357 loads in .38 cases? why not?

[DanWalker]

One thing not mentioned is that the continued practice of shooting 38 cases in 357 chambers can leave a nasty soot ring built up just in front of the case mouths.
As most of us are pretty dilligent about leaning our guns, this will likely never be a real problem.
I only bring it up because the model 66 I bought used last month had this condition to the point where it wouldn't chamber factory 357 ammo without signifigant force. I don't know how much pressures might have spiked, because as soon as I discovered this problem, I unloaded the gun and cleaned the bejeebers out of the cylinder.
I am guilty of loading HOT loads in 38 cases for use in a rossi 357 levergun I had. It was built like a safe, and I assembled some pretty insane loads for it before I became older and wiser.

[chemist308]

I'm not an expert, but I know that the 357 was developed off of the 38, and then lengthened so it would not be accidentally chambered in 38 revolvers. But wouldn't they have had to adjust the load again to achieve the same pressure as intended?

That said, won't case volume (which is directly proportional to case length in this instance) be a function of the pressure achieved? So, if you use a 357 load in a 38 case, won't you actually be creating greater pressure than in a 357 load? Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you want 357 performance aren't you just looking to load +P in 38, and that is assuming your revolver can take it?

[woodsie57]

Guess I have my answers- my question relates to using such ammo in a .357 SW revolver only- seems the .38/.44 revolvers were about equally strong, judging by the powder charges/velocities. Thanks all.

[Larry Gibson]

I'm not an expert, but I know that the 357 was developed off of the 38, and then lengthened so it would not be accidentally chambered in 38 revolvers. But wouldn't they have had to adjust the load again to achieve the same pressure as intended?

That said, won't case volume (which is directly proportional to case length in this instance) be a function of the pressure achieved? So, if you use a 357 load in a 38 case, won't you actually be creating greater pressure than in a 357 load? Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you want 357 performance aren't you just looking to load +P in 38, and that is assuming your revolver can take it?

Yes, case volume is a function of pressure if the OAL is for the .38 Special. Refering to the use of 358156 which was designed for the bullet to be crimped in the second groove giving it close to the same AOL and thus case capcity as almost as much as a .357 magnum case. This was to increase the case capcity for the use of more 2400 in 38/44 revolvers. Seating that bullet out to the second crimp obviously with the same effective AOL as a .357 has the affect of lowering pressures.

It also then became common practice to use such loads in .357 revolvers when those came out. The Lyman Reloader's handbook, circa 1960, shows such loads. They list as a "heavy load" 12.5 gr of 2400 under the 358156 solid bullet and 13.5 gr under the 358156HP. The bullets have to be seated to the second crimp groove to get that much powder in the case. Pressure wise those are top end .38 Special +P+ loads (I am not recommending their use in .38 Special revolvers only reporting the facts).

Larry Gibson

[zxcvbob]

IIRC, the maximum OAL of .357 Magnum and .38 Special is the same, only the case length is different. So loading .357 data in .38 brass and seating the bullets long to keep the pressure from spiking will work, but it probably will not keep the rounds from chambering in a .38 Special.

I do load some .38/44 HiVel equivalent loads for my Marlin carbine (it actually feeds Specials better than Magnums, and I get one more round in the magazine) but like I stated in that other thread, I vividly mark every round so they don't get mixed up. (if one of them did accidently get in my Model 15, I'm pretty sure it could safely handle the pressure, it's not that different from a Model 19, but it wouldn't be good for it -- I don't even shoot +P's in that gun)

[Big Dave]

Dad and I did this back in the early 60s but seated the boolits long enough that they wouldn't chamber in a 38 cylinder to prevent accidents. mostly with the gas checked Lyman158 gr swc. Also loaded full bore 357 loads with the 125 gr. spire point 9mm cast from pure linotype, local state troopers loved em for road block duty. they would penetrate the grill, radiator and fan blades and still break an engine block.

[Rocky Raab]

As somebody else here wrote so VERY well: just what are you trying to kill besides yourself?

I'll add: Or your unsuspecting grandkids after you are gone?

[vanilla_gorilla]

Yes, whatever would we have done with a hot loaded round that would fit in a .38 revolver with only the markings of the box and the common sense of the user to prevent issues?

Oh wait, that was called the .38-44 and worked rather well.

[softpoint]

Elmer Keith,in Loading for Sixguns, did ,indeed recommend the 13.5 gr. 2400 with his 173gr bullet for both the strong .38's and the .357. He did say you could go to 15 gr. 2400 with the 160 gr. in the M27, and crimp over the front band with .357 cases. Crimping over the front band with that bullet would just about reduce you to .38 sp. capacity! reference,p44 of RCBS third edition reloading guide.
I do use the 13.5 gr. load in my M67 for a field load, but I don't recommend it for any .38 for regular use, and NOT in any cheap revolvers such as the old RG.

[Rocky Raab]

Elmer Keith used a lot of balloon-head cases, chlorate primers and the older, cooler version of 2400.

If you assume that nothing changes over the span of 75 years, you'd be typing this on a Smith-Corona by a kerosene lamp - as Elmer also did.

[sturf]

the 358429 is supposed to be crimped on the grove in 38 spec. and on the front driving band in .357. then it will chamber. been loading these for 40 years and never had a problem chambering in anything but hey; I read the manual.

[Dale53]

Jerry;
I am a photographer and those are absolutely EXCELLENT photos!

My two cents:
Heavy .38 Special loads were intended ONLY for the "N" frame 38/44 as illustrated in Jerry's pictures. They were NOT .357 magnum loads in .38 Special cases but .38/44 loads in .38 Special cases. Some different...

Dale53

[Papa smurf]

Ha Rocky Raab-------Need your help-------What do you mean by cooler 2400.
Been using it for 35 years now and have not found any difference.
My load is 14gr in a .357 case and a 173 gr 50 /50 lead WW bullet.
Papa Smurf

[vanilla_gorilla]

Ha Rocky Raab-------Need your help-------What do you mean by cooler 2400.
Been using it for 35 years now and have not found any difference.
My load is 14gr in a .357 case and a 173 gr 50 /50 lead WW bullet.
Papa Smurf

Common knowledge is that 2400 has been reformulated, about the time that Alliant took over production from Hercules. I've read here and there of people doing tests and finding little to no difference, but they are the exception, not the rule.

I just finished loading another 50 rounds of the exact same loading myself, though with a slightly harder boolit.

[ChuckS1]

Common knowledge? First I've heard of it. Hasn't made a difference that I can tell when I load from the older manuals. Maybe I'm the exception.

If you know what you're doing and exercise a little common sense, you'll be fine.

[vanilla_gorilla]

Common knowledge? First I've heard of it. Hasn't made a difference that I can tell when I load from the older manuals. Maybe I'm the exception.

If you know what you're doing and exercise a little common sense, you'll be fine.

Maybe common knowledge is like common sense, and not really as common as it sounds.

[Nora]

you'd be typing this ---- by a kerosene lamp

I do regularly, tonight being no exception. I much prefer the yellow glow to almost anything with a cord attached to it.

Nora

[Bret4207]

There is a difference between loading a 38 case to 357 levels (can do, have done, will continue to do so, those cases are segregated) and just sticking a 357 load in a 38 case. Some folks feel this is foolish and are certianly entitled to their opinion. Others feel that by marking the boxes and cases and letting those around us know just what goes in what gun we;ll be okay. I fall into the latter category.

FWIW- I used Skeeter type loads in a Colt Agent way back when with no problems. I wouldn;t do it today, but it works.

[pmeisel]

Re 2400 reformulation:

I have read the opinion of several on boards that 2400 was "reformulated" when Alliant took over from Hercules.

I have read from others, who seemed at least equally respected and well-informed, that there was no "reformulation", just some normal lot-to-lot variation that made the first Alliant lots seem a little less powerful.

If you are working carefully up to max in your own gun, or staying well below max, it shouldn't make any difference.

[Mk42gunner]

Re 2400 reformulation:


...If you are working carefully up to max in your own gun, or staying well below max, it shouldn't make any difference.

This is what everyone should be doing; not just blindly following loading recipies.


Robert