357 Load Dilemma

Status
Not open for further replies.
I figured a couple thing. One people who post here are pretty experienced. Second, I need to consider that some powders work better in certain scenarios than others. Hence the post. Your responses will save me a lot of trial and error. So thanks.
I really like THR and the majotity of mebers are poite, and faily knowledgable, but I doubt if everyone is experienced enough for me to rely on for load data. Long ago I read a load given by a high post number member of a well known forum that turned out to be over one full grain of Unique over a max listed load. The post remained on the forum for at least 24 hrs. until the poster came back and fixed the post, apologising "my fat finger hit the wrong key". So, I established my "Rule #1"; I pay little (no) attention to any load data I see on any forum, any Pet Loads website, hear from any range rat, gun counter clerk, good intended friend or nice guy at the LGS or the Gun Shop Guru. I get 98% of my load data from published reloading manuals and some from powde manufacturer's websites. I started reloading waaaay pre web and got all my load data from published manuals (and Lee Loader data sheets), so it was no big deal to ignore free info on powder chrges. I have had one squib in 1970, and no Kabooms, in my entire reloading history and I'm not "Mr Reloder" expert. I just follow directions and don't guess about anything. I reload for 11 different calibers including 12 hndguns and 4 rifles and haven't runout of load options using pubished data...

Not bragging, just sharing my experience...
 
4227 as mentioned needs a heavy bullet. I’ve found starting in the middle on charge weight does wonders on filth, and a heavy crimp. You’re doing the right thing starting at the bottom, never change that practice, but 4227 is the wrong powder for the bullets you have.

There’s a saying about 4227 and it’s “ you nearly can’t stuff enough 4227 in to blow up” I’ve found that to be true as most max book charges won’t let me seat the bullet deep enough without breaking the press arm. Quite a few 3/4 power charges are rather compressed.

My king cobra likes a 160gr Speer truncated over 2400 for full power, and 158gr lead swc over aa5 or bullseye for the dinkers, but both of those are stated as reduced loads in the 357 section, I tried a few 38 in 357 brass loads, 3” gong at 50yds was the best I could achieve, the 357 loads each are a golf ball at 50yds every time.
 
In Hodgdon's burn-rate chart published in 2019, they rated 4227 slower than Lil'Gun and H110/Win296. It was rated just faster than CFE BLK.
4227 is a single-base powder. It is an extruded powder of nitrocellulose (gun cotton) and contains no nitroglycerin. The cylindrical extrusions have a single perforation in the center that results in a highly progressive burn rate. It starts to burn slow, and then as the grains burn from the inside-out, the surface area of the grains increases, and the burn rate accelerates.
If you don't give it enough time under pressure to burn thoroughly, it will eject "powder skeletons." This isn't necessarily "unburnt" powder, but it is incompletely combusted grains. Some of the cellulose has not been gasified. I suppose it is like ash.

One time I was shooting 357 loads of 4227 over snow. They were maximum loads in the sense that the case would not hold any more powder. I was shooting a single action with a 5.5" barrel. After about 50 loads or so, there was a fan-shaped debris field of black 4227 skeletons across the snow in front of me.

Hodgdon's data shows for a 158 grain XTP, the maximum load is 16 grains of 4227 or 16.7 grains of H110.

Quickload calculates 16 grains of 4227 will fill the case 119.8% under a 158 grain XTP seated to an OAL of 1.58" (Hodgdon's spec.) Hodgdon measured the pressure at 42,600 CUP.
68% of the load will be burnt before the bullet base exits the muzzle. The rest of the load will combust, but it will be in free air (at low pressure).

16.7 grains of H110 will fill the case to 106.6% under the same bullet at same OAL. Hodgdon measured 40,700 CUP.
77% of the H110 will burn before the bullet exits.

Hodgdon measured 1520 fps (4227) and 1591 fps (H110) in their 10" test barrel for these loads. For the 18.5" test barrel, they measured 1668 fps and 1757 fps respectively.

What this evidence indicates to me is that 4227 needs a larger case. I thought it might work well in 357 Maximum, so I looked at the data and it is very telling because Hodgdon also includes a CFE BLK load.

For 357 Maximum, H110 is measured at 1865 fps with an uncompressed load of 22.5 grains. Similarly, Lil'Gun is measured at 1911 fps with an uncompressed load of 22.4 grains.
4227 is measured at 1749 fps for a compressed load of 22.5 grains. Similarly, CFE BLK is measured at 1698 fps with a compressed load of 27 grains.

The problem with 4227 and CFE BLK is that they are too bulky for even 357 Maximum. They need an even larger case.

Browsing some data, it looks like 4227 really comes into its own with 375 Super Magnum and some 44 Magnum loads (look at 300 grain XTP loads). These are where the case and bullet combinations are allowing enough room for sufficient mass of 4227 to develop the pressure, and where H110 or Lil'Gun are exceeding the MAP with case capacity to spare.

My conclusion is that 4227 is too bulky and too slow in burn rate for most 357 Magnum use. Note that we see the same thing in 350 Legend -- compressed loads with low pressures, and velocities that just can't keep up with H110 etc.
 
For the bullets and powder you listed, I suggest
W296 with magnum primers and the 125 grain bullets for big, blasty magnums. Watch your eardrums. Especially with short barrels, these can rupture them with one shot. Double-up with plugs and muffs.
Bullseye and W231 will make great target loads under the wadcutters. The other powders won't fit well.
Trailboss, No. 5, and Unique will do well behind the 125 grain bullets for light to modest loads, and No. 9 can step up to something stouter.
 
In Hodgdon's burn-rate chart published in 2019, they rated 4227 slower than Lil'Gun and H110/Win296. It was rated just faster than CFE BLK.
4227 is a single-base powder. It is an extruded powder of nitrocellulose (gun cotton) and contains no nitroglycerin. The cylindrical extrusions have a single perforation in the center that results in a highly progressive burn rate. It starts to burn slow, and then as the grains burn from the inside-out, the surface area of the grains increases, and the burn rate accelerates.
If you don't give it enough time under pressure to burn thoroughly, it will eject "powder skeletons." This isn't necessarily "unburnt" powder, but it is incompletely combusted grains. Some of the cellulose has not been gasified. I suppose it is like ash.

One time I was shooting 357 loads of 4227 over snow. They were maximum loads in the sense that the case would not hold any more powder. I was shooting a single action with a 5.5" barrel. After about 50 loads or so, there was a fan-shaped debris field of black 4227 skeletons across the snow in front of me.

Hodgdon's data shows for a 158 grain XTP, the maximum load is 16 grains of 4227 or 16.7 grains of H110.

Quickload calculates 16 grains of 4227 will fill the case 119.8% under a 158 grain XTP seated to an OAL of 1.58" (Hodgdon's spec.) Hodgdon measured the pressure at 42,600 CUP.
68% of the load will be burnt before the bullet base exits the muzzle. The rest of the load will combust, but it will be in free air (at low pressure).

16.7 grains of H110 will fill the case to 106.6% under the same bullet at same OAL. Hodgdon measured 40,700 CUP.
77% of the H110 will burn before the bullet exits.

Hodgdon measured 1520 fps (4227) and 1591 fps (H110) in their 10" test barrel for these loads. For the 18.5" test barrel, they measured 1668 fps and 1757 fps respectively.

What this evidence indicates to me is that 4227 needs a larger case. I thought it might work well in 357 Maximum, so I looked at the data and it is very telling because Hodgdon also includes a CFE BLK load.

For 357 Maximum, H110 is measured at 1865 fps with an uncompressed load of 22.5 grains. Similarly, Lil'Gun is measured at 1911 fps with an uncompressed load of 22.4 grains.
4227 is measured at 1749 fps for a compressed load of 22.5 grains. Similarly, CFE BLK is measured at 1698 fps with a compressed load of 27 grains.

The problem with 4227 and CFE BLK is that they are too bulky for even 357 Maximum. They need an even larger case.

Browsing some data, it looks like 4227 really comes into its own with 375 Super Magnum and some 44 Magnum loads (look at 300 grain XTP loads). These are where the case and bullet combinations are allowing enough room for sufficient mass of 4227 to develop the pressure, and where H110 or Lil'Gun are exceeding the MAP with case capacity to spare.

My conclusion is that 4227 is too bulky and too slow in burn rate for most 357 Magnum use. Note that we see the same thing in 350 Legend -- compressed loads with low pressures, and velocities that just can't keep up with H110 etc.
This is the best characterization of 4227 I've ever seen, and the type of useful insights I expected when I bought propellant profiles from Wolfe publishing. Double thumbs up....
 
I am using .357 cases. All I got at the moment.
dh: If you will pm me your address I will send you a small priority mail box of 38 spl. brass. I was a range master and accumulated more brass of every caliber then I can use in what's left of my lifetime. No charge for brass or shipping. Just be sure to pay it forward someday. Let me know if you want brass or nickel plated.
 
I really like THR and the majotity of mebers are poite, and faily knowledgable, but I doubt if everyone is experienced enough for me to rely on for load data. Long ago I read a load given by a high post number member of a well known forum that turned out to be over one full grain of Unique over a max listed load. The post remained on the forum for at least 24 hrs. until the poster came back and fixed the post, apologising "my fat finger hit the wrong key". So, I established my "Rule #1"; I pay little (no) attention to any load data I see on any forum, any Pet Loads website, hear from any range rat, gun counter clerk, good intended friend or nice guy at the LGS or the Gun Shop Guru. I get 98% of my load data from published reloading manuals and some from powde manufacturer's websites. I started reloading waaaay pre web and got all my load data from published manuals (and Lee Loader data sheets), so it was no big deal to ignore free info on powder chrges. I have had one squib in 1970, and no Kabooms, in my entire reloading history and I'm not "Mr Reloder" expert. I just follow directions and don't guess about anything. I reload for 11 different calibers including 12 hndguns and 4 rifles and haven't runout of load options using pubished data...

Not bragging, just sharing my experience...
I read and listen to loads from other people and use data and my experience as a sounding board.
If their load is over max. I may work up to it. But I'm doing my own work. Not blindly following.
If it's a new to me gun or powder I'm starting at minimum no matter what.
 
I started reloading under the Obama shortage, so IMR 4227 was one of my first powders since H110 was fairly unobtainable near me, and I was loading for .357 magnum rifle and .30 Carbine for my M1 Carbine. I, too found it to be dirty in some revolver loads, but in a rifle or carbine, it really shines. It's right there in the name "Improved Military Rifle". IMR 4227 was originally intended to replace IMR 1204 in small capacity rifle cartridges. Along the lines, somebody figured out that it was also good for "magnum" pistol loads, but it really needed something to build pressure like a long barrel, heavy bullet, heavy crimp, or all three. I have used it for lots of things, even down to .32 H&R Magnum, but it spends the vast majority of time running through my rifles.
 
Thanks for the kind reminders to always vet data. I will and always do. Got a busy couple weeks at work, then a trip to Destin for a conference. Said that because it may take me a bit to get started on this. Hopefully I can get my Kimber this week.
 
AA-5 & Unique under the 125s will make good "not quite full power" loads even when loaded a grain or so under book max. I have loaded buckets of ammo in this power range. For me, this is the power level that makes shooing a 357 fun.

AA-9 or 296 under the 125 only if you really need full power.

Any of your fast powders will do fine for the wadcutters. This power level has an element of fun to it, but I tend to use this power level for serious practice with respect to reducing group sizes.
 
Last edited:
AA-5 & Unique under the 125s will make good "not quite full power" loads even when loaded a grain or so under book max. I have loaded buckets of ammo in this power range. For me, this is the power level that makes shooing a 357 fun. .

While the powder wasn't listed, would AA7 be a better powder for 357-125gr load? Would AA5 be best for 357-125gr cast bullet load?
 
While the powder wasn't listed, would AA7 be a better powder for 357-125gr load? Would AA5 be best for 357-125gr cast bullet load?

What is "best"?

#5 for low velocity, target load.
#7 for median load.
#9 for full magnum.

Many will skip #7 and load #5 and #9.
Others will load #7, both light and MAX.

The decision is yours.
 
Sorry to post twice in a row, but just to show how slow IMR 4227 is, I use an old load listed in IMR’s 2001 Reloaders Guide to load and shoot 55 gr .223 from an AR-15. It cycled the action perfectly and was fairly accurate at about 2700 fps.
I've done the same. But with 52 gr Speer bullets. It made a good varmint load.
If I ran suppressed. It would be my powder of choice. Because the relatively low charge weight would equal less fouling.
 
I posted to give away at fire sale some my extra rifle powder. Not really any takers.
I’ve driven from Florida to New York before. Drove from Melbourne to Syracuse. No offense - it’s beautiful countryside - but once was enough for me. I got happy feet as a youngster and got all that out of my system before my thirties. :)
 
I'd try to find a powder that splits the difference between WW-296 and WW-231 to get good performance out of the shorter barrel. It will still have a "Magnum Attitude" but not be insane like 296, and will remain accurate and controllable.
I use 231 for 38 SPL velocities and no more...
I use 296 for full tilt magnums, and no less.

For me, my favorite load for my 3" King Cobra is a
158gr Xtreme plated SWC w/ 8.0gr Power Pistol.
CCI small pistol primers, seated to cannelure to 1.580" OAL. Light taper crimp.

These are great "medium" magnum loads, and very accurate. They had almost as much noise as full house loads, but with a faster recoil impulse, but less felt overall recoil..... and, a quick muzzle flash that would definitely be blinding in low light conditions. (I definitely see BE-86 performing similar, but with less flash) from my experiences with PP and BE-86 in 9mm. Since these are just strictly "fun" loads, I could care less about the flash. Just the first run, and it's a keeper.
 
I'd try to find a powder that splits the difference between WW-296 and WW-231 to get good performance out of the shorter barrel. It will still have a "Magnum Attitude" but not be insane like 296, and will remain accurate and controllable.
I use 231 for 38 SPL velocities and no more...
I use 296 for full tilt magnums, and no less.

For me, my favorite load for my 3" King Cobra is a
158gr Xtreme plated SWC w/ 8.0gr Power Pistol.
CCI small pistol primers, seated to cannelure to 1.580" OAL. Light taper crimp.

These are great "medium" magnum loads, and very accurate. They had almost as much noise as full house loads, but with a faster recoil impulse, but less felt overall recoil..... and, a quick muzzle flash that would definitely be blinding in low light conditions. (I definitely see BE-86 performing similar, but with less flash) from my experiences with PP and BE-86 in 9mm. Since these are just strictly "fun" loads, I could care less about the flash. Just the first run, and it's a keeper.
8.4 grains of Silhouette with a 158 is your money maker. Flash suppressant included.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top