357 Magnum Light Loads - Good or Poor Choice

[Salmoneye]

Please do NOT deep seat with the 4.5gr Red Dot...

I never suggested any such thing, and would not...

[03lover]

Accuracy is something we all talk about but what we consider accurate can vary like crazy. I have my idea of what I consider accurate and I prefer to see very good ballistic uniformity with that accuracy.

What I am trying to say is the load I consider to be best is not only accurate but the extreme spread is low. Also, the load is not powder position sensitive. I Always perform the following test. Fire ten rounds by pointing the loaded handgun straight down, slowly raise to level and fire. Do the same for ten rounds. Firing over a chronograph provides important data and a good rest aids in accurate shooting. Then fire ten more rounds by pointing the handgun straight up, slowly lower to level an fire each ten rounds this way.

What I often find with this test of loads of powder charges that use less than 75% to 85% of the available space is two things. First the chronograph indicates the powder forward are always 75fps to 250fps slower, especially when the powder charge uses less than 50% of the available space. Next I see the point of impact vary vertically on the target. Sometimes by as much as 1-1/2" at fifty feet. That is enough to mess up accuracy if firing is done with a lot of movement between shots.

I started to persue this problem after a day of load testing was indicating many of my first shots of a five shot string were lower in velocity and out of the group. I realized my first shots followed loading my revolvers with the gun pointed down and raised to level in the pistol rest on the bench. That put the powder forward for the first shot. The next four rounds were fired with the gun reaimed and powder wherever the recoil left it. The last four rounds had the powder positioned in the same place but the first round was very different.

I think most of us see any number of groups we shoot with one or two rounds out of the group. The ten shot groups in a nice tight cluster can and do occur with loads that may actually have some powder position problems, it all depends on how consistent the shooter is with positioning the gun for each shot.

Before you beat me up for being so nit picky, I have been retired for twenty years. I love shooting and reloading in persuit of perfection. Do I get perfect loads, not too often, but I get a lot of darn good ones, loads without the things that cause me to look for a new excuse for less than desirable accuracy. It is a great reason for loading more and firing more and keeps me busy doing what I like most.

Powder position sensitivity is one of the biggest reasons for less accurate loads and should be avoided whenever possible.

[Wally]

Accuracy is something we all talk about but what we consider accurate can vary like crazy. I have my idea of what I consider accurate and I prefer to see very good ballistic uniformity with that accuracy.

What I am trying to say is the load I consider to be best is not only accurate but the extreme spread is low. Also, the load is not powder position sensitive. I Always perform the following test. Fire ten rounds by pointing the loaded handgun straight down, slowly raise to level and fire. Do the same for ten rounds. Firing over a chronograph provides important data and a good rest aids in accurate shooting. Then fire ten more rounds by pointing the handgun straight up, slowly lower to level an fire each ten rounds this way.

What I often find with this test of loads of powder charges that use less than 75% to 85% of the available space is two things. First the chronograph indicates the powder forward are always 75fps to 250fps slower, especially when the powder charge uses less than 50% of the available space. Next I see the point of impact vary vertically on the target. Sometimes by as much as 1-1/2" at fifty feet. That is enough to mess up accuracy if firing is done with a lot of movement between shots.

I started to persue this problem after a day of load testing was indicating many of my first shots of a five shot string were lower in velocity and out of the group. I realized my first shots followed loading my revolvers with the gun pointed down and raised to level in the pistol rest on the bench. That put the powder forward for the first shot. The next four rounds were fired with the gun reaimed and powder wherever the recoil left it. The last four rounds had the powder positioned in the same place but the first round was very different.

I think most of us see any number of groups we shoot with one or two rounds out of the group. The ten shot groups in a nice tight cluster can and do occur with loads that may actually have some powder position problems, it all depends on how consistent the shooter is with positioning the gun for each shot.

Before you beat me up for being so nit picky, I have been retired for twenty years. I love shooting and reloading in persuit of perfection. Do I get perfect loads, not too often, but I get a lot of darn good ones, loads without the things that cause me to look for a new excuse for less than desirable accuracy. It is a great reason for loading more and firing more and keeps me busy doing what I like most.

Powder position sensitivity is one of the biggest reasons for less accurate loads and should be avoided whenever possible.

I use such loads in my .357 Magnums...use a poly filler and all will be well for you.

[03lover]

I loaded up fifty rounds of 148 grai HBWC's using the Hornady bullet. Twenty five rounds had Remington 1-1/2 small pistol primers and twentry five had Winchester small pistol primers.

Now this test is with my Ruger 357 magnum Bisley, 7-1/2" barrel, my batches of primers, powder and brass is Winchester. Also I noted there was very little space left between the top of the powder and base of the bullet, so this test simply blew my mind. I didn't anticipate any change from powder to the rear to powder forward. WRONG!!

First five rounds with 4.5 gr. of RD and Remington primers and powder to the rear, blew the skirts off two of the bullets. The the second five with powder forward were OK and the group was nice.

Then I fired five rounds with the Winchester primers and powder to the rear. Like the Remington primed rounds, two of the five blew the skirts off the bullets. The second five with Winchester primers and powder forward acted OK but the group was strung out a little vertically. The Winchester primers were a little warmer than the Remington as noted by brass expansion and resistence to extraction.

The Winchester small pistol primers have always been a bit warmer with all the powders I have tried them with giving somewhat higher velocities.

I will have to repeat the test, but drop the powder charge to 4.0 grains.

[zxcvbob]

I loaded up fifty rounds of 148 grai HBWC's using the Hornady bullet. Twenty five rounds had Remington 1-1/2 small pistol primers and twentry five had Winchester small pistol primers.

Now this test is with my Ruger 357 magnum Bisley, 7-1/2" barrel, my batches of primers, powder and brass is Winchester. Also I noted there was very little space left between the top of the powder and base of the bullet, so this test simply blew my mind. I didn't anticipate any change from powder to the rear to powder forward. WRONG!!

First five rounds with 4.5 gr. of RD and Remington primers and powder to the rear, blew the skirts off two of the bullets. The the second five with powder forward were OK and the group was nice.

Then I fired five rounds with the Winchester primers and powder to the rear. Like the Remington primed rounds, two of the five blew the skirts off the bullets. The second five with Winchester primers and powder forward acted OK but the group was strung out a little vertically. The Winchester primers were a little warmer than the Remington as noted by brass expansion and resistence to extraction.

The Winchester small pistol primers have always been a bit warmer with all the powders I have tried them with giving somewhat higher velocities.

I will have to repeat the test, but drop the powder charge to 4.0 grains.

Drop all the way to 3.0 if you insist on using hollow-based bullets. 4+ is a high pressure load and of course it blew the skirts off. (I thought I said DEWC.) You can't safely load a midrange .357 Magnum with a HBWC, whether you loading it forward or backwards.

[1Elkhunter]

.357? light or heavy, don't really matter when you're shootin' crows... now the .45 Colt? Now we're talkin! Step up!

[1Elkhunter]

OK, so here's a suggestion, take it or leave it. Seat deeper in the case. With a revolver, there's no problem seating Nagant style, with the boolit shoulder below the case mouth. I use this method for 120 grain boolits in my S&W model 52, which requires that any boolit is seated below the mouth. And this load of 2.8 gn bullseye behind a 120 grain TC shoots like a target pistol out of my snubby as well. Seating deeper will increase powder efficiency too, just don't seat too deep for the boolit weight. Consider the length of the cartridge to be from the rim to the nose of the boolit, wherever it's seated, as long as the COL and the load are copasetic, your'e golden.

I sense a squib coming! Feel the force Luke!

[03lover]

Sorry. I did misread the DEWC and was thinking HBWC that I have been working with.

I am not insisting I use the 148 gr. HBWC, I simply have (2500) of them to work with. I have some DEWC's also, so I can do some testing with them also.

Later.

[zxcvbob]

Use the HBWCs for light .38 Special target loads. That's what they excel at. You can load them in .357 Magnum cases, but you still have to use .38 Special load data (plus a extra about .1 grain of powder) If you try to load them hot you will either blow the skirts out (as you found), or blow the centers out and possibly stick the half a bullet in the barrel as an obstruction for your next shot.

DEWCs rock. You can use them in anything from light target loads to full-power magnum loads. In the target loads they /may/ not be as accurate as the HBWCs, and in full power loads you can't get as much power as with SWC's because you have to seat them deep in the cases so you lose case capacity.

[Char-Gar]

Some years back there was a blow up by a fellow loading the old standard load of 2.7/BE over a wadcutter. The NRA had H.P. White labs run some tests on double charge and deep seated bullets and this is what they got. I gather that deep seating alone will at least double the pressure. I would never deep seat a bullet. Click on pic to enlarge.

[subsonic]

That's a cool test Char-Gar. Thanks for sharing that! Obviously a slower powder would be a little less sensative. I wish they would have tested it with that wadcutter crimped in the crimp groove as well.

Pressure signs are still pressure signs, regardless of seating depth.

[44man]

So important, safe or totally dangerous.
Wonderful post Char-Gar.

[uscra112]

Please do NOT deep seat with the 4.5gr Red Dot...

I never suggested any such thing, and would not...

AMEN, AMEN, AMEN. That charge with a flush seated 158 grainer - well, Quickload thinks it's a 60,000 PSI load.

2.5 grains Red Dot for flush seated is more like it. BTW I do that myself, but I use Bullseye.

[Ola]

Ok, this is an old thread but just in case someone needs the info: 4,4 grs of Vihtavuori N310 is a great LIGHT load for 150 gr boolits. This N310 load was found in old LAPUA manual from the time Lapua was still making lead revolver bullets for .357. It doesn't exist in the current VV data.

The 4,4 gr load is mild, but consistent and accurate in S&W 586 6" and T/C 10". (I use it up to 100 meters. It feels almost like shooting a .22LR but it has enough power to topple the 1/2 size rams.)

N310 burns so easily that there is no need for dagron or other fillers. I load them with Dillon 650, just like any other 357 mag load. The only difference is that I do not grimp the bullets: there is no need for it and the accuracy is better.

One more thing: IF you accidentally make a double charge, it SHOULD NOT be a "bomb" in a modern revolver or pistol.

[sargenv]

Wondering why not use shorter brass instead of seating bullets deep? Lots of ICORE shooters load the 38 short and long colt, or something in between (self trimmed 38 spl cases to 0.900"). That would eliminate the issue of too much space in the case.. If you are worried about ringing the cylinders, well, I know many shooters with over 100,000 rounds through their guns with no issues.. (usually 627's).

[rogerstg]

Have you tried Titegroup? It doesn't seem to care about it's position in the case.

[Outpost75]

A very accurate shooting field load I use in the .357 is the Saeco #348 bevel-based, double-end wadcutter, seated and crimped in its normal crimp groove, with the beveled front band outside the case, in .357 brass with 10 grains of Alliant #2400. This leaves very little airspace in the case and gives about 1000 fps in my 4-5/8" Ruger Blackhawk and is both accurate and effective on game. Power level is a bit more than .38 Special +P, but less than a full-charge .357 Magnum. The DEWC bullet cast of wheelweights, loaded as-cast and unsized, lubricated with Lee Liquid Alox and then run through the Lee Factory Crimp die does not lead, but is more accurate than match .38 Special wadcutters fired in the .357 chambers.

A charge of 5 grains of Bullseye or 6 grains of PB similarly loaded in .357 brass also shoots well.

[siamese4570]

To continue on "got_lead's" deep seating idea. I do that in a 357 handi rifle for my cat sneeze loads. I intentionally did it to increase the pressure to get the 158 gr rf out of the barrel. Of course I'm only using 1.5 gr Bullseye. Sound like a pellet gun. Chrono's at about 600 fps. got a lot of time on my hands.
siamese4570