S&W M28-2, 357 Magnum, High Pressure, Locked Action,

243winxb

Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
14,321
Location
Hopewell Big Woods
Tried No 9 powder today in my S&W M28-2 357 mag. 164.5 gr lswc, WSPM, Staarline brass. Shot 10 rounds @ 11.5 grs. Loaded 1 at Hodgdon maximum of 12.4 grs.
The 12.4 did not go well. Primer extruded into the firing pin hole. Locked action, cylinder jammed forward.

I know not to up the powder charge 9/10 of a grain at a time with ball powder, but i got lazy & 1 round cant hurt. Wrong.

Photos here- https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?media/albums/s-w-m28-2-357-high-pressure-locked-action.371/
 
CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The High Road, nor the staff of THR assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

Good i didnt use this 1992 data. Big difference. Note- different primer. The WSPM is said to add 5000 PSI? If you beleave the interweb?

20220510_182801.jpg 20220510_182501.jpg 20220510_182438.jpg Screenshot_20220510-155801_Chrome.jpg
 
Glad you and the gun are ok. Yea, it’s easy to do that, guilty here before, bit me with high pressure too.

I sometimes get chastised for being too cautious in my advice, but it’s only because I know what can happen sometimes if we don’t go slow.

Y'all be careful out there.:)
 
Tried No 9 powder today in my S&W M28-2 357 mag. 164.5 gr lswc, WSPM, Staarline brass. Shot 10 rounds @ 11.5 grs. Loaded 1 at Hodgdon maximum of 12.4 grs.
The 12.4 did not go well. Primer extruded into the firing pin hole. Locked action, cylinder jammed forward.

I know not to up the powder charge 9/10 of a grain at a time with ball powder, but i got lazy & 1 round cant hurt. Wrong.

Photos here- https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?media/albums/s-w-m28-2-357-high-pressure-locked-action.371/
Thanks for sharing, this is a good reminder.
 
Hodgdon data lists the bullet as LC. A Oregon Trail Laser Cast with a BHN of 12 & bevel base. 158 gr, .358" diameter, lswc.
Screenshot_20220510-231926.jpg

Maybe a bad primer? :confused:
 
i would go with the cci 500 primer with that load (as listed in your 1992 data). the winchester primer cup may be a bit thin, or soft (or both).

that n-frame is bull strong and the cylinder is quite large, so the round itself should not adversely affect the gun.

luck,

murf
 
Fortunately you were using an N frame and things didn’t go badly. Not to chastise, but this is why I go up in .2 (not .02)grain increments when trying something new in handgun and .3(not .03) grain increments in small rifle. Not saying I have always done that, but there are reasons, like you saw, that I do now. I did some scary testing early on in 357 and fortunately I was using a GP-100 and only scared myself, but it could have been bad with a lesser gun.

What’s important is you are fine, the gun appears fine, and it’s a good reminder for many of us also.
 
Last edited:
Fortunately you were using an N frame and things didn’t go badly. Not to chastise, but this is why I go up in .02 grain increments when trying something new in handgun and .03 grain increments in small rifle. Not saying I have always done that, but there are reasons, like you saw, that I do now. I did some scary testing early on in 357 and fortunately I was using a GP-100 and only scared myself, but it could have been bad with a lesser gun.

What’s important is you are fine, the gun appears fine, and it’s a good reminder for many of us also.
.02 really.....
 
I have that 1992 manual, and the second edition Accurate Arms manual. What I have learned about Accurate Arms data is: it could be. It could be on the money, it could stick a bullet in the barrel, and the first round downrange range could blow primers on the recommended starting load. While I have kegs of AA#9, purchased when a 8 lb keg was $64.00 (that was the days!), just like any ball powder, ball powders go from zero to bitch in pico seconds. I never liked ball powders habit of going nasty without any previous warnings. I think it is because the stuff has so much surface area and the initial pressure spike is higher than flake or stick powders.

And then the stuff is hard to ignite in cold weather. One cold weekend I took to the range to shoot two recent acquisitions. The first was a well worn S&W M586 and the other a 95% Colt Trooper Mk III both chambered for the 357 Mag.

I bought a very used M586, the previous owned shot PPC with it, said he fired about 40K of 148 LSWC with 2.7 Bullseye and Federal primers. If you are not aware, Federal primers are the most sensitive primer on the market a combination of thin cups and special sensitive priming compound. These primers are outstanding in pistol mechanisms, especially mechanisms with weak or marginal ignition systems. This is an excellent post on this issue: IT DON’T GO BANG: FIRES, HANGFIRES, MISFIRES AND SHORT ORDER COOKS IN JERSEY It turns out, there are a lot of fire arms on the market with marginal ignition systems. Federal primers will ignite when other primers misfire. While this is a wonderful benefit for revolvers and pistols, it is not an advantage with semi auto rifles. In these mechanisms, Federal rifle primers, standard and match, are the most slamfiring rifle primer on the market.

The weather was cold there were infact snow flakes in the air, it was overcast and the wind was blowing. The ammunition had been overnight in the bed of the truck. With the M586 I had misfires, no hangfires, but I experienced squibs with a load I tested in 103 F weather. I had rounds that were anywhere between full power and squib. I did not have issues with the Colt Trooper. My load was with a 158 LRN with 12.0 grains AA#9. I used WSP primers. Below is my test data, 12.0 grains AA#9 was close to my “reference” load of 13.5 grs 2400, so that’s what I used.

AA#9 is a very fine grained ball powder. It shot just fine in warm weather.

One round left a bullet in the throat of the M586, another round left a bullet lodged between the cylinder of the M586 and the throat. The bullet stuck in the M586 throat had a column of ball powder behind it. The texture of the powder was similar to cotton candy. Ball powder was all over the mechanism, I had to get a paper towel and wipe it out from under the extractor star, cylinder recess. Luckily I had a long shafted screwdriver. Inserting the screwdriver through the muzzle and pounding on the handle enabled me to knock the lead bullets out and continue shooting.

I may have had light primer strikes with the 586, but as you can see from the primer on the M586 case, I had deep primer indentations. I have looked at the firing pin protrusion with the M586, and that looks to be good. It protrudes a significant distance out the recoil shield. I loaded this ammunition on a Dillion 550B over a couple of years ago. Out of 100 rounds, these were the only two that stuck in the barrel, but I did have squib rounds.

Shot well, even out to 50 yards. The squib loads barely rocked the gong.

As you can see, the primer looks fairly well smacked.


Tested velocities of my loads in a M27 Smith:


Code:
[SIZE="3"]


[b]Smith & Wesson M27-2 6.5” barrel[/b]


158 LSWC 13.5grs 2400 R-P cases CCI primers

9-Oct-05 T = 64 °F

Ave Vel = 1273

Std Dev = 44.03

ES = 176.7

High = 1372

Low = 1195

N = 30

Very accurate.


158 LRN 12.0 grs AA#9 CCI500 Mixed cases

5-Aug-06 T = 103 °F

Ave Vel = 1278

Std Dev = 34.98

ES = 117.4

High = 1344

Low = 1226

N = 27

Accurate little or no leading


158 LRN 12.5 grs AA#9 CCI500 3-D cases

5-Aug-06 T = 103 °F

Ave Vel = 1348

Std Dev = 34.16

ES = 134.7

High = 1386

Low = 1251

N = 25

Very Accurate no leading[/SIZE]


F3lwQts.jpg
SobhuKC.jpg

xXFMOxJ.jpg

When I got back home, I replaced the old M586 mainspring with a new, took the pistol out in slightly warmer weather, same ammunition, no problems. But the thing is, ball powders require strong primer ignition, and are not tolerant of weak ignition, or weak primers.
 
just like any ball powder, ball powders go from zero to bitch in pico seconds.
I think I dated her once in high school.
No, I'm wrong, it was twice. :)

Down here in Florida warm only happens a few weeks in the winter and hotter than the gates of Hades happens a few days in the summer; the rest is pretty nice. We average around 80F most of the year (from May through October). Ball powders are great for indoor ranges and summer hunting but I avoid No.9 for anything but Ruger single actions. Mostly .44Mag, not .357Mag. I prefer No.7 - also a ball powder but much more polite - in .357Mag. I'm much more a fan of 2400 and IMR 4227 and consider No.9 a substitute standard for when times get tough. I have a pound hanging around from before the 2016 primaries...
 
hammer nose
On 2nd one. Its been awhile. I will have to check the Hammer nose protrusion, when i find out what the specification is.

Edit add- My protrusion .058" Spec seems to be .045 to .060" Nose replaced Nov. 2020.

The top 10 fired today with 11.2 grs No. 9. Bottom 11.5 grs. I knocked out the primer on the 12.4 gr one that blanked the primer.

20220511_183320.jpg
 
Last edited:
Tried No 9 powder today in my S&W M28-2 357 mag. 164.5 gr lswc, WSPM
I tried 12.2 and 12.4gr of Accurate #9 with a 158gr Hornady XTP in a Ruger Security six, the primers were flat and shell casings were stuck in the cylinder. With all being the same I tried 13.6gr of Accurate #9 and that worked very well. The cases fell out of the cylinder and the spent primers were rounded and normal.
This my most accurate load for this 2 3/4" gun, go figger.
 
7.8% is a big jump between steps when going to max, for me. I suppose the term is always “work up” (or “work down” for subs) but no one quantifies the increments…
 
Back
Top