357 load development and casual observations

Just got back from the range.

The 158gr RNFP shot ok, about as good as the RN if not a little better

SWC on the other hand...oo boy, my rifle does not like the SNS 158gr SWC at all. Totally inconsistent grouping, left, right, high, low you name it.
I'm not going to waste another 50 primers and the powder on the last 50/100 SWC from my sample pack but will definitely try another go around with the RNFP.
 
Just got back from the range.

The 158gr RNFP shot ok, about as good as the RN if not a little better

SWC on the other hand...oo boy, my rifle does not like the SNS 158gr SWC at all. Totally inconsistent grouping, left, right, high, low you name it.
I'm not going to waste another 50 primers and the powder on the last 50/100 SWC from my sample pack but will definitely try another go around with the RNFP.
I really like loading and shooting rnfp. When pushing on the nose of the bullet. .002 total variation is easy. One of the biggest reasons for casting is aways having the exact same bullet. Run out, just make more.
 
EVERGLADES RNFP #2 (PLATED)- 158 GR- 5 round sets- FED SP primer
10.0gr- ~966 FPS, SD: 55.84, ES: 140
10.6gr- ~1094 FPS, SD: 38.6, ES: 106
11.1gr- ~1181 FPS, SD: 23.27, ES: 63
11.6gr- 1239 FPS, SD: 61.98, ES: 161
12.1gr- 1323 FPS, SD: 14.35, ES: 32
I've seen people who know way more about statistics than I do say that you really need 20 shots per load to have valid stats. The lack of any convincing trend in these SD/ES data over five rounds suggests there might be something to that. Painful though it may be, loading at least a dozen rounds per charge weight is probably a good idea.
 
I've seen people who know way more about statistics than I do say that you really need 20 shots per load to have valid stats. The lack of any convincing trend in these SD/ES data over five rounds suggests there might be something to that. Painful though it may be, loading at least a dozen rounds per charge weight is probably a good idea.

These days I usually run sets of 10 EA per charge weight and then typically more than one round of testing but you're right, that lack of trend makes me want to re-visit that powder with probably a different bullet, cast most likely.
 
Anyone use HS-6 for 357? I tried it a while back with good accuracy, but I just reviewed some load data comparing it to Enforcer and became a little concerned with the pressure HS-6 takes to reach the same velocity. It’s still below max as far as I know but I may limit HS-6 to 9mm and 38 Special with lighter bullets, even though the 9mm load I tried is pretty hot too.
 
Anyone use HS-6 for 357? I tried it a while back with good accuracy, but I just reviewed some load data comparing it to Enforcer and became a little concerned with the pressure HS-6 takes to reach the same velocity. It’s still below max as far as I know but I may limit HS-6 to 9mm and 38 Special with lighter bullets, even though the 9mm load I tried is pretty hot too.
HS-6 is a lot more like Herco (IMO) than Unique or Universal, even though they're all in the same burn range. It's kind of Universal's nasty-tempered cousin... o_O

HS-6 is my goto for hot .45ACP/AR lead and jacketed. I like in 147gr 9mm loads, too. I loaded up some 180gr. LFN in .40S&W and the guy in the lane next to me at the range though I'd blowed up a gun. :rofl: It was actually pretty tame and got good velocity (1000fps +/- 50 or so) with a 180gr. cast but it was a might bit flashy and boomy. :what:
 
Last edited:
Anyone use HS-6 for 357? I tried it a while back with good accuracy, but I just reviewed some load data comparing it to Enforcer and became a little concerned with the pressure HS-6 takes to reach the same velocity. It’s still below max as far as I know but I may limit HS-6 to 9mm and 38 Special with lighter bullets, even though the 9mm load I tried is pretty hot too.
I believe your observation is just a function of burn rate. Do you come to the same ends with hs-6 vs 2400 or #9.
 
I believe your observation is just a function of burn rate. Do you come to the same ends with hs-6 vs 2400 or #9.
HS-6 is identical to Winchester 540 (discontinued).
Same/similar burn rate as Universal, Unique, Power Pistol, and VV N340, but it's got more nitro than any of them. It's a flattened ball, double-base powder and acts like you'd expect a high nitro powder to react.
 
I believe your observation is just a function of burn rate. Do you come to the same ends with hs-6 vs 2400 or #9.

I haven’t tried #9. I also haven’t tried HS-6 and 2400 in the same bullet combination. 2400 gave amazing accuracy (1.03” @ 25 yards) with 158 grain bullets and a rather stout charge of 14.1 grains. HS-6 did nearly as well with 125 grain bullets and a near max charge.

I bought the HS-6 for a 2400 substitute since I haven’t seen any more since I bought that first pound. HS-6 seems quite versatile in handgun loads I use, going from light 9mm to mid range 357 and likely covering 38 Special in between, though I haven’t tried it yet.

When comparing it to Enforcer it just seems to require higher pressure to get the same velocity with the 125 grain bullets. When I tried it I saw some impressions of the rear plate in the primers. I need to see if that happened on my 2400 loads too. The primer corners were still rounded. There were some lines from the plate around the firing pin hole (Ruger Blackhawk) visible in the primer surface. I didn’t have any heavy factory loads to compare so I haven’t gone back to it. I’ve switched back over to mostly rifle loading so I haven’t gone back to check it again.
 
HS-6 is identical to Winchester 540 (discontinued).
Same/similar burn rate as Universal, Unique, Power Pistol, and VV N340, but it's got more nitro than any of them. It's a flattened ball, double-base powder and acts like you'd expect a high nitro powder to react.
Snatching a learning opportunity here, if'n ya doesn't mind. How should one expect high nitro powders to react, compared to powders with less nitro?
 
Got it. Thanks.
It also contributes leading with cast bullets, case mouth wear and scorching. In the Ideal 40th is an explanation of leading and accuracy problems related to pressure and temperature. I don’t have it saved to my phone files but I think @AJC1 has the PDF saved if the passages can be found easily. Anything that applies a thermal extreme to the base of the bullet is going to effect pressure and accuracy.
So why use double base powder? Energy. Nitroglycerin is significantly more energetic than nitrocellulose. High nitroglycerin powders have other ingredients that contribute to stabilizing that energy so look for double base powder with multiple stabilizers and less than 50% nitroglycerin if you need a steady push versus a sudden hit. But, if you want that smack, like for a small short barrel or a big bore smooth bore, then lots of nitroglycerin is going to be your thing.
 
It also contributes leading with cast bullets, case mouth wear and scorching. In the Ideal 40th is an explanation of leading and accuracy problems related to pressure and temperature. I don’t have it saved to my phone files but I think @AJC1 has the PDF saved if the passages can be found easily. Anything that applies a thermal extreme to the base of the bullet is going to effect pressure and accuracy.
So why use double base powder? Energy. Nitroglycerin is significantly more energetic than nitrocellulose. High nitroglycerin powders have other ingredients that contribute to stabilizing that energy so look for double base powder with multiple stabilizers and less than 50% nitroglycerin if you need a steady push versus a sudden hit. But, if you want that smack, like for a small short barrel or a big bore smooth bore, then lots of nitroglycerin is going to be your thing.
No nitro powders are very limited in pistol with universal, 4227 and the 300 series of vihtavouri powders being the only options left.
 
It also contributes leading with cast bullets, case mouth wear and scorching. In the Ideal 40th is an explanation of leading and accuracy problems related to pressure and temperature. I don’t have it saved to my phone files but I think @AJC1 has the PDF saved if the passages can be found easily. Anything that applies a thermal extreme to the base of the bullet is going to effect pressure and accuracy.
So why use double base powder? Energy. Nitroglycerin is significantly more energetic than nitrocellulose. High nitroglycerin powders have other ingredients that contribute to stabilizing that energy so look for double base powder with multiple stabilizers and less than 50% nitroglycerin if you need a steady push versus a sudden hit. But, if you want that smack, like for a small short barrel or a big bore smooth bore, then lots of nitroglycerin is going to be your thing.
All I need is an email address and I can send it to anyone you deem worthy. ;)
 
I just read this entire thread from the beginning. Very informative, and inspirational.

I have 3 .357s; 2.5” SP101, 4” Security Six and 18” Marlin. And the LGS is trying to find me a GP100.

This thread has inspired me to get busy building some .357!

My goal will be to try to get a load that’s accurate in both the Marlin and GP100.

But with a few other projects in front of the .357, it may be a month before this gets started. But I’ll be sure to come back and ask my questions here from those that have more experience with this caliber.

But if that GP100 shows up, this project may get elevated.

With about 1,200 factory .357 stashed, I have more pressing projects although I’m not really satisfied with the accuracy of the factory rounds except for some 38+p ammo that’s fairly accurate in the 101.

I’ll be back!

And thanks again for the read and wealth of information.
 
I’m using the Hornady hollow base wadcutter. They were among the most accurate handgun loads I’ve tried. I have not tried any solid wadcutters. They have a BC slightly higher than a brick so they probably won’t work for my intended purpose of 50+ yard shooting with the Blackhawk but for cutting playing cards at 5-10 yards they’re probably the best I have. Only the 158 grain XTP I tried is more accurate but not by much and it’s a full magnum load. Moving beyond 25 yards gives the XTP the advantage.
 
Hi guys! I thought I'd drop in and share some experience and results with 2400 and 158gr bullets.

Firstly, most of my .357 mag loading was several years ago, when I was less cautious and less experienced. But I have loaded an SNS Casting 158gr coated LSWC with 2400. I got as high as 15.5gr with 2400. That was scary. But I've shot many loads with 14.5gr and had no issues whatsoever. QL goes a little wonky when I put that data in, and tells me it's a compressed load at 105.6% and 47,855psi. I can hear the powder moving when I shake a cartridge. QL does not seem to like 2400. It tells me the same kind of story with a 158gr XTP....but we'll get to that.

Accuracy of the LSWC and 14.5gr of 2400 is pretty reasonable as I recall. I've shot many of them through my various GPs, and an SP101. Zero problems. But my notes do not indicate that I completed an accuracy evaluation from a bag, and I have never run them over a chronograph. Not surprising as this was the first load I ever worked up. I plan to chrono some this week, and I really should check accuracy too, but I just might not get to that.

Now for the 158gr XTP. Lyman 50th claims 14.9gr is max even though Hornady is lower. I ran 14.5gr and 15.0gr over the chronograph, and did an accuracy evaluation for both. However, my notes on this load aren't great either. All they say is that the 14.5gr group had slightly better accuracy overall with 10 shots at 1.75" - 2" shooting off a bag at 25 yards (because apparently I didn't care enough to measure it exactly). But the higher load of 15.0gr had a very tight cluster of 6 out of 10 shots. The other 4 made it the larger group, but that could have been my-flinching-fault. The chrono results went the other way, so I cut it back to the 14.9gr in the book and called it good. Figuring 0.1gr couldn't make much of a difference but why tempt fate.

All testing for this load was done with a 4.2" GP100.

14.5gr:
Average - 1245
E.S. - 76
S.D. - 27

15.0gr:
Average - 1252
E.S. - 45
S.D. - 20

I'll chrono the LSWC/2400 load when I can, and a load using the same bullet but 6.5-6.7gr of Unique.

Edit for Update:

In an effort to consolidate the data, here are the chrono results for the two loads using the SNS coated 158gr LSWC.

42-46 degrees, very windy, partly sunny but I found shade for the unit. 4.2" GP100 used at a distance of 10-12'.

The Unique load of 6.5-6.7gr (probably actually 6.5-6.8gr) gave a wide range, but it just a range load.

High - 1097
Low - 980
Average - 1042
E.S. - 117
S.D. - 49

The 2400 load of 14.5gr (+/- less than 0.1gr) gave more uniform results, but nothing too exciting.

High - 1297
Low - 1233
Average - 1261
E.S. - 64
S.D. - 17

Extraction wasn't sticky. The primers looked just fine.
IMG_20220423_112708626_HDR.jpg

It was too windy to do an accuracy test out there. I was getting jostled around, and I ended up running after the paper plate I had taped up as a target because it came loose and started blowing away. But with this 2400 load, I was able to hit partial (as in already broken) clays at 25-30 yards about 1/3rd of the time from an improvised rest once I dialed in POI a little. I believe it's more accurate than I am in a 20 mph crosswind. :rofl:

With this bullet, 14.5gr of 2400 doesn't seem like an excessive or over pressured load to me. Just my two cents based on what I've experienced.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top