I don't know whose load data to trust

[jamesp81]

I usually load my 357s pretty light. Because of that, conflicting load data has never been a concern. If I'm loading to 38 special pressures and the load data I'm working from is not accurate it's not a big deal if I stray into 38 +P or light magnum pressures.

This presents a problem if I want to load some honest to goodness crackenboomers however.

I am casting .358 boolits from a Lee mold, 358-158-rf. I haven't got this working at 38 velocities yet but I will eventually. After that, I will explore loading these at magnum pressures.

RCBS lists a 159gr boolit that is very similar in profile to the Lee 358-158-rf. It lists the start and max charges for 296 at 16 and 17 grains. Lee's reloading manual lists 14.5gr max for a 158gr lead boolit without mentioning what kind of lead boolit. RCBS lists a max charge for a 175gr boolits that is slightly higher than the max charge listed by Lee.

Lyman lists a charge for a 168gr boolit that is also above Lee's max for 158gr.

This is a problem. Lee's data doesn't specify which 158gr lead boolit you should be using. Others list powder charges for their similar boolits that, if the Lee data is correct, would stand a good chance of blowing up the gun. I don't expect powder charges for boolits from other companies to be exactly the same but I would expect them to be somewhere in the same zip code.

I guess my question is, who do I trust? I'm inclined to go with Lee's data since I'm using a Lee mold but the manual doesn't specify the 358-158-Rf boolit specifically.

Maybe I'm overthinking this. I only got into cast boolits fairly recently. Until then I just bought Hornady jacketed bullets and went by Hornady load manuals. Standard load work up always served me well. Cast boolits are far more...ambiguous.

[Fordcragar]

You might check out some other manuals. You didn't mention what powder you are using, have you checked their recommendations? Some of the powder manufacturers have load data online.

[Buckshot]

...............My answer is that you don't trust anyones data until you back check a couple of loading manuals. To put it into perspective. Reloading ammo is somewhere between a squib and a bomb, and we're usually loading closer to a bomb then a squib. A squib load is an annoyance, but producing a bomb is several levels beyond where you want to be. Blowing your face or several of your fingers off is really not where you want to go.

I'm reminded of a post made many years ago on the "Gunloads" forum, (not here at Cast Boolits) when Swede M96 Mausers were cheap and plentiful in the late 90's. A young man posting on the Swede board was agonizingly candid in reporting his results. He and his father checked at a local gunshop about reloading for their brand new 1896 Swede Mauser. That worthy said they needed to used Red Dot. The young man was candid in reporting that they used some particular amount of powder but his father felt that it didn't seem like enough, so they poured in some more, until it looked about right.

While their M96 Swede didn't blow up, it did lock up the bolt, and in effect ruined their nice M96 Swede Mauser, as it swelled the action and upset the bolt and the lugs. THe young man reported that they couldn't open the bolt with a large hammer.

...............Buckshot

[reed1911]

My first thought is that with that plain base bullet, you will not want to run H110/W296; and that may be the reason for the lower charge listed. W296/H110 is a pretty high pressure powder, needing the high pressure to fully burn properly, and frankly there are very few situations where it produces stellar groups with cast, even with GC. Don't fail to try it as it may be the load that give you award winning accuracy, it just would not be my first powder choice.

When you look at data that all use similar bullets or bullets that will leave the case volume very close to the same once seated, and data set X, Y, Z are all quite close and data from source M is lower or higher; you can likely discount data M unless you can nail down the exact cause. This is not an uncommon occurrence and if you add in data from different periods you will see the data begin to grow even larger apart from the min/max.

[tsubaki]

The data in the Lee book is that compiled from other data and does not show or take into consideration certain factors. You will note the absence of barrel lengths, firearm type, primer manufacturers and even types, case manufacturers, every aspect of the bullet except the weight and if it is cast or jacketed, etc.

Sort of like only reporting the portions of news that are interesting.

Take the published data for exactly what it is worth, it is a compilation of what was tested at that time. And you even need to consider the date it was published.

I have at least 7 different manuals I refer to when looking at load data, not to mention the listed stuff from manufacturers on-line. I always look for variances in load data because I'm as guilty as the next person, not adhering to the data completely.

[dragon813gt]

You're over there thinking it. People always seem to want load data for the exact lead bullet they're using. Very rarely does this exist. Since all my molds are from the custom makers it never exists for me. Use Lee's data. I choose the load that's for the same bullet weight and work up from there.

I will also disagree about H110/W296 not being accurate. I haven't found a need for a gas check design w/ a 357. Either revolver or rifle. There is a reason it's the top performer. If all people got was velocity and no accuracy they would stop using it. It provides both. But it's for top end loads only. If you want to plink there are better suited powders.

[psweigle]

I agree with dragon813gt

[6bg6ga]

Where to look and what to believe? If you look thru the older manuals you will find that the loads were in fact heavier. Some of the loads for 357 for example are borderline sheer stupidity. Always start a load at or near the bottom of the load. Start working up the load watching for signs of pressure. To my line of thinking pressure tells everything.

[ioon44]

When I look at loading manuals I try to see what length barrel and what type of fire arm were used for for there testing. As stated, start with the bottom load and work up and watch for pressure sings, some primers will show pressure quicker than others.

[Wayne Smith]

I also look for the boolit I'm using to choose a powder, not choose a powder first. You mentioned 296, not a bad powder but, as mentioned, a high pressure powder and you won't find a lot of loads for it that are low pressure because of that. If you want to go lower (38special) look at Unique or Bullseye, the traditional powders for lower pressure cases

[mozeppa]

warning on the H-110......

do NOT​ USE REDUCED loads ....bad things can happen.

[jamesp81]

You might check out some other manuals. You didn't mention what powder you are using, have you checked their recommendations? Some of the powder manufacturers have load data online.

296. Lee and Winchester list 14.5 as max AND minimum. Lyman, RCBS list start charges above Lee and Winchester's maximum in some cases.

[Tackleberry41]

The various manuals can be a pain to deal with. Older ones generally have hotter loads than new ones. Lee has often much more data, but as you learned its not always that useful.

I have been fighting with some 45 colt for a conversion cylinder. The powder data was the same across the various books. But I was getting really low velocity compared to the book. But '250gr lead' really doesn't say much. It was the difference in the cast bullet length. A SWC is longer than a RN, seating them to the same OAL length as the book, the RN drops the pressure alot since being shorter it increases the case capacity. I had to do some math and shorten my 250gr by .046, which also required cutting the case back to be able to crimp. Once I did that, my velocity lined up with the book.

[jamesp81]

My first thought is that with that plain base bullet, you will not want to run H110/W296; and that may be the reason for the lower charge listed. W296/H110 is a pretty high pressure powder, needing the high pressure to fully burn properly, and frankly there are very few situations where it produces stellar groups with cast, even with GC. Don't fail to try it as it may be the load that give you award winning accuracy, it just would not be my first powder choice.

When you look at data that all use similar bullets or bullets that will leave the case volume very close to the same once seated, and data set X, Y, Z are all quite close and data from source M is lower or higher; you can likely discount data M unless you can nail down the exact cause. This is not an uncommon occurrence and if you add in data from different periods you will see the data begin to grow even larger apart from the min/max.

despite how Lee describes the 358-158-rf mold, these are, in fact, bevel based instead of plain base, if that matters.

I can't buy 2400 locally in 8 lb kegs, thus looking at 296.

[jamesp81]

warning on the H-110......

do NOT​ USE REDUCED loads ....bad things can happen.

This is part of my concern. When one manual lists start charges above another's maximum, I no longer know what constitutes reduced.

[GhostHawk]

Speaking for myself I do not expect exact bullet match's in a manual.
It is nice to compare cast to cast, jacketed to jacketed. But as a general rule I find that cast slides easier than jacketed of the same size/weight. So I will sub a cast bullet of the same weight for a jacketed, but not the reverse.

Easier to slide = lower pressures, doing it the other way round raises pressure.

Next, it has been my experience that low to moderate loads are much more accurate than "crackenboomers" as you say. If I want more thump on the far end I prefer to raise the bullet weight significantly rather than powder levels.

I have yet to find a load more accurate than 4.6 grains of Red Dot under my Lee .358 158 gr Round nose.

Last, a slower cast lead projectile may or may not expand a lot depending alloy. What it will do is penitrate. Instead of blowing up on or near the surface the bullet will penitrate, and penitrate until it finally finds something it can not pass, like a major bone. Or it will exit the far side.

Last, I have come to trust the Lyman #3 and #4 cast boolit manuals. I have done a lot of checking on powder manufacture's sites and while it may be a touch cautious, it won't blow you up. Not if you follow it and use good practices to prevent double charge. YMMV

[357Mag]

JamesP -

Howdy !

I used to have all of the ( then-current ) reloading manuals.

When I first tried WW296 in .357Mag w/ 158's, I when exactly per Winchester's reloading pamphlet specs.
Their brass, their primes, their powder.

I figured out fairly quickly that I could use other brands of brass and primers, but wanted to stick w/ Winchester's ( later Olin's )
recommendation for minimum powder charges; when shooting WW296. That minimum charge was 14.5gr WW296 under
158SWCs.

Further reloading and range work showed that I could safely shoot bullet wt of 158-172gr over this same 14.5gr charge.
And for me, in my guns ( 4, 5, and 6" "N" frames ); all of these bullet weights shot well.

FWIW _ 14.5gr WW296 is a great charge that gives a truly " Magnum " load, and has been my go-to load for 40+ yr.



With regards,
357Mag

[TexasGrunt]

1. RCBS manuals ONLY have data for RCBS bullets.

2. Lee manuals aren't all that great.

3. Lyman makes two manuals. One is for cast boolits. The other includes those other types of bullets.

4. There's not complete data for every cast boolit out there. Many times the best you can do is shoot for something the same weight area, with a similar profile, in about the same length.

5. There's very little data out there for Lee molds. One would think that Lee would have data but they don't.

[C. Latch]

In revolver cartridges, especially, bearing surface of the bullet has some impact on pressure and velocity (a bullet with more bearing surface than the data you're using was created with, will have more pressure) but the *big* variable is length in the case.

Example: I have (and had) multiple .45 colt molds that were roughly the same weight but have very different bearing surface lengths and seating depths.

I can guarantee you that if you load the same load with two bullets of identical weight and bearing surface, but one is seated a quarter-inch deeper in the case, the deeper-seated one will produce 100' or more velocity, with hotter ruger-only loads. You might have to go as much as two grains higher on your powder charge to get equal speeds. Good news is, in theory, you'll be doing so at lower pressures. Bad news is, you don't have the equipment to know for sure.

[rond]

I check the powder company website for the info.

[lotech]

You can't have too many paper loading manuals for making comparisons. The Lee book is a reference-only source. It lacks sufficient information to use as a single direct source for developing handloads.

[Larry Gibson]

jamesp81

"I guess my question is, who do I trust?"

You've answered your own question; "Standard load work up always served me well."

All reloading manuals, especially the ones you've mentioned, say to start at the "start" load and work up. They also say to watch for pressure signs, which most manuals explain what those are, and to stop if any appear.

The data (start and max loads) are different in different manuals for a variety of reasons. All pressure test barrels do not give the same measurements of pressure with a given load. All firearms will not give the same pressure with a given load. A test string of the same given loads psi measurement will probably not be the same even if fired in the same test barrel or firearm consecutively. If you check SAAMI specifications they do not test pressure limits only for the MAP (Maximum Average Pressure) but also for the MPLM (Maximum Probable Lot Mean) and the MPSM (Maximum Probable Sample M). For example using psi as determined by peizo conformal transducers or strain gauges; the MAP for the .308W is 62,000. The MPLM is 63,600 and the MPSM is 66,000 psi. While the MAP is the basic figure all are acceptable as safe for commercial .308W ammunition.

However, do not assume every time you shoot factory .308W ammunition that it produces 62,000 psi......odds are it does not. Factories load with non canister lots of powder and develop loads with those powders for any cartridge based on a +/- fps of the advertised velocity for that cartridge/bullet. There is a rather large +/- industry acceptable fps btw. Point is they load to an acceptable velocity while maintaining less psi than the SAAMI MAP. Further production samples are tested under various conditions to ensure the MAP, MPLM and MPSM are not exceeded. The MAP of most .308 commercial ammunition I have tested falls several thousand psi below the SAAMI MAP. Same for 357 magnum factory ammunition; most I have tested falls several thousand psi below the SAAMI MAP for the 357 magnum.

NOTE: this has been an explanation only and I am certainly not suggesting to load "hotter" than manual data. While that can be done with certain cartridges in newer/stronger firearms one should have a sound knowledge of the pressure indications and limitations and know when to stop and back off.

Bottom line; stay within load manual data and work up the load. Stop when pressure signs arise or if inaccuracy occurs prior to any pressure signs. If you work up to the max listed load(s) w/o pressure signs and the load is accurate all is well.......:lovebooli

Larry Gibson

[Texas by God]

There are inexpensive load books devoted to one caliber only. I scoffed at these until I bought one for 25-06. It's a great source to compare every bullet or powder company's data in one place. Just sayin'.

[aspangler]

You say you can't get 2400 in 8lb jugs local. How about Accurate #9? Almost identical burn rate and works very good in the 357. I load 12.5 grains behind any 158 grain lead and it shoots really well in my Dan Wesson model 12 service revolver. Try it and start at 10 grains and work up.
Lee manual is as stated a reference not a definitive work. A lot of good advice on this thead. Use common sense and you should be OK.

[Soundguy]

i TRY to find my boolit data exactly, if I can.. if not.. I look at the powder i'm using and data from a lead boolit of the same profile and weight, and call it good. They are always under cast load pressures, so there is built in safety.

The lyman cast bullet handbook is a great resource.

[buckshotshoey]

First off......there have been many blown up guns caused by reduced loads, maybe more then over charged loads. I will say It another way. A low pressure event that leads to a high pressure event. A charge that is too light might leave the boolit stuck in the bore. Then another round shot on top of it produces the high pressure event and bulges the barrel or ruptures the case.

I am with the ones that say start low and work up. I bet a paycheck that you will get barrel leading, or a substantial decrease in accuracy long before you get to dangerous loads. Keep looking for signs of pressure on case, AND recovered bullets. You can learn a lot by looking at the base of a recovered lead bullet (unless you use a gas check that is). When you get to the point where you have good accuracy, then it starts to drop off, why would you want to go hotter? Back it off to the accurate charge and leave it there. 9 out of 10 times, your accurate load will be below maximum charge in most, IF NOT ALL, load manuals listing cast bullets. There are some exceptions of course. But generally, is true.

[dverna]

I look at all the load books and what is on the manufacturers sites. I ignore all the stuff posted on sites like this.

After compiling all the "good" data, I start at the bottom of the "starting" loads. Some do not have a "starting load" published so I go 10% below what is published. I work up in a conservative manner for the cartridge. IE Silly to move up in .2 gr increments for a .308 but not silly for a 9mm.

Use common sense, and look for pressure signs, and nothing bad will happen. I rarely run at maximum so I always have wiggle room.

[dragon813gt]

Some do not have a "starting load" published so I go 10% below what is published.

I cut out the dangerous part in your post. The OP was asking about H110/W296. Your 10% reduction from max would have him in a dangerous area. Not trying to single you out but it points out why you have to be careful w/ information posted on the internet.

[jamesp81]

There are inexpensive load books devoted to one caliber only. I scoffed at these until I bought one for 25-06. It's a great source to compare every bullet or powder company's data in one place. Just sayin'.

I'm working from one of those very books for 357, plus Lyman 49, Speer 13, and Hodgdon's website (covers Winchester, Hodgdon, and IMR).

The addition of data has made the question murkier, not clearer. Yes, I should start with start charges listed in one of the manuals. That seems ill advised when one manual's start charge exceeds another's max charge. It gets doubly complex with 296 as that's a powder the manufacturer says you should not load light.

Lee Precision really does need to get their act together and publish load data for their own molds.

[jamesp81]

You say you can't get 2400 in 8lb jugs local. How about Accurate #9? Almost identical burn rate and works very good in the 357. I load 12.5 grains behind any 158 grain lead and it shoots really well in my Dan Wesson model 12 service revolver. Try it and start at 10 grains and work up.
Lee manual is as stated a reference not a definitive work. A lot of good advice on this thead. Use common sense and you should be OK.

The local guy will only order 8 pounders from Hodgdon, Winchester, or IMR, and only then if they are good sellers because he has to order them 4 at a time.

I ought to take a road trip to Mexico, MO. It's within 4 hours of where I live. That's where Graf and Sons is. It'd save on the hazmat fees if I did decide to go with 2400.

[dragon813gt]

Start w/ the powder manufacturer's data. This is always the most up to date. I realize there are risks in reloading but people make a big deal out of nothing.

Lee will never publish data for their molds. All data in their manuals is simply reprinted from others. They are in the business of making tools, not load development. The fact that they combine all data into one source is what makes it one of the best available IMO. OAL, barrel length, and all the other pieces are going to be determined by your firearm. So what that manual says it was doesn't have as much meaning as some place on it.

Don't get me wrong, seating a bullet a lot deeper in a 9mm case is going to increase pressure quickly. But it's called load development for a reason. As much as some want it to be a recipe where you follow every detail this isn't the case most of the time.

[jamesp81]

Start w/ the powder manufacturer's data. This is always the most up to date. I realize there are risks in reloading but people make a big deal out of nothing.

Lee will never publish data for their molds. All data in their manuals is simply reprinted from others. They are in the business of making tools, not load development. The fact that they combine all data into one source is what makes it one of the best available IMO. OAL, barrel length, and all the other pieces are going to be determined by your firearm. So what that manual says it was doesn't have as much meaning as some place on it.

Don't get me wrong, seating a bullet a lot deeper in a 9mm case is going to increase pressure quickly. But it's called load development for a reason. As much as some want it to be a recipe where you follow every detail this isn't the case most of the time.

14.5gr of 296 it is then. That is from Winchester's load data in my single caliber manual for 357. I'll make sure my shooting glasses are on extra tight :D

[fatelk]

This is a timely thread for me. It just so happens that I've been working on the exact same load; .357 magnum using the Lee 358-158-RF (powder coated) and 296/H110. I'm using R-P brass and WSPM primers. In my S&W 586, 14.5gr was perfectly fine. I went up from there and settled on a load about a grain higher. They shot nicely in my gun, about as good as that gun has ever shot for me, nice little silver-dollar sized group at 50 feet.

[fredj338]

Look at 5 diff manuals, you will get 5 diff data points. SO I avg them together. Use avg starting data & work it up or down. 1/10gr increments with powders AA#7 & faster & 2/10gr with slower powders.
With powder like W296/H110, you also have a floor to not go below. It has worked for me for 40yrs now, regardless of caliber.

[Texas by God]

My old dog eared no cover Lyman book gets used more than the rest for handgun loads. I only use Unique and 296/110 for my .357 magnums. Mild to wild and Safe. I never trust loads quoted on forums without cross checking. If you can't find data for a particular bullet weight, use data for the next heavier bullet. This is an old, safe practice.
Best, Thomas.