Has anyone tried this .357 ammo?
- Thread starter tipoc
- Start date
- Status
buck460XVR
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,085
Due to testing equipment and R&D, major manufacturers are capable of using proprietary powders not available to reloaders. Due to modern testing equipment, they can define more closely what is and what isn;t within SAAMI specs. With modern equipment there is less "margin of error". Many off the shelf standard factory loadings are more anemic than BB's boutique type loadings for several reasons. First is those loadings are made to be safe in more firearms. They are bought by folks that are not always as picky about performance and then there is the profit margin. No way can one expect the performance from a Wally World 100 round "bonus box" that cost $34 a hundred than you get from the BB offering at $34 for 20. Many times factory loads are also more anemic for other reasons. For instance....the SAAMI max pressure for .460 is 65,000 PSI. Most factory loadings are loaded to 55,000 or less for ease of extraction. Most folks will never notice the few FPS less.
Not only were the old J and k-frames a tad fragile for a regular diet of heavy .357 loads, but so was the original Pythons. Read a review of the new Python the other day and the writer claimed that back in the day of the original Pythons, most folks never shot more than a box of .357 mags thru their guns anyway. That the majority of the ammo shot thru them was .38 special. In his opinion, the same is true today. Thus, there really was little demand for heavy factory .357 loads. With the big new interest in hunting with revolvers and the advent of the really big bores and the power they develop, there is a renewed interest by non-reloaders for heavy .357 ammo. The market is small for such expensive and specific ammo and BB fills the niche. Still there is a cost that goes beyond the initial cost per round. While safe for any modern firearm, don't think it will not be harder on the gun as standard factory ammo. If you can feel it in your wrist, the gun will feel it too. Newton's law still prevails.
Not only were the old J and k-frames a tad fragile for a regular diet of heavy .357 loads, but so was the original Pythons. Read a review of the new Python the other day and the writer claimed that back in the day of the original Pythons, most folks never shot more than a box of .357 mags thru their guns anyway. That the majority of the ammo shot thru them was .38 special. In his opinion, the same is true today. Thus, there really was little demand for heavy factory .357 loads. With the big new interest in hunting with revolvers and the advent of the really big bores and the power they develop, there is a renewed interest by non-reloaders for heavy .357 ammo. The market is small for such expensive and specific ammo and BB fills the niche. Still there is a cost that goes beyond the initial cost per round. While safe for any modern firearm, don't think it will not be harder on the gun as standard factory ammo. If you can feel it in your wrist, the gun will feel it too. Newton's law still prevails.
Speedo66
Member
I used .357 Buffalo Bore as hunting ammo in my Rossi carbine. For the small number of rounds used, and the extra power granted, I didn't think the amount spent was outrageous. I considered it an alternative to .30-30 in a straight wall cartridge state.
I also carry BB in my LCP as self defense ammo. Not recommended by Ruger, but I wouldn't think the small amount used by me in testing damaged anything.
I also carry BB in my LCP as self defense ammo. Not recommended by Ruger, but I wouldn't think the small amount used by me in testing damaged anything.
shoebox1.1
Member
They way I see it when looking at expensive ammo.. buy two boxes ONE time. Burn up one box making sure you can hit with it and carry the other box in your guns. Your life or your family’s lives are worth EVERY penny of the ammo and the lawyers fees
shoebox1.1
Member
Little off topic but is the Aguila 158 gr lswc ammo really hot? Stated at 1500 I think.. I like aguila
Well, advertised numbers might have reached that high. That was back when manufacturers tested revolver loadings in 15" unvented test barrels and virtually nobody else had chronographs to check the numbers in real-world guns. Unsurprisingly, in 1977 when SAAMI started pressuring ammo companies to provide revolver ammo velocities from 4" vented test barrels, the advertised velocities started coming down to match reality as the companies gradually came into compliance.
The 2006 August/September issue of Handguns magazine had an interesting article on the topic. The author managed to find some vintage .357Mag ammunition and tested it vs. current offerings. There was no evidence that the old loadings were appreciably hotter than the new stuff.
Dunno what to say about BB's stuff. I believe their velocity figures. People would be calling them out left and right if they didn't match reality--chronographs are cheap and readily available these days. Pressure testing equipment, on the other hand...
You gotta ask yourself what special magic BB has whipped up that allows them to get way more velocity out of their ammo than other manufacturers can. If they were a powder manufacturer, it might make sense for them to have exclusive access to powders that could allow them to somehow exceed everyone else's performance without increasing pressure. But they're not.
fxvr5
Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2017
- Messages
- 3,273
Can you give us more detail on this? What ammo and what handguns and what velocities? Thanks.
I don't have the issue any more. I remembered posting something on the topic on another forum years ago and went back and found that post. The author had some vintage loadings and modern ones. No significant difference in velocities when fired from the same guns. Sorry, that's all I've got.
You may be right on the test barrel. I have seen some sources state that 15" unvented test barrels were being used, but this source (see page 55) indicates that unvented test barrels were being used but that the length was supposed to be calibrated such that the resulting velocities would be equivalent to an 8.5" revolver barrel.
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/51111218/american-handgunner-july-august-1977
That's marginally better, although even that would explain why the velocities came way down in the 1977 timeframe when SAAMI made its members start using 4" vented test barrels.
According to BBTI's data on the .357Mag, the average difference in velocity from an 8" to a 4" barrel is about 300fps.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html
You may be right on the test barrel. I have seen some sources state that 15" unvented test barrels were being used, but this source (see page 55) indicates that unvented test barrels were being used but that the length was supposed to be calibrated such that the resulting velocities would be equivalent to an 8.5" revolver barrel.
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/51111218/american-handgunner-july-august-1977
That's marginally better, although even that would explain why the velocities came way down in the 1977 timeframe when SAAMI made its members start using 4" vented test barrels.
According to BBTI's data on the .357Mag, the average difference in velocity from an 8" to a 4" barrel is about 300fps.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html
Not this exact load, but their 158gr Jacket hollow point chroned at 1540-1560 from both a 5" GP, and a 5.5" NM Vaq. I think a 16" marlin ran in the 18-1900 range. Point being, it did what they said it would, from the revolver they said. The rounds I used however, came with Montana Gold bullets, which I am sure are fine, but they claimed they were Gold Dots. They clearly were not, and I haven't order from BB since.
Deleted.... The same thing I asked earlier, but simpler. Is there any published reloading data anywhere that will get a 158gr to 1550 from a 5" barrel, or a 125 gr to 1700 from a 5" barrel? 100% of data I have seen in this range is from a 20"+ barrel with a sealed breech.
Last edited:
Speedo66
Member
Buffalo Bore's .357 charts go from 3" revolver to 18.5" rifle, 125g to 180g, with the velocities of each.
I find them pretty amazing, their 125g from a rifle is hitting 2300 fps.
Here's the link: https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=100
I find them pretty amazing, their 125g from a rifle is hitting 2300 fps.
Here's the link: https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=100
Eddietruett
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2018
- Messages
- 1,076
Western Powders published a load of 16.5gr of Enforcer for a 125gr Barnes JHP at 1750 from a 6" Barrel. I'm willing to bet a Coated Lead with this load will exceed 1750 out of a 5" barrel. From experience, coated lead gives a noticeable increase in velocity over Jacketed bullets. Can't find anything published quite that fast on the 158gr. Some old notations in one of my loading books has a load of 18.5gr of Lil Gun that gave a velocity of 1625 fps with a 158gr bullet, and I'm just guessing it was a JHP since back in those days we hunted deer with a 158gr XTP or Speer JHP and might have been from a 8 3/8" Barrel. No notes on that. Its been a while. I quit using Lil Gun a long time ago. That is such a hot burning powder after 5-6 near max loads, you can't touch the barrel. I have a buddy who swears he dug some lead bullets out of a backstop and the base was melted after using Lil Gun loaded to the max.
Thanks for the info. I'm not much into mags these days, but its good to know options may still exist. I personally have zero interest in Linlgun either, you may remember Freedom arms destroying one of their barrels in a test a couple years back. I think it took 50 rounds to ruin a barrel. 125@1750 is right there with the BB, and I bet it makes your face hurt from the concussion.
Eddietruett
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2018
- Messages
- 1,076
Those were loads shot when I was younger and much dumber. I hardly ever shoot a magnum load in .357 or 44 anymore except when hunting which seems to be less frequent every year or on occasion we will shoot at some steel plates at longer ranges. I just don't see the need to shoot a magnum load at a piece of paper. unless I'm checking alignment on an optic. Took a lot of years, but I finally figured out a .38 Special wadcutter will make a bigger hole in a target at 700fps than a 158gr JHP running at 1200fps. Amazing what wisdom comes with age, weak eyes and shaky hands.
OP
OP
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
A few points.
Powder and primers are more developed today than in the 1930's. Bullet design more varied.
Neither BB or Underwood are members of SAMMI. They do not say what pressures their ammo is running at.
As mentioned by John KSA, SAMMI had the manufacturers agree to begin using vented test barrels that were shorter sometime back in the 70's as I recall. This set off the first round of claims that 357 ammo was hotter "back in the day". But it was not accurate.
Phil Sharpe, in his book Complete Guide to Handloading from 1937, wrote that the standard working pressure for the new gun was 35,000 psi to 38,000 psi. During testing DB Wesson did his hunting and shooting with pressures at at 33,000 psi (pounds per square inch). This was higher pressures than any other revolver cartridge ever built. Sharpe played a critical role in the development of the 357 Mag.
The gun Sharpe used had an 8 3/4" barrel. In his charts in his book he shows pressures as high as 40,000 psi this got a 158 gr. lead bullet to 1290 fps. He also records a 146 gr. SHP bullet to 1660 fps and 36,000 psi. From the same 8 3/4" barrel.
In his 1936 book, "Sixguns Cartridges and Loads" Elmer Keith writes in chapter 10 and 11 of his Heavy Loads and and notes that the new S&W N Frame in 357 is a gun strong enough for his heavy loads. He bragged of going up to 42,000 psi in his strong guns like the 357. But that was with over pressure loads.
In looking at several reloading manuals P.O. Ackley's Pocket manual from 1964, Ideal Handbook #35, Speer Manual #7 from 1966 and a couple of other sources I see nothing that Get's hotter than Sharpe's figures and those are from a 8 3/4" barrel.
So what I think is that today's ammo for the 357 is hotter than a good deal of that from the past or at least not weaker.
Powder and primers are more developed today than in the 1930's. Bullet design more varied.
Neither BB or Underwood are members of SAMMI. They do not say what pressures their ammo is running at.
As mentioned by John KSA, SAMMI had the manufacturers agree to begin using vented test barrels that were shorter sometime back in the 70's as I recall. This set off the first round of claims that 357 ammo was hotter "back in the day". But it was not accurate.
Phil Sharpe, in his book Complete Guide to Handloading from 1937, wrote that the standard working pressure for the new gun was 35,000 psi to 38,000 psi. During testing DB Wesson did his hunting and shooting with pressures at at 33,000 psi (pounds per square inch). This was higher pressures than any other revolver cartridge ever built. Sharpe played a critical role in the development of the 357 Mag.
The gun Sharpe used had an 8 3/4" barrel. In his charts in his book he shows pressures as high as 40,000 psi this got a 158 gr. lead bullet to 1290 fps. He also records a 146 gr. SHP bullet to 1660 fps and 36,000 psi. From the same 8 3/4" barrel.
In his 1936 book, "Sixguns Cartridges and Loads" Elmer Keith writes in chapter 10 and 11 of his Heavy Loads and and notes that the new S&W N Frame in 357 is a gun strong enough for his heavy loads. He bragged of going up to 42,000 psi in his strong guns like the 357. But that was with over pressure loads.
In looking at several reloading manuals P.O. Ackley's Pocket manual from 1964, Ideal Handbook #35, Speer Manual #7 from 1966 and a couple of other sources I see nothing that Get's hotter than Sharpe's figures and those are from a 8 3/4" barrel.
So what I think is that today's ammo for the 357 is hotter than a good deal of that from the past or at least not weaker.
Last edited:
right there with you. I figured out hot mags are just me being to lazy to pick up a rifle. I still bring them out for new shooters, who love to try them out, and see what all the fuss is about.
Rock185
Member
Reference the Buffalo Bore ammo, I can only comment on the two types I have used, the ,357 180 grain and 10MM 180 grain. I did not find BB's numbers to be optimistic with either.
In .357 I chronographed the BB 180 grain in several different revolvers. Don't have all my notes close at hand, but did find data for 180 BB chronographed in three different S&Ws and one Ruger revolver.
S&W 686 no-dash, 4" Bbl. ==1384 FPS.
S&W 686 SSR , 4" Bbl. === 1444 FPS.
S&W 27-2, 5" Bbl. === 1436 FPS.
Ruger Blackhawk 4 5/8" Bbl.=1422 FPS.
Forgot to add that there was no hard/sticky,etc. extraction in any of these guns, primers were no flatter than common major manufacturer .357 ammunition.
In .357 I chronographed the BB 180 grain in several different revolvers. Don't have all my notes close at hand, but did find data for 180 BB chronographed in three different S&Ws and one Ruger revolver.
S&W 686 no-dash, 4" Bbl. ==1384 FPS.
S&W 686 SSR , 4" Bbl. === 1444 FPS.
S&W 27-2, 5" Bbl. === 1436 FPS.
Ruger Blackhawk 4 5/8" Bbl.=1422 FPS.
Forgot to add that there was no hard/sticky,etc. extraction in any of these guns, primers were no flatter than common major manufacturer .357 ammunition.
Be careful about relying on pressure signs in straight-wall handgun cartridges.
Here's a quote from John Linebaugh--unfortunately the original source link for it doesn't exist any longer, but you can still find places where it is quoted.
"Straight cases handle pressure differently than bottle-neck cartridges and often show no excessive pressure signs. We have blown a few guns up here, on purpose, and in all instances upon recovery of the cylinder fragments and case remains, the primer has shown normal pressure. Pressures in these instances have run from 70,000 to over 100,000 psi in our estimation. Do not depend on case pressure signs for danger signs in a sixgun. In most cases the first sign of high pressure you will have, other than excessive recoil and blast, is a bulged cylinder or cracked bolt notch.”
Here is a source that mentions that Linebaugh found that even with very high pressures (55,000+ CUP), it was possible that there could be no pressure signs in revolver cartridges.
https://www.johnlinebaughcustomsixguns.com/writings/heavyweight_bullets.htm
"...what do you estimate the pressure at? Approximately 55,000 CUP... I see ... the cases simply fall out of the chambers and pressure signs on the case and primer are non-existent."
Rock185
Member
JohnKSa, yes, thank you. I have been reloading since 1967, and shooting longer than that. I am well aware of the warnings, admonitions, caveats, etc. reference factory or reloaded ammunition, pressure signs or lack of, etc.
I was merely sharing my experience with two of Buffalo Bore's loads. I experienced no issues whatsoever with the two that I tried, and would not hesitate to use either again. I don't know, some other BB load/s might prove unsatisfactory in some way. Should that happen, I would be willing to share that information too.
I was merely sharing my experience with two of Buffalo Bore's loads. I experienced no issues whatsoever with the two that I tried, and would not hesitate to use either again. I don't know, some other BB load/s might prove unsatisfactory in some way. Should that happen, I would be willing to share that information too.
Fair enough. In that case, it probably would have been better to complete your comment with the addition of the caveat that lack of pressure signs in a straight wall handgun cartridge provides essentially no information regarding the operating pressure levels just so those who don't have your experience and knowledge will understand the value of the observation.
Well, to be perfectly accurate, the ones you tested may well have been unsatisfactory in terms of pressure levels, but there wouldn't really be any way to tell that without pressure measuring equipment. Although, I suppose one might argue that over 5 decades of reloading experience could lead to suspicion about a loading that provides velocities dramatically in excess of what is possible with max loads from reputable sources or ammunition from SAAMI compliant manufacturers.
OP
OP
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
Some years back, around 10 years ago, I picked up 2 boxes of BB's 357 180 gr. hard cast ammo to try out. It claimed around 1400 fps from a 4" barrel. I tend to think of 180 gr. 357 at a higher velocity, as more of a good choice for a levergun than a revolver. But i wanted to try it out. I was at the range with two 28-2's a 4" and a 6".
Of the 20 rounds in the box there were three split cases. One of the chambers showed a noticeable bulge in it (measured .003" oversized from a bore mic once I was home).
I've shot other BB ammo over the years that has done well. In this case it did not.
Of the 20 rounds in the box there were three split cases. One of the chambers showed a noticeable bulge in it (measured .003" oversized from a bore mic once I was home).
I've shot other BB ammo over the years that has done well. In this case it did not.
- Status
