357 Magnum with IMR-4895

[Daekar]

*** THIS THREAD CONTAINS DISCUSSIONS OF USING POWDER OUTSIDE THE TYPICAL CARTRIDGE APPLICATION AND EVEN DUPLEX LOADS. THIS EXPERIMENTAL DATA IS OFFERED FOR YOUR INFORMATION ONLY. THESE LOADS WERE WORKED UP WITH MY DIES, MY ALLOY, MY SIZER, MY POWDER COAT, MY SCALE, AND TESTED IN A GUN WHICH IS RATED FOR CARTRIDGES THAT EXCEED MAXIMUM 357 MAGNUM PRESSURES. IF YOU BLOW UP YOUR J-FRAME OR 50 YEAR OLD LEVER ACTION PLAYING WITH THESE LOADS, THAT'S ON YOU.***

IF YOU DECIDE TO TRY THESE OUT REMEMBER:
1) Start low and work up just like anything else. I crammed as much rifle powder into a case as I could and verified that was safe before I started duplexing.
2) NEVER have more than one powder canister open on your bench at the same time. EVER. Do one, then the other.
3) There is a reason this data isn't in any loading manuals. While it has proven safe for me at the time of writing, there is no guarantee it will be safe for you.

"And thus ended the disclaimer. And the Lord saw that it was good, and covered the blessed behind of the original poster, and the warning was sent throughout the land that the People of the Lord might know the risk unto their necks. Amen."
______________________

Original Post Text:

I was reading another thread somewhere this weekend and was surprised to learn that IMR-4895 has been used in little cartridges like the 22 Hornet. LoadData.com suggests a load of 12gr. with a 45gr bullet for a velocity of 1735fps. That got me thinking, I've got quite a bit of the stuff, could I use it in 357 magnum loads destined for my Henry Single Shot?

According to Nosler, the 22 Hornet holds 14.2gr of water (https://www.nosler.com/22-hornet) with a 35gr bullet, while the 357 Magnum holds 17.6gr of water (https://www.nosler.com/357-magnum) with a 158gr bullet.

That gives us a case capacity ratio of ~1.24. If we reduce that to 1.20 to account for the difference in bullet weight between the Nosler and LoadData.com numbers, that would give us 12gr * 1.2 = 14.4gr as a starting load for the 357. The difference in maximum pressures favors the 357, so we have a safety margin to start with. Perhaps starting with a 125gr boolit would be wise, although the bore volume is so much larger than the baby Hornet that maybe that isn't necessary.

Does that sound even vaguely plausible?

__________________

For those who haven't read the entire thread, the responses initially fell into a few basic categories:

This is a bad idea because it's dangerous.
This is a bad idea because it won't work.
This is a bad idea because it's wasteful of good rifle powder.
Use rifle powder in rifle cartridges and go buy some H-110 or W296 or 2400.
You'll shoot your eye out.
I tried this and it sort of worked and sort of didn't.


However, our gurus did explain to me some of the forces at work and educated me a bit on ways to move forward without necessarily endorsing exploration outside the manual. This is probably a good thing, well done gurus.

With additional information and a combination of foolish optimism and caution borne of my awareness of ignorance, I forged onward in my pointless quest to burn the wrong powder in my favorite cartridge!

Testing ensued, and kind, supportive posts followed.

I had a bunch of copy-paste from subsequent posts, but that was getting really confusing. So here are my results a more readable format:

Gun: Henry H015 Single Shot, 357 Magnum
Brass: Hornady
Primer: CCI Small Magnum Rifle


Boolit (PC'd)
Green Dot (gr)
IMR-4895 (gr)
FPS
Accuracy
Notes


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
0.0
20.0
1221
????
Very light report hidden by sonic boom. Lots of unburned powder.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
0.5
19.5
1362
????
Sharper report. Some unburned powder.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
1.0
19.0
1479
????
Sharper report. Almost no unburned powder.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
1.5
18.5
1593
????
Normal report. No unburned powder.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
2.0
18.0
1673
OK/Good
Normal report. No unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
14.4
????
Shot to point of aim at 10 yards
Very mild "foof" report. Lots of unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
16.0
????
Shot to point of aim at 10 yards
Mild "foof" report. Lots of unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
17.0
????
????
Mild "foof" report. Some unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
18.0
????
????
Lighter than normal report. Some unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.5
17.5
????
????
Report sharpened from straight IMR-4895. Marked decrease in unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
1.0
17.0
????
????
Report further sharpened from 0.5gr load. Almost no unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
1.5
16.5
1473
????
Report sounded normal. No unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
2.0
16.0
1521
Good
Report sounded normal. No unburned powder.


Accurate 35-245P
0.0
12.5
????
Shot to point of aim at 20 yards
Report sharper than 158gr boolit with IMR-4895. Lots of unburned powder.


Accurate 35-245P
0.5
12.0
????
????
Report sharpened. Unburned powder barely reduced from straight IMR-4895.


Accurate 35-245P
1.0
11.5
1040
????
Single unburned kernel of powder. Lots of residue.


Accurate 35-245P
1.5
11.0
1104
????
No unburned powder. Lots of residue.


Accurate 35-245P
2.0
10.5
1155
Good
No unburned powder. Little residue.


Accurate 35-245P
2.5
10.0
1197
????
No unburned powder. Little residue. Might have mild pressure on primer, but easy extraction.



This data is for Benchmark powder, NOT IMR-4895:

Gun: Henry H015 Single Shot, 357 Magnum
Brass: Hornady
Primer: CCI Small Magnum Rifle


Boolit (PC'd)
Green Dot (gr)
Benchmark (gr)
FPS
Accuracy
Notes


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
0.0
21.0
1400
????
Compressed. Medium report. Some unburned powder.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
0.5
20.5
1515
????
Compressed. Medium report. Almost no unburned powder.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
1.0
20.0
1617
????
Compressed. Medium report. No unburned powder, some residue.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
1.5
19.5
1647
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean. Possible out of character V/C.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
2.0
19.0
1722
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
2.5
18.5
1828
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean.


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
14.5
1020
????
Very light report. Lots of unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
15.5
1100
????
Light report. Some unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
16.5
1160
????
Light report covered by sonic boom. Some unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
17.5
1178
????
Lightly compressed. Medium report, some unburned powder. Possible out of character V/C ratio


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
18.5
1258
????
Compressed. Medium report, some unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
19.5
1343
????
Compressed heavily enough for duplexing. Medium report, some unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.5
19.0
1466
????
Compressed. Medium report. Little unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
1.0
18.5
1494
????
Compressed. Medium report. Almost no unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
1.5
18.0
1578
????
Compressed. Normal report. A single kernel of unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
2.0
17.5
1609
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
2.5
17.0
1684
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean.


Accurate 35-245P
0.0
12.5
880
????
Compressed. Medium report. Lots of unburned powder.


Accurate 35-245P
0.5
12.0
1001
????
Compressed. Medium report. Almost no unburned powder.


Accurate 35-245P
1.0
11.5
1094
????
Compressed. Medium report. Almost no unburned powder.


Accurate 35-245P
1.5
11.0
1163
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, some residue.


Accurate 35-245P
2.0
10.5
1183
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean.


Accurate 35-245P
2.5
10.0
1218
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean.



That's more or less it for now since I've run out of powder/boolit combinations to test. While it's hardly comprehensive, and (as has been pointed out) lacks any but the most scanty data on accuracy, I feel like it's illustrative of some general principles of duplex loading, at least in the 357 magnum. I might add to this later if I get another powder or boolit, we shall see.

If you have a particular load you're interested in seeing accuracy data for, I can do that so please post in this thread and I'll try to pay attention. "But this comes with a couple of caveats," foremost among them being that I don't have a bench and therefore my accuracy rating scale really doesn't get more detailed than "Bad" (unusuable), "OK" (probably doesn't impact my ability to hit target gongs offhand inside 100 yards too much), and "Good" (this load is more accurate than I am).

Thanks for reading my experiments!

[Walks]

Not for me. Think maybe ya just can't get enough powder in the case to make a difference.
Who knows what the pressure would be.

[reddog81]

Maybe reasonable if for some reason I had no access to any of the dozens of powders that are more appropriate, have load data and are significantly cheaper. You'd be better off offering up the 4895 for trade on something useable rather than wasting it on 357. With many appropriate powders you'd get twice as many loads per pound.

[dannyd]

Anything is possible; milled out primer pockets on 38 Special and 357 magnum for Large Rifle Primers. Tried them with my normal loads got some of the best chronograph number for the loads ever.

So who knows just be careful.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

you'll have very slow velocity and lots of unburnt powder.

https://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?271376-rifle-powder

[uscra112]

Just for jollies I ran it in Quickload. From a 24 inch RIFLE barrel, a compressed load under a 200 grain bullet would give you around 1000 fps, and less than half the powder would burn. In a a handgun far less.

In the K-Hornet (I already have the model set up) A casefull would get you 2000 fps, at around 20kpsi. Might do in a pinch, if you had nothing else and were desperate for a squirrel or a bunny to stave off starvation.

[Daekar]

Just for jollies I ran it in Quickload. From a 24 inch RIFLE barrel, a compressed load under a 200 grain bullet would give you around 1000 fps, and less than half the powder would burn. In a a handgun far less.

In the K-Hornet (I already have the model set up) A casefull would get you 2000 fps, at around 20kpsi. Might do in a pinch, if you had nothing else and were desperate for a squirrel or a bunny to stave off starvation.

OK, so that's a lousy outcome. I guess my question is, why? What is it about the difference in case geometry which means a complete burn in my full power rifle cartridges, but not in the 357 magnum from a longer (22") barrel length with the same weight class of bullet and far less powder?

Is this because the bore volume is enough larger that the slow powder can't reach sufficient pressure when the boolit starts moving down the barrel and increasing the effective volume of container? If that's the case, what is different about the many .45 cal cartridges listed for this powder on LoadData?


Is it insufficient primer performance to ignite the powder? I have some some small rifle magnum primers that I was going to use to kick it off rather than pistol primers, if that makes a difference.

I don't mind coming up with an idea which doesn't work, but I really hate not understanding why it wouldn't work.

[smithnframe]

Not on my bench!

[243winxb]

Nosler case volumes are to base of bullet, i think?

IMR 4895 in 357 mag may work? IMR 4895 works well with reduced loads. The bigger the bore, the faster burn rate powder is needed. Photo 1999 IMR data.

[dale2242]

The smallest cartridge that I have used IMR4895 successfully was the 223 with 50-52 gr bullets.
I am not saying that it can`t be used in smaller cases.
I just haven't tried it.
I have a lot of faster burning powders that will be much more efficient in smaller cases.

[Larry Gibson]

Nosler case volumes are to base of bullet, i think?

IMR 4895 in 357 mag may work? IMR 4895 works well with reduced loads. The bigger the bore, the faster burn rate powder is needed. Photo 1999 IMR data.

The "C" behind the gr amount means the loads are "C"ompressed. With a 125 gr cast bullet in the 357 i doubt 4895 will reach a pressure where it will burn efficiently and not leave a lot of residue in the bore. With GC'd 180 - 200 gr bullets it might.....but that would remain to be determined through testing.

[243winxb]

The 357 may have more room then the hornet?

When i said, may work, meaning the bullet may exit the muzzle. Yes, should be dirty. May produce squibs?

Overall, not a good idea.

[MT Gianni]

According to Nosler, the 22 Hornet holds 14.2gr of water (https://www.nosler.com/22-hornet) with a 35gr bullet, while the 357 Magnum holds 17.6gr of water (https://www.nosler.com/357-magnum) with a 158gr bullet.

That gives us a case capacity ratio of ~1.24. If we reduce that to 1.20 to account for the difference in bullet weight between the Nosler and LoadData.com numbers, that would give us 12gr * 1.2 = 14.4gr as a starting load for the 357. The difference in maximum pressures favors the 357, so we have a safety margin to start with. Perhaps starting with a 125gr boolit would be wise, although the bore volume is so much larger than the baby Hornet that maybe that isn't necessary.

Does that sound even vaguely plausible?

That ignores the bore ratio. You might get enough pressure to burn with a 280 gr rifle bullet but it is in no way a ideal powder for the cartridge.

[1hole]

That got me thinking, I've got quite a bit of the stuff, could I use (4895) in 357 magnum loads destined for my Henry Single Shot?

You sure could, safely too. Who knows, you might even be able to hit a 100 yard target if you aim high enough. ;)

[Daekar]

At this point I know there are better options and the idea is kind of stupid. But I am curious...

So I loaded up a Lee 358-158 RF over 14.4gr of 4895 with a small rifle magnum primer. No squib, the bullet exited the 22" barrel of the Henry no problem, and I actually hit the pistol spinner I was aiming for about 10 yards away. There were unburned powder sticks left in the barrel, although not many. Clearly, anything not compressed isn't going to work well enough to bother with... still, I think I will see what I can get it to do when I have some spare time. If I can get complete combustion I will be pleased regardless of the performance. It might be acceptable for subsonic loads with those 245gr boolits I have been playing with.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

Maybe try a duplex load, a few kernels of FF under the 4895.

[bluejay75]

Go with as good of a crimp as you can get on it or maybe go to a heavier Boolit. A bullet jammed into the lands, good crimp and hot primer should get you a complete burn.

[Daekar]

I tested charges with a 158gr boolit from 14.4 to 18.0gr (definitely compressed) without breaching the sound barrier and without achieving complete combustion. Don't see why adding another grain or two of powder would change that since it's already compressed (explain to me why I am wrong if I am, please!)

Going to have to try 245gr boolits next. If that doesn't work, I will need to learn about duplex loads... I have some Green Dot I can use to kick off the burn, but I am not comfortable going there without finding a bit more information.

[358429]

Are you attempting to reduce the pressure available at the muzzle after the bullet has left the barrel? This is a very interesting experiment you are running. I am excited to know more[emoji3]

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[popper]

Trade off the 4895 for something that works or just get some that works, unless you just like to tinker.

[Daekar]

Are you attempting to reduce the pressure available at the muzzle after the bullet has left the barrel? This is a very interesting experiment you are running. I am excited to know more[emoji3]

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

Well actually at this point I'm just trying to achieve complete burn of the powder without regard to muzzle pressure or bullet velocity. If I get the same performance as Trail Boss but manage to get everything to burn, I'll be happy even if it's a highly inefficient use of powder. Duplex loads will probably be required to get things to work properly in the end. The great boolit gurus have decreed my venture pointless but not impossible... I'm inclined to agree with the former and feel hopeful about the latter.


Trade off the 4895 for something that works or just get some that works, unless you just like to tinker.
Oh just tinkering at this point. If I need speed I have a couple pounds of Lil'Gun, Green Dot for middle stuff, and Trail Boss for light stuff.

[358429]

Does the gun report have a different sound? I imagine a fwuump versus a Craack!

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[Texas by God]

I have loaded .44 magnum with 4320 before. I found the load in the old IMR pamphlet. I filed it under " Things I can do if I have to".
Good ammo, not great ammo.

Sent from my SM-A716U using Tapatalk

[Daekar]

Does the gun report have a different sound? I imagine a fwuump versus a Craack!

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

Yes! That's precisely it! A very strange sound. I imagine that, if I were able to keep the sound while getting a complete burn, it would be very quiet indeed out of a suppressor.

[PAndy]

I shot a few rounds through my 32-20 with 4895 years ago. Sounded weird and I thought I stuck a bullet. It didnt. I was surprised to see a fairly good group at 100 yards, but I don't consider it a useful load. Many 32-20 rifles including mine shoot well with slow powders (RL7, 4198, h322) despite the unburned kernels.

[farmbif]

I like powders that fill the shell, no chance for kaboom error, but in all reality some things just work, like h110/296, 4227, 2400 in 357 mag,
not being a ballistics engineer or anything like that I stick to what is taught in reloading books, never to mix different powders. but that's just me. my experience witness or have an accident or two and I tend to be very careful in what I do.

[dannyd]

We used 5744 back in the 80’s and never got a complete burn; there was little piles of powder at every station. But I may try this again with a Large Rifle Primer or Large Pistol primer and see if the burn is any better.

287604

[dverna]

If you decide on a duplex load, do some research.

It seems to me (and I have never tired it) but you need to keep the fast powder near the primer and not have it migrate into the slower powder...so a compressed load makes sense.

Not sure how vibration from carrying rounds around will affect powder migration. I would carry rounds primer down instead of primer up....but I am just guessing.

To me, it seems like a poor way to develop a load but if someone has nothing else suitable, it is a way to use slower than normal powders for a cartridge. I know some folks use up bargain surplus powders this way to save a few $$.

But in your case, 4895 is neither cheap or is it necessary to "use it up"; as it works well in many rifle loads...seems like a waste of "good" powder for no gain.

[Daekar]

If you decide on a duplex load, do some research.
...
...
To me, it seems like a poor way to develop a load but if someone has nothing
But in your case, 4895 is neither cheap or is it necessary to "use it up"; as it works well in many rifle loads...seems like a waste of "good" powder for no gain.

Yes, research definitely required! I haven't had the time to properly search for resources yet, but that's definitely the first order of business.

To be honest, this is more an exercise in curiosity than anything. I have already learned more about how cartridges and powders interact simply by asking the question, and I think pursuing this line of inquiry further will be interesting even if it is not eminently practical. I get your point about wasting powder, but since the goal of most of my guns is fun, I consider it simply part of the cost of this particular kind of fun! It's the same kind of questioning that has led me to my Encore pistol with 245gr boolits in the 357mag... if you start with "why not?" sometimes you can end up in surprisingly good places, or at least learn a lot about things in the process of failing. As long as that failure isn't explosive, I don't feel like it's time or resources wasted.

[Thumbcocker]

IMR used to have load data printed on cheap brown paper that listed lots of loads that didn't seem natural using rifle powders in handguns. I may still have one of the pamphlets in my stuff somewhere.

[Bazoo]

Interesting discussion. I’ve thought of using 4198 or 3031 in 357 or 44 magnum chambered rifles. I have neither, so never did more than think about it. 296 is a small rifle powder, so would be close to ideal I think. AA1680 or w680 could be made to work according to my research, but I’ve never done any experimenting with either.

[Daekar]

Interesting discussion. I’ve thought of using 4198 or 3031 in 357 or 44 magnum chambered rifles. I have neither, so never did more than think about it. 296 is a small rifle powder, so would be close to ideal I think. AA1680 or w680 could be made to work according to my research, but I’ve never done any experimenting with either.

I believe that W-296 is pretty much the same as H-110, and both are highly regarded as powder for 357mag, so your intuition is right on the money. :-)

I took a few minutes this evening and tested 12.5gr IMR-4895 (compressed) load, same magnum rifle primers, under Accurate 35-245P sized to .358 in the Henry H015. Report was markedly sharper than the poof sound of the 158gr RF and shot to point of aim at about 20 yards, but was subsonic (not a surprise) and still left unburned powder grains. It appears that even with a very heavy boolit, a duplex load will be necessary.

[358429]

How long are your 245 grain 357 Magnum cartridges?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[Daekar]

How long are your 245 grain 357 Magnum cartridges?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

I have 1.690" recorded on my OneNote entry for that load, although the metric I actually use is the setting on my Redding micrometer seater, which is basically all the way out.

That length works in both my Henry Single Shot and Encore. I continue to be surprised at how well it works. BadMan Bullets sells a 230gr WC which I had success with loaded to 1.600

[243winxb]

A revolver with the cylinder gap & short barrel may act very differently with IMR 4895?

[Daekar]

A revolver with the cylinder gap & short barrel may act very differently with IMR 4895?


Oh, absolutely. Even if you manage to get a full burn, I expect this would be a very inefficient choice for short barrels. Velocity would be very low since the barrel dwell time wouldn't be long enough for the slow powder to act.

[Duckiller]

Why are you using 30/06 powder in a 357 mag? Use a powder like H110/W296 or something similar for your pistol calibers even if you are shooting them in rifles.

[Daekar]

Why are you using 30/06 powder in a 357 mag? Use a powder like H110/W296 or something similar for your pistol calibers even if you are shooting them in rifles.

I usually do... but I'm prone to curiosity. So now I've had a chance to absorb some wisdom from our reloading gurus and learned firsthand about compressed loads and how different speed powders behave. Still more to learn!

Here's the first batch of duplex testing:
Tested several different duplex loads of Green Dot and IMR-4895. Each load had a total weight of 18gr and was highly compressed with a 158gr RF boolit, with the Green Dot added first to keep it right next to the small magnum rifle primer.
With 0.5gr of Green Dot there was a marked decrease of unburned powder. Report sharpened.
With 1.0gr of Green Dot there was almost no unburned powder. Report further sharpened.
With 1.5gr of Green Dot there was no unburned powder. Report sounded normal.
No pressure signs or uncharacteristic recoil for any of these loads. Chronograph numbers to come, the sky opened up while I was loading 5 testing rounds with 1.5gr Green Dot.

[PAndy]

I'll pass on the duplex loads here. But will follow to see what your chronograph says.

[NEKVT]

222 Rem is probably the smallest case you will find 4895 recommended for. I use H4895 in mine. The load is compressed and velocity and pressure is a bit less than the more popular powders for it but accuracy is outstanding and I always have it on hand. But you don't see it recommended even for the 221 Fireball that is a slightly shortened 222 Rem that operates at much higher pressure than the parent case and a 357 Mag is a long way from either of these in recommended burn rate. The old IMR reloading guides show just about all their powders for each cartridge listed but that is for for comparison, not necessarily a recommendation as in more detailed and practical reloading guides.

[Daekar]

Chronographed some duplex loads with the 158gr RF and I was pleased with the numbers, although there is room for improvement in the spread. I believe that deviation is the result of my powder scale struggling with very small measurement amounts, and in subsequent loadings I'm going to use a mechanical powder dropper which has proven very repeatable even with small amounts.
1.5gr Green Dot + 16.5gr IMR-4895 - 1473fps avg, spread = 49fps
2.0gr Green Dot + 16.0gr IMR-4895 - 1521fps avg, spread = 22fps

I am actually really pleased with the performance. I'm going to load up a few more and test for accuracy as well as I can - I don't have access to a shooting bench so accuracy for me usually falls into three categories: bad, OK, and good.

In my "bad," "OK," or "good" rating (calibrated for shooting at various sized target plates with iron sights offhand inside 100 yards) the 2.0gr Green Dot + 16.0gr IMR-4895 load rates a good. It is among the straightest-shooting loads I have developed for my Henry H015 Single Shot. I would absolutely consider using this load for anything which needed around 800ft*lbs of directly applied energy.

EDIT: Chronographed some duplex loads with the Accurate 35-245P. Eliminating unburned powder kernels took less Green Dot than with the 158gr boolit, but up to 2.5gr did not completely eliminate what I consider atypical residue in the barrel and my spider-sense told me not to venture further for reasons I can't articulate. Despite its velocity, because of the residue I don't consider the 1.0gr load a candidate for suppressor use. Will do more chrono and accuracy testing on 2.0gr load when I get some more time.

All values from single shot of each load:
0.5gr Green Dot + 12.0gr IMR-4895 - almost no reduction in unburned powder
1.0gr Green Dot + 11.5gr IMR-4895 - 1040fps, a single unburned kernel of powder and lots of residue
1.5gr Green Dot + 11.0gr IMR-4895 - 1104fps, no unburned powder, lots of residue
2.0gr Green Dot + 10.5gr IMR-4895 - 1151fps, no unburned powder, some residue
2.5gr Green Dot + 10.0gr IMR-4895 - 1197fps, no unburned powder, some residue

Additional velocity data from 5 shots with Accurate 35-245P:
2.0gr Green Dot + 10.5gr IMR-4895 - 1155fps (39 spread), no unburned powder, little residue; "good" accuracy.

[AlaskaMike]

Sounds like a very interesting experiment, and I like your caution.

Several years ago I experimented in using H4198 in .44 Mag carbine loads with my Rossi 92. I can't find my notes anymore, but if I recall correctly I ended up with a compressed load under a 295 grain gas check bullet. It was nicely accurate, but of course velocities weren't as high as with 296, for example. There was no significant residue left in the barrel as I remember. My next steps at the time was to start duplexing using Unique, but a move into a new house interrupted my experiment and I never got back into it.

Going back to some earlier discussion in this thread--I think a big reason why 4895 works better in the .22 Hornet than the .357 Mag isn't to do strictly with case capacity, but more because the Hornet is a slightly bottle necked cartridge. The more "overbore" a bottle necked cartridge is, generally speaking, the slower the powders which offer best performance. There's certainly more to it than that of course. I just hadn't seen any discussion of how straight-walled vs. bottle necked applies here, so I thought I'd mention it.

Mike

[Daekar]

Sounds like a very interesting experiment, and I like your caution.

Several years ago I experimented in using H4198 in .44 Mag carbine loads with my Rossi 92. I can't find my notes anymore, but if I recall correctly I ended up with a compressed load under a 295 grain gas check bullet. It was nicely accurate, but of course velocities weren't as high as with 296, for example. There was no significant residue left in the barrel as I remember. My next steps at the time was to start duplexing using Unique, but a move into a new house interrupted my experiment and I never got back into it.

Going back to some earlier discussion in this thread--I think a big reason why 4895 works better in the .22 Hornet than the .357 Mag isn't to do strictly with case capacity, but more because the Hornet is a slightly bottle necked cartridge. The more "overbore" a bottle necked cartridge is, generally speaking, the slower the powders which offer best performance. There's certainly more to it than that of course. I just hadn't seen any discussion of how straight-walled vs. bottle necked applies here, so I thought I'd mention it.

Mike

Glad you approve! Caution seems to me a reasonable thing... after all, I'm not in a hurry!

Interesting to hear that you had some success with rifle powder in 44 Mag. I would love to see some results with Unique!

I noticed what you pointed out about the bottlenecked cartridges and slow powder, but I confess that while I see the correlation I'm failing to really understand the reason why the correlation exists unless it has something to do with the ratio of bore volume to cartridge volume.

I just had a chance to test a few loads with my only other 357mag bullet, a 125gr TCBB sold by Missouri Bullets as Cowboy #2. It's Hi-Tek coated. I expected poor performance, but actually the light boolit wasn't really a liability. Not too shabby, all things considered. I've got 10 more rounds of the 2.0gr/18.0gr load on my bench but no time for accuracy and detail velocity testing this evening.



Boolit (Hi-Tek)
Green Dot (gr)
IMR-4895 (gr)
FPS
Accuracy
Notes


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
0.0
20.0
1221
????
Very light report hidden by sonic boom. Lots of unburned powder.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
0.5
19.5
1362
????
Sharper report. Some unburned powder.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
1.0
19.0
1479
????
Sharper report. Almost no unburned powder.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
1.5
18.5
1593
????
Normal report. No unburned powder.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
2.0
18.0
1673
OK/Good
Normal report. No unburned powder.

[358429]

(Preface this is how I feel I am not a ballistician.)

I think it has to do with the internal volume behind the bullet, as the bullet travels along

the bore, increasing available volume until the bullet uncorks the pressure by leaving

the barrel, and I think that the shape of the cartridge casing as it is fire forming into

the gun's chamber May contribute to a type of rocket jet effect if it is bottleneck to increase velocity efficiency for a given powder charge.

For example I feel that 4227 gives me significantly more power when loaded in 308 win as opposed to 357 mag( several months ago friends and I were

shooting at a steel plate with rifles and watching how hard it swung). Of course it's apples to oranges, the case volume and shape is different and the powder charges

are different and the bullets are different and the calibers are different Etc

But the powder charges and bullet weights are not really that far apart, if anyting the significantly larger internal volume of 308 should make them about the same but they are not.

20gr4227/172 grain in 308.

17gr4227/160 grain in 357.

The 357 rifle smack the plate about like a ball peen hammer. The 308 rifle smack the plates so hard that it ripped the ropes and broke them and started to bend the target frame.

The 357 load was very compressed and was pushing the bullets out of the case.

The 308 load sounded like Maracas when you shake the case you could hear the powder rattling.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[358429]

Afterwards we did shoot the plate with the 308 Winchester with that lee bullet and 30 grains of IMR 3031.

Since then I've had a curiosity idea that what if it was safe and not dangerous to load that imr3031 into my 357 and shoot it from a carbine like my 77-357.

[emoji848]

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[Daekar]

Afterwards we did shoot the plate with the 308 Winchester with that lee bullet and 30 grains of IMR 3031.

Since then I've had a curiosity idea that what if it was safe and not dangerous to load that imr3031 into my 357 and shoot it from a carbine like my 77-357.

[emoji848]

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

I suspect that there are a good number of rifle powders that are safe but non-optimal. Certainly anything that requires a duplex load of a faster powder to get a complete burn would almost certainly be safe by itself. I don't know anything about IMR-3031, where is it compared to IMR-4895? Or Lil'Gun?

[358429]

These are two burn rate charts that I found. I will not vouch for their accuracy however they passed my eyeball test.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210825/2c015717aa707fb2755c0efb33f36d9f.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210825/5eb991569ce9d856b5eb9d6dbe91a812.jpg

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[Daekar]

Ah, very interesting! It looks like IMR-3031 and Benchmark are both faster burning than IMR-4895, but slower than Lil'Gun or H-110. There is a chance that a case stuffed full of either one might successfully reach an effective operating pressure with a hot primer.

I just happen to have several pounds of Benchmark sitting at my reloading bench, I might have to think about a safe way to approach testing it. The closer it is to functioning normally in the case, the more dangerous it is to fiddle with, I think.

[farmbif]

don't know how far north in va you are but id be more than happy to trade you pound for pound unique or lilgun for 4895 if your out of pistol powder

[Daekar]

don't know how far north in va you are but id be more than happy to trade you pound for pound unique or lilgun for 4895 if your out of pistol powder

Nah, I am not out, just curious about possibilities. I feel like the 357mag is really an ideal do-it-all cartridge when handloading, and I like the idea of contributing something to the body of knowledge about it.

[358429]

This is a fantastic thread. I just reread it. I appreciate it greatly the amount of work you put into testing and recording and reporting the results.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[Daekar]

This is a fantastic thread. I just reread it. I appreciate it greatly the amount of work you put into testing and recording and reporting the results.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

That makes me really happy to hear, thank you!!

I got around to thinking my way toward a load with Benchmark, and since I failed to find something closer to 357 I'm thinking I'll start with data for 35 Remington. The case capacity is considerably higher, but at least the bore is the same.

I had trouble finding what I consider an authoritative case volume for 35 Remington, but I did find something that looked reasonably trustworthy which gave a value of 39gr of water. If we do the same exercise as we did when extrapolating a "don't blow myself up" load from 22 Hornet, we get a 17.4/39 = 0.4462 ratio, and based on a 35 Remington load with a 180gr boolit with a starting charge of 32.5gr of Benchmark, that would give us 14.5gr starting load for 357mag.... remarkably close to the 14.4gr we started with with IMR-4895.

Will report back with some preliminary results when I get time, this week is filling up quickly...

EDIT: OK, grabbed a few minutes before my wife got home to do Benchmark-only tests. Definitely faster burning than IMR-4895 but will need duplexing for this boolit.

Gun: Henry H015 Single Shot, 357 Magnum
Brass: Hornady
Primer: CCI Small Magnum Rifle


Boolit (PC'd)
Green Dot (gr)
Benchmark (gr)
FPS
Accuracy
Notes


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
14.5
1020
????
Very light report. Lots of unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
15.5
1100
????
Light report. Some unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
16.5
1160
????
Light report covered by sonic boom. Some unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
17.5
1178
????
Lightly compressed. Medium report, some unburned powder. Possible out of character V/C ratio


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
18.5
1258
????
Compressed. Medium report, some unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
0.0
19.5
1343
????
Compressed heavily enough for duplexing. Medium report, some unburned powder.

[Daekar]

Had a few moments to try some duplex loads with Green Dot and Benchmark:

Gun: Henry H015 Single Shot, 357 Magnum
Brass: Hornady
Primer: CCI Small Magnum Rifle


Boolit (PC'd)
Green Dot (gr)
Benchmark (gr)
FPS
Accuracy
Notes


Lee 358-158RF
0.5
19.0
1466
????
Compressed. Medium report. Little unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
1.0
18.5
1494
????
Compressed. Medium report. Almost no unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
1.5
18.0
1578
????
Compressed. Normal report. A single kernel of unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
2.0
17.5
1609
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder.


Lee 358-158RF
2.5
17.0
1684
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean.

[Daekar]

Got a chance to try a few loads with the Accurate 245P boolit:

Gun: Henry H015 Single Shot, 357 Magnum
Brass: Hornady
Primer: CCI Small Magnum Rifle


Boolit (PC'd)
Green Dot (gr)
Benchmark (gr)
FPS
Accuracy
Notes


Accurate 35-245P
0.0
12.5
880
????
Compressed. Medium report. Lots of unburned powder.


Accurate 35-245P
0.5
12.0
1001
????
Compressed. Medium report. Almost no unburned powder.


Accurate 35-245P
1.0
11.5
1094
????
Compressed. Medium report. Almost no unburned powder.


Accurate 35-245P
1.5
11.0
1163
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, some residue.


Accurate 35-245P
2.0
10.5
1183
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean.


Accurate 35-245P
2.5
10.0
1218
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean.

[AlaskaMike]

Good stuff--thanks for the update Daekar!

[dverna]

Got a chance to try a few loads with the Accurate 245P boolit:

Gun: Henry H015 Single Shot, 357 Magnum
Brass: Hornady
Primer: CCI Small Magnum Rifle


Boolit (PC'd)
Green Dot (gr)
Benchmark (gr)
FPS
Accuracy
Notes


Accurate 35-245P
0.0
12.5
880
????
Compressed. Medium report. Lots of unburned powder.


Accurate 35-245P
0.5
12.0
1001
????
Compressed. Medium report. Almost no unburned powder.


Accurate 35-245P
1.0
11.5
1094
????
Compressed. Medium report. Almost no unburned powder.


Accurate 35-245P
1.5
11.0
1163
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, some residue.


Accurate 35-245P
2.0
10.5
1183
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean.


Accurate 35-245P
2.5
10.0
1218
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean.



If at all possible, your data would be far more valuable if you would be kind enough to post group sizes.

Thanks,

[Char-Gar]

No THANKS!

[Daekar]

If at all possible, your data would be far more valuable if you would be kind enough to post group sizes.

Thanks,

I know what you mean, but I don't have a bench to shoot from so I can't really remove myself from the equation...that makes me doubt the value to others. I have posted accuracy data when I have bothered to take it, though, in my own bad / OK / good format. I actually didn't think anyone would care about accuracy data for the 245! Did you have a particular line you were interested in? I'm afraid that I can't really do it for every load, primers are still too dear in these parts.

[derek45]

get some H110/296 and good old 2400 for 357 mag

save the 4895 for the M1 Garand

.

[Daekar]

Got the last bit of testing done for now since I've gone through all my bullet and powder combinations!

Gun: Henry H015 Single Shot, 357 Magnum
Brass: Hornady
Primer: CCI Small Magnum Rifle


Boolit (PC'd)
Green Dot (gr)
Benchmark (gr)
FPS
Accuracy
Notes


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
0.0
21.0
1400
????
Compressed. Medium report. Some unburned powder.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
0.5
20.5
1515
????
Compressed. Medium report. Almost no unburned powder.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
1.0
20.0
1617
????
Compressed. Medium report. No unburned powder, some residue.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
1.5
19.5
1647
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean. Possible out of character V/C.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
2.0
19.0
1722
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean.


Missouri 125gr Cowboy #2
2.5
18.5
1828
????
Compressed. Normal report. No unburned powder, clean.



I continue to be surprised at how effective this boolit with these powder combinations despite the fact that I expected to have more trouble with combustion when using them, not less. It's hardly an efficient use of powder, but it would certainly be immune to positional variation. Given how loud the upper loads are, I expect that a barrel longer than 22" would continue to gain velocity with these loads.

[PAndy]

I have done some similar cautious experiments with 180 cast and 4198 powder in a Henry .357 rifle. Accuracy of a case full of 4198 is excellent for some reason, but velocity is under 1300 fps. I have to load at 1.6" oal. So a little duplex charge is the way to step up speed. Probably a dead end for me, but my loads and results have a lot of similarity with yours. Of course a normal charge of H110 or Lil gun will make plenty of speed without the hassle. Duplex loading gives us yet another opportunity to make a mistake at the loading bench