357 Magnum loading for Cowboy Action Shooting - component availability issues

[dcarr]

I used a lot of Unique, Clays, Bullseye, 700-X, Green Dot, Herco and Red Dot.

Then I struck gold

View attachment 1136870


MANY powders are good for what you want.

To use less powder and reduce recoil; load lighter bullets.
I use 125 gr, 115 gr, 105 gr, 98 gr and 95 gr.

The 98 gr powder coated RN has become my favorite. Loaded in .38 Spl brass.

You have MANY options.

looks like gold to me

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

This was my thought as well, but I have a PO Box and some company's won't ship to it. It's kind of funny, I live about 500 yards from the Post Office, but because our road isn't paved they won't deliver to our street.

Fed EX and UPS will sometimes deliver to our door, and sometimes to the PO Box, so be sure to check how they deliver and if they will deliver to a box.

chris

We’re in the same boat. The USPS won’t come down our road. There’s a big lock box on the Hwy but it gets busted into every month. Parasites looking for checks probably. One thing you can do is get a PO Box then pay a small fee to use the post office as our “physical address.” They’ll sign for packages and leave a call slip in your box. At least that’s how it works here. We have to use a delivery center though. The local post office is too small and understaffed.

 

[JimGnitecki]

[QUOTE="JimGnitecki, post: 12562654, member: 120061"
However, this Quickload table is based on a 158 g Lee CAST bullet, correct? My swaged Hornady 158g SWC (pn 10408) might give different results? Or similar?

Jim G

Swaged bullets should perform essentially the same as cast bullets provided they are loaded to the same seating depth. I just used the cast bullet out of habit. I re-ran the Titegroup table with the exact Hornady bullet and got the same performance with the same (0.312") seating depth. If I run the Hornady bullet with the same AOL, seating depth increases to 0.390" and velocities increase.

Cartridge          : .357 Magnum (SAAMI)
Bullet             : .358, 158, Hornady SWC 10408
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 1.590 inch = 40.39 mm
Barrel Length      : 6.0 inch = 152.4 mm
Powder             : Hodgdon TiteGroup

Step    Fill. Charge   Vel.  Energy   Pmax   Pmuz  Prop.Burnt B_Time
 %       %    Grains   fps   ft.lbs    psi    psi      %        ms

-40.0   25     3.00    734     189   10001   1875    100.0    1.070
-36.0   27     3.20    764     205   11151   1981    100.0    1.019
-32.0   29     3.40    794     221   12361   2087    100.0    0.972
-28.0   30     3.60    823     238   13630   2193    100.0    0.927
-24.0   32     3.80    851     254   14957   2299    100.0    0.886
-20.0   34     4.00    878     270   16343   2404    100.0    0.849
-16.0   36     4.20    904     287   17786   2509    100.0    0.816
-12.0   37     4.40    929     303   19288   2613    100.0    0.786
-08.0   39     4.60    954     319   20849   2717    100.0    0.758
-04.0   41     4.80    979     336   22468   2820    100.0    0.732
+00.0   42     5.00   1003     353   24146   2924    100.0    0.708
+04.0   44     5.20   1026     369   25884   3026    100.0    0.686
+08.0   46     5.40   1049     386   27682   3128    100.0    0.666
+12.0   47     5.60   1072     403   29541   3230    100.0    0.647
+16.0   49     5.80   1094     420   31462   3331    100.0    0.629  ! Near Maximum !
+20.0   51     6.00   1116     437   33445   3432    100.0    0.613  ! Near Maximum !

[/QUOTE]

P Flados: THANK-YOU! This is GREAT, and will help me a LOT. I can try several different loads between 3.0g and 3.7g and see where I find a good node.

Jim G

 

[Crunchy Frog]

I find Titegroup to be more “snappy” than other similar powders but I chronographed some .38 Special cowboy loads recently and found TG to be very consistent.

Here in the US I can buy cast bullets at a lower cost than the swaged bullets made by Hornady and Speer. Many vendors offer coated cast bullets than some shooters prefer.

 

[.45Coltguy]

I prefer the coated cast for my revolvers and my 1911-A1. Waaay cleaner and zero barrel fouling. Every bit as accurate also.

 

[JimGnitecki]

I find Titegroup to be more “snappy” than other similar powders but I chronographed some .38 Special cowboy loads recently and found TG to be very consistent.

Here in the US I can buy cast bullets at a lower cost than the swaged bullets made by Hornady and Speer. Many vendors offer coated cast bullets than some shooters prefer.

For CAS matches, the rules require lead bullets that are not jacketed and not plated, for safety (CAS tagrets are usually metal and at close range, so the rules specify no jacket or plating). So it's best to use bullets that do not have ANYTHING on them, including coatings, so you don't have to keep responding to "Your ammo is not pure lead". The gamier competitors, the same ones who make sure a crossdraw is executed with "the dance", can watch for this kind of stuff and purposefully interrupt your loading to rattle you before you shoot the stage.

Jim G

 

[.45Coltguy]

For CAS matches, the rules require lead bullets that are not jacketed and not plated, for safety (CAS tagrets are usually metal and at close range, so the rules specify no jacket or plating). So it's best to use bullets that do not have ANYTHING on them, including coatings, so you don't have to keep responding to "Your ammo is not pure lead". The gamier competitors, the same ones who make sure a crossdraw is executed with "the dance", can watch for this kind of stuff and purposefully interrupt your loading to rattle you before you shoot the stage.

Jim G

Ahh, info here regarding CAS and bullets I didn't know, as I am not a CAS shooter.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

The gamier competitors, the same ones who make sure a crossdraw is executed with "the dance", can watch for this kind of stuff and purposefully interrupt your loading to rattle you before you shoot the stage.

Jim G

Those kinds of people are why I don’t participate in organized competitions. Those kinds of shenanigans run counter to the purpose of CAS.

 

[Seedy Character]

For CAS matches, the rules require lead bullets that are not jacketed and not plated, for safety (CAS tagrets are usually metal and at close range, so the rules specify no jacket or plating). So it's best to use bullets that do not have ANYTHING on them, including coatings, so you don't have to keep responding to "Your ammo is not pure lead". The gamier competitors, the same ones who make sure a crossdraw is executed with "the dance", can watch for this kind of stuff and purposefully interrupt your loading to rattle you before you shoot the stage.

Jim G

There is ALWAYS "one of those".

We don't shoot "sanctioned" matches. 99% of us are there for FUN and comraderie.

I had "one of those" come up, just before I shot, telling me, "you do know Blackhawks aren't allowed in sanctioned matches, they aren't authentic?"

I laughed, "but your STAINLESS .357 IS authentic? This isnt a national sanctioned match and Blackhawks are allowed."

A couple of our shooters laughed. He hasn't been back.

Don't start none, won't be none.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

There is ALWAYS "one of those".

We don't shoot "sanctioned" matches. 99% of us are there for FUN and comraderie.

I had "one of those" come up, just before I shot, telling me, "you do know Blackhawks aren't allowed in sanctioned matches, they aren't authentic?"

I laughed, "but your STAINLESS .357 IS authentic? This isnt a national sanctioned match and Blackhawks are allowed."

A couple of our shooters laughed. He hasn't been back.

Don't start none, won't be none.

Yup. Club where I shot back in the late 90's told me my 1883 manufactured Simpson & Suhl German Reichsrevolver was disqualified because it had a safety and "genuine" Cowboy guns don't have safeties. I had proof the gun came from a cattle family in Dixie County that emigrated in the 1890's from Holland - so it was a genuine cowboy gun owned and used by genuine cowboys. Didn't matter. Must be the same kinda folks who run HOA's.

 

[JimGnitecki]

I did some "statistical analysis" on the 158g Hornady pn 10408 bullets, to see how consistent they are in weight, length, and diameter, and whether the NEWER batch of bullets I bought is the same or at leats close to the OLDER batch in these metrics.

I used proper tools. Here is the Mitutoyo caliper, which is one the best out there.



It display to 4 decimal digits, but NO digital caliper made is actually accurate to 4 digits. The good ones are accurate to 3 digits. Usually, the 4th digit does not even display all numbers (0 to 9), but rather simply a "0" or a "5".

Here is the Mitutoyo micrometer:



You have to use a mircometer for bullet (and case) diameter measurement, in order to get any accuracy. Micrometers are inherently more accurate than claipers, AND the WIDE jaw faces of the micrometer ensure that you are capturing the actual precise diameter.

Note that I have the micrometer mounted in a Mitutoyo "clamping base". Micrometer measurements are SO precise that the body temperature in your hands affects the reading of any truly accurate micrometer. The clamping base ensures that you touch only the rotating ratchet knob that applies the identically calibrated force to the tighenting of the jaws for each measurement.

Here are the results of weighing and measuring 15 bullets from the older batch and 15 bullets from the newer batch:

CAS 357 Mag bullets 158g SWC Hornady 10408 - Weight & Dimensions statistics

Weight Length Diameter
grains inches inches

OLD Batch
158.2 0.6905 0.35655
157.9 0.6840 0.35730
158.0 0.6825 0.35815
158.0 0.6865 0.35780
158.0 0.6885 0.35695
158.3 0.6895 0.35760
158.0 0.6875 0.35760
157.9 0.6845 0.35785
158.1 0.6825 0.35805
157.7 0.6870 0.35700
157.9 0.6835 0.35720
158.2 0.6830 0.35795
158.1 0.6880 0.35780
158.1 0.6870 0.35770
157.7 0.6805 0.35840

NEW Batch
157.4 0.6875 0.35720
157.2 0.6845 0.35750
157.4 0.6850 0.35850
157.4 0.6850 0.35810
157.6 0.6865 0.35715
157.4 0.6875 0.35805
157.3 0.6845 0.35785
157.4 0.6860 0.35800
157.6 0.6835 0.35890
157.5 0.6840 0.35770
157.4 0.6870 0.35750
157.3 0.6820 0.35815
157.4 0.6810 0.35810
157.5 0.6830 0.35825
157.4 0.6855 0.35780

TOTAL:
Average 157.7 0.6853 0.35776
Std Dev 0.3 0.0025 0.00051
Max 158.3 0.6905 0.35890
Min 157.2 0.6805 0.35655
Extreme 1.1 0.0100 0.00235

OlderBatch:
Average 158.0 0.6857 0.35759
Std Dev 0.2 0.0029 0.00050
Max 158.3 0.6905 0.35840
Min 157.7 0.6805 0.35655
Extreme 0.6 0.0100 0.00185

Newer Batch:
Average 157.4 0.6848 0.35792
Std Dev 0.1 0.0019 0.00047
Max 157.6 0.6875 0.35890
Min 157.2 0.6810 0.35715
Extreme 0.4 0.0065 0.00175

Note that:

For the entire population of bullets tested (old plus new batch):
Average weight was 157.7g
Standard deviaiton was jst 0.3g
The extreme spread between maximum and minimum weights was just 1.1g or about 7/10 of 1%. Plenty consistent for CAS.

The average length was 0.6857" with a standard deviation of just .0029" and an extreme spread of 0.0100". That extreme spread is notable, because it WILL affect peak pressure a bit, and thus also bullet velocity, if I am loading via COAL versus Base-to-gage, which depends on where the bullet seating die insert can grab the bullet when the bullet is a SWC shape. With the low pressure CAS loading a small increase in peak pressure is probably not critical. But the variation in bullet velocity will affect accuracy a bit, although not a lot since so much of the case volume is empty below the bullet.

I do not know much about modern unjacketed lead bullet consistency, since I last used unjacketed bullets a couple of decades ago. But the variation in diameter seems relatively large to me. The average diameter is 0.35776 so pretty much at .358" which is supposedly ideal for .357 Magnum. But a standard deviation of .00051" seems large for a bullet diameter variance, and the extreme spread of .00235", to me, sounds like too much. Am I wrong?

In comparing the older batch to the newer batch, it looks like the newer batch has less variaiton on the key metrics, BUT the weight on the newer batch is further from the nominal target of 158g, coming in at an average of 157.4g versus the older batch's dead-on 158.0g average. I guess the lower variation on the newer batch is an overall plus, but the 0.6g "miss' on the AVERAGE weight in the new batch seems like, well, a "miss".

The slight variances between the old and new batches means that I should NOT mix the 2 batches, but rather fire them in 2 distinct batches for optimized overall consistency within any individual box of ammo loaded.

Anyway, that's what I found when examining the bullets.

Next, I need to see how consistently the Dillon 750 can throw the powder charges when the powder is TiteGroup. Note from the Quickload analysis kindly done by P Flados, that each 0.1 grain change in powder seems to cause about a 15 fps variation in muzzle velocity, so any inconsistency in the powder charge WILL have SOME effect on bullet velocity and trajectory, and also on accuracy nodes.

Jim G

 

[JimGnitecki]

There is ALWAYS "one of those".

We don't shoot "sanctioned" matches. 99% of us are there for FUN and comraderie.

I had "one of those" come up, just before I shot, telling me, "you do know Blackhawks aren't allowed in sanctioned matches, they aren't authentic?"

I laughed, "but your STAINLESS .357 IS authentic? This isnt a national sanctioned match and Blackhawks are allowed."

A couple of our shooters laughed. He hasn't been back.

Don't start none, won't be none.

That last line is good advice. But sometimes another guy or gal is DETERMINED to do that stuff. A lot of people don't know that one of the top shooters in CAS had a CAS firearms importer create a model using HIS sight specifications for the front and rear sights, and some other mods, which give him, and anyone else who buys that model, an advantage over other shooters. No kidding.

Jim G

 

[JimGnitecki]

GREAT news on how TiteGroup meters ouit of the powder system on my Dillon XL750! It meters PERFECTLY. I dio mean PERFECTLY:

After dialing in 3.2 grains (MANY 360 degree turns of the adjustment bolt on the Dillon powder measure), I starting dropping loads one after another, taking the powder pan off the Chargemaster Lite each time as I added the next drop of powder to the powder pan, placing the powder pan back on the scale, and noting the readings on my Chargemaster Lite as the charges accumulated.

I used this procedure since the scale only reads to the nearest 0.1 grain, and I wanted to maximize accuracy by letting the TOTAL weight for all consecutive charges accumulate on the display. That way, the 0.1 grain display granularity of the Chargemaster Lite, AND the unknown actual weight accuracy on very small weight items, would be mitigated.

It turns out that I needn't have worried. The scale readout went from 0.0 to 32.0 grains EXACTLY as I added a total of 10 drops, AND in fact, EVERY reading getting to the 32.0g was EXACTLY 3.2 grains higher than the prior one! You can't ask for anyhting better than that. (Other than buying a really expensive scale and probably seeing some variances wtth each individual reading that the Chargemaster Lite's resolution capabilities might not detect).

When I was using Trail Boss, the dispensed displayed weight varied slight from load to load -about 0.1g, which was also very good given Trail Boss's low density. But Trail Boss had to become "old news" since it is no longer available anywhere I could find.

So, now I know the Hornady 10408 bullets are reasonably consistent, and the TiteGroup powder meters very accurately.

The next step is to compare the new Starline cases that just arrived in the mail to the Hornady cases I already have, and see if there are any dimensional differences that would make it wise to keep the 300 new Starline cases separated from the 190 Hornady cases I already had. I am hoping any dimensional differences will be insignificant so that I can freely mix the Starline with the Hornady.

One thing I canNOT determine is if there are any meaningful differences in the metallurgy of the two brands. If so, that could warrant keeping them separated since they might react differently when fired (more or less expansion, more or less springiness, different rates of primer hole growth, etc). Such differences might not show on a CAS target, but might show if I ever use the CAS firearms for other disciplines.

Does anyone have any experience with the two brands of cases (Hornady and Starline)?

Jim G

 

[JimGnitecki]

Following up on the case questions raised above:

My pre-existing once to twice fired Hornady cases, and my brand new Starline cases, do not appear to have any signfiicant difference from each other, other than the already fired and resized Hornady cases have a slightly smaller mouth diameter than the unfired and unsized Starline cases.

The average overall length of the brand new Starline cases is .0006" longer than the average fired Hornday cases, and that difference is meaningless given the actual attainable accuracy of even a high quality Mitutoyo digital caliper.

Similarly, the average external diameter at the base of the new Starline cases is just .0003" larger than the average fired Hornady cases, and that difference is meaningless given the actual attainable accuracy of even a high quality Mitutoyo digital caliper.

The average wall thickness of the new Starline cases is just .0005" larger than the average fired Hornday cases, and that difference is meaningless given the actual attainable accuracy of even a high quality Mitutoyo digital caliper.

The only reliable difference between the new Starline cases and the fired and sized Hornady cases is in the diameter at the mouth of the cases, where the Hornday cases are on average .0022" smaller. This makes perfect sense though, given that the Hornady cases have already been sized, whereas the Starline cases have not.

My fired but not yet resized Hornady cases run an average .3755" and higher, versus the sized but not yet re-fired Hornady cases at .3712" and the brand new unfired Starline cases at .3734".

Given all the above, I see no reason to keep the Hornady cases separate from the Starline, unless someone here experienced with both can tell me their metallurgy is different enough to warrant separation because they might react differently when fired (more or less expansion, more or less springiness, different rates of primer hole growth, etc).

Jim G

 

[Crunchy Frog]

For CAS matches, the rules require lead bullets that are not jacketed and not plated, for safety (CAS tagrets are usually metal and at close range, so the rules specify no jacket or plating). So it's best to use bullets that do not have ANYTHING on them, including coatings, so you don't have to keep responding to "Your ammo is not pure lead".
Jim G

Here’s the applicable SASS rule governing bullets: “May not be jacketed, semi-jacketed, hollow point, plated, or gas checked. It must be all lead. Moly-Disulfide, polymer coated bullets, or equivalents are acceptable.”

Coated bullets are clearly allowed and have been for years. They are actually quite common and are more popular every year.

Never let ignorant people set the tone. If someone is spouting nonsense about what they think someone else is doing wrong they will be corrected.

 

[Crunchy Frog]

There is ALWAYS "one of those".

We don't shoot "sanctioned" matches. 99% of us are there for FUN and comraderie.

I had "one of those" come up, just before I shot, telling me, "you do know Blackhawks aren't allowed in sanctioned matches, they aren't authentic?"

I laughed, "but your STAINLESS .357 IS authentic? This isnt a national sanctioned match and Blackhawks are allowed."
.

I’m sorry you had this experience. Assuming you were at a SASS match the fellow was dead wrong.

The winner of the first End of Trail match used a Ruger Blackhawk. EOT begat SASS, and Blackhawks and other adjustable sighted revolvers have always been legal under SASS rules. There are some categories that require fixed sights but Blackhawks are SASS-legal. That means at any match up to and including the World Championship.

SASS has rules. So do tennis and bridge. Clearly defined and consistently applied rules help participants know what to do.

When people start making pronouncements about rules that only exist between their ears, we have a problem. We don’t tolerate that in my club, and it’s not consistent with the “Spirit of the Game”.

 

[lordpaxman]

Titegroup checks off a lot of your requirements, metering in either a rotary or shuttle is excellent. Case fill, on the other hand, well, just make sure you visually check before seating a bullet, or have a lock out die or powder check if possible.

Does anyone have any experience with the two brands of cases (Hornady and Starline)?

I run a range mix in my .38/.357 so I just examine them as I’m loading to see if there’s any issue. I’ve only had to throw out case splits, I’ve never seen a primer pocket problem but I load at the low to middle side of things. For bolt rifle I segregate cases, but not for pistol. Bullseye shooters in my club do, but that’s a different crowd.

 

[JimGnitecki]

Titegroup checks off a lot of your requirements, metering in either a rotary or shuttle is excellent. Case fill, on the other hand, well, just make sure you visually check before seating a bullet, or have a lock out die or powder check if possible.

I run a range mix in my .38/.357 so I just examine them as I’m loading to see if there’s any issue. I’ve only had to throw out case splits, I’ve never seen a primer pocket problem but I load at the low to middle side of things. For bolt rifle I segregate cases, but not for pistol. Bullseye shooters in my club do, but that’s a different crowd.

Yes, I am running a Dillon Powder Check die with its irritatingly loud alarm.

Yes, my Hornady and Starline cases are SO dimensionally similar that I really don't want to segregate them, UNLESS someone here tells me that the metallurgy is different enough that they behave differently with multiple firings.

Jim G

 

[Seedy Character]

That last line is good advice. But sometimes another guy or gal is DETERMINED to do that stuff. A lot of people don't know that one of the top shooters in CAS had a CAS firearms importer create a model using HIS sight specifications for the front and rear sights, and some other mods, which give him, and anyone else who buys that model, an advantage over other shooters. No kidding.

Jim G

Gamers gonna game
If you ain't cheating, you ain't winning
People are pathetic

 

[dcarr]

Gamers gonna game
If you ain't cheating, you ain't winning
People are pathetic

The last can be particularly true

 

[Crunchy Frog]

Gamers gonna game
If you ain't cheating, you ain't winning
People are pathetic

I have been shooting SASS for 13 years. I don’t see people cheating. Does it happen, ever? Sure. If I were willing to cheat to win I would pick a game where there is a reward for winning. There’s no money or valuable prizes in CAS.

It is something of a myth that only people with highly modified guns win matches. You could lend me the most gee-whiz equipment available and I doubt it would affect my place in the scoresheet. One of the overall winners at End of Trail used Ruger New Vaqueros with a spring kit. Do most top shooters have mods done? Sure. Is that why they win? Absolutely not. It’s like any other endeavor-a little bit of talent and lots and lots of work.

 

[JimGnitecki]

I have been shooting SASS for 13 years. I don’t see people cheating. Does it happen, ever? Sure. If I were willing to cheat to win I would pick a game where there is a reward for winning. There’s no money or valuable prizes in CAS.

It is something of a myth that only people with highly modified guns win matches. You could lend me the most gee-whiz equipment available and I doubt it would affect my place in the scoresheet. One of the overall winners at End of Trail used Ruger New Vaqueros with a spring kit. Do most top shooters have mods done? Sure. Is that why they win? Absolutely not. It’s like any other endeavor-a little bit of talent and lots and lots of work.

Yeah, but when I look analytically at the issue, I realize that not all mods people do are for "gaming". Sometimes they may be pretty desirable, or even a necessity for that shooter to be able to enjoy that particular sport.

In my own case, I could easily self-justify modding the sights on my 2 Cimarron original model Peacemaker replicas. I really don't expect to win even local club matches, or care if I do or not. I simply enjoy the game, especially the costuming, the humour, and the spirit of the game. But those "authentic" replica sights, a thin rounded blade front sight that gleams in the sunlight, and a 1-1/4 inch groove in the top strap actually make it HARD for me to line up the overall sight picture at age 72. That's BEFORE the left windage and high elevation POI versus POA these sights happen to deliver - on both pistols, but a bit different on each as well!

I will not hesitate to correct the sights somehow (beyond an ammunition load change which might conceivably help) if its possible to do so without spending a fortune. I personally would not see that as gaming, but I am sure there are folks who would say I should shoot it like it would have come from the (1870s) factory, just to be "correct". Now if a shooter has a pair of these and butchers the handguns by mounting modern target sights in dovetails cut into the barrle and top strap, I'd think that a pair of Rugers or Freedom Arms revolvers might have been a less jarring idea!

Jim G

 

[nofendertom]

I would think that some old time gunslingers put a file to their front sights to correct POI.

 

[JimGnitecki]

I would think that some old time gunslingers put a file to their front sights to correct POI.

Yeah, but these front sights are very narrow to begin with! VERY hard to see already, and filing them would make them even harder to see and align, AND make them more likely to bend or break if impacted. The front sight on this model measures out, with a digital caliper, as being onlky .064" wide! If I filed off the .032" I mentioned above, that would get it down to only .032" ! That's 1/32" of an inch!

I think I know now why most gunfights were held at very short distances between opponents. It would be embarrassing to report that "Sheriff Jones and Bad Bart emptied their revolvers at each other on Main Street, and neither was hurt".

Jim G

 

[Seedy Character]

Some seem to have a totally different concept of "gaming".


I will never "win" a match, my age, eyesight, arthritis, and general condition make sure of that. I shoot Cowboy for my FUN, my practice, my enjoyment, my comraderie.
If a trigger job, adjustable sights, light loads; adds to my enjoyment, that is not gaming.
If something is done, contrary to the rules , trying to be deceptive, or throw other's concentration off; to gain an advantage; that is gaming.
To game when monetary value is attained; is THEFT. When no monetary value is involved, just being called winner is a narcissistic azzhat.