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.