information. This powder was previously not on my radar, and looks like it may be worth a try to optimize performance in my application if the accuracy holds. Did you use SP magnum or standard primers? My barrel will be 22 1/2", so I might get some ridiculous velocities.

Your information about general accuracy is more useful to me than a picture of a tiny group fired from a rest. I tend to speak in terms of minute of intended purpose also. People get too obsessed with the micrometer on their targets and not obsessed enough with shooting their rifles IMHO.

Click to expand...

I used CCI 500 (SP Standard) primers.

I will chime in on my results with 300MP. I first tried 300MP in my 5” GP100 and did not see much velocity gain over other powders I had tried. In fact, in doing the load workup, I did not see any velocity increase AT ALL in the last 1.6gn increase in charge. It puzzled me. Later, when I tried 300MP in my 16” Rossi, I saw a linear increase in velocity all the way up to the max published charge, and no pressure signs. I settled on a charge of 18.2gn powder, Hornady 158 XTP/FP bullet, and regular CCI 500 primers, which resulted in 1800fps and decent accuracy.

It is my opinion that 300MP really shines in longer barrels. The load data from Alliant was developed with a 10” barrel.

Toprudder said:

It is my opinion that 300MP really shines in longer barrels. The load data from Alliant was developed with a 10” barrel.

Click to expand...

Just a note, the data wasn't developed with a 10" barrel, it was tested in a 10" barrel. There is a difference.

ArchAngelCD said:

Just a note, the data wasn't developed with a 10" barrel, it was tested in a 10" barrel. There is a difference.

Click to expand...

Thanks for taking the time to point out that I chose the wrong word. If that is all you could find wrong with my post, I guess I am doing pretty good. You didn’t mention the grammatical error, I should have used “were” instead of “was” in that sentence.

Toprudder said:

Thanks for taking the time to point out that I chose the wrong word. If that is all you could find wrong with my post, I guess I am doing pretty good. You didn’t mention the grammatical error, I should have used “were” instead of “was” in that sentence.

Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to find anything wrong with your post. We are not the only ones reading these posts. There are new reloaders out there and I didn't want them to think the data was for long barrels. The data is good for all barrel lengths and they give us the barrel length used so we can approximate the velocity we will get in our barrels of different lengths.

I mearly made mention because it sounded like the data was developed for a 10" barrel and I didn't want anyone to think that, I was not trying to point out anything you wrote as a mistake.

ArchAngelCD said:

We are not the only ones reading these posts. There are new reloaders out there

Click to expand...

Perhaps what Thomas was getting at?

When reading this forum on my phone it only gives screen names, not the join date or number of posts.

ArchAngelCD said:

I merely made mention because it sounded like the data was developed for a 10" barrel and I didn't want anyone to think that

Click to expand...

Agreed. This flummoxes many a new handloader of an AR when their new chronograph tells them they aren't making book velocity yet.

Toprudder said:

In fact, in doing the load workup, I did not see any velocity increase AT ALL in the last 1.6gn increase in charge.

Click to expand...

I had that happen to be with BE86 in the 9mm... albiet out of my 4" Kahr. The powder simply plateaued in that barrel length.

Demi-human said:

Agreed. This flummoxes many a new handloader of an AR when their new chronograph tells them they aren't making book velocity yet.

Click to expand...

I've never really trusted book velocity values... in reality they very rarely match, I think there are too many variables. I've even had velocity differences in the same (factory) cartridge in 2 identical pistols.

ArchAngelCD said:

There are new reloaders out there and I didn't want them to think the data was for long barrels. The data is good for all barrel lengths and they give us the barrel length used so we can approximate the velocity we will get in our barrels of different lengths.

Click to expand...

Absolutely agree. The point I was trying to make (admittedly not clearly) was that the velocity they listed was from a 10" barrel, while some of their 357 data was from a shorter barrel, which makes the performance of the 300MP powder appear to be much better than it is, relatively speaking. I suspect the max charge they list was where there was no more velocity increase for an increase in charge - in a 10" barrel. Interestingly, Hornady lists a lower max charge, but they used a shorter barrel (8") for their data. This is one reason why I like to see pressures in the load data.

I mearly made mention because it sounded like the data was developed for a 10" barrel and I didn't want anyone to think that, I was not trying to point out anything you wrote as a mistake.

Click to expand...

Charlie98 said:

I had that happen to be with BE86 in the 9mm... albiet out of my 4" Kahr. The powder simply plateaued in that barrel length.

Click to expand...

Interesting that you observed the same thing with a different powder.

I like to look at velocity increases to see if they are somewhat linear with charge. I tend to be cautious so when I see a significant change in linearity, I stop. That is what I did with 300MP in my 5" revolver. I'm glad I thought to try it again in my 16" rifle.

Toprudder said:

Interesting that you observed the same thing with a different powder.

I like to look at velocity increases to see if they are somewhat linear with charge. I tend to be cautious so when I see a significant change in linearity, I stop. That is what I did with 300MP in my 5" revolver. I'm glad I thought to try it again in my 16" rifle.

Click to expand...

I wish I would have had my old HiPower to compare loads with... I think an extra inch of barrel might have made a difference.

Random 8 said:

Just an update for those following. Finally got the rifle in my hands and this thing is a peach. Ran some random loads I had from partial boxes through it just to get a feel.

110 Hornady XTP over Max H110, 158 Nosler JHP over max H110, 158 TC hardcast over a firm load of HS-6, .38 Spl 125 ACME TC cast over medium load HP-38. This thing just plunked them all into ragged holes at 40 yards in my backyard sand pile with near nonexistent recoil. I expect great things from this rifle.

Click to expand...

The h110 and 110gr bullet is destructive you should try it on a ground hog or coyote.

Bfh_auto said:

The h110 and 110gr bullet is destructive you should try it on a ground hog or coyote.

Click to expand...

I have never tested 110gr bullets in a .357 Magnum Levergun. I have however shot 125gr bullets and sent them over a chrono. I posted data in Post #15 but the 125gr data is worth repeating.

Using a 125gr Hornady XTP/HP bullet these numbers are amazing. Using H110/W296 I got within just under 200fps of a 30-30 with the same weight bullet.
17.7gr 2400 - Win WSP primer - AV=2055 fps
22.0gr H110 - CCI-550 primer - AV=2239 fps

Using a 110gr bullet will obviously produce higher numbers, probably quite a bit higher.

ArchAngelCD said:

1025gr bullets...

Click to expand...

Whoooo...whee!!! I'll bet those kick! Those are probably not seated to magazine length, however... just guessing.

Sorry, couldn't help it.

Random 8 said:

What sort of velocities were you getting? Longshot would be useful for me, as I also occasionally use it for 12ga field loads.

Click to expand...

Not to dispute what the gentleman said regarding longshot in the .357 mag but that powder is only a little slower than Unique and PowerPistol and cannot POSSIBLY give the same velocities at the standard working pressures of the .357 Mag as 296/H110...I use longshot as my go-to powder for heavy bullet .45 super loads but I for one would not use it in the .357 Mag for max performance loads..

Richard Jay King said:

Not to dispute what the gentleman said regarding longshot in the .357 mag but that powder is only a little slower than Unique and PowerPistol and cannot POSSIBLY give the same velocities at the standard working pressures of the .357 Mag as 296/H110...I use longshot as my go-to powder for heavy bullet .45 super loads but I for one would not use it in the .357 Mag for max performance loads..

Click to expand...

It should be decent for light bullets, definitely not going to match h110 with 158s though.