Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

.357: 125-gr and maximum H-110, bad for the gun?

Discussion in 'Handloading and Reloading' started by IMtheNRA, May 3, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. IMtheNRA

    IMtheNRA Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,166
    I have some of these left over from experimenting with different loads. I'm wondering if shooting about a thousand of these, loaded with max or close to max charges of H-110 would result in flame cutting the top strap of my S&W revolvers or faster than usual forcing cone erosion.
     
  2. Longhorn 76

    Longhorn 76 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2012
    Messages:
    234
    Location:
    South Carolina
    The top strap will reach a point and stop. The forcing cone will not stop. Took me about 2000 to eat the forcing cone on the Python. 125 Sierra and a lot of WW296.
     
  3. IMtheNRA

    IMtheNRA Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,166
    Oh geez. 2,000 rounds is only about a year of shooting for my .357 revos...
     
  4. CPLofMARINES

    CPLofMARINES Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    293
    Location:
    Shelby Twp., Mi
    I feel better keeping that load at 1350 Fps or lower, that's
    Just me though.
     
  5. Kurastduuks

    Kurastduuks Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2013
    Messages:
    156
    Location:
    Very rural washington
    Loading like that is hard on all guns but harder on some. Keep them out of your smith I would say with the possible exception of the model 27
     
  6. gamestalker

    gamestalker member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2008
    Messages:
    9,832
    Location:
    SW Arizona
    I have no doubt that running full tilt loads with a light bullet like 110's or 125's through a medium framed revolver, is considerably harder on the firearm. But in all honesty, I've been almost exclusively running H110 / 296 with everything jacketed from 110's - 158's for decades, and I haven't really noticed anything unusual. I'll add that I have two K frames that have had a good 3K each of this load make up, I estimate that at least 20% have been either 110's or 125's.

    GS
     
  7. ArchAngelCD

    ArchAngelCD Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    22,793
    Location:
    Northeast PA, USA
    My question is, which S&W revolver are you shooting?
     
  8. IMtheNRA

    IMtheNRA Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,166
    All of my 357s are N-frames. But, what does frame size have to do with forcing cone erosion?
     
  9. CPLofMARINES

    CPLofMARINES Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    293
    Location:
    Shelby Twp., Mi
    Typically , the larger frames can withstand the hotter
    Loads. But, remember it's not how powerful the round is,
    It's all about the size/weight of the projectile, when you
    Are talking about flame cutting and forcing cone erosion.
     
  10. bluetopper

    bluetopper Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,257
    Location:
    Northeast TX
    Old K frame Smith's forcing cone is thin at the bottom and has a tendancy to crack. Your results may vary. The choice is yours. It's your gun.
     
  11. ArchAngelCD

    ArchAngelCD Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    22,793
    Location:
    Northeast PA, USA
    When the K frame was developed there were no 125gr jacketed bullets screaming along at over 1800 fps so the K frame's forcing cone was a little light for that development. Some of the K frame magnums suffered cracked forcing cones because of the beating they were taking. The L frame was developed to fix that problem. The N frame never had a forcing cone problem because it was beefier than the one on the K frame. Erosion will happen to any forcing cone, it was the cracking that was the major problem.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page