What's possible with the .38Spl case in a .357Mag Contender

[Lonegun1894]

So, and I'm sure I'm not the only one, but I have a 10" .357 Mag Contender and a lot more .38 Spl brass than Mag. I do not have a .38 Special, so accidentally loading this ammo into a .38 is not a concern. Now that we have that out of the way, I keep thinking about loading some 158gr GCd boolits into some of these cases and seeing what is possible. Now I'm sure the vast majority of these will be used for paper-punching, but I would like to work up a load that is suitable for game up to about 100# hogs. Now part of me says to just use whatever is most accurate, having taken hogs up to about 225#s with a .22LR pistol with single rounds and just relying on placement, but it would be nice to know what has been done safely, and especially anything that has been done that was beyond safe limits, to make sure that I do NOT exceed safety limitations, as I would like to continue this hobby for quite some time. So what do y'all think? I know there is potential for increased performance, but don't know where the limits are. Part of me says to just start working up loads while watching all the signs and see what I end up with, but I'm sure I'm not the only one that has had this idea. Any recommendations? Thanks.

[44MAG#1]

13.5 gr 2400 and the 173 gr Keith bullet will do a good job. Just make sure the accuracy is there. This is in the 38 Special brass and std primers. A companion charge with H110 or W296 will be just as good maybe around 15 grains with a mag primer. I've used both in a revolver.

[Andrew Mason]

a big 200 grain flat nose like an rcbs-35-200 would be a cool bullet, and would hit like a freight train.

[PS Paul]

What powders do you currently have? Certainly the classic heavy-duty Keith 38-44 loads with 2400 (as some allude to above) would be great in your Contender. 110 and 296, as well as #9 and lil gun would work too.

MANY of us who shoot 357 also shoot 38 in the same guns, but I have a lot more 357 brass than 38 brass. Gave most 38 brass to other fellas on the forum in the past year or so.......

If you have availability to different powders, the 2400 load with a 158 gr. GC boolit and 12 to 13 gr. powder would be a terrific way to go, in my assessment.....

[Lonegun1894]

I should have remembered to list the powders, sorry. I have Unique, 2400, Red Dot, and Bullseye. I do the vast majority of my pistol loads with Unique and 2400. The boolits I am thinking of using are the Lee 158grSWCGC and the Lyman 358156, and expect both to be about equal where performance on game is concerned. Accuracy seems to be equal also, with different loads slightly preferring one or the other, but not by much in the guns I have tried them in. GCs are made with Pat Marlins checkmaker, and have worked very well in every .357 I have tried them in.

[fecmech]

Well I think you have the perfect bullet for the .38 cases in the 358156. Seat it out to the bottom crimp groove and add the appropriate .357 mag load of 2400 and go slay some hogs.

[Outpost75]

Back in the day when the outfit I worked for had its own piezo-electric pressure test equipment to do QA checks on pallet loads of incoming service ammo, I tested the so-called "Keith SPECIAL" load with 13.5 grains of #2400 and the #358429 bullet in .38 Special brass. With Hercules #2400 powder available in the 1980s this load exceeded SAAMI Max. Product Average for .357s.

In my experience currently produced Alliant #2400 is somewhat faster burning than the older Hercules product. Trying to duplicate those old loads with current components is dangerous. While you may not hurt a Contender pistol, you are unnecessarily stressing revolvers with such loads and there is no point to taking the risk of a case failure, taking .38 Special; brass beyond its design limits when .357 brass is readily available.

[44MAG#1]

Outpost75
That is the reason loading manuals are an ever changing thing. If you test 2 3 or 4 different lots of the same powder you will more than likely will get as many different pressure readings.
I have used the 13.5 gr charge in the M19 Smith and have had no problems. Now if they were over on or under I don't know. Even if they had been on over or under I am sure the next lot of powder would have been different.
As long as one is careful and watches what they are doing and works up ( as everyone should) they will be okay.
As always CHECK the books on any load that is posted on the Internet on any forum before loading it.
Since the Contender will handle the 223 at 52000 CUP levels I am sure that the 38 Special loaded carefully will not hurt it.

[SOFMatchstaff]

I load 38spec brass for my Coonan at the levels mentioned above, but I seat them out to magazine length. that kinda precludes the ammo being used in a weaker revolver. I havent had any problems with the strength of the brass or bulging in the auto, I doubt the Contender will know the difference. Seat the projos out for best accuracy and work up the load as you normally would. My old Contender barrel always shot the longer heavier bullets better when seated out to the lands.

[Outpost75]

Your experience with the M19 is much better than mine. I have touched close to 1000 of them in the 24 years before I retired.

During the 1980s the outfit I worked with issued M19s and fed them with Olin Q4070 110-gr. JHP +P+ .38 Special ammunition which was loaded about 15% hotter than industry +P standard.

Revolvers would be checked by armorers twice annually when agents came in for retraining and requalification which usually consisted of four trips over a 60-shot tactical revolver course. Individual practice was encouraged and agents were sent back to their field offices with a 1000 round case of Q4070 .38 Special +P+ ammo. Users were required to log rounds fired and revolvers were inspected by armorers and repaired at each requal.

Our experience was that it is typical for S&W K-frames of that era, M15s, M19s, M13s, M10-6, M10-8, (1980s) to require timing readjustment and have the crane stretched to remove excess endshake over 0.002" after each 1500-2000 rounds of .38 Special Q4070. Frequent use of .357 Magnum ammunition would shorten this interval significantly.

By the time the crane is stretched twice to remove endshake, cylinder gap exceeds 0.008", requiring that the revolver either be refitted with a "+" (long) cylinder or be rebarreled.

No K-frame was never designed for full duty with .357 Magnum ammunition. The M19 and M13s were capable of handling a steady diet of +P or +P+ .38 Special with "occasional" use of .357 ammunition when operational conditions required it.

The S&W "L" frame was developed to provide a more compact revolver than the N frame which would stand up to full duty cycle with .357 ammunition.

In endurance tests conducted at FLETC, Glynco, GA neither "K" nor "L" frame revolvers produced at that time could pass a 5000-round endurance test with service ammunition without repairs or parts replacement performed beyond the user level.

Rugers endured these test with no drips, runs or errors.

[Char-Gar]

Back in the day when the outfit I worked for had its own piezo-electric pressure test equipment to do QA checks on pallet loads of incoming service ammo, I tested the so-called "Keith SPECIAL" load with 13.5 grains of #2400 and the #358429 bullet in .38 Special brass. With Hercules #2400 powder available in the 1980s this load exceeded SAAMI Max. Product Average for .357s.

In my experience currently produced Alliant #2400 is somewhat faster burning than the older Hercules product. Trying to duplicate those old loads with current components is dangerous. While you may not hurt a Contender pistol, you are unnecessarily stressing revolvers with such loads and there is no point to taking the risk of a case failure, taking .38 Special; brass beyond its design limits when .357 brass is readily available.

13.5/2400 was always way over pressure, no matter when the 2400 was made. I recall reading many years ago a piece by Kent Bellah where he had a good Smith N frame cylinder unlatch with that load multiple times. He felt 12.5/2400 was max with that load and felt 11.5/2400 was what he wanted to use.

I have fired lots of 12.5/2400 with 358429 in Special cases and N frame Smiths, but that is as hot as I want to go. I keep that stuff out of K frames for sure and for certain. 13.5 grains is red line stuff.

[44MAG#1]

I didn't shoot those loads as a practice load. I shot those those loads sparingly. Would I do it again? Yes I would.
I am just saying that just because a load generates a certain pressure with a certain lot of components doesn't mean it stays the same.
I am sure you are well aware of that.
The M19 is intended to be used sparingly with "hot" ammo and practice ammo mostly. I know that.
Just saying that everyone needs to be careful. No matter what loads one uses.
But a M19 needing overhaul with 23,000 PSI loads (+15% over plus p) every 1500 to 2000 rounds? Something is wrong somewhere. I believe you but something else was wrong in my opinion. No lube? Slamming the cylinder closed and slinging it open? Maybe?

[Outpost75]

......The M19 is intended to be used sparingly with "hot" ammo and practice ammo mostly. I know that......But a M19 needing overhaul with 23,000 PSI loads (+15% over plus p) every 1500 to 2000 rounds? Something is wrong somewhere. I believe you but something else was wrong in my opinion. No lube? Slamming the cylinder closed and slinging it open? Maybe?

ONI, USAFOSI, US Treasury, all had the same experience. Thousands of revolvers involved in nationwide Federal service.

Air Force used PGU/12B which was a 130-gr. +P+, other agencies US factory production of contracted types.

Proper user operation and maintenance stressed in training and deployed locations. Problems across the board were well documented. Government's QAR, Agency IGs and GAO all investigated why contracts were awarded when the products couldn't meet the specs. Started going to 9mm autopistols shortly after that.....

[Larry Gibson]

For use in the 10" Contender with 38 SPL cases I use the 358156 and 2400. I seat the 358156 so the case is crimped in the bottom crimp groove (that bullet was designed for just this application). I suggest starting at 12 gr 2400 and work up to 100% load density. Works for me and I know not to stick a 38 SPL case with the 358156 seated out and crimped in the bottom groove in my 38 SPL revolver.

Larry Gibson

[Cosmiceyes]

I have a 10 .357 Super Mag that I use for a test gun on 38's,and 357 mag. I have worked a great target load out for the 38 with a old Geo A Hensley mold #12358 which make 150 gr.Kieth style wad-cutters. I load it with 5.5 gr. of Accurate #5 which I would have to guess is about 1000 fps.What makes me like it is clover leafs at 75 yards.For the TC I seat it like Larry on the bottom grove with a very slight crimp. For my 2" bbl S&W personal defense gun I use the top ring with a normal crimp. What is nice is my 3 1/2 inch off hand groups at 25 yards. Only difference is seating,and crimp.

[Outpost75]

FYI a load I have tested and use in my RUGER. 38 Spl. revolvers (SP101, 2-3/4" Speed Six and 4" Service Six) is 9.0 grs. of Alliant #2400 in Federal cases with Federal 200 primers, with Saeco #348 146-grain DEWC at 1.25" OAL, gives 950+/- 30 fps from SAAMI vented test barrel at 22,500 psia, using Kistler conformal transducer. Payload and velocity very similar to Federal Hydrashok 147-gr. +P+, and very accurate. Good field load. Will shoot clear through a cow or horse broadside.

[GP100man]

In my experience trying to push the short cases in long chambers result in the boolit skidding prematurly especially with alloys under 14bhn.

Harder boolits seem to tolerate the jump a bit better ,but will still show slight signs of alloy failure when ya get close to magnum performance .

Renenber in the 38 case you`re workin with ALOT smaller boiler & powder/pressures do funny spiking when thier elbow room ain`t there.

As already stated ,you`re best accuracy will be found with longer boolits seated out at least to sit in the throat a bit.

[Tatume]

My 10" 357 Magnum T/C Contender barrel was sent to Mike Bellm and rechambered to 357 Maximum. In doing so Bellm cut a correct throat for a barrel with an integral chamber (as opposed to a revolver). The barrel is now more accurate and easily outperforms any load that is safe in 357 Magnum cases. The conversion is well worth the money.

[Tatume]

During the 1980s the outfit I worked with issued M19s and fed them with Olin Q4070 110-gr. JHP +P+ .38 Special ammunition which was loaded about 15% hotter than industry +P standard....

Thank you for a fact-filled and informative report.

Sincerely, Tom

[LouisianaMan]

Your experience with the M19 is much better than mine. I have touched close to 1000 of them in the 24 years before I retired.

During the 1980s the outfit I worked with issued M19s and fed them with Olin Q4070 110-gr. JHP +P+ .38 Special ammunition which was loaded about 15% hotter than industry

It is amazing what you and some of the other guys have seen and done. Wish you'd write a book!

[44MAG#1]

What I would like to see is a thread on the M19 Smith and other people's experiences with them.
While I do believe Outpost75's posts on the M19's I still find it hard to understand the trouble they had with them running a load that was only 15 percent over +P which was 23000 PSI.
In 1500 to 2000 rounds they had to have tweaking to get them back to par seems like some other problem was involved.
Maybe a thread pertaining to others experiences would be good.
I don't need to know that the M19 is more fragile than some 357's on the market as I know that. I have had a M19 and a M66 at one time and fully understand that.

[Outpost75]

I can tell you that while government specifications required firing of six proof rounds, one in each charge hole, that S&W was caught more than once, fudging on the proofing, in that they were only firing one proof load in one chamber, and five regular service rounds in the other chambers.

The discrepancy was detected by a sharp-eyed government inspector at FLETC who noted that the burn stains on stainless cylinders which were part of the contract, were of different colors. Cylinders of suspect guns were sent to a government lab in which electron probe analysis was done on the powder residues in the chambers, using the same methods used for identifying explosive residues in bomb debris.

When confronted with the evidence S&W admitted to following their "commercial practice" of firing only one proof load, rather than six, because when they fired proof loads in all six chambers they had to hammer the revolvers open and that the amount of force required to open the revolvers bent the cranes out of alignment.

Firing only one proof load in a revolver cylinder is not accepted engineering practice in the environment I spent my career in. If there is shrinkage porosity in an ingot in the mill, and billets are not cropped properly, any flaw becomes elongated when the bars are rolled. Catching a bad mill crop requires (ideally) ultrasonic and xray inspection, unless you have your own metallurgist at the mill to witness the cropping, you discard the 1-top and 2-top cuts off the billets, number and track the billets through the rolling mill and barcode the 30 foot mill-length bars so that when the rail car arrives at the plant you can be sure the bars they are making the cylinders from are the ones the government bought.

At that time S&W was only sampling cut cylinder blanks, checking the cut ends of bars with dye penetrant. That is not a 100% check and some bad cylinder blanks could get through into revolver assembly. If only one proof load is fired, defects elsewhere in the cylinder wall may be missed. On government contracts revolvers were required to be fired with six proof loads and then subjected to magnetic particle inspection using the wet method with continuous circular magnetization. This has been the required practice since WW2.

That they couldn't open the gun after firing six proof loads is an indication that the gun had inherent strength of design issues if .357 ammunition was used.

That entire group of guns was reproofed in the presence of the government's Quality Assurance Representative. A significant number, several times the usual expectation in production, did not pass proof. This was in the 1980s, so cannot be extended to current production or management, but having personally witnessed these and similar events, I am not inspired.

It reminds me of the 1981 Ford Escort I owned at the time, in which the water pump seized, shredded the timing belt and the pistons drove the valves through the head in a cascading failure.

I don't drive Fords anymore, and my revolvers are Rugers.

[PS Paul]

EXACTLY why I choose Ruger revolvers! ha ha!!

The notion of a "Castboolits Book" (as someone mentioned above) sure is intriguing, eh? Just IMAGINE the collective experience, knowledge, anecdotal in formation and just plain outstanding stories that could fill hundreds of pages of this book!!

To the OP, it appears you have some great info on the recommended loads. obviously, in your Contender, the pressure limitations are NOT the same as a Smith revoylver. I suggested 12 to 13 gr. 2400 since those are what I consider "max safe" loads for the 358156 or equivalent. I do not have the Lee version, but it sounds like they're close?

Considering your chamber and the ability to seat the boolit further out in the case and maybe even touching lands(?), I suspect you should be able to get some pretty spectacular results after fiddling with the fit and function of your gun/load combination.

Keep us posted, eh?

PS P

[Lonegun1894]

My revolvers are Rugers also, but those get .357 brass. I keep thinking that the single-shot action of the Contender is first off very strong, and then, being a break action, allows for messing with OAL and various other variables and doesn't have to be treated like a revolver with the limitation of the cylinder length, and other variables. Basically, I think of the Contender as a "short rifle" for loading purposes. And this has definitely been very informative, and I will be taking some of the suggestions here (mainly limited by powder varieties and primer supply in my possession) and will post results. As to the Lee version being similar to the 358156, it is similar, but the lube grooves seem slightly different in dimensions and the Lee only has one crimp groove as opposed to the Lyman's 2 grooves. Both have shot well in every .357 I have tried them in, but I have had the Lee quite a bit longer than the Lyman, so have fired a lot more Lees.

[44MAG#1]

That is not the issue. The issue is that the M19 needing repairs after 1500 to 2000 round of ammo that was 34 percent under SAAMI specs.
I don't doubt for a minute that enough ammo of that level would eventually wear one to a point that it needed repair.
34 percent under SAAMI specs for a 357 Mag keep that in mind.
Again not doubting for a second what you are saying but even you must see what I am saying so please don't get ruffled over this.
I am saying something else was amiss in my way of looking at it. Was something else looked at as PART of it or was it just dismissed as the ammo and the weakness of the gun due to the maligning press of the gun?

[Tatume]

I find it very unlikely that thousands of M19 revolvers would all show the same failure without a common cause. It appears that 1500 - 2000 rounds of +P+ is the effective service expectancy of the M19 before repairs are required.

[44MAG#1]

I have caused this thread to get off course. The question was a Contender not a M19 so who care about a M19?
The OP stated a Contender so lets start a thread on the M19 at a later date and stick to the topic.
The Contender will handle the 223 so let's say it will handle a +P+ load for goodness sake in a 38 Special case hopefully with out coming apart.

[Lonegun1894]

I appreciate you trying to put this back on course, but I'm sure we have all been guilty of running off in some other direction and usually still learn something. I for one have never had a M19, but have mostly just stayed with Ruger and away from S&W and other brands due to the wear issues I always heard about them having. My one attempt was a Taurus .357 I bought new and completely wore out by firing about 5-600rds of .357, and the rest of the 10K rds I fired were standard .38 Spl. After that experience, I haven't bought any revolver that didn't say Ruger on the side. Part of me wanting to use .38Spl brass in this Contender is to make sure these loads don't end up in my Rugers, even though I am sure they can handle anything I can throw at them, but I just figure this gun doesn't need crimp, and doesn't have to be short enough OAL to makes sure the cylinder can turn, and the barrel walls are thicker on the TC than in my cylinder chambers, and.... :) It's basically a toy that is useful in the hunting fields as well as on the range, and I haven't played with it enough so need to remedy that.

[exile]

I appreciate you trying to put this back on course, but I'm sure we have all been guilty of running off in some other direction and usually still learn something. I for one have never had a M19, but have mostly just stayed with Ruger and away from S&W and other brands due to the wear issues I always heard about them having. My one attempt was a Taurus .357 I bought new and completely wore out by firing about 5-600rds of .357, and the rest of the 10K rds I fired were standard .38 Spl. After that experience, I haven't bought any revolver that didn't say Ruger on the side. Part of me wanting to use .38Spl brass in this Contender is to make sure these loads don't end up in my Rugers, even though I am sure they can handle anything I can throw at them, but I just figure this gun doesn't need crimp, and doesn't have to be short enough OAL to makes sure the cylinder can turn, and the barrel walls are thicker on the TC than in my cylinder chambers, and.... :) It's basically a toy that is useful in the hunting fields as well as on the range, and I haven't played with it enough so need to remedy that.

This thread may have gotten off topic but was very informative! Makes me want a .357 Max barrel for my Encore rifle. Thanks to all.

[marshall623]

This is interesting , I'm thinking about picking up a 10" 357 mag tender barrel if the price is right . I was wondering if you can and how well 38's shoot in them

[Lonegun1894]

If the one you get shoots as well as mine, I don't think you can go wrong, but I REALLY like the .357. When everything cooperates, and I hold my tongue right, I have gotten the occasional 1.5-2" group with the .357s, and usually 2-3", while the .38s usually give 2.5-3.5" normally, and the occasional 2". Not much of a loss in accuracy. I am thinking seating these bullets out closer to the rifling, even with a .38 case, should help the accuracy. I would say go for it.

[marshall623]

That sounds good , a elderly gent who shot silly's is hanging it up ( he's 84 ) he's selly his tender & barrels to another shooter for a song and all he wants is the frame