.357 rifle load safety

[kmittleman]

Hey fellas,

I saw a .357 load in one of the articles on this site that listed a 158 gr JSP over 15.9 gr of 2400. I bring it up because my Lyman and Lee manuals max out at around 14.9 gr. Has anyone tried this one - is it safe?

I plan on firing it out of an 18.5" H&R Trapper.

-Kevin

[Rusty]

It might have been safe in the writer's gun at the time with his components. If it's safe in your H&R that would be a different mater. Any time you get near max power levels those levels should be approached with caution.

[olyinaz]

Speer #11 shows 15.9 as a max 2400 load for rifle (Marlin M94, CCI 550mag primer, Speer case). They backed off that in their latest to 14.8.

I did also find 16.0 with a Remington No. 7.5 small rifle primer listed for the Ruger No. 1 rifle over at Load Data .com site, 158gr. jacketed of course, and I think the data came from "Handloader" issue 111. It chronoed at 1850fps.

And another set of loads simply listed for the .357 158 JSP showed 15.5 as max for 2400 with a CCI 550 primer.

So I'd say you're talking about a max load that needs to be approached carefully, but clearly it's been done because it was published at one point. Most manuals seem to have backed off a bit.

Oly

[Ji in Hawaii]

On hot loads I usually start 10% below max in manual, and work my way up.

[Moondawg]

That load may have been safe at one time with a particular lot# of 2400. It does not mean it is safe with current lot# of 2400 and current components in your particular firearm.

[Old Ironsights]

Ditto to what has been said. Start below max, work up to whats shoots well in your gun.

That could be under "max" or over "max". No way to tell until you try a handful each of a dozen different loads.

[2571]

I like light loads for general shooting at paper & pop cans because of recoil, noise, component accessibility & because I'm cheap. I load up for the occasions I'm going to hunt deer.

What is the fascination with loads so hot that many people have to go on the internet to inquire if they are safe? Why is it important to use that extra, one grain of propellant if there is any question about personal or firearm damage?

I am asking out of general interest, not to flame or inspire argument here. Again, I shoot enough to have decided in favor light versus medium loads.

tia

[Old Ironsights]

I like light loads for general shooting at paper & pop cans because of recoil, noise, component accessibility & because I'm cheap. I load up for the occasions I'm going to hunt deer...

Ditto. But he asked the question.

[FatJackDurham]

What is the fascination with loads so hot that many people have to go on the internet to inquire if they are safe? Why is it important to use that extra, one grain of propellant if there is any question about personal or firearm damage?
tia

Speaking only for myself, I feel a desire to make top efficiency. As an amateur, I find I have to fight the desire to believe that a hotter, faster load is better and more accurate. It is very strange, I think. I have read the books, they all say this is not true. In my head I know that accuracy and range have more to do with the condition of the bore, the sights, the shooting habits and a well tuned load that is matched to the weapon.

But KNOWING all that, I still have a visceral urge to want a powerful load. It must be some form of machoism, or psycology. I don't know.

One think I want to learn, is how to estimate chamber pressure. One book I was reading recently, or it could have been an online article, mention Vol. 2 of some reference. It seemed to imply that if you measure your brass before and after, there is some way to calculate the pressure in the chamber.

Being able to do this seems critical to me, if you really want to dive into reloading. I, for instance, shoot a Rossi 357. My range is severily limited by this choice of round, however, that only makes me want to seek out a way to hit a target reliably at 200 - 250 yards, just to do it. To do this, I need to find the right size bullet, the right load, the right COL, velocity and pressure.

Unfortunately, most of the available manuals only list data for handguns in 357. Being able to tailor a 357 specifically for a rifle, probably means using slightly slower powders, etc, righty? But, to deviate from the printed loads seems to be courting disaster unless you have some way to monitor pressure.

ANy thoughts on these ramblings?

[kmittleman]

I picked that as a load because it would in theory develope the 1200 ft lbs of energy required by Maryland law for rifle hunting for deer (or come very close to it). The 180 gr loads don't seem do that as easily even if they do kill deer more efficiently (or not as the case may be).

-Kevin

[Old Ironsights]

I picked that as a load because it would in theory develope the 1200 ft lbs of energy required by Maryland law for rifle hunting for deer (or come very close to it). The 180 gr loads don't seem do that as easily even if they do kill deer more efficiently (or not as the case may be).

-Kevin

1200ftlbs at what range?

the 180gr/16gr LilGun load (Buffalo Bore 180) makes 1294ftlbs at the muzzle and still making 880 ftlbs at 100yds...
(180 @ 1800 - what my gun gets with this load)


The lighter 158 isn't going to carry as well over distance either.
(158 @ 1900)


To get a 158 to match the 180 you have to push it over 2000fps. (Yes, you can do that - the BB 19C runs about 2150 from a rifle, but it's still a lighter bullet...)

I use 158s strictly as GP/AP loads. For Deer (where legal) it's the 180 all the way.

[FatJackDurham]

Wow. Good question. Hopefully the law specifies muzzle. Otherwise 357 is a goner for deer hunting.

[alnitak]

I picked that as a load because it would in theory develope the 1200 ft lbs of energy required by Maryland law for rifle hunting for deer (or come very close to it). The 180 gr loads don't seem do that as easily even if they do kill deer more efficiently (or not as the case may be).

-Kevin

Wow, talk about over kill! I find it interesting to note that the specifications for pistol hunting of deer (and bear) only calls for 700 ft-lbs!

Guess the same bullet moving slower is more deadly out of a handgun that a lever rifle!

(I'll forgo the rant about stupid politicians making up nonsensical rules!)

[mikld]

FWIW; Long ago I learned not to pay much attention to any reloading data that comes from any forum expert, web-site (mebbe a powder mfg's site, mebbe), or gun shop guru. Just reciently I've read some very questionable loads in forums, and in the past saw some that were downright dangerous. The gun shop guru is the one I just listen to, smile and say thanks, and immediately forget what he said. Becaue of his "position" as resident in charge of all reloading/shooting/hunting knowledge, his suggestions can be especially dangerous. The counterman of the sporting goods dept. fits this catagory too. I use data from published reloading manuals almost entirely (there's enough different load combinations that will last me a lifetime in my manuals), even though some argue that typos occur, I haven't run across any...

jes my dos centavos

[kmittleman]

Yeah our laws here are stupid. But then again, most of this state thinks Obama is the best thing to come along since sliced bread.

The 1200 ft lbs is at the muzzle so I'm good there.

-Kevin

[Rusty]

Kevin,

Here is a link to a forum that is totally dedicated to Handi Rifles. You can do a lot with them. A lot of the .357's have long chambers right from the factory. Most are long enough that a .360 Wesson will chamber right off. A lot of folks run a reamer in the .357 Mag. and turn it into a .357 Max.

[kmittleman]

Hey Rusty,


Thanks for the lead - the link didn't show up though. Can you tell me what it is again?


-Kevin

[86er]

There's nothing wrong w a max load that proves safe in your rifle. However, the performance may actually be diminished if the projectile cannot sustain the pressure (uneven obturation, early release from brass or instability) or the velocity (accuracy, yawing, weight retentiion and lack of penetration).

[Marlin32]

900 ft-lbs at 100yds here in Nebraska, if you want to compare stupid. The kicker for me is that the revolver in 357 is legal, but shoot same bullet out of 12" longer barrel, and now it is no longer legal. I have gone over this so much, still torques me off.

[Griff]

There's nothing wrong w a max load that proves safe in your rifle. However, the performance may actually be diminished if the projectile cannot sustain the pressure (uneven obturation, early release from brass or instability) or the velocity (accuracy, yawing, weight retention and lack of penetration).

Gold in those words. It is theoretically possible to push a bullet too fast... even while maintaining safe pressures. In order to maximize the accuracy of any round, you must be able to make ammo that is utterly, and unerringly reliable and consistent. Bullet design has a LOT to do with this. I have one 7mmRemMag rifle (a 1980 produced Remington 700DBL, sporter weight 24" barrel) which I've killed deer with at over 300 yards. (When I lived in CA). I found that while my most accurate load @200 yards was a 115HP at around 3100fps... in THAT gun; the same load in my newer 1997 Rem 700SPS with a 24" bull barrel, is not hold similar groups. I found that my 2nd most accurate load in the sporter weight gun is the MOST accurate in my heavier barrelled 700. That load is a 140gr Nosler Ballistic tip pushing around 2750fps. And that load is far more accurate in the bull barrel than the sporter weight... almost 1/3 smaller groups. That's for ranges from 100 yards out to 300. And, if I use the 150 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip at ranges beyond 300 yards it provides even better accuracy than the 140s at those longer ranges... even tho' it's only has a muzzle velocity of 2650fps.

Anyone guess the reason?

[COSteve]

The 357mag maximum recommended loads have diminished along with every other load over the years in part because of better measurement devices and in part because of more lawyers. I've got some old reloading books that list loads as high as 17.7 grns of H110 with 158grn jacketed bullets in a Win '92 style levergun. I'm not saying that these are recommended or even safe in your levergun but I'm saying that I've tried these in my Rossis and except for a bit of a flattened primer (not bad actually) they worked fine. No sticking when ejecting and good accuracy using 158grn Zero JSP bullets and CCI SPM primers. However, your situation might vary so be sure to start at 10% below recommended max and work your loads up in your firearm.

[AJMD429]

It always seems like 2400 is moreso than any other powder, one where the 'old time' loads were listed as very high grains, vs. the 'modern' loads.

Maybe the other powders are just more consistent, or maybe the 2400 has some lawyers who are more paranoid and have talked them into dropping the loads over the years.

It would be interesting to know why of all the other powders around, 2400 seems to be the one that is 'different'...

I, for instance, shoot a Rossi 357. My range is severily limited by this choice of round, however, that only makes me want to seek out a way to hit a target reliably at 200 - 250 yards, just to do it. To do this, I need to find the right size bullet, the right load, the right COL, velocity and pressure.

If you get a bullet stabilized (enough RPM's for its length), any velocity will enable you to hit out at those long ranges, IF you know your range (either by marked distances, rangefinder, or trial-shots). Nothing wrong with that goal. As for hunting, of course you want to make sure the energy and bullet are adequate for a humane kill at the distance you intend to hunt, and that your shot placement skills can compensate for the variables in trajectory.

FWIW; Long ago I learned not to pay much attention to any reloading data that comes from any forum expert, web-site (mebbe a powder mfg's site, mebbe), or gun shop guru.

LoadData.com is a website that consolidates reloading data that IS from 'manufacturer published' data, and although there is a modest annual fee, it can replace the reloading manuals 'data' sections - although the manuals are VERY valuable for overall instructional use as well. In addition, the AmmoGuide.com website differentiates between 'manufacturer published' data and 'user' data, and has lots of search features for things like seeing what powder has listed data for a given set of cartridges, etc.

So, I'd not write off 'web-site' data entirely - just take it ALL with a grain of salt.

[Rusty]

Sorry about the lost link, here it is again

http://www.go2gbo.com/forums/index.php?board=126.0

[Old Ironsights]

It always seems like 2400 is moreso than any other powder, one where the 'old time' loads were listed as very high grains, vs. the 'modern' loads.

Maybe the other powders are just more consistent, or maybe the 2400 has some lawyers who are more paranoid and have talked them into dropping the loads over the years.

It would be interesting to know why of all the other powders around, 2400 seems to be the one that is 'different'......

That's 'cause 2400 is such a good powder that if they didn't reduce the loads there wouldn't be enough of it to go around...

[Rusty]

You might be right about that OS. I know I use it in just about everything I load.

[gundownunder]

My rifle likes hot loads, yours may not. If you work up sssslowly and don't have a pressure problem then you may be good to go until you get a warmer day. I believe 2400 is temperature sensitive, and it would be no good finding that out after you wake up with half the action shoved up your left nostril