296 In a .357?

[Uncle R.]

Hi All:
Since my SillyWet shooting days in the '80s I've used 16.5 grs. of 296 behind 158 gr. J-Word or cast in my .357 magnum loads. That charge was a "book" load in those way-back days, and my Contender along with my Trooper MKIII happily digested many thousands of rounds of it without trouble. When I chronographed those loads years ago they went in the low thirteens, just where I'd expected them to be.
I set out last night to work up a load for a Model 19 S&W and figuring that it's "only" a K frame I'd do well to be cautious and stay away from top-end loads. Checking some newer loading manuals I came up with max loads of 296 in the fourteen-point-something grain range! I figured that old load would be hotter than new data showed but I didn't expect to see such a drop in listed maximums.
What gives? Did the burn rate of 296 change somewhere over the intervening years, or I am just looking at lawyer-proof data in the newer books?
Thanks:
Uncle R.

[Linstrum]

Hi, Uncle R,

I'd kinda like to know what the story is myself. I have done some reading here and there that mentioned it, though, and from what I have gathered the best explanation has several parts to it. It seems to be a combination of the powder and bullet manufacturers lawyer-proofing themselves from personal injury suits that were the results of a change in attitude of the younger shooters today who can't follow simple instructions. It seems that there were enough new shooters who figured that if a powder charge was printed in a book of tables that it was a perfectly safe load and the warnings printed in bold red type that said "APPROACH MAXIMUM LISTED LOADS WITH CAUTION" were just there to pi$$-off beginners. So when these few young know-it-alls got out of the hospital they sued and as a result the powder folks drew the lines for the upper limits a bit closer to the bottom. Now, that is just hearsay but there is probably a bit of truth in it somewhere. Also, some powders actually have changed burn rate values over the years due to a change in manufacturing methods employed to increase the speed of production in order to make more powder safely, but those are probably the exception rather than the rule. The one powder that stands out in my mind as having a faster burn rate nowadays than originally back 65 years during WW2 is IMR4831. It was listed as a powder for our 20mm Oerlikon anti-aircraft canon, but despite it being one of the slowest of the IMR powders I can't imagine using it for that, much less even the .50 BMG!

Like I said up above, I too would like to hear what anybody else has to say about the downward change in powder charge listings.

[Uncle R.]

Yeah - it's strange - especially since the max loads for .44 magnum with that powder and 240 gr. bullets are pretty much unchanged over the same time period - which would seem to imply that the powder burn rate is unchanged.
<
<
:confused:
Uncle R.

[357maximum]

I am as confounded as the rest of you looking through some data up through the years.....I know 2400 has supposedly changed, but I cannot prove it with pressure signs or a chronograph.....I suppose I could theorize all day, but instead I propose a solution: Only keep older mauals on hand and read that red print " loads listed are maximum loads approach with caution" and abide by it's warning...

[44man]

Every book I have shows a distinction between everyday loads and silhouette loads. The stronger silhouette guns can take more pressure. My books show a range of 14.5 max to 16 max for 296 depending on what section you go to.
Then my Shooting Steel book shows a load of 16.6 gr's for a S&W 27.
It gets real confusing when you look in the books. I always worked to best accuracy without sticky cases or flat primers. The most accurate loads were always below max anyway and a slight increase would open groups long before a sticky case would appear. Every gun is different and to just keep pushing to get max velocity after the most accurate load is found doesn't make sense anyway. Some guys just HAVE to have the fastest bullet without regards to what they do at the target.
I am glad you question it, it shows you have enough experience to work loads in any gun for the best accuracy without worrying about how fast they are.
The S&W will show hard extraction long before any danger because you have to extract 6 cases at once instead of just one. Once it gets hard to push the pin and get out cases, back off a little.
Most don't realize that a case that is hard to get out of a single action, times six for a S&W, will make it VERY hard to get the six out. A built in pressure indicator for sure. Even a slight sticky with each of them will make you look for a mallet.
I have used the same loads of 296 forever without a change I can detect. Even lot to lot has been no concern.
Remember, it is more dangerous to load too light with 296 and H110 anyway. Always start no lower then a minimum listed charge.