Quick Review of Gallant Cast Bullets for 38/357

[DMW1116]

I bought these from Sportsman’s Warehouse on sale when I was going through the Asheville, NC area last year. At $0.06 each for 500 I figured I’d find something to do with them.

These are 125 grain round nose flat point bullets, Hi-tech coated. They have a beveled base and 2 grooves. The color is hard to describe, sort of dark bronze?

I’ve never heard of them before so I checked the web site. They seem reputable and the bullets look to be decent quality. I have not weighed any or measured length though.

They seem to load fine. They stay square when seating. The coating doesn’t chip or flake off. They seem to require a little more flare in the case mount to seat properly but once I found the right amount they seat fine. This is only in comparison to Hornady 38 caliber HBWC as they’re the only two cast bullets I’ve tried in 38/357. If I remember right they are a BHN of 18.

Now for how they shoot. I’ve only tried them in 38 Special. I use a moderate charge of Silhouette powder, on the order of 60% of the charge range from Ramshot. After testing, this charge shot the best out of 6 I tried. For now this is my standard load for 38 Special from my Blackhawk. It shoots better than any of the HBWC loads I tried in 38 cases.

I did just load a test set of these in 357 Magnum over HS-6. The cast bullet manual list this powder for nearly all the cast bullets in 357 Magnum. I’m being cautious as their starting load is the top load for HS-6 under a 125 grain XTP.

 

[Docendo Discimus]

I always like to read field reports. Thanks for sharing.

 

[DMW1116]

I forgot to mention basically the only thing I can think of that might be a problem. At the overall lengths I used for 38 and todays 357 loads the grooves don’t line up for crimping. Doesn’t seem to be a problem but it might not work for some people.

 

[DMW1116]

Thread needs pics.

This was the best load at 10 yards rested.


This was typical of the other loads tested.


This was one of the higher loads at 25 yards rested. Not great but at least they’re all there.


The best load I expect would probably fit 4 shots inside the 9 ring on those targets. It might be able to get them in or touching the 10 ring but that’s starting to put a lot of weight on my shooting ability rather than the load. I can pull 2/4 shots with the best of them.

 

[barnfrog]

Thanks for the report. I may have to cajole my wife into swinging by there the next time she visits her mom in Hendersonville.

 

[DMW1116]

They didn’t shoot as well in magnum loading as they did in 38 Special. They weren’t awful, and there were a couple magnum loads that might be worth testing again. I need to clean the gun and check for leading as some of the loads were pretty hot.

 

[DMW1116]

The barrel was just a little sooty. I didn’t see any sign of leading. I plan to try one more time for a magnum level load with these and 2400 powder. If it doesn’t work then I’m content to shoot them in 38 Special given the accuracy in the best load above.

 

[Cump]

Glad to hear. I recently picked up a box of 240 grain for light 44 mags.

 

[DMW1116]

The next time I’m in a sportsman’s warehouse I’ll have to see if they have anything heavier like a 140 or a 158 grain bullet. I’m not too picky but a SWC 357/38 design would be nice to try. I need to check my remaining bullet/primer ratio. As long as it’s less than 1 I should be good for now.

 

[DMW1116]

I pushed these through my Blackhawk with some light 357 Magnum loads today, searching for a cheaper alternative to the 158 grain XTP load. Starting charge in the Lyman Cast Bullet Manual is 13 grains for a 120 grain LRN and 2400 powder.

Working up to 14 grains finally paid off, with the maximum test charge yielding the smallest groups. I’ll have to clean it to see if there was any leading. I doubt it since I tried a range of HS-6 loads without leading.

 

[DMW1116]

These bullets seem to prefer minimum charges of standard pistol powders. I tried CFE Pistol and W 231 in 357 Magnum loadings today and the minimum charge in each was quite good. The highest charge in CFEP was also pretty good but not up to what I’d hoped for. I have a couple more tests to load and I’m out of options. These will be the upper limit of 2400 powder looking for a true magnum load with good accuracy. Fortunately that seems to be where 2400 settles down and does best.

So far I’m pretty happy with these and have found good loads in both 38 Special and 357 Magnum. I’m just hoping to luck into a good load above 1350 fps.

 

[DMW1116]

I have to say I like these bullets quite a bit for my 357 Magnum Blackhawk. I haven't found any leading even with full power loads. I was able to get 3 loads that shot really well during testing with a variety of powders. These range in power level from minimal 38 Special (800fps) to mid-357 Mag velocity (1300 fps). They are available locally in 500-count containers, so I don't get charged for shipping lead. As long as the test loads are representative and I didn't just get lucky, I'll keep shooting these and save the XTP/2400 loads for more serious uses.

CFE-Pistol from 25 Yards with light magnum velocity


Minimum Charge of W231 at 25 yards and stout 38 Special velocity (top with pulled shot).


Just above a minimum charge of Silhouette in 38 Special cases from 10 yards. Obviously a 6 o'clock hold.

 

[P Flados]

Good for you to have tried something "less common" and found it to be to your liking.

I actually shoot a lot of 120 gr bullets that I cast in a Lee 6 cavity mold and then tumble lube (for 38s) or powder coat (for hotter stuff).

Some of my favorite loads are a 357 mag pushed to around 1300 fps with Unique, a mid range 357 mag using Promo and even a 357 Max load that runs over 1500 fps.

 

[DMW1116]

I’ve only seen them at Sportsman's Warehouse but they seem like a good bullet, though it took about half the box to find those three good loads. Not really that bad considering I tried five or six powders. All would work in a pinch.

I bought the Blackhawk for long range handgunning, beyond 50 yards. The CFE Pistol load is accurate enough to make it interesting. The minimum charge is a velocity of 1375 according to Hornady’s website. That’s from a 10” barrel so I’m sure I’m loosing a bit. Hopefully it’s still above 1300 fps. The maximum was over 1500 by their specs. If I needed to do real damage that would be a good pest control load after I confirmed the accuracy. It had three shots in about 1.4” and one went high. I may have pulled that one to but need another test to be sure.

If I hadn’t pulled that shot on the W231 load I might have beat the XTP/2400 load for accuracy though certainly not power. That’s a good 25 yard load but I don’t think it will get it for beyond 50 yards though. Until I can find the Hornady wadcutters again this or the Silhouette load in 38 Special will work fine.

 

[AJC1]

I’ve only seen them at Sportsman's Warehouse but they seem like a good bullet, though it took about half the box to find those three good loads. Not really that bad considering I tried five or six powders. All would work in a pinch.

I bought the Blackhawk for long range handgunning, beyond 50 yards. The CFE Pistol load is accurate enough to make it interesting. The minimum charge is a velocity of 1375 according to Hornady’s website. That’s from a 10” barrel so I’m sure I’m loosing a bit. Hopefully it’s still above 1300 fps. The maximum was over 1500 by their specs. If I needed to do real damage that would be a good pest control load after I confirmed the accuracy. It had three shots in about 1.4” and one went high. I may have pulled that one to but need another test to be sure.

If I hadn’t pulled that shot on the W231 load I might have beat the XTP/2400 load for accuracy though certainly not power. That’s a good 25 yard load but I don’t think it will get it for beyond 50 yards though. Until I can find the Hornady wadcutters again this or the Silhouette load in 38 Special will work fine.

10" barrel information belongs in the contender section but I keep seeing it migrate to pistol. My 4" speeds never meet their 10" velocities by a lot. I wish all pistol data was 4 or 6".

 

[Jim Watson]

I shot Gallant .45s before the panicdemic and if I get another keyhole from the stuff I am using now, will go back to them now that they have resumed making the 200 gr roundnose I need.

 

[P Flados]

The velocities I posted previously were rough Quickload (QL) estimates. I frequently run estimates for others when requested.

To be as accurate as possible for revolvers requires some work. The best estimates for a specific load requires entering the correct barrel length (QL uses breech to muzzle for barrel length), bullet info (I would need bullet length if not a common bullet), COAL, powder (FYI, QL does not have all newer powders) and powder charge. Also, QL does not have a method to deal with cylinder gap velocity loss, so I usually use google to track down a reasonable estimate.

 

[DMW1116]

I use a SWAG based on the Hodgden data and the velocity loss from Ballistics by the Inch. It’s close enough for my purposes.

As an update I got a box of Gallants 135 grain 9mm bullets. They are coated a charcoal black with no lube groove. I plan to try them in my M&P pistols. They seem to like cast bullets, especially the M&P9.

 

[IWAC]

I forgot to mention basically the only thing I can think of that might be a problem. At the overall lengths I used for 38 and todays 357 loads the grooves don’t line up for crimping. Doesn’t seem to be a problem but it might not work for some people.

If it has a crimping groove, USE it! The COL is a secondary consisderation most of the time.The COL given in my manuals are listed as MAX. Not to say that depending upon the bullet, you can't fudge another + .O10" or so. Max. listed for my 357 Mag is 1.580". I can go to 1.600" with most projectiles, but...why? Works just fine with the manual figures.

 

[AJC1]

If it has a crimping groove, USE it! The COL is a secondary consisderation most of the time.The COL given in my manuals are listed as MAX. Not to say that depending upon the bullet, you can't fudge another + .O10" or so. Max. listed for my 357 Mag is 1.580". I can go to 1.600" with most projectiles, but...why? Works just fine with the manual figures.

Except the Sammi max is 1.590 and the listed oal is what they tested at not max.

 

[Jim Watson]

So if you are loading at the maximum, you should do the "start low, work up" ritual.
But if you are loading at the maximum, you need that roll crimp in the groove.

I have some coated no-lube-groove .38s. They are not loaded hot and a taper crimp is adequate. I wouldn't use them for magnums.

 

[DMW1116]

The loads I don’t use the crimp groove on are minimum loads of standard pistol powders so I’m not too worried about set back or cylinder lockup. My heavier magnum loads with 158 grain SWC are crimped in the groove and are over length at 1.605”.

I tried the 135 grain 9mm bullets and they work pretty well over a minimum charge of W231. They function all my 9mm pistols. I need to try a few in my Sub 2000. Accuracy is better than most loads in my Shield and M&P9. They shot well enough I don’t plan to test a different powder for now.

 

[JimGnitecki]

I am finding the comments on COAL in this thread pretty interesting. I have always resisted doing COAL shorter than the COAL shown in the loading table being used for the load, because I thought it might raise peak pressure too high. But on the other hand, I have read in the past few days, at multiple forum sites, that many handloaders "disregard" the loading table COALs and always load so that the crimp is into the crimping groove on the bullet, even when that creates a MUCH shorter COAL (like .060" shorter!).

So, has my conservative adherence to COALs in the loading tables been unnecessary?

Jim G

 

[AJC1]

I am finding the comments on COAL in this thread pretty interesting. I have always resisted doing COAL shorter than the COAL shown in the loading table being used for the load, because I thought it might raise peak pressure too high. But on the other hand, I have read in the past few days, at multiple forum sites, that many handloaders "disregard" the loading table COALs and always load so that the crimp is into the crimping groove on the bullet, even when that creates a MUCH shorter COAL (like .060" shorter!).

So, has my conservative adherence to COALs in the loading tables been unnecessary?

Jim G

This is why using load data for the bullet is important... one could use modeling software to extrapolate much more data, but a starting load should get you there if it's the same material and bearing surface. .060 is a lot, and would probably be catastrophic in 9mm. The semi auto cartridges have much less wiggle room from the data and data runs I've done. Does that reduction keep you in Sammi minimums.

 

[IWAC]

Except the Sammi max is 1.590 and the listed oal is what they tested at not max.

Don't know from SAMMI, But all my reloading manuals as far back as I can remember have given the 1.580" as a safe max COL, so I figure good enough for me, Unless for some reason I wish to carefully increase the length...but, not much!