The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 26, 2012, 11:47 PM   #1
John D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2000
Location: California
Posts: 252
.357 : magnum vs. standard primers?

Just loaded a number of 38 specials and then switched to my .357 mag dies. I see that I am almost out of magnum primers but have a ton of standard primers. How important is using magnum primers for my .357 loads? Can I just use standard primers???
John D is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 11:51 PM   #2
joneb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Location: Central , OR
Posts: 1,724
Quote:
How important is using magnum primers for my .357 loads? Can I just use standard primers???
That depends on all the details you forgot to mention.
joneb is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 12:00 AM   #3
John D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2000
Location: California
Posts: 252
OK. 125g JHP, 8.4g Universal Clays. 4" and 6" revolvers. Used for general shooting. What else do you need to know?
John D is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 12:10 AM   #4
joneb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Location: Central , OR
Posts: 1,724
Quote:
Can I just use standard primers???
Yes.
joneb is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 12:21 AM   #5
joneb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Location: Central , OR
Posts: 1,724
Quote:
OK. 125g JHP, 8.4g Universal Clays.
That is already a hot load, small pistol primers won't make it any worse. You might find improved accuracy with the standard primers
joneb is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 12:49 AM   #6
Lost Sheep
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2009
Location: Anchorage Alaska
Posts: 2,946
Primer choice mostly depends on how easy the powder is to ignite. Also how tightly packed it is and the powder's burn rate. Some of it is fairly easy to understand and some of it seems like magic.

I will not try to school you on the principles, lest I be wrong. I hedge my choices by reading as many different manuals as I can and seeing what primers are chosen for what powders in what velocity ranges and bullet weights.

Good luck

Lost Sheep.
Lost Sheep is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 01:59 AM   #7
joneb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Location: Central , OR
Posts: 1,724
Quote:
Some of it is fairly easy to understand and some of it seems like magic.
Wise words.
Hodgdon shows 7.6gr of Universal is a max load with a 125gr xtp. It would be best to work up the load with standard primers. sorry
joneb is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 03:33 AM   #8
BruceM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 12, 2006
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 285
Quote:
How important is using magnum primers for my .357 loads? Can I just use standard primers???
I just have to ask. What did it say in your reloading manual?



Bruce
BruceM is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 06:43 AM   #9
excelerater
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 27, 2011
Location: Memphis TN
Posts: 694
2400 w std primers
excelerater is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 09:20 AM   #10
John D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2000
Location: California
Posts: 252
My Hodgdon manual lists 8.8g as the max load for 125g JHP, Jibjab. Why the difference???
John D is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 10:22 AM   #11
rclark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 12, 2009
Location: Butte, MT
Posts: 1,553
It was alluded to above ... but using magnum or standard primers has nothing at all to do with a 'magnum' cartridge. It all comes down to what 'powder' you are using. Some powders are primer insensitive ... like Unique and Universal. Others like 4227 or H-110 require a magnum primer. And some powders like 2400 you see a big velocity (pressure) swing when switching primer types... Anyway, in your case my preferred primer is standard with Unique/Universal.
__________________
A clinger. When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Single Action .45 Colt (Sometimes improperly referred to by its alias as the .45 'Long' Colt or .45LC). Don't leave home without it. Ok.... the .44Spec is growing on me ... but the .45 Colt is still king.
rclark is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 10:50 AM   #12
joneb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Location: Central , OR
Posts: 1,724
Quote:
Why the difference???
I don't know my Hodgdon data is from 2003;
.357 mag.
Winchester case
Win SPM primer
125gr Hornady xtp
max load, Universal 7.6 gr

This coincides with Hodgdon's website data.
http://www.hodgdon.com/
What brand bullet, primer and case is used whith your data ?
joneb is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 10:53 AM   #13
John D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2000
Location: California
Posts: 252
Wow, just looked and I have a 1997 book! Now, I'm concerned about these loads...although, I'd use my GP100 (which is strong as a tank). Should I pull them and get under the 7.7??
John D is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 11:05 AM   #14
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,028
Set them aside. Work up a new batch starting lower. You don't have to decide anything yet.

(use standard primers unless you are using a hard-to-ignite powder like HS6 or W296, or if SPM or SR primers is all you have)
__________________
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun"
zxcvbob is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 11:36 AM   #15
joneb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Location: Central , OR
Posts: 1,724
Hodgon data.jpg
The 7.6gr of Universal as a max load just doesn't seem right to me.

I would follow zxcvbob's advice;
Quote:
Set them aside. Work up a new batch starting lower. You don't have to decide anything yet.
joneb is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 11:42 AM   #16
89blazin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 13, 2009
Posts: 107
primers

Can I just use standard primers???

Yes.
89blazin is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 08:09 PM   #17
John D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2000
Location: California
Posts: 252
Boys, I'm just going to set these up for a while. I haven't been into MAX loads for 20 years....I just want something "Mag-like".

I was just using Universal because that's what I had in for the 38 specials. I usually load .357 with 2400.
John D is offline  
Old March 28, 2012, 02:48 AM   #18
BruceM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 12, 2006
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 285
Quote:
Wow, just looked and I have a 1997 book! Now, I'm concerned about these loads.
Why? Do you think that the burning rate is different now? I frequently hear a lot of talk about "new" 2400 being faster than "old" 2400, etc.. With all the load data published for that propellant since it's introduction, how big a product liability exposure do you thing it would be if the manufacturer arbitrarily starts dinking with the burning rate??? Canister grade propellants are canister grade for a reason and the manufacturers cannot just "VOID" previously published load data. They may try some day but things just do not work that way.

Quote:
My Hodgdon manual lists 8.8g as the max load for 125g JHP, Jibjab. Why the difference?
Because published load data is a collection of test results taken on a specific day with a specific firearm or pressure barrel with specific lots of components used under specific atmospheric conditions at that elevation above sea level. This stuff does not come down from a burning bush etched on granite tablets. This is not exact science and you use the data at your own risk-as noted by the many disclaimers on component containers and in reloading manuals. As a matter of fact, info such as exact component type and brand along with the firearm or test fixture used and the COAL are furnished only as a way to qualify the parameters under which the data was obtained and in no way guarantee functional utility.

I'm sure that handloaders sometimes lose sight of what those numbers in the books and on the websites really are and what they really mean, hence the rules such as Handloader's Rule #1-when starting load development, changing any component in an existing load or using a load in a different gun, start low and work up.

If you decide to disregard Rule #1, you proceed at your own risk.

Bruce
BruceM is offline  
Old March 28, 2012, 11:36 AM   #19
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,028
Alliant lists 9.6 grains of Unique as a max load with 125 JSP's. http://glarp.atk.com/2004/2004Catalo...ntPowderSM.pdf

Universal is faster than Unique, but it's not *that* much faster. 8.8 seems reasonable with light bullets. It would be way too much with 158's.
__________________
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun"
zxcvbob is offline  
Old March 28, 2012, 04:23 PM   #20
John D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2000
Location: California
Posts: 252
BruceM, I'm not sure what your rant is about. The new published MAX load is more that 10% less than what was previously published...this gives me pause. I never get up to max loads without working up - if I see evidence of excessive pressure (primer blow outs, bulging cases, etc.), I back off immediately. I always err on the side of safety.
John D is offline  
Old March 29, 2012, 12:59 PM   #21
jhansman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 17, 2007
Posts: 624
FWIW, I use magnum primers with W296 and 158gr. jacketed loads in my GP100. All else takes a SPP.
__________________
Blessed is the man who has nothing to say, and cannot be compelled to say it.
jhansman is offline  
Old March 30, 2012, 04:16 AM   #22
BruceM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 12, 2006
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 285
Quote:
The new published MAX load is more that 10% less than what was previously published
So, what you're saying is that either the "new" powder is substantially faster or the old data produced a substantially overpressure load?

Possibly I didn't articulate the reasons for that in my "rant". That said, I do not wish to restate the reasons.

Incidentally, there are many folks you feel the reason for reduction in published charge weights of old propellants is directly proportional to the degree of involvement of the legal and underwriting departments have in the publishing process-a theory I agree with to varying extents.

Quote:
I never get up to max loads without working up - if I see evidence of excessive pressure (primer blow outs, bulging cases, etc.), I back off immediately. I always err on the side of safety.
That's always a good plan of attack. Be advised that when you get to the point of primer blow outs, bulging cases, etc., you are already way past the safe point and further, there will be no "classic" signs of high pressure in lower intensity rounds such as .38 Special, .45 Colt and .45 ACP until your stratospherically over the edge. In those cases, the chronograph becomes your good friend.



Bruce

Last edited by BruceM; March 30, 2012 at 04:26 AM.
BruceM is offline  
Old March 30, 2012, 09:18 PM   #23
joneb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Location: Central , OR
Posts: 1,724
Quote:
The new published MAX load is more that 10% less than what was previously published...this gives me pause.
Lawyers, improved testing equipment, weaker firearms found for a particular cartridge that came from 1880 or Pakistan I don't know
BruceM brings up some good points.
If a powder manufacturer changes the burn rate or deviates from the grain per cubic centimeter beyond spec they would need to call that powder by a different name.
joneb is offline  
Old March 31, 2012, 01:14 AM   #24
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,028
I just ran some Quickload calculations. 8.4 grains of Universal is pushing it (35800+ psi) 8.8 is too much (39000+ psi) That's assuming Hornady XTP/HP's loaded 1.59" OAL. If you load them shorter, the pressure will be higher. Same calcs using Remington 125 grain SJHP's were 2000 psi higher.
__________________
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun"
zxcvbob is offline  
Old March 31, 2012, 02:03 AM   #25
joneb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Location: Central , OR
Posts: 1,724
Quote:
Same calcs using Remington 125 grain SJHP's were 2000 psi higher.
Thats no surprise; reloading 001.jpg
This is a Rem. 158gr SJHP next to a 158gr Hornady XTP
See anything different ?
joneb is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2013 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12176 seconds with 10 queries