Reloading 357 for Rifle vs. Pistol

[Skeptic13]

I'm usually Mr Safety, but he's already developed his load... it works fine in his pistols, and appears to be within published data... why would you drop back? A .357 is a .357... rifle or pistol.

I think that I am going to agree with everyone who says I should be fine. Just didn’t want to blow my rifle up on my first range trip so I thought I would throw the question out to the group.

 

[cfullgraf]

I use 357 Magnum loads developed for my hand guns in my Marlin 1894C. They work great in both.

Generally I load 158 grain jacketed bullets over Win 296.

My Marlin has a micro groove barrel and I’ve never had good luck with accuracy using 158 grain SWC at lighter load levels.

A few years ago I bought a Miroku/Winchester 1873 chambered in 357 Mag. It shoots my jacketed bullet loads well. I have not tried cast bullets in the rifle. It has conventional rifling so cast may work fine as long I don’t drive them too fast.

Anyway, any 357 Mag load that is safe in a revolver will be safe in a rifle. The one caveat, if your shooting light loads, like target loads, they may stick the bullet in the rifle barrel.

Full power 38 Special loads work fine in my Marlin.

With load data, there are many reasons why one source does not include a particular powder.

They may not sell a particular powder.

They may have a particular powder that does not give the results they want.

They may have not tested newer powders or recently acquired different product lines.

Load testing is not recent but still valid. They have not expanded their tests recently.

And I’m sure there are other reasons.

 

[Show Me]

This is another great example. Hodgdon shows load data for 296 under pistol loads but doesn’t show any Winchester or Ramshot or Accurate powder load data in rifle. That is why I am leaning toward Hodgdon just didn’t put a lot of effort into developing 357 rifle load data.

Example of what? That your not picking up what's being laid down. You don't ever need separate data for .357 long guns. 357 is 357

 

[dobedo]

I shoot a .500 S&W magnum BFR revolver with 7.5" barrel. I also shoot the .500 S&W pistol loads in a .500 lever carbine. I have tried just about every load in both. I even shot a .500 load with 11 grains of Titegroup in a 350 gr round in the carbine. No squibs as the rounds are the bare minimum FPS for the .500. They exit the revolver at around 1000FPS and exit the rifle at about 1300FPS. Test and retest be safe.

 

[Mr_Flintstone]

I agree with the fact that pressure-wise, if a load is safe in a revolver, then it almost certainly is in a rifle as well, but might not always be the best for your brass. If I’m not mistaken (and I apologize if I am), the Winchester 92 has a rear locking mechanism which will allow your brass to flex and stretch a little at high pressures.

Ordinarily you won’t run into too much trouble with this at normal pressures except with slightly shortened brass life. I have found one exception to this with my Henry. When using full power 125 gr XTPs loaded over a near-max charge of Bullseye powder I had some case head separations after a few loadings. From what I’ve been able to deduce, the sharp pressure spike of fast powders at max or near-max pressure is harder on the brass than that of slower “magnum” powders, and causes the cases them a great deal of wear.

Longshot is fairly slow, so you probably won’t run into that issue, but your case life will be shorter than it would be when strictly fired from a revolver.

 

[Palladan44]

This also might be a good opportunity to start trimming brass (if you dont already), just to get uniform lineup wit dat cannelure.

 

[mcb]

Add others have said, for pistol caliber carbines any load safe in the pistol/revolver will be safe in the rifle. That said if you choose slower powders they usually will give you a larger velocity boost in the rifle.

Example. Worked up two loads for my 44mag revolver only differing in the propellent used, same bullet. I work both up to give me ~1350 fps from my revolver. The one with fast powder only made ~1600 fps in the carbine but the one using the slower powder made ~1750 fps.

 

[Charlie98]

If I’m not mistaken (and I apologize if I am), the Winchester 92 has a rear locking mechanism which will allow your brass to flex and stretch a little at high pressures.

Yes, the 92 is the strongest lever with rear locking lugs for handgun cartridges, it is, essentially, a downsized version of the 1886 action. I don't really think the both thrust of even a .357MAG would be enough to flex the bolt, and particularly with modern metallurgy, but I may be all wet on that. The 92 is a well-built lever-action.

Add others have said, for pistol caliber carbines any load safe in the pistol/revolver will be safe in the rifle. That said if you choose slower powders they usually will give you a larger velocity boost in the rifle.

I do the same with my .41's... a midrange load of Unique and a cast bullet for the pistols, but does dandy in the rifle, and a higher velocity load, usually with IMR4227, cast or jacketed, for the Marlin... but still works well in the pistols.

 

[Palladan44]

Yes, the 92 is the strongest lever with rear locking lugs for handgun cartridges, it is, essentially, a downsized version of the 1886 action. I don't really think the both thrust of even a .357MAG would be enough to flex the bolt, and particularly with modern metallurgy, but I may be all wet on that. The 92 is a well-built lever-action.




I do the same with my .41's... a midrange load of Unique and a cast bullet for the pistols, but does dandy in the rifle, and a higher velocity load, usually with IMR4227, cast or jacketed, for the Marlin... but still works well in the pistols.

I'm going to admit I'm learning something from this thread. What I'm gathering here is that straight walled cartridges, especially ones that headspace on the rim, pressures are more uniform in between firearms if loads are transferred between, yes? Shouldered cartridges are where a load would probably be necessary to re work from the starting charge and work back up?

When does maximum pressure occur when a round is fired? Is it when the powder ignites, and the bullet just begins to start moving and pressure steadily decreases from there? Not to be confused with velocity, the bullet continues to accelerate despite dropping pressure...

 

[AJC1]

I'm going to admit I'm learning something from this thread. What I'm gathering here is that straight walled cartridges, especially ones that headspace on the rim, pressures are more uniform in between firearms if loads are transferred between, yes? Shouldered cartridges are where a load would probably be necessary to re work from the starting charge and work back up?

When does maximum pressure occur when a round is fired? Is it when the powder ignites, and the bullet just begins to start moving and pressure steadily decreases from there? Not to be confused with velocity, the bullet continues to accelerate despite dropping pressure...

That is a powder characteristic mostly. Things like inhibitors will change that. I've never seen a pistol pressure trace but I suspect there are not double humps like in some rifle powders.

 

[Charlie98]

Heres and example of the pressure wave... it's for the .41MAG in my Marlin, but easily would translate to other cartridges. Note, peak pressure is in the first 1/2" of barrel. The same load in a revolver, for example, would in reality be a little difference, because of the jump between the cylinder and the barrel forcing cone.

Rifle cartridges, and particularly bottleneck cartridges, are a bit of a different animal, and as John suggests, much of it has to do with propellant.

 

[Charlie98]

As an example, here is a map of a .308 round with IMR3031... note the less peaked pressure wave (slower powder) and that it takes nearly 2" of barrel to peak. Note, also, that the rifle round burns all of it's propellant before 16" of barrel, but the previous load, with W296, does not, even in 20" of rifle barrel.

This also demonstrates why big charges of fast powders give more felt recoil... the very sharp pressure peak... when compared to slower powders, and even when the slower powders deliver more velocity. It took me years to understand that.

 

[GooseGestapo]

You’re close. Pressure is usually peaked shortly after the bullet enters the throat. Most powders are consumed in pistol cartridges within 1” of barrel travel. Rifle’s perhaps 2”.
The increase in velocity with longer barrels is due to continued pressure behind the bullet continuing to accelerate it, but acceleration decreases as barrel length is lengthened. This point of diminished return occurs at approximately 16” with a 22rf.
The muzzle flash present in most cases is the result of uncombined oxidizer being exposed to the open atmosphere igniting in the presence of other combinable elements.
Fascinating physics/organic chemistry!
Charlie98’s diagram clearly demonstrates/illustrates the dynamics.

 

[Palladan44]

Heres and example of the pressure wave... it's for the .41MAG in my Marlin, but easily would translate to other cartridges. Note, peak pressure is in the first 1/2" of barrel. The same load in a revolver, for example, would in reality be a little difference, because of the jump between the cylinder and the barrel forcing cone.

Rifle cartridges, and particularly bottleneck cartridges, are a bit of a different animal, and as John suggests, much of it has to do with propellant.

I'd think the cylinder gap affects a lot, just judging on how velocity fluctuates with the same load (W296, book max, 158gr Deepcurl JHP) in between my 6" Model 28-2, my 6" M586 no dash and my 6" M27-2

The M28 barely gets more than 1225fps.
The 586 gets 1300
The M27 gets a bit closer to advertised but not quite, to around 1,330fps.

I've never measured the cyl gaps, but the 28 is well a well worn firearm. The spent casings contain the most amount of unburnt powder, or granules in it.
This low velocity out of the M28 coupled with the dirtiness in the barrel and kernels in the brass tells me that this M28 probably doesn't allow for the pressure to build up to the narrow window that W296 likes to be in. Whether its the cylinder gap, the forcing cone, or a well worn barrel, who knows.

I doubt any other powder could get that same slug going any faster, though. Could a faster burning powder get a higher pressure and thus maybe a higher velocity out of that old M28??
The popular belief is No. But I should give it a try..... I have AA#9, Blue Dot, Longshot and 2400.

 

[Charlie98]

I doubt any other powder could get that same slug going any faster, though. Could a faster burning powder get a higher pressure and thus maybe a higher velocity out of that old M28??
The popular belief is No. But I should give it a try..... I have AA#9, Blue Dot, Longshot and 2400.

No... and I wouldn't suggest trying it. A faster powder will, indeed, pump your pressures up, but you will not see a higher velocity. There may be some very specific caveats to that... a 2" barrel or something... but that's the general rule.

Back Home, Years Ago, my brother and I wore his S&W 57 out trying to get Magnum velocities.... with Unique. As Arnold said in The Terminator... "It doesn't verk that vay."

 

[Palladan44]

No... and I wouldn't suggest trying it. A faster powder will, indeed, pump your pressures up, but you will not see a higher velocity. There may be some very specific caveats to that... a 2" barrel or something... but that's the general rule.

Back Home, Years Ago, my brother and I wore his S&W 57 out trying to get Magnum velocities.... with Unique. As Arnold said in The Terminator... "It doesn't verk that vay."

Understood, and that's what I thought. I would only try using published data if I did try.
@Walkalong explained this to me awhile ago, basically said the highest velocity from a long barrel will be the highest velocity you'd get from a short one too, really no exceptions.

Can you explain why there's a lot of talk why W-296 or Say Alliant Power Pro 300MP really "Shines" in longer barrels?
Is it a straight up product of the burn speed of the powder and charge weight? (Longer barrel, slower powder?) I'm thinking a more massive charge that's slower burning will have more fuel to continue to ignite as the bullet accelerates down the barrel..... it's the same reason W-296 has a huge fireball out of most 6" and less handguns, unburnt powder that otherwise would still be creating pressure to accelerate the bullet from a longer barrel, right?

But despite the lack of efficiency in a short barrel, the W-296 would be unmatched in velocity still. It might just have excessive muzzle flash and excessive recoil from the high charge weight and maybe a little of the jet effect (the force of the larger muzzle blast pushing out forward on the surrounding atmosphere, and thus pushing back on the firearm, on top of just the physical acceleration of the bullet (and mass of the fuel(powder) going forward)

 

[Charlie98]

Can you explain why there's a lot of talk why W-296 or Say Alliant Power Pro 300MP really "Shines" in longer barrels?

You can group the slower pistol powders into one group... say W296/H110, 300MP, IMR4227, 2400, et al. Those all benefit from a full case... the burning efficiency actually goes up on a compressed load, vs a 90% case fill load. It's just how those powders work. Further, they need weight to push... they don't do well with very light bullets (erratic burn, incomplete burn... in my experience.) Where a midrange powder, like Unique, really could care less about case fill and bullet weight, as soon as you demand higher velocity, it is wise to move to those powders designed for it. For that matter... powders like IMR4227 and 2400 work really well as a rifle powder, for much of the same reason, but bringing that idea around full circle... don't expect to get maximum velocity from a rifle cartridge using IMR4227 when compared to IMR3031, or anything slower.

The muzzle flash present in most cases is the result of uncombined oxidizer being exposed to the open atmosphere igniting in the presence of other combinable elements.
Fascinating physics/organic chemistry!

Quite!

 

[Mr_Flintstone]

Understood, and that's what I thought. I would only try using published data if I did try.
@Walkalong explained this to me awhile ago, basically said the highest velocity from a long barrel will be the highest velocity you'd get from a short one too, really no exceptions.

There actually are exceptions, but the rule seems to hold more often than not.

Can you explain why there's a lot of talk why W-296 or Say Alliant Power Pro 300MP really "Shines" in longer barrels?
Is it a straight up product of the burn speed of the powder and charge weight? (Longer barrel, slower powder?) I'm thinking a more massive charge that's slower burning will have more fuel to continue to ignite as the bullet accelerates down the barrel..... it's the same reason W-296 has a huge fireball out of most 6" and less handguns, unburnt powder that otherwise would still be creating pressure to accelerate the bullet from a longer barrel, right?

H110, W296, 2400, 4227, etc… all fill the biggest portion of the case in a .357 Magnum. All of that powder mass gets converted to gas when ignited. That larger volume of gas will push farther down the barrel than the smaller volume of gas from something like Titegroup when both achieve the same peak pressure.

 

[AJC1]

I'd think the cylinder gap affects a lot, just judging on how velocity fluctuates with the same load (W296, book max, 158gr Deepcurl JHP) in between my 6" Model 28-2, my 6" M586 no dash and my 6" M27-2

The M28 barely gets more than 1225fps.
The 586 gets 1300
The M27 gets a bit closer to advertised but not quite, to around 1,330fps.

I've never measured the cyl gaps, but the 28 is well a well worn firearm. The spent casings contain the most amount of unburnt powder, or granules in it.
This low velocity out of the M28 coupled with the dirtiness in the barrel and kernels in the brass tells me that this M28 probably doesn't allow for the pressure to build up to the narrow window that W296 likes to be in. Whether its the cylinder gap, the forcing cone, or a well worn barrel, who knows.

I doubt any other powder could get that same slug going any faster, though. Could a faster burning powder get a higher pressure and thus maybe a higher velocity out of that old M28??
The popular belief is No. But I should give it a try..... I have AA#9, Blue Dot, Longshot and 2400.

Yes, lil gun gets bullets moving faster, no I wouldn't even try it with a faster powder excep#9. I've really pushed #9.

 

[AJC1]

Understood, and that's what I thought. I would only try using published data if I did try.
@Walkalong explained this to me awhile ago, basically said the highest velocity from a long barrel will be the highest velocity you'd get from a short one too, really no exceptions.

Can you explain why there's a lot of talk why W-296 or Say Alliant Power Pro 300MP really "Shines" in longer barrels?
Is it a straight up product of the burn speed of the powder and charge weight? (Longer barrel, slower powder?) I'm thinking a more massive charge that's slower burning will have more fuel to continue to ignite as the bullet accelerates down the barrel..... it's the same reason W-296 has a huge fireball out of most 6" and less handguns, unburnt powder that otherwise would still be creating pressure to accelerate the bullet from a longer barrel, right?

But despite the lack of efficiency in a short barrel, the W-296 would be unmatched in velocity still. It might just have excessive muzzle flash and excessive recoil from the high charge weight and maybe a little of the jet effect (the force of the larger muzzle blast pushing out forward on the surrounding atmosphere, and thus pushing back on the firearm, on top of just the physical acceleration of the bullet (and mass of the fuel(powder) going forward)

Those powders generate the largest volume of Gas below peak pressure. Faster in all senerious, still burning and making gas exiting the pistol, technically inefficient. Worst case situation for a suppressor

 

[OS/N]

In rifle
W296/H110 for 125 and under
Lil'gun for 158 and above

In handgun
Medium pistol powder longshot +/-

The med will do okay for regular shooting in the rifle but if hunting you want all you can get and still get accuracy.

If you load too hot in the 92 the split bolt face will uneven the brass head. Go with slower powder to get more fps at decent pressure. You wont see it in a marlin but pressure would still be over spec.

 

[Show Me]

In rifle
W296/H110 for 125 and under
Lil'gun for 158 and above

In handgun
Medium pistol powder longshot +/-

The med will do okay for regular shooting in the rifle but if hunting you want all you can get and still get accuracy.

If you load too hot in the 92 the split bolt face will uneven the brass head. Go with slower powder to get more fps at decent pressure. You wont see it in a marlin but pressure would still be over spec.

What do you mean too hot. Over max? Why would anyone do that. Just get a 44 mag. H 110 is perfect for 158 gr

 

[Soonerpesek]

Example of what? That your not picking up what's being laid down. You don't ever need separate data for .357 long guns. 357 is 357

This is the bullet the OP is using…..
Hornady sez to load them accordingly…..?!?


But, what does Hornady know about their own products…..!!!…

 

[Show Me]

This is the bullet the OP is using…..
Hornady sez to load them accordingly…..?!?
View attachment 1188792View attachment 1188793

But, what does Hornady know about their own products…..!!!…

Ya I've got that book too and the Sierra book. Your not reading the op saying he doesn't want to blow up his rifle with revolver loads. Reading comprehension not picture books

 

[Soonerpesek]

Ya I've got that book too and the Sierra book. Your not reading the op saying he doesn't want to blow up his rifle with revolver loads. Reading comprehension not picture books

Read the picture book….
Max load in a revolver is OVER max in the rifle….
Thanks for tryin’ to play……