• You are using the old High Contrast theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

Reloading for the .357 Magnum

Status
Not open for further replies.
Old Grumpy

Old Grumpy

Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
195
Location
Central Illinois
I am going to build some test loads using several different powders to compare them.

These rounds will be built using new Starline cases, CCI Small Pistol Magnum primers, 158gr Speer JHP, and five different powders (Blue Dot, 2400, AA#7, AA#9, and IMR-4227).

Charge weights were researched using four different sources; Lyman's 49th, Hornday's 7th Edition, Speer's 5th Edition, and the powder company's web sites. Not all data sources listed all five powders and as expected charge weights and velocities conflicted. All loads were listed in a minimum of two different guides, none were listed in all four reference sources for the bullet/caliber being used.

Here are the details on the loads I'm going to build:

Starline cases, 1.590" OAL, CCI 200 SPM, Speer 158gr JHP, target velocity range 1,150fps +/-

Each lot will consist of 20 rounds. Ten rounds to be fired over my chronograph to determine velocities and the second ten to be fired from a rest at 25 yards to check accuracy.

Lot #1, Alliant Blue Dot, charge 10.6gr

Data found for this load is:
Lyman's 49th, start 9.6gr/929fps maximum 10.7gr/1,158fps
Hornady's 7th, not listed
Sierra's 5th, start 11.6gr/1,150fps maximum 12.6gr/1,250fps
Alliant's web site, start not given maximum 10.2gr/1,188fps

So lot one is within Lyman's and Speer's data but 0.4gr above Alliant's maximum. OK 2, Not listed 1, Over 1


Lot #2, Accurate #7, charge 11.1gr

Data for this load is:
Lyman's 49th, start 10.2/1,005fps maximum 11.5gr/1,220fps
Hornady's 7th, not listed
Sierra's 5th, start 10.2gr/1,050fps maximum 12.0gr/1,200fps
Accurate's web site, start 9.5gr/1,196fps maximum 10.5gr/1,357fps

So lot two is within Lyman's, Hornady's, and Speer's data but 0.6gr above Accurate's maximum. OK 2, Over 1, Not listed 1


Lot #3, Accurate #9, charge 13.4gr

Data for this load is:
Lyman's 49th, start 13.4gr/1,158fps maximum 14.9gr/1,357fps
Hornady's 7th, start 9.7gr/1,000fps maximum 11.5gr 1,200fps
Sierra's 5th, start 12.7gr/1,100fps maximum 14.1gr/1,200fps
Accurate's web site, start 12.4gr/1,202fps maximum 13.8gr/1,367fps

So lot three is within Lyman's, Speer's, and Accurate's maximum but above Hornady's maximum. OK 3, Over 1


Lot #4, 2400, charge 13.5gr

Data for this load is:
Lyman's 49th, start 11.3gr/938fps maximum 14.9gr/1,279fps
Hornady's 7th, start 11.9gr/1,150fps maximum 15.5gr/1,350fps
Sierra's 5th, start 14.0gr/1,200fps maximum 15.0gr/1,250fps
Alliant's web site, not listed

So lot four is within Lyman's, Hornady's, and Speer's but not listed in Alliant's web site for this bullet/caliber. OK 3, Not Listed 1


Lot #5, IMR-4227 14.8gr

Data for this load is:
Lyman's 49th, start 12.2gr/944fps maximum 16.1gr/1,249fps
Hornady's 7th, start 15.3gr/1,150fps maximum 16.1gr/1,200fps
Sierra's 5th, not listed
Hodgdon's web site, not listed

So lot five is within Lyman's and Hornady's data but not listed by Speer or Hodgdon for this bullet/caliber. OK 2, Not Listed 2


So there you have it. With seemingly conflicting data you can see why new reloaders get confused. Points to be noted, some of this data was developed using firearms while other data was developed using Universal Receivers. Some sources round their data so velocities are given in 50 fps steps. No one source consistently listed higher charge weights. Some charge weights and velocities do appear very close while others seem way off.

What is a reloader to do?

I always check multiple sources, examine the data, and use my experiences to make my decisions. I will post my results in the revolver section when I get the chance to run to the range and drop a notice here for anyone interested in how my real-world numbers look compared to the source data.

Thoughts and experiences welcome.

Grumpy
__________________
 
Last edited:
Speer's 5th came out before most of today's handloaders were born!


What is it you are testing for? Just an overall evaluation of each load?


Dependng on what you are looking for, it may be incomplete without 296 or 110.
 
^^^Ditto^^^

What is it you want from the round rather than what every thing shows.
State specific desire then someone here can offer suggestions on point.
 
Go shoot them and look for signs of pressure.

As far as safety concerns, I always understood, maybe mistakenly, that a large publisher of reloading data would be wise to keep their maximum loads at a conservative level given the specs provided, and that some people are more conservative than others.

Personally, I like your charge weights as they ensure that you're not undercharged and highly likely not overcharged given the various data.
 
The OP stated that his " target velocity " range was 1150 FPS which I took as him saying that this is about the velocity that he desired.

Old Grumpy, the Alliant site does list a load for the 158 gr. GDHP and 2400 powder . They state that their max is 14.8 grs. / 1265 FPS. I will say that 2400 powder does not need a mag primer and many of us achieve better results using standard primers .

You also list using 13.5 grs of 2400 with that 158 gr. JHP . This is the load that I have settled on ( using standard small pistol primers ) as of late for my 90% of full power load for my Ruger GP100. It does do an honest 1150 FPS from a 4 " barrel , is accurate for me and though it's a fairly potent load it is still very manageable in double action mode for all six shots in a short length of time. Fired cases almost extract from gravity alone.
 
Last edited:
Might want to update a few manuals. It is always good to compare other manuals but the data is going to vary.

Mainly by the specific bullet used and of course the test barrel or actual gun used. Primers can play a part also. So you test results will not be what their tests show.

2400 is a long time traditional powder for the 357 Mag. Blue Dot needs to be up at the high end it spits out unburned bits of powder and can be finicky in hot or cold weather,.
 
TimSr, I'm just loading a few rounds using various powders I have on hand. If I were doing this for a gun magazine or broad publication I'd include more powders and W296 certainly would be part of the group. However I just curious about the powders on hand and I don't look for some of these to be "ideal" loads. But it keeps me out of the tavern (at least part of the day).

Grumpy
 
Rule3, Yes some of my manuals are dated. I've got a couple Ideal guides from the 50s but for the most part I can't find most of the powders listed it them. :D

I believe Lyman's 49th is still their newest but the 50th should be out sometime. As far as Speer's #5, it was a gift from a buddy for helping him move (in lieu of money).

I have used 2400 for decades in my .44 mag and some .357 mag. I know it's hard to beat.

Grumpy
 
geo57, being able to use SPP with 2400 is one reason I like it. I realize I listed CCI 200 SPM primers as one of the components but I'll probably go with Winchester SPP under the 2400.

1,150 fps is the range I'd like to aim for. Trying to build test loads using similar velocities is not real easy since charge weight/velocity is not a straight line. There is a point of diminishing returns where the fps increase lessens as the charge weight increases. Oh if it were only that simple.

Grumpy
 
murf, These will be worked up with a 6" Ruger Security-Six. Should anything turn out promising I'll try them in my 4" Security-Sixes (2) and maybe my 6" Python. Still the main goal is to experiment with different powders to compare loads and accuracy.

Grumpy
 
grumpy,

every firearm is different. what works in one pistol may not work in another pistol of the same make and manufacture. glad to see you are using a chronograph. suggest you take heed of any abnormal readings. and ask as many questions as necessary.

luck,

murf
 
Drail, Do you have any personal experience with BD in the .357? There is a lot of chatter regarding BD and "light for caliber" bullets but other than "it's dirty at lower than max weights" I've only heard what's been posted on the net.

Grumpy
 
I'd save my bullets and primers and not test Blue Dot. I used to shoot it before the warnings with light bullets but was never satisfied with the results. I shoot AA#9 powder now for all 158 gr. loads in .357 Magnum. Accurate Arms 1st Manual tested all loads with CCI 500 standard primers and that is what I use with AA#9. My 6" Python and Marlin lever action rifle both like 13.0 grains of AA#9 in RP and Win cases using CCI 500 standard primers. In AA's no. 1 manual they list 13.0 grains of AA#9 in Frontier cases, CCI 500 primers, Hornady 158 XTP's at an oal at 1.580" as MAXIMUM. Just for more info. Accurate Arms #9 is the best powder I've loaded and I've used Blue Dot, Win 296, and 2400.
 
I've used mag primers a few times but have reduced the charge and chrono'd them to make sure I wasn't in over load/ over pressure range. I don't trust a visual look for over pressure signs.
 
I'm hoping you run the 4227 and the Blue Dot through the shorter barrel.
 
Conflicting data has several base reasons.

1. The lawyers are different for each source :D

2. the test barrel - some use an actual gun, some use a - can't think what it's called.
But it's a SEALED barrel - so there's no barrel-cylinder gap.
And some of the barrels used are 10 inches or more in length.

3. Different components - different bullets, different primers as well as different powders.
There can even be differences noted between Lot numbers of said components.

I know when I first started reloading, I relied VERY heavily on Lyman's data.
Mainly because I used cast bullets.

Have you ever tried to find data for a specific manufacturer's lead bullets?
I used a lot of bullets from Missouri Bullet Co, Magnus Bullet Co & Berry's plated.

By the way 2400 works fantastic under a 125 gr Hornady XTP. I've shot thousands of 'em.
 
Hondo 60 said:
Conflicting data has several base reasons.

1. The lawyers are different for each source :D

2. the test barrel - some use an actual gun, some use a - can't think what it's called.
But it's a SEALED barrel - so there's no barrel-cylinder gap.
And some of the barrels used are 10 inches or more in length.

3. Different components - different bullets, different primers as well as different powders.
There can even be differences noted between Lot numbers of said components.

I know when I first started reloading, I relied VERY heavily on Lyman's data.
Mainly because I used cast bullets.

Have you ever tried to find data for a specific manufacturer's lead bullets?
I used a lot of bullets from Missouri Bullet Co, Magnus Bullet Co & Berry's plated.

By the way 2400 works fantastic under a 125 gr Hornady XTP. I've shot thousands of 'em.
Click to expand...
Hondo 60, I believe you are referencing the "Universal Receiver" and you are correct, no barrel cylinder gap.

Grumpy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

9
  • Locked
Alliant load data vs. manual for 55 gr. .22-250
Replies
5
Views
2K
OrangePwrx9
O
H
  • Locked
Magnum primer Vs standard primer in .357
Replies
4
Views
3K
Peter M. Eick
P
T
  • Locked
Viht. N110 in .357 Mag: primer choice
Replies
15
Views
5K
RDub
R
L
  • Locked
Start Charge Weight Reduction
Replies
3
Views
440
LiveLife
LiveLife
O
  • Locked
.357 Mag with H110/296 and 180 gr XTP
Replies
8
Views
7K
murf
murf
Back
Top