Help loading a non-neutered .357 magnum...

[_N4Z_]

Just a little more info from the "new" Lee Modern Handloading, 2nd edition, reprint 2008.

357mag 158gr. jacketed w/ 2400 max = 15.2
357mag 158gr. lead w/ 2400 max = 15.3

These are the highest max listings from any of my four reloading manuals.
I've shot 15gr of 2400 under 158 jsp's out of a 6" gp100 and they worked great.


I imagine that lead listing would be not fun to clean up after.

 

[Ben Shepherd]

My do-all load(Keep in mind I have all rugers and Win 94 rifles, no k-frames, colts, etc.) is 15.2 with a federal small magnum primer and the laser-cast 158 HCSWCs seated to groove with a firm/heavy crimp.

This load clocks 1550 on the button out of my 7.5" redhawk, and right at 1300 out of my 2 1/4" sp101.

Keep in mind that currently non-magnum primers are reccomended with 2400 and that 15.2 grain charge is right at or over current published maximums. So approach with caution and due dilligence

Most folks as well as most manufacters report better consistency velocity wise with the standard primers. In my case, I saw no improvement, and actually had trouble with cold weather ignition using standard primers. So I went back to magnum primers. Remember, each gun is a law unto itself however. YMMV.

 

[Old Fuff]

I would seriously question that load consisting of 15.3 grains of 2400 behind a 158 grain semi-wadcutter (obviously had to be deep seated to get a 1.58" OAL). going 1620 out of a 5.6" (?) barrel with pressure measured at 34,000 psi. When a similar charge in the original load produced 1510 fps with pressure running a 42,000 psi, and that out of a 8 3/8" barrel. Back in 1935 a S&W engineer recorded the muzzle velocity out of a 5" barrel @ about 1385 fps, which would be consistant with using a slow burning powder.

Anyone who desides to try the Alliants load mentioned above should cut the charge at least 10% and work up very carefully.

Lyman lists a load consisting of their #358429 /#2 alloy/168 grain (Keith) bullet @ 1422 fps using 13.5 grains of 2400 powder. Cartridge OAL = 1.647 (obviously bullet NOT deep seated) Test platform was a 10" T/C Contender. Chamber pressure is not listed.

Everyone be very careful...

 

[CTSigLover]

Good point Old Fuff, but we preach as gospel the idea of not exceeding factory published loads- granted this is a max load and needs to be worked up - but who knows more about 2400 and its capability than Alliant... with a SPM primer no less. And they did publish it... the liability would be huge if the load pressure listed was not correct...

If we can't trust the powder manufacturer's load data and pressure measurements... who can we trust? I am starting to think there is more "art" than "science" to this reloading business.

Do you think the data is a typo? How would one know? I do note that Alliant no longer lists this load... is there something wrong with it? Makes me think your spider sense may be on to something...

 

[Old Fuff]

Well typos have been known to seek into reloading handbooks

One problem I have is they didn't explain what revolver or test barrel they used. I wondered about the odd length (5.6") barrel they specified. It is always a good idea to pick a particular load, bullet and powder, and check it in more then just one handbook.

Understand there can be some variance because different platforms and velocity/pressure measuring devices are used. But in the end it is always best to cut back from a maximum load, and work up to what is best in your own gun.

On more then one occasion I have been working up a load, and stopped short of the listed maximum because it was obvious I’d reached maximum + in my gun. I have also found that on many occasions a load slightly (or sometimes more then slightly) under maximum is much more accurate then going all the way – even if it is safe.

 

[Hoxviii]

Using that Allaint data, I've run out to a little above max in an M-27 and right up to max in an SP-101 to see if anything changed.

My experience was that at 15.3 of 2400 grains, all grouping was lost in both guns.

The 27 got tighter and tighter to 15.3 with a minimum of right at 1.25" 5 shot groups at 25 yards off the bench. At 15.4, it opened up to better than 2.5".

In the 101, it got tighter and tighter to 15.0, and slowly loosened up until 15.2. At 15.3, the group doubled size from 15.2.

Instead of loading for power, load for accuracy within published bounds- going over the limits typically looses accuracy in my experience.

Now I load 15.0 of 2400 for both guns. It's deadly accurate in both, and the recoil isn't excessive in the snub.

 

[Ben Shepherd]

My experience was that at 15.3 of 2400 grains, all grouping was lost in both guns.

The 27 got tighter and tighter to 15.3 with a minimum of right at 1.25" 5 shot groups at 25 yards off the bench. At 15.4, it opened up to better than 2.5".

My Rugers were close to those results, most of them tightened in the manner you described. I got best accuracy right at 15.2, it opened up a bit at 15.4, and at 15.6, it turned into a decent looking buckshot pattern, and the 15.8 charge showing about the same as the 15.6.

Part of the larger groupings at the highest two charges may very well be attributed to me. The substantially increased recoil had me nervous enough I may well have been flinchy a bit, as after every shot I took a moment to make sure something hadn't let loose on the gun. I don't mind recoil, I own a couple 44's and at that point in time had fired 454 Casull and 475 Linebaugh on several different occasions. That's why I was nervous........A 357 that is actually heavier than an identical model chambered in 44 should not equal it in the recoil dept with both running full power loads! This heavy recoil was telling me I was WWAAYY up there in the pressure dept. with the 357.

It should be noted here considering our subject matter, that ANY time you see a velocity DROP with an increased powder charge that the powder being used is getting into pressure territory that it was not designed for, and pushing it any farther is VERY dangerous as the powder has ceased behaving in a predictable manner.

 

[pwrtool45]

I wondered about the odd length (5.6") barrel they specified

1.6" of chamber/vent and 4.0" of rifled test barrel. Alliant used that length up until the latest revision on their online load information, at which point they stopped specifying the barrel length and chamber pressure. I'm going from memory, but I seem to remember they specifically noted that the barrel was vented. This would have been as recent as 2007.

They also broke the old link I had (recipes.alliantpowder.com). The new link is here.

 

[Ol` Joe]

The old std for the 357 was I believe 46,000 "CUP" and was later changed to 35000 "PSI". Old hand loads were also normally worked up useing head expansion and the other "pressure" signs we see in the manuals. Most labs had no proper equipment. That`s one of the reason Speer dropped their data from the earlier books. They found when useing proper lab equpiment they were way over on lots of their loads.
The factory had crusher equipment, but used unvented barrels of unknown lenght, likely 8-10" for their velocity claims.