.357 Loads

[GeoDudeFlorida]

With an accent on "and heavier".

I've never understood the fascination with lightweight (125-130) grain bullets in 357 mag. To each his own, I suppose.

You had to have lived through the Lee Jurras/SuperVel years to understand.
A 125gr JHP at ~1350fps makes an impressive wound cavity at any range inside the 100yd line. The recoil isn’t terrible and the risk of top-strap flame-cutting is negligible. A steady diet of 296 may be a little unkind to the forcing cones of certain makers guns but that’s not a universal problem.
It depends on what you want to put a hole in.

 

[Hooda Thunkit]

You had to have lived through the Lee Jurras/SuperVel years to understand.
A 125gr JHP at ~1350fps makes an impressive wound cavity at any range inside the 100yd line. The recoil isn’t terrible and the risk of top-strap flame-cutting is negligible. A steady diet of 296 may be a little unkind to the forcing cones of certain makers guns but that’s not a universal problem.
It depends on what you want to put a hole in.

I did live through those years. And, Lee Jurras just died maybe 5-6 year's ago.

It's just a continuation of the age-old argument: light and fast vs slow and heavy.

I do realize the points of the argument for the light/fast side. I'm in the other camp.

The correct one.

 

[Riomouse911]

I’m a 6.5 gr Unique/158 gr SWC guy for most of my .357 loads. Just enough boom to know you are shooting more than a .38 without beating up my K frame .357’s.

With AA9 check your load books. There are lots of good loads for that powder, I use it for boomers using 165, 178 and 200 gr bullets in my 686+ and GP-100 .357’s.

Stay safe.

 

[Barmcd]

Shooting one box of factory .357 loads is what started me in reloading! They just were not that fun...

Forget about velocity, you're simply looking for "feel" in the recoil.

Slower powders spread the recoil over a longer period of time. More of a "push". Faster powders seem to "bite" or "snap" with their recoil. Think shotgun vs rifle...

Having shot HP-38 and Titegroup, I don't think you'll find what you're looking for there. Lighter loads of 2400 satisfied my search for a manageable load. Lyman lists some reasonable loads, recommend you start there.

That's good to know, thanks.

 

[Walkalong]

They have brass for each one of those loads
Slow 38sc
1k fps 38spl
1200ish 357 mag brass.

Yes.

And for my .357 Mag revolvers, it’s .357 Mag brass.

I have plenty of .38 Spl and .357 Mag cases, I’ve been picking them up at the range for decades, and I likely don’t shoot as much as many of you, not like when I was younger.

Consolidation isn’t something I try to do. I get it, just don’t do it.

 

[Walkalong]

This approach seems the best because of a reduction in components used, the ability to control pressure for optimum burn, and reduced position sensitivity.

As posted, I don’t try to reduce components used, although my .38 Spl/.357 Mag bullet usage does overlap, I can get optimum burn with.357 cases, and while yes, the .38 case has slightly less volume, it’s still a challenge reducing position sensitivity because of its volume to charge ratio. I overcame that to my satisfaction with all three as well. The midrange load was the toughest and took the most experimenting.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

I did live through those years. And, Lee Jurras just died maybe 5-6 year's ago.

It's just a continuation of the age-old argument: light and fast vs slow and heavy.

I do realize the points of the argument for the light/fast side. I'm in the other camp.

The correct one.

I’m bipartisan.
It just depends on how I want to use the tool. Sometimes you want a sledgehammer and sometimes you want a trim hammer. The two are not interchangeable.

 

[Barmcd]

While I appreciate the advice on other powders, I'm going to start with what I have on hand. Since I have 8 lbs of Accurate No. 9, I'm going to start there.

This is what I found on the Hogdon website. Their test barrel is 10".

Powder	1100 FPS	1150 FPS	1200 FPS	1250 FPS	1300 FPS	1350 FPS
Accurate No. 9			12.4	12.9	13.4	13.8

This is Hornady data using an 8" barrel.

Powder	1000 FPS	1050 FPS	1100 FPS	1150 FPS	1200 FPS	1250 FPS
Accurate No. 9	9.7	10.1	10.6	11	11.5

I do wonder why Hogdon says it takes 12.4 gr. to achieve 1200 FPS out of a 10" test barrel while Hornady only needs 11.5 gr. to get the same velocity out of an 8" barrel. I suppose it has to do with the powder burn rate. In any case, I'm going to start with 9.7 gr. and work up to see what happens in my S&W 681 with 4" barrel. I have a 6" barrel S&W model 19, but don't shoot a lot of magnum loads in that gun. How does that sound?

 

[AJC1]

While I appreciate the advice on other powders, I'm going to start with what I have on hand. Since I have 8 lbs of Accurate No. 9, I'm going to start there.

This is what I found on the Hogdon website. Their test barrel is 10".

Powder	1100 FPS	1150 FPS	1200 FPS	1250 FPS	1300 FPS	1350 FPS
Accurate No. 9			12.4	12.9	13.4	13.8

This is Hornady data using an 8" barrel.

Powder	1000 FPS	1050 FPS	1100 FPS	1150 FPS	1200 FPS	1250 FPS
Accurate No. 9	9.7	10.1	10.6	11	11.5

I do wonder why Hogdon says it takes 12.4 gr. to achieve 1200 FPS out of a 10" test barrel while Hornady only needs 11.5 gr. to get the same velocity out of an 8" barrel. I suppose it has to do with the powder burn rate. In any case, I'm going to start with 9.7 gr. and work up to see what happens in my S&W 681 with 4" barrel. I have a 6" barrel S&W model 19, but don't shoot a lot of magnum loads in that gun. How does that sound?

I love me some #9. With a 158 jacketed you should be very happy between 13.5-14.2. Works well in 4" and 16" I've been as high as the Lyman max of 14.9, and those are real spicy.

 

[41 Mag]

One of my favorite bullets was the 146gr Speer sjhp swc, before it was discontinued, then I gravitated to the Remington 158gr SJHP. I loved those scalloped jackets they used to use. Nowadays those have disappeared as well in component form anyway.

When the Remington disappeared I had loads for everything 38 SPL thru 44 mag, and since I had started casting about then I picked up a MP 359-640 which is VERY similar in shape to those Remington bullets. Didn't take but a few charge changes and they were rocking right along from my GP-100'S.

Me personally, I load the magnums to magnum loads. Just never saw a reason to download them. My cast from the above mold drop at 160grs with my alloy. Loaded into 357 cases over 13gr of AA-9 for an average of around 1275fps, and they shoot great and hit with authority.

The great thing about that particular mold is the bullets ha e two crimp grooves, one for 38s a d the other for 357s. Or one could use a longer or shorter seating depth for a shorter cylinder.

If one might be looking to try some give GT Bullets a look here, 165 gr hollow point

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

While I appreciate the advice on other powders, I'm going to start with what I have on hand. Since I have 8 lbs of Accurate No. 9, I'm going to start there.

This is what I found on the Hogdon website. Their test barrel is 10".

Powder	1100 FPS	1150 FPS	1200 FPS	1250 FPS	1300 FPS	1350 FPS
Accurate No. 9			12.4	12.9	13.4	13.8

This is Hornady data using an 8" barrel.

Powder	1000 FPS	1050 FPS	1100 FPS	1150 FPS	1200 FPS	1250 FPS
Accurate No. 9	9.7	10.1	10.6	11	11.5

I do wonder why Hogdon says it takes 12.4 gr. to achieve 1200 FPS out of a 10" test barrel while Hornady only needs 11.5 gr. to get the same velocity out of an 8" barrel. I suppose it has to do with the powder burn rate. In any case, I'm going to start with 9.7 gr. and work up to see what happens in my S&W 681 with 4" barrel. I have a 6" barrel S&W model 19, but don't shoot a lot of magnum loads in that gun. How does that sound?

Which bullet?

 

[Barmcd]

Which bullet?

158 gr Hornady XTP

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

158 gr Hornady XTP

The “Hodgdon’s” data is actually the old Western data, which was actually the old Accurate Arms data. Accurate did their own testing but tended to lean towards hot loading data that focused on velocity and energy. Hornady tests just for their bullets and tends towards lighter loads that focus on accuracy. Accurate Arms was trying to sell powder; Hornady is trying to sell bullets. Hornady doesn’t publish pressures. Hodgdon’s doesn’t perform testing (unless things have changed recently).
That’s why the loading tables are so different from publisher to publisher.
HTH.

 

[AJC1]

The “Hodgdon’s” data is actually the old Western data, which was actually the old Accurate Arms data. Accurate did their own testing but tended to lean towards hot loading data that focused on velocity and energy. Hornady tests just for their bullets and tends towards lighter loads that focus on accuracy. Accurate Arms was trying to sell powder; Hornady is trying to sell bullets. Hornady doesn’t publish pressures. Hodgdon’s doesn’t perform testing (unless things have changed recently).
That’s why the loading tables are so different from publisher to publisher.
HTH.

How about any post 90s data in.psi is significantly reduced because the pocket pistol j frames couldn't take it... that's the history I'm following at least

 

[DMW1116]

I thought you were looking for just the heavier bullets. I also use 125 grain XTP and cast bullets from my 357 Magnum. I don't use 38 Special cases much. For some reason they just don't seem to shoot very well from my Blackhawk. I do use upper end 38 Special loads in 357 Magnum cases. I have some options you might try. I don't have light loads for 125 grain and 158 grain XTP bullets, but I do for same weight cast loads.

125 grain XTP - near max charge of HS-6 according to Hornady. These shoot accurately and don't beat me up. The velocity is near 1400 fps.
125 grain cast and coated RNFP - these seem to work best with a minimum charge of CFE-Pistol or W231. Velocity is on the 1000-1100 fps range, based on Hodgden's data.
158 grain XTP - again, a near max charge using 2400 powder. These are pretty stout, especially off a rest. Standing off-hand, they're not too bad. Velocity is near 1200 fps, based on Hornady data.
158 grain cast and coated SWC - These are right on the line of fun. Data came from the Lyman Cast Bullet Manual and uses a near max charge of 2400. Max for these is about 13.5 grains and I use 13.1. These provide all the magnum I want to deal with for a fun range load. I've shot them out to 50 yards and they'll hold the 9 ring of a Bullseye Pistol target (5.5"). The other loads will too probably, but I haven't shot them that far.

 

[J-Bar]

Alliant BE-86 is considered by some to be the clean updated Unique. It plays well in my .38s and .357s, meters well through my Dillon powder measure. The fellow who sold me a pound to try said he likes it in his 10mm, for what it's worth. Alliant's reloader guide says a 158 grain lead RNFP over 8.1 grains of BE-86 produces a MV of 1156 fps in the .357 Magnum. I load 5.0 grains under my home cast 158 RNFPs for a pleasant plinking round. I don't have a chrony; your guess on MV is as good as mine.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

How about any post 90s data in.psi is significantly reduced because the pocket pistol j frames couldn't take it... that's the history I'm following at least

That would about when Accurate came out with their numbers, IIRC. So, yes, both would be correct.
Then again, my memory isn’t what it never was so I could be misremembering.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

One of my favorite bullets was the 146gr Speer sjhp swc, before it was discontinued, then I gravitated to the Remington 158gr SJHP.

That was my favorite for years. Then I switched to the 160gr. When it disappeared I switched to the Remington 158gr.
Now I’m looking for the Sierra’s I replaced the Remington with.

 

[AJC1]

That was my favorite for years. Then I switched to the 160gr. When it disappeared I switched to the Remington 158gr.
Now I’m looking for the Sierra’s I replaced the Remington with.

I've been looking for the Sierra 158 since I started reloading, never seen one in person. Looking for the Speer to try out, haven't seen them either.

 

[41 Mag]

That was my favorite for years. Then I switched to the 160gr. When it disappeared I switched to the Remington 158gr.
Now I’m looking for the Sierra’s I replaced the Remington with.

And that was the turn of events that really got me to double down on casting my own. When we had the first clearing house buy up back in the 90s during Clinton, things got sparse, then 08, things got screwed up again, but it really didn't effect me much, but between the first and now several good bullets have either been discontinued or have become unobtainable.

My goal with casting initially was just to pour the Lee 452-300 RF and feed my 454, but it quickly became to be able to pour my own duplicate or as close as I could cobble up the HP's I use in others. I know that the SWC, and RFN are both used and have been used for hunting purposes, but I wanted the expanding option. It took a bit of work, trial and error, lots of scrubbed barrels, but I managed to work it out and they do just fine on most critters. Sure are cheaper in the long run than Gold Dots in every caliber, and are usually available on demand.

 

[tominboise]

Zero sells decent JHP bullets. I used to buy bulk 158gr JHP bullets from Midway back in the day (late 1980's). I have no idea who made them, but they shot OK. Remington SJHP bullets were also pretty good but I have no idea if they are even available anymore.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

I've been looking for the Sierra 158 since I started reloading, never seen one in person. Looking for the Speer to try out, haven't seen them either.

Sierra has the 158’s on their site for $35/100. I’ve been looking for the 140gr JHP. Every time I put a couple of boxes in my cart by the time I get to checkout it says they’re not available.
The 140gr over 8gr of Unique is good for 1300fps out of my RBH. That’s good for 50yds on Whitetail.

 

[BBarn]

While I appreciate the advice on other powders, I'm going to start with what I have on hand. Since I have 8 lbs of Accurate No. 9, I'm going to start there.

This is what I found on the Hogdon website. Their test barrel is 10".

Powder	1100 FPS	1150 FPS	1200 FPS	1250 FPS	1300 FPS	1350 FPS
Accurate No. 9			12.4	12.9	13.4	13.8

This is Hornady data using an 8" barrel.

Powder	1000 FPS	1050 FPS	1100 FPS	1150 FPS	1200 FPS	1250 FPS
Accurate No. 9	9.7	10.1	10.6	11	11.5

I do wonder why Hogdon says it takes 12.4 gr. to achieve 1200 FPS out of a 10" test barrel while Hornady only needs 11.5 gr. to get the same velocity out of an 8" barrel. I suppose it has to do with the powder burn rate. In any case, I'm going to start with 9.7 gr. and work up to see what happens in my S&W 681 with 4" barrel. I have a 6" barrel S&W model 19, but don't shoot a lot of magnum loads in that gun. How does that sound?

When I see data discrepancy this large (one source's max powder charge is below another source's starting powder charge), I select another powder unless the reason for the discrepancy is clear. In most instances there are several loads/sources that are in better general agreement.

 

[Barmcd]

Zero sells decent JHP bullets. I used to buy bulk 158gr JHP bullets from Midway back in the day (late 1980's). I have no idea who made them, but they shot OK. Remington SJHP bullets were also pretty good but I have no idea if they are even available anymore.

I've got 500 Zero 125 gr jacketed soft point bullets I planned to use for38 special. I've been using 125 gr Barry's Bullets flat nose for 38 special and thought I'd see how the Zero bullets work in that application.

 

[Barmcd]

When I see data discrepancy this large (one source's max powder charge is below another source's starting powder charge), I select another powder unless the reason for the discrepancy is clear. In most instances there are several loads/sources that are in better general agreement.

Yeah, I don't know what to make of that. I loaded six rounds of each load starting at the bottom of Hornady's data through the top end of Hogdon's data. I expect I'll find a load I like before I get to the high end of Hogdon's data. I use CFE Pistol for all my autoloaders and Accurate Nr. 5 for 38 and 44 special and 45 Colt. I'd like to use the same powder for .357 and 44 mag whether its Accurate Nr. 9, H110, HS6 or whatever.