mcappys
Member
Ruger LCR 357, Speer Lawman 110gr JHP
357 Magnum as you're ccw
- Thread starter Arizonan
- Start date
- Status
ljnowell
Member
Curious where you got the load data for that load. Earlier you said 17 gr of 2400 from alliant they say 15gr is max under a 140gr gold dot. Seems like an awful hot load you are shooting.
Last edited:
MCgunner
Member
Comes from the Speer number 11 manual. I worked that load up many moons ago and have been shooting it for 30 years. Very accurate with the Speer 140 bullet. Both the Speer number 8 and number 11 manuals lists 17.5 grains as max. Lawyers get more paranoid in modern times. Powder company lawyers seem to be worse than bullet companies.
Hell, I shoot 14.5 grains of 2400 under a 158 grain cast, gas checked bullet. This is an old standby load that folks like Skeeter Skelton used to tout in the zines. 15 grains is powder puff under a 140 grain bullet. I have loaded (don't work that well in short barrels) 18 grains behind a 125 grain bullet. The Speer number 11 manual lists 19.5 as a max. The loads I low now were mostly worked up 30-45 years ago and still shoot well today. I was actually being 1/2 grain conservative on that 17.0 grain 2400 load with the 140 Speer.
And, BTW, I've owned a Chronograph for 30 years. That load has not changed performance in that time. The powder hasn't changed, just tort paranoia.
Last edited:
MCgunner
Member
I really don't think you could go 2.5 grains over pressure and not detect it with the copper crusher method. Heck, the cases probably wouldn't extract.
ljnowell
Member
The older manuals definitely had some hotter loads for 2400. I personally stick to current data and don't have any problems with the performance. When I chrono them they provide sufficient velocity.
It's up to each person though, I load done 45 colts that make people shake their head and refuse to shoot them.
ColtPythonElite
Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2011
- Messages
- 10,477
Yep, I loaded thousands of Blue Dot 125 gr JHP .357 rounds using the Speer #11...They sure we're stout.
Ranger Roberts
Become a THR contributing member!
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2012
- Messages
- 1,091
I will occasionally carry my SP101 if my clothing doesn't permit me to carry my EDC. It's a great carry gun and a real tack driver!
HankB
Member
My "always" gun is an S&W 340Sc stoked with Winchester .357 Mag 145 grain Silvertips. I carry it in a pocket holster . . . if I see a potential threat, casually putting my hand in my pocket allows me to grasp the gun without alarming casual passers by, and I'm only ~1/2 second away from "BANG!" if it becomes necessary.
ArchAngelCD
Member.
I have a S&W M640 that is scary accurate with those 145gr Winchester Silvertip .357 Magnum rounds. It gets only that ammo. I was able to buy 2 boxes of 50 rounds during the last run Winchester made.
MCgunner
Member
I wonder what pressures Buffalo Bore gets for their factory loads, loads that I can't/won't try to beat with my Speer manual! Buffalo Bore simply states that their loads are safe in ANY revolver chambered for the .357 magnum rounds, including J frames. If the SAAMI dehorned the .357, nobody told Buffalo Bore.
BUT, that makes ulitmate sense as to why SO many factory loads are so weak now days, if they're loaded to a lower pressure limit. Thanks for that bit of knowledge, but I ain't changing what ain't broke, my old standby loads. Skeeter Skelton must be rolling in his grave. I use his old standby 14.5 grains 2400 under 158 GC SWC as a utility/practice load and for hunting, have shot a few pigs and deer with it, though I normally practice with .38 specials. I reckon I'll stick with the .38s for practice in any J frame sized gun other than perhaps the very strong SP101 which can handle anything a K frame can and then some. The J frame magnums came along in the early 90s and, MAYBE (I'm just speculating) the lower pressure limit was to help limit wear on those guns. Cops had problems keeping even K frames serviceable through the 70s, why the L frame came along, stronger gun. Cops went to autos by the time the L frame came out, though.
Last edited:
ArchAngelCD
Member.
The K frames had a problem with screaming hot 125gr bullet loads, not all .357 Magnum loads.
I think you're right about SAAMI lowering the pressures to protect the ultra-light J frames that came out around the same time period.
I think you're right about SAAMI lowering the pressures to protect the ultra-light J frames that came out around the same time period.
MCgunner
Member
Yeah, it was a flame cutting and forcing cone erosion thing IIRC.
There was some forcing cone crack problems at the bottom where the flat is on the K frame that the L frame solves with a round forcing cone, more space in the cylinder window.
Pit4Brains
Member
When hunting, hiking around I carry my 686 with a 8 3/8 barrel. Not very practical for day to day carry. When I do carry, it's my trusty ol Desert Eagle in 9mm.
HankB
Member
From what I can determine (without an inside line to SAAMI) is that the current SAAMI pressure limit for .357 Mag is 35,000 PSI, measured with a piezo transducer. The old SAAMI pressure limit was around 46,000 CUP, measured with a copper crusher. There's no universal formula that I know of to convert the two, but in every other cartridge I can think of, current piezo PSI numbers are higher than the old CUP numbers.
I remember reading somewhere that SAAMI allows either PSI or CUP data to be used in .357 Mag, and that CUP standard results in hotter loads . . . but at least one fairly well respected gun writer insists that this isn't so, and only the test methods have changed. (I think he's wrong.)
But looking at old pressure tested data (from sources like DuPont, before they sold their powder business) the hottest old loads indeed are hotter than what's being recommended today.
I haven't been able to find definitive info from SAAMI online . . .
ArchAngelCD
Member.
That is probably true but if you look closely at the data they are trying to tell us you can reduce the charge weights 10% or 15% and still see the same or higher velocities. You can claim better testing methods for pressure but you can not tell me less powder will deliver higher velocities. Even though I'm a simple man and I am not a ballistics expert I know enough to know that just is not possible.
hankb,
go to saami.org for the old 1993 pressure/velocity data. there is where you can compare cup data to psi data. pistols and rifles.
suggest you read the preamble at the beginning to get a better understanding of what these ansi standards are all about. also, notice there are no standards for transducer testing equipment, or methods. i personally don't trust the transducer method. but, it's easier and cheaper, so guess which one is going to be used for pressure testing.
if you want to compare older cup standards to these "new" standards, the speer #11 reloading manual has the former standards.
murf
go to saami.org for the old 1993 pressure/velocity data. there is where you can compare cup data to psi data. pistols and rifles.
suggest you read the preamble at the beginning to get a better understanding of what these ansi standards are all about. also, notice there are no standards for transducer testing equipment, or methods. i personally don't trust the transducer method. but, it's easier and cheaper, so guess which one is going to be used for pressure testing.
if you want to compare older cup standards to these "new" standards, the speer #11 reloading manual has the former standards.
murf
mcgunner,
i think the pressures have been reduced to allow for the industry-wide trend: to go smaller, to cut cost by eliminating certain processes, to increase tollerances, to substitute cheaper materials.
i also think this "cost cutting" started back in 1964 when winchester ruined their reputation as a gun manufacturer.
murf
i think the pressures have been reduced to allow for the industry-wide trend: to go smaller, to cut cost by eliminating certain processes, to increase tollerances, to substitute cheaper materials.
i also think this "cost cutting" started back in 1964 when winchester ruined their reputation as a gun manufacturer.
murf
Black Knight
Member
Most of the handguns I cary concealed are 357 Magnums. I usually carry a 4" Colt Python, 6" Colt Python, 4" S&W 686, 4" S&W 28-2, or a 3" S&W 65. Yeah some are big but with the right clothing they are not difficult to conceal.
MCgunner
Member
I LOVE this Taurus 605 Poly I just got. I'd been carrying a 3" 66 as a belt gun, 35 ounces or some such. The Poly is 20 ounces and makes a huge difference in all day belt carry comfort. The barrel conceals under 1" shorter shirt, of course, or for me is less of a worry for flashing, and if I wanna, it carries IWB a LOT more comfortably than the 6 shooter. Top that off, it's a danged good shootin' gun. It IS a little heavier than the LCR, which helps tame recoil. Only thing I've found I don't like about it so far is lack of aftermarket grips and accessories like a hammer spring. The DA is very smooth, but a bit heavy. I'd like to lighten it up a might, but Wolff has no spring for it. The LCR does have a light, smooth trigger. It's a good gun, too, it's 13 ounces, though. The 605 Poly is a little easier to handle with heavy loads.
Yeah, sure, I can carry a bigger, heavier revolver, but all day comfort suffers and your choice of clothing is more limited, especially in south Texas in August.
Yeah, sure, I can carry a bigger, heavier revolver, but all day comfort suffers and your choice of clothing is more limited, especially in south Texas in August.
I am not carrying a revolver at the moment, but I do have them.
For a medium or large sized revolver, I will take nothing less than a 357 Magnum, in 3 inch barrel GP100 or larger.
9mm is my minimum for medium sized pistol or larger, and because of that, I do not have much confidence in 38 Special even in +P.
For a medium or large sized revolver, I will take nothing less than a 357 Magnum, in 3 inch barrel GP100 or larger.
9mm is my minimum for medium sized pistol or larger, and because of that, I do not have much confidence in 38 Special even in +P.
ljnowell
Member
Why would you have no confidence in 38 special? It's been killing people for over 100 years. It's been especially potent since the advent of modern bullet profiles. Even the old SWC is an effective bullet in 38 special.
MCgunner
Member
Yup, .38 is special. It's all I carried today, snubby in my pocket.
It's all I carried today, snubby in my pocket. - Status
Similar threads
