357 Rifle Loads

Well, I can try to answer the question but I’m not sure you’ll understand the answer: Correlation does not imply causation.

By that I mean, muzzle energy is not the only factor in ballistics, or even a principle factor.

The real question is: what do you want the bullet to do?

I’m by no means an expert on this, but here’s my take on this. If energy is the only concern, then Yes. The lighter bullets will have a greater muzzle energy than the heavier bullets, but they lose that energy more quickly than the heavier bullets. When you combine that with the greater penetration of the heavier bullets at a distance, the initial difference in energy becomes a moot point. If you intend to shoot very soft targets like small varmints at a close range, you’ll be good with the light bullets. If you intend to hunt larger animals like deer with a .357, you’ll probably want a heavier bullet even though it has a lower initial energy.

Energy (I don't mind spelling it ) is by no means an indication of how well a bullet will perform, it's just math and that's all. .358" 125 gr. bullets don't have the capability of sufficient penetration on game. The lightest bullet I used in a .357 rifle (carbine, actually) is a 162 gr. cast HP loaded with H110 and running 1700+ fps, and it failed to penetrate completely on a broadside shot on a 150 lb. sow. Last season I used a somewhat heavier ~170 gr. cast HP and it completely penetrated.
So, don't worry about energy figures, just load a bullet that will penetrate sufficiently.

35W

film495 said:

I think the idea for me is to develop a load that would be something that could take a deer at 75 yards. I'm just looking at powder and bullet combinations, for a rifle I don't even own yet, but one can dream a bit. Idea being - to make up some plinking loads in .38 Special and ..357, probably same as pistol loads, but also just thinking about a load designed to get performance out of the round in a rifle. I don't think I'll ever deer hunt with it - I just want to work with the reloading with that idea to see what I can do, just as a hobby.

Click to expand...

Well, back in squandered days off youth when I hunted wild pigs with a Blackhawk and nothing else, I used to load 200gr ,359” LFN bullets meant for the .35Rem sized to .358” in .357Magnum cases over 6.5gr of Unique. Now, understand that’s over book loads and not to used by any sane, rational person. I was young and stupid and 10 feet tall and all that so don’t you go loading up crazy things like that. I have no idea what the “nrg” of that bullet was but it would punch clean through a swamp pig, nose to tail and drop them DRT. I didn’t use gas checks back then and that load never leaded my barrel so it wasn’t moving too fast but it was plenty of bullet to do the job.
Start looking at hard cast heavy bullets moving close to 1000fps - just under supersonic - and you will find your load.

film495 said:

I think the idea for me is to develop a load that would be something that could take a deer at 75 yards. I'm just looking at powder and bullet combinations, for a rifle I don't even own yet, but one can dream a bit. Idea being - to make up some plinking loads in .38 Special and ..357, probably same as pistol loads, but also just thinking about a load designed to get performance out of the round in a rifle. I don't think I'll ever deer hunt with it - I just want to work with the reloading with that idea to see what I can do, just as a hobby.

Click to expand...

I highly recommend H110 and a heavy cast bullet with as big of metplat as possible. Or use a 158 jhp.
I had a 125 loaded with AUTOCOMP blow up on a shoulder at 10 yards. The hog fell, spun in a circle and got a second to the head.
180 WFNs will trash the lungs and heart if you hit them.

It is typical for mid weight bullets to develop more kinetic energy than lighter or heavier bullets.

As stated, kinetic energy is seldom the main design goal. If you are shooting bowling pins, momentum and a big meplat works better. If you want a long, flat trajectory then a lighter, faster bullet is a good choice. For more penetration against heavy bones, a heavy for caliber bullet might be your charm.

One thing that is a hunting aspect that I have herd about but am far from knowledgeable is sectional density. It's a number game like your muzzle energy that theoretically is a better method of comparing hunting bullets. May hold your answer. BC is also important because pistol bullets shed speed quickly.

Mr_Flintstone said:

The lighter bullets will have a greater muzzle energy than the heavier bullets, but they lose that energy more quickly than the heavier bullets.

Click to expand...

That. As far as hunting, bullet weight (and obviously terminal performance) are key, and particularly at longer ranges where a lighter bullet will have shed much of it's energy by the time it gets to target.

film495 said:

Am I looking at this wrong?

Click to expand...

Please read this before taking any "ideas" into the field.

https://sportsafield.com/2018/use-enough-gun/

Ethical hunting is a very real concern.

I appreciate the thread since after my .223 project, a .357 load for my 16” Marlin is next.

I’ve purchased several boxes of the Hornady FTX 140 grains to begin the project with because of their higher BC looking for a compromise between trajectory and penetration. From what I read, the case needs to be trimmed to load them.

If they don’t shoot well enough for me I was going to try Sierra 140 grain HPs and 158 jacketed HPs.

So I’m going to follow this with a lot of curiosity.

I’ll probably never use this gun for hunting since I have many bolt guns for specific chores.

film495 said:

I have no plan or intention to hunt with the loads developed or the rifle. It is just a hobby, and an excuse to work with the reloading which I enjoy and like learning about. If I was going to hunt, I'd just use factory 30-30 or 30-06 and a couple other rifles I have. The .357 is just a way to continue learning about reloading and shooting. The deer load is just a theoretical example of function for discussion, not practice.

Click to expand...

Yes, understood. But read Boddington's article and the underlying book to understand why, "Bring Enough Gun" and the principles of ethical hunting ARE essential concepts to your intellectual pursuit. What "Enough Gun" means is defined by your ethical standards. Going back to my first response, "I can try to answer the question but I’m not sure you’ll understand the answer."

The answer is, the load which you can use effectively to deliver a clean, humane, ethical kill on the target game in the target area is the right load - and therefore, enough gun.

film495 said:

I have no plan or intention to hunt with the loads developed or the rifle. It is just a hobby, and an excuse to work with the reloading which I enjoy and like learning about. If I was going to hunt, I'd just use factory 30-30 or 30-06 and a couple other rifles I have. The .357 is just a way to continue learning about reloading and shooting. The deer load is just a theoretical example of function for discussion, not practice.

Click to expand...

If that's the case. Try a coated 158 swc with H110.
Coated are cheap and accurate even with heavy loads.

Bfh_auto said:

If that's the case. Try a coated 158 swc with H110.
Coated are cheap and accurate even with heavy loads.

Click to expand...

This! ->

160gr. Keith type 358429 design with hollow point added, cast from 2-2-96 alloy. Soft enough to expand, heavy enough to penetrate, hard enough not to fragment. Run it up to 1300fps without a gas check over 2400 or 4227 powder - or H110 is it's all you've got - in a carbine barrel and it will perform exceptionally well on any thin-skinned, medium game. I prefer going with as heavier bullet in a carbine but I also am fortunate to have a Handi-Rifle rechambered to .357Maximum to use for really juiced-up .357 loads.

GeoDudeFlorida said:

This! -> View attachment 993465

160gr. Keith type 358429 design with hollow point added, cast from 2-2-96 alloy. Soft enough to expand, heavy enough to penetrate, hard enough not to fragment. Run it up to 1300fps without a gas check over 2400 or 4227 powder - or H110 is it's all you've got - in a carbine barrel and it will perform exceptionally well on any thin-skinned, medium game. I prefer going with as heavier bullet in a carbine but I also am fortunate to have a Handi-Rifle rechambered to .357Maximum to use for really juiced-up .357 loads.

Click to expand...

That is a sweet piece of lead.

Bfh_auto said:

That is a sweet piece of lead.

Click to expand...

I buy them online from a small business, GT Bullets. They're still trying to fill orders from November.

Some fun with numbers...

Kinetic Energy is only conserved in perfectly elastic collisions. So when bullets meet meat, kinetic energy is NOT conserved. HOWEVER... Momentum IS conserved in real-world, inelastic collisions, such as when bullets meet meat...

so let’s look at those numbers, expanding your table a bit... (using simplified momentum of bullet weight in pounds * velocity)

bullet.........KE...........MV...........Momentum
110...........1404.........2398...............37.7
125...........1438.........2276...............40.6
140...........1240.........1997...............39.9
150...........1087.........1807...............38.7
158...........1083.........1757................39.7

You can see here, despite ~25% reduction in kinetic energy from the fast 125grn bullet to the 158, the momentum only changes by 2.3%....

But recall... as the bullet enters the body, it begins to slow down. The faster 125 loses momentum through the wound tract faster than the 158, because its momentum is proportionately more dependent upon velocity, which declines rapidly, than upon its mass. So the 158 keeps on trucking through better than the 125, despite having similar initial velocity.

But honestly, don’t overthink this. Big bullets kill stuff better than light bullets in revolver cartridges.

I make my own

GeoDudeFlorida said:

This! -> View attachment 993465

160gr. Keith type 358429 design with hollow point added, cast from 2-2-96 alloy. Soft enough to expand, heavy enough to penetrate, hard enough not to fragment. Run it up to 1300fps without a gas check over 2400 or 4227 powder - or H110 is it's all you've got - in a carbine barrel and it will perform exceptionally well on any thin-skinned, medium game. I prefer going with as heavier bullet in a carbine but I also am fortunate to have a Handi-Rifle rechambered to .357Maximum to use for really juiced-up .357 loads.

Click to expand...

I make my own



35W

Varminterror said:

Some fun with numbers...

Kinetic Energy is only conserved in perfectly elastic collisions. So when bullets meet meat, kinetic energy is NOT conserved. HOWEVER... Momentum IS conserved in real-world, inelastic collisions, such as when bullets meet meat...

so let’s look at those numbers, expanding your table a bit... (using simplified momentum of bullet weight in pounds * velocity)

bullet.........KE...........MV...........Momentum
110...........1404.........2398...............37.7
125...........1438.........2276...............40.6
140...........1240.........1997...............39.9
150...........1087.........1807...............38.7
158...........1083.........1757................39.7

You can see here, despite ~25% reduction in kinetic energy from the fast 125grn bullet to the 158, the momentum only changes by 2.3%....

But recall... as the bullet enters the body, it begins to slow down. The faster 125 loses momentum through the wound tract faster than the 158, because its momentum is proportionately more dependent upon velocity, which declines rapidly, than upon its mass. So the 158 keeps on trucking through better than the 125, despite having similar initial velocity.

But honestly, don’t overthink this. Big bullets kill stuff better than light bullets in revolver cartridges.

Click to expand...

Yup. Not just in revolvers, either. Ever wonder why Hornady's 100gr. half-jacket soft points are NOT the most popular deer hunting bullets for .30-06?

35 Whelen said:

I make my own



I make my own

View attachment 993501

35W

Click to expand...

PRETTY!! And with gas-checks, too!

I gave up casting back in 1987 when I moved from Cocoa to Vero Beach and was living in a boarding house. No place to cast safely, no place to store my stuff, the owners of the boarding house didn't want me heating lead in my room and the public areas were very public, including lots of little kids running around, so I sold it all off (still have my Lyman Lubrisizer - nobody wanted it) and settled for buying bullets from professionals. Back then every gun store and hunting supply place had shelves of cast bullets for $2-3 per 100 so casting was a matter of making what I wanted vs. what the market demanded. Found out pretty quick what I wanted was what the market demanded so I never had a problem finding what I wanted. As the years have gone by and the inter-web has changed the markets, it made less sense to go back to casting my own. Still doesn't make sense considering how cheap and plentiful really well made cast and jacketed bullets are available, cheap.

Things I have never run short on in any "panic" are cases, powders or bullets. Primers and TIME! I run short on, constantly.

Load up a 158gr RNFP over a max load of h110 or 2400

....or a Keith SWC, if it will feed smoothly

kalielkslayer said:

I appreciate the thread since after my .223 project, a .357 load for my 16” Marlin is next.

Click to expand...

film495 said:

I have no plan or intention to hunt with the loads developed or the rifle. It is just a hobby, and an excuse to work with the reloading which I enjoy and like learning about.

Click to expand...

Combining those two comments...

I have a Marlin 1894 in .41MAG that I handload cast for. No, I don't hunt with it, but I do shoot it at longer ranges... I've had it out to 900yds before. My layman's observations are, more bullet weight carries further, and more accurately... but it's also a trade-off. I shoot a lot of standard commercial cast 215grn SWC bullets... they have a smaller meplat compared to my other bullets, those in the 240-250grn range. I can drive the 215's faster... because of the lighter weight, but not by much, a healthy charge of H110 was pushing the 250grn FN bullets only 100fps slower. I was easily hitting the steel at 600yds using a Williams peep jacked out to the stops, but the difference was impact. I (and my spotter...) could tell when I was shooting the 250's vs the 215's by the sound it made when it hit the steel pipe. Moving to 900yds... the 215's simply ran out of gas at that range, and were starting to scatter, the 250's did not... at least not to the extent the 215's did... and I actually made a few strikes. Yes... I was completely out of sight, I wound up putting the front bead on TOP of the peep aperture... and having my spotter work me in.

Transfer that to jacketed bullets... I have some Remington 210grn JSP's that I load over H110 to 1800fps, widening the gap between them and the 250's... but is it enough to offset the loss of energy at distance? Probably not.

Film495...Pick up a copy of this months Handloader. Brian Pierce wrote an extensive article with lots of data on the subject of your thread...

I always like Brian's articles...lots of comparative data and well written, easy to read prose.