Alliant website info for 357 magnum LSWC correct?

[C5rider]

I have a lb. of Unique and was going to try it in some 357 magnum rounds with some cast 158gr bullets. I checked the Alliant website and it shows 6gr of Unique as the charge for this weight bullet. Not really looking for top-end rounds (hence, the cast bullets) but my 1873 lever gun doesn't like to load 38 specials, which is a shame.

I checked what everyone else is using and thinks of this powder for 357, and I see charges for LEAD bullets going up to 7, 8 and 9gr of Unique!

It was my understanding that you take the charge weight shown on Alliant's website and REDUCE that by 10 percent for a starting load and not exceed the charge weight listed. Did I miss something or are some of these guys reloading on the metric system?

Anyone have any Unique loads and please explain what I'm apparently NOT seeing. Again, thanks in advance.

 

[rcmodel]

The thing is, Alliant, and Speer are both owned by ATK now.
Since then, Alliant and Speer data are the same.

And Speer only sells soft swaged lead bullets. (Not cast bullets.)

So data is held pretty low to prevent leading with the soft swaged Speer bullets.
(It's in the details, but you have to read between the lines!!)

Pre-ATK Alliant data says 6.8 grains MAX Unique produces 1,295 at 33.9 PSI in a 5.6 inch barrel.

IMO: 6.5 grains with a Cast 158-160 SWC is a good shooting .357 load.

(You are correct that the data published by Alliant are all MAX with the bullet's they are using.
Always reduce 10% for the starting load.)

rc

 

[C5rider]

So (without being too dense) I would take 10 percent of which load?

Would 6gr of Unique (which shows as THEIR max) be out of the realm of possibility for a starting load?

Appreciate the insights RC !!!!

 

[rcmodel]

No.

If you are using real cast bullets.

Consider the old Max of 6.8 Max.

And take 10% off that (6.1) as your starting load.

(Remember you are using Cast bullets, and they are using soft swaged bullets.)

But 6.0, or 6.1 for your starting load???

Gee, that's a hard one??
I'll probably have to ponder that overnight before I can give you a definitive answer.


rc

 

[RealGun]

Alliant is most likely limiting velocity to those recommended for soft lead. Harder alloy castings can run much faster and are probably the context for the heavier powder weight loads you are finding. Actually harder bullets should not be run as slow as Alliant says or they will lead the barrel.

 

[C5rider]

Gee, that's a hard one??
I'll probably have to ponder that overnight before I can give you a definitive answer.

Hey, RC! Wake up! Yoo-hoo! Hey! You up?!!!! What's your pillow calculator say?!!!!!

(edited to inject some seriousness into the thread)

Thanks guys! I was wondering what was going on. Didn't want to AssUme anything. I'd like to keep what I've got and don't need any life-lessons due to any "Bah! It'll be alright!" moments. When the math doesn't add up, speak to the folks who know the conversion tables! Thanks again.

 

[slickracer]

6.1 Unique with a 158 LSWC is a nice load. I get 3/4" five shot groups with my Henry Big Boy at 25 yards.

 

[C5rider]

Update

Went to the range today and tried out a few 6.0gr loads. They worked quite well. Out of my ol' Navy Arms 357, they did a very nice job out to 75 yards (longest part of the range). They did better than my old eyes could see out that far!


Thanks for the clarification everyone!

 

[joneb]

It's the same with Hornady, their lead data is for their swaged soft lead bullets which are around 8 BHN.

 

[au_prospector]

Good looking rifle!!!

 

[RealGun]

Yes, a good picture is instant thread drift.

 

[C5rider]

Thanks guys. Picked her up a few years ago from a small gun shop a little south of me. My son loves to shoot this one, since it doesn't have much kick at all. Most likely, it'll become his gun some day.

 

[TimSr]

With cast bullets of a hardness suitable for actual 357 magnum loads (BRN 18) you can load from jacketed data. My age old moderate 357 magnum load for 158gr SWC (revolver) is 8.0gr Unique.

 

[RealGun]

With cast bullets of a hardness suitable for actual 357 magnum loads (BRN 18) you can load from jacketed data. My age old moderate 357 magnum load for 158gr SWC (revolver) is 8.0gr Unique.

Some of the powders though are too hot for bare lead. The higher velocity numbers would call for gas checks.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

In your OP you said your rifle doesn't like .38 Special ammo, many .357 Magnum leverguns don't. I have found if you are trying to make a light magnum load, use the Special load data. If you use the max powder charge from the .38 Special in the .357 Magnum brass with the same bullet you will get a very soft shooting and safe round.

 

[C5rider]

Some great information. I've not been reloading for very long, so it's moments like this that lead folks out into deeper waters. The trick is to do it safely! That's where the tribal knowledge from the folks who have been doing this for most of their lives is invaluable. Thanks!

Arch, good info on the reduced loads. Wanting to use 38 rounds wasn't really due to recoil. The rifle is really mild, even with the 357s, the reason for trying it was because I've got a bunch of 38s. They do work in my revolver though.

 

[TimSr]

Some of the powders though are too hot for bare lead.

He is using Unique. In addition to Unique, I've also shot thousands of 158gr SWC with 296/110 and have recently gone through a few hundred with Blue Dot as well. I've never used a gas check, never will. Defeats my main purpose for shooting cast.

 

[RealGun]

With cast bullets of a hardness suitable for actual 357 magnum loads (BRN 18) you can load from jacketed data.

"Jacketed data" includes velocities beyond any credible loads for lead alloy. At some point, the lead bullet data is going to indicate gas checks. Ignoring tested data and going beyond that is not something the ordinary reloader should do. Just know that if your barrel is significantly fouled, you went too far, and either gases are leaking around the bullet, or the ignition was hot enough and of sufficient duration to melt the base of the bullet.

Some of the powders though are too hot for bare lead.

He is using Unique.

My reply addresses what I quoted, taking no exception to use of Unique. It doesn't require correction.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Arch, good info on the reduced loads. Wanting to use 38 rounds wasn't really due to recoil. The rifle is really mild, even with the 357s, the reason for trying it was because I've got a bunch of 38s. They do work in my revolver though.

I hear you on the 38/357 brass. While I have a good supply of .357 Magnum brass I probably have enough .38 Special brass to span 2 lifetimes lol.

I'm very lucky that my Marlin in .357 Magnum feeds .38 Special ammo well so I use a lot of 38s in it. But... It won't feed LSWC bullets for anything in .38 Special brass.

 

[TimSr]

"Jacketed data" includes velocities beyond any credible loads for lead alloy. At some point, the lead bullet data is going to indicate gas checks.

You're going to be hard pressed to find load data for a jacketed .357 that exceeds the potential of an 18 BRN cast bullet, and needs a gas check, even from a .357 carbine. Midrange loads for jacketed bullets begin to put it in its obturation sweet spot.


Great site with tons of cast information:
http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell_Book_Chapter_3_alloySelectionMetallurgy.htm

Useful
Application Hardness Range
Light target loads (<800 fps and 10,000 psi) BHN 6-12
Standard revolver loads (800-1000 fps, 16,000 psi) BHN 8-14
+P revolver loads (1000-1200 fps, 20,000 psi) BHN 10-16
Magnum revolver loads (1200-1500 fps, 35,000 psi) BHN 12-20
454 Casull (1400-1800 fps, 50,000 psi) BHN 16 and up

 

[RealGun]

You're going to be hard pressed to find load data for a jacketed .357 that exceeds the potential of an 18 BRN cast bullet, and needs a gas check, even from a .357 carbine. Midrange loads for jacketed bullets begin to put it in its obturation sweet spot.

I only use loads I find in a book or on a powder company website. I do place some credibility in magazine articles but know some that were dead wrong on some issues. In any case, I know magazines of any kind as subject to errata.

Loading lead beyond ultra conservative published loads is a subculture that is very much like "I read it on the internet". I don't mean that disrespectfully, but want to make sure as best I can that my reloading is on solid ground.

Gas checks are available for a reason, and I have some in .357 and then know they exist.

I have been thoroughly bullied for citing problems with 300-MP behind coated lead, so I'm pretty sensitive about having credible sources for reloading. Extrapolation is not always valid or is more complex than one might at first suppose.

 

[Average Joe]

I use Unique for loads in my Rossi 92. My .357 load is 6.0 grains of Unique under a 158 grain hard cast LSWC, or RNFP. Nice load , accurate and soft shooting.

 

[TimSr]

Loading lead beyond ultra conservative published loads is a subculture that is very much like "I read it on the internet". I don't mean that disrespectfully, but want to make sure as best I can that my reloading is on solid ground.

I can certainly understand how it seems that way. The issue starts with the major bullet mfgs who publish most of the manauls. They don't make cast bullets of different hardnesses. For example Speer/Hornady offers a soft lead cold swaged semi-wadcutter. Alliant's site calls it a SPEER LSWC (lead semi-wadcutter).

That is what goes into Alliant's load data. If you are using anything other than a Speer bullet, you are left to define "lead".

Hodgdon is a little better in that they used the generic term "cast" which is assumed to be harder than swaged but not specificed. You'll notice they have laods of upwards of 1300fps for their "LSWC" data while Alliant caps it at @1000 fps for their "LSWC"

Lyman has the best cast load data which is centered around their casting data and instructions, but even when using their data you need to understand the characteristics of the specific bullet it's wrapped around. If you try to use Linotype (hard) data for a cold swaged bullet it doesn't work out so well either.

Asking for "lead bullet" data is like asking for mileage specs for "a car". It's all very confusing for those who have not spent a lot of time learning about it. It may seem like a "cult" type thing, but it's really people who understand various lead and cast bullets, and are not pushing existing data, but creating data where none exists. I won't even get into how "plated bullets" have made it even more confusing.

I wish somebody who people trusted, like Lyman, would publish a simple Reloading data manual that specified bullet hardness and chamber pressure in specific applications. I'm sure it would be cost prohibitive for bullet casters like Missouri to publish data data for their bullets.

Speer/Hornady/Sierra don't cast bullets so nearly all lead or cast data currently available is extrapolated from data for a bullet that may be very different. The published "lead" loads only have value if the you have specifications of the "lead".

Missouri Bullet Company's website explains appropriate hardness for specific applications based on velocity and pressure but leaves getting the data to put you there up to you.

 

[C5rider]

Hmmm... Some of that "tribal knowledge" that one learns over the years. Good stuff, as it leads someone into a further knowledge and application that suits their particular need.

So, let me ask this question. Since our buddy "AL" invented the internet, has it made information easier to acquire, or more difficult to differentiate from all the static around it?

I came to that question as I read these posts and envisioned how learning was once, much more "hands-on", and typically passed down from generation to generation. But it was limited to what grandpa knew. Now, anyone with a hint of Google-fu can find more stuff on the 'net than they could read in a weekend. The reason for this thread was because I didn't want to simply go with an answer that suited my desires or what so-and-so said, but wanted to know why the difference, and make an informed decision.
(I know, it's STILL a bunch of "what so-and-so said), but at least there are SEVERAL so-and-so's)!