Best high velocity .357 powder using standard primers.

Status
Not open for further replies.

PO2Hammer

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
4,122
Location
MINNESOTA
I've been loading .357 for many years but all my loads have been mid range or light loads.
Now I'm interested in full or near full power loads using 158 grain jacketed bullets. This will be for 4" revolvers primarily and also carbines. Good metering would be a big plus. I would like to avoid magnum primers. Cold weather (below zero cold) performance is important. I think that rules out H110/W296 and Lil'Gun from what I've read in Handloader magazine.

2400?

SR 4756?

300-MP?
 
2400 would be a good choice. AA#7 or Power Pistol will do a good job with less powder, but are probably not juicy enough for what you want. You also might try AA4100.

Why don't you want to buy some SPM primers and just go with 296? Primers are cheaper than experimenting with new powders. (I like to experiment, but it looks like you might not)
 
2400 would be a good choice. AA#7 or Power Pistol will do a good job with less powder, but are probably not juicy enough for what you want. You also might try AA4100.

Why don't you want to buy some SPM primers and just go with 296? Primers are cheaper than experimenting with new powders. (I like to experiment, but it looks like you might not)
Why didn't you mention AA#9? You went from AA#7 and jumped over AA#9 to AA4100.
 
I would choose AA#9 or 2400. I found that 2400 is more flexible than #9, but at the mid to upper end of the load data #9 works really well with standard pistol primers. I think for cold temperatures 2400 is more consistent than #9 with standard primers, but I have not confirmed this.
I have found AA#7 worked well for me at the lower end of the load data with jacket bullets in 357 mag. with standard primers, I have not tried #7 at cold temps.
I would like know more about these powders and how temperature affects them, if I had more time I would explore this.
 
I'm new to this, why would one not want to use magnum primers? I mostly ask because they are generally easier to find locally than Small Pistol.
 
I'm new to this, why would one not want to use magnum primers? I mostly ask because they are generally easier to find locally than Small Pistol.
a lot of people think that the current group of Washington buttmunches are going to be re-elected as the economy is improving juuuuuust enough...
they're buying up everything.. guns, ammo & reloading components included..

so if a certain component becomes unavailable, they're developing contingency plans..

my plan is archery..
they're less likely to see bows and arrows as a threat..
Agincourt has been forgotten...
 
Since I can't sleep tonight, I thought I would spend my insomnia moments offering my assistence.

Alliant's has data for 300 MP uses a Federal #100, which is a standard small pistol primer. But I feel confident that most would agree, Federal primers would not be the primer of choice for high operating pressure loads. This is primarily because they are so soft, thus making them suseptable to leakage or punching when exposed to full magnum operating pressures. My initial choice here, would be a CCI 550, with my second choice a Wichester small pistol magnum.

The best possible powders capable of achieving your performance goal, are going to be slow burning types. Full house loads, and especially those being used with heavy jacketed bullets, are going require slow burning powders, and magnum primers for cosistent and safe operating pressures.

2400 is certainly capable of lower to mid range magnum performance, but to try and achieve maximum obtainable velocities is going to put you on thin ice regarding operating pressures when topping out at maximum obtainable performance. It's a powder many love and use for achieving magnum performance, but it still falls a little short of what 296 / H110 can do at mid range data, and without unpredictably pushing the pressure envelope. So stear clear of fast burning powders, and even mid range burn rates aren't even going to get you there without some elevated pressures concerns.

I lived in South Dakota for about 7 years, so my experience with sub zero operating conditions and slow burning powders is on target to your concerns. In this regard, any powder that fits the bill, is going to require a magnum primer to provide acceptable ignition, and consistent burn characteristics. The extreme cold enviroments you contend with, are clearly justifiable concern. And for those who have never lived and shot firearms in conditions as extremely cold as South Dakota, my first experience with minus 80-90 degrees below zero chill factors, froze the entire firing pin mechanism in under 1 minute on my Rem. 870's. My Son's and I tried everything we could think of to eliminate the issue, but to no avail what so ever. Nature won that battle hands down!

Now for consistent full house magnum performance, 296/H110 with a CCI-550 primer has met my full hous magnum goals without ever experiencing a single issue for more than 30 years now. 296/H110 are specifically designed to get you maximum obtainable velocity while safely doing so. In fact, the work up I perform with those powders, is unrelated to pressure. I have justifiably always felt safe just pickng the charge I want for those two magnum propellants because they don't really produce much of a noticable difference within the published load range. Do not mis construe that statement to imply that skipping a proper work is not necessary with them. I'm only relating my personal experience with them.

GS
 
Related question.

Which magnum primer would you choose for sensitivity and good igniting power?

I do have some Rem. 5-1/2 primers in my stash, but have read that the only difference between 5-1/2's and their standard primer is a thicker cup, not better igniting power. That would be counter productive in extreme cold (Minnesota) when hammer fall might be a little sluggish.

Winchester primers are for standard and magnum loads and are readily available now. Are they hotter than a CCI 500 or a Federal 100?

I don't see Federal SPP magnums very often.

Sounds like 2400 is for me, I don't need top velocity, just want solid powder to drive a 158 XTP to expansion in any weather. I've been leaning towards Federal 100s for their sensitivity and was trying to match a powder to it.
 
AA 5 and 7 work great with standard primers. gives good 1250 to 1340 fps with 158gr bullets. also tried vit N340 noticed less powder more fps efficient load with that one. with 4 inch barrel and full power loads the vit has less flash and that means less:what:
 
2400 & standard CCI primers.

Mag primers & 2400 reportedly give higher then normal pressure and wider then normal Standard Deviation numbers.

That is what the .357 factory loads used until ball powder became common after it was invented in WWII.

rc
 
There are several explanations that support the reasons for magnum primers having ever being introduced to the reloading world. They may in fact have a thicker cup too, but that simply doesn't independantly justify or support the primary motive for them ever having been designed. If that were the primary motivation, manufacturer's could have simply made all primer cups thicker to accomodate both standard, and magnum applications, but that's just not the case.

#1 A test you can perform at home is prime 2 or 3 cases with mag primers, and 2 or 3 with standard primers, no powder or bullet, and then fire them staggard in the cylinder so you can compare them side by side. And if you can perform this test at night time, you'll deffinitely see some serious and confirming differences.

#2 Published recomendations I've seen over the years, indicates reducing powder charges when substitutiing a mag. primer for a standard primer or visa versa, as do most experienced reloaders. My personal experience with magnum primers when they were unavailable a couple three years back, produced horrible performance with H110/296 when I substituted with standard primers. I got bombarded with hot particles of powder residue with the standard pirmers, and the chronograph clearly supported the difference as well as incredibly poor accuracy. I also had small speckled holes all over the paper. Nothing like that ever happened to me with magnum primers in more than 30 yrs. of reloading with recommended primers applications.

3# The following statement is straight from my Speer reloading pages.
Speer specifically states, that when using slow burning powders, magnum primers, and a firm crimp are STRONGLY recommended for best IGNITION, VELOCITY, and ACCURACY.

I've never used Federal primers before, but I have heard horror stories about the cups being extremely soft and were blamed for unintended discharges when seating them, chambering (slam fire), and contact in tublar magazines. Like I said, I have no first hand experience in this regard.

And regarding Winchester primers. Winchester makes 3 different versions of primers for small pistol applications. They have one for "standard" application, one for either "standard or magnum" applications, and one for "magnum only" applications. I've used all three of those and have found the "magnum only" to be noticably more stout than the "small pistol for magnum or standard application".

Please accept my appology for getting so excessively long winded with this topic. This is what happens when someone has too much time on their hands (retired).

GS
 
And regarding Winchester primers. Winchester makes 3 different versions of primers for small pistol applications. They have one for "standard" application, one for either "standard or magnum" applications, and one for "magnum only" applications. I've used all three of those and have found the "magnum only" to be noticably more stout than the "small pistol for magnum or standard application".


GS

Altho Winchester makes a Large Pistol Primer that works for both standard and magnum designations, I know of no such primer for small pistol applications, nor does it show one on their website. Winchester Primers

If I want to step down a tad from H110/W296 velocities in any of my magnum loadings(.357, .44, 460), I've found IMR4227 to be very accurate and much less temperature sensitive. It also does not NEED a magnum primer to ignite it, altho that has no bearing to me on it's use.
 
Please accept my appology for getting so excessively long winded with this topic. This is what happens when someone has too much time on their hands (retired).
Type away, it's a cold rainy weekend here, so the more I have to read, the better.

I've never used Federal primers before, but I have heard horror stories about the cups being extremely soft and were blamed for unintended discharges when seating them, chambering (slam fire), and contact in tublar magazines. Like I said, I have no first hand experience in this regard.

My only use for them is in my revolvers and single shot rifle. I prime on my turret press one primer at a time by hand. No primer tubes for me, so premature detonation is not a concern for me.

Wasn't there a brisance test for small primers somewhere on the net?
 
i like 2400 & IMR4227 but i cant find standard primers so i switched to H110
:confused: You've for something backwards there.

ETA: Nevermind. I reread it and it made sense this time.
 
Last edited:
all i can find are mag primers so i switch powder to H110 i use this in my 44 mag and my 454
so it' on hand i dont use mag primers in 2400
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top