Is it safe to load .357 level charges in .38 Special cases? - Page 2

CraigC · July 11, 2008, 07:13 PM

Quote:

The single most significant factor is the design specs for .38 Special vs .357 Magnum brass.

Those aren't design specs for the brass. Those are industry pressure standards for the guns. For brass does not contain pressure. Bad things happen when it's depended upon to do so. Think, unsupported chambers. The brass case is merely a gasket. There's nothing magical about magnum cases.

nate45 · July 11, 2008, 07:19 PM

Quote:

the design pressure for .38 Special is 17,000 to 18,000 PSI, and 35,000 to 38,000 for .357 Magnum

You see sir, here was where Mike Irwin and I had our biggest point of departure.

I say that the above rating is the max pressure for the pistol chamber not the cartridge case.

The Ultimate Stress rating for Cartridge Brass Cu.7 Zn.3 dead soft is 44,000 psi

The Ultimate Stress rating for Cartridge Brass Cu.7 Zn.3 annealed is 51,000 psi

The Ultimate Stress rating for Cartridge Brass Cu.7 Zn.3 1/4 hard is 54,000 psi

The Ultimate Stress rating Cartridge Brass Cu.7 Zn.3 1/2 hard is 62,000 psi

The Ultimate Stress rating for Cartridge Brass Cu.7 Zn.3 H04 full hard is 76,000 psi

The Ultimate Stress rating for Cartridge Brass Cu.7 Zn.3 H06 ex hard
is 86,000 psi

Even if cartridge companies used the softest brass for .38 Special (which I highly doubt) it would still be stronger than the max suggested psi the ratings you listed.

Quote:

Nate, who is JohnK and why should we believe he knows what he is talking about any more than, say, Mike Irwin?

I don't know he has a lot of load listings on handloads.com and he rights very intelligently in the forums section and seems to be correct. I assumed it might be JohnKsa, but even if it is I don't know who he is either. I do however know who Elmer Keith, John Taffin, Brian Pearce, Ross Seyfried, Skeeter Skelton are and they all do or have done the same thing, that is load .357 level loads in .38 special cases.

Swampghost · July 11, 2008, 07:50 PM

I'd be very careful when uploading .38's especially with a Smith. I would mark the boxes well just in case you get hit by a garbage truck tomorrow and the cartridges end up in other hands.

After I had cracked the reciever on my Mini-14 I split the cylinder on my Super Blackhawk in .44 Mag., my gunsmith showed me what could happen and used a Smith for an example. He produced a revolver with about 3/16-1/4" missing from the active cylinder, the rear of the topstrap had seperated and been raised about 3/4". Any idea of where all of that metal went?

Ever since I've bought firearms for the job at hand. If you think that you need something more powerful, BUY it. There are hundreds of rounds out there, be safe and get the right one.

jaguarxk120 · July 11, 2008, 08:06 PM

In a few post people have stated 38 special brass is designed for 18,000PSI and 357 magnum brass is designed for higher pressures.

Please state your references, in other words WHO says so other than your opinion!!

The pressures you state are the working pressures of the revolver weather it is a 38 or 357. The brass case can take much higher pressure as long as it is supported by the cylinder walls. Where not supported by the steel of the firearm the brass will begin to flow in the openings not supported by steel as pressures increase!

Again please state your reference! Tom F.

**Mal H** · July 11, 2008, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CraigC

Those aren't design specs for the brass.

I am well aware of that. I think you missed my point, or, more probably, it wasn't clear enough.

Brass cases are usually made to match and slightly exceed the chamber design pressure of the firearm it is intended to be fired in. .38 Special is not necessarily thick enough in the web to contain the pressures associated with the .357 Magnum. I'm thinking of case head separation and the resulting bad stuff that happens at that time, not case splitting, etc. The upper walls of a case can be paper thin and still function properly for a firing (probably wouldn't be able to reload them, however).

By your logic it is perfectly fine to load, for example, a 7-30 Waters case to the same pressure levels as a 7mm assuming the rifle can take the pressure. I wouldn't want to be firing that load.

zxcvbob · July 11, 2008, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaguarxk120

WHO says so other than your opinion!!

The brass is not supported *lengthwise*. (and that's how my .38 brass failed when I abused it.)

What are you getting so angry about? You can load your brass however you want. (you wouldn't believe how much AA#5 will fit in a .38 or a .357 case; try it sometime.)

Peter M. Eick · July 12, 2008, 07:54 PM

Quikload says that a 168 grn lyman lead swc (I could not find a 173 so close enough).

Now if we load 13.5 grns of 2400 at 1.550 col then we peak out a 55,644 psi!

That would be NASTY!

Now if we do the same to 1.525 (brian pearce's col) we get 62,926 psi.
If we drop back to 13.0 grns at 1.525 we are at 54,791 psi.

Lets be a bit more sane about this:

Lets load this to 1.575 (357 magnum distance). Now we are down to 44,105 psi. Still pretty darn hot.

Lets try 11 grns back at 1.555 this gives us 28,515 psi 1224 fps out of a 6" barrel.

10 grns at 1.555 at 1.555 gives us 21,851 and 1106 fps out of a 6".

Mike V's max load with 2400 and a 158 goes at 28,540 psi and leaves at 1290 fps with a 6".

Bottom line?

13.5 grns of 2400 with a 173 loaded to normal 38 special lengths? That is a proof load and I am truly impressed that your gun can take it day in and day out.

Bottom line 2?
This is why I bought Quikload so I could test some of the things I read about on the net. It is surprisingly accurate program. Especially when you tweak it to your gun!

Terry_t63 · July 12, 2008, 10:23 PM

I found this thread and tried not to get in the fray but, I can’t help my self. If you shorten the case or up bullet weight you increase case presser. Might work with some loads but I would be very careful and do a very slow workup to make sure. I also would make sure I used a newer gun Ruger, Thomason Contender. That’s just me. I want to make sure I am not over time ruining my gun or pulling trigger on a handgranad with a handle.

Terry

CraigC · July 12, 2008, 10:54 PM

Quote:

The brass is not supported *lengthwise*.

It's not, I thought that's what the recoil plate was for???

Your Quickload results are way off, no question. We would not be seeing that load in print, in recent times, if the pressure was that high, period. That's published data, it was not pulled out of a hat. At one time, it was listed in the Lyman reloading manuals. So here are links to three articles by John Taffin, one by Brian Pearce, one by Chuck Taylor and one by Mike Venturino. When you guys can flaunt the collective resume' of these gents, get back to us. Unfortunately for this discussion, you'll have to buy the issues of Handloader. Venturino has always been a conservative handloader and deems 12.0gr as his self-induced maximum but does mention the 13.5gr load from the Lyman manuals. LoadData.com also lists up to 13.0 or 13.5gr, depending on which bullet is used.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...46/ai_60897647

http://www.sixguns.com/range/Firstmag.htm

http://www.sixguns.com/range/elmersloads.htm

http://www.sixguns.com/range/Mademag.htm

http://www.riflemagazine.com//magazi...49partial1.pdf

http://www.riflemagazine.com/magazin...0(LO)%2021.pdf

http://www.loaddata.com/members/sear...etallicID=3364

zxcvbob · July 12, 2008, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Quote:
The brass is not supported *lengthwise*.

It's not, I thought that's what the recoil plate was for???

How much headspace clearance is there? The brass is unsupported until the head hits the recoil plate. The brass expands and grabs the cylinder walls, and it stretchs to the rear until it hits the gun's bolt or frame or something. Normally this kind of brass failure is associated with rifle cartridges, but I've seen it in .38 Special brass (see my previous post).

Quote:

Your Quickload results are way off, no question. We would not be seeing that load in print, in recent times, if the pressure was that high, period. That's published data, it was not pulled out of a hat. At one time, it was listed in the Lyman reloading manuals. So here are links to three articles by John Taffin, one by Brian Pearce, one by Chuck Taylor and one by Mike Venturino. When you guys can flaunt the collective resume' of these gents, get back to us. Unfortunately for this discussion, you'll have to buy the issues of Handloader. Venturino has always been a conservative handloader and deems 12.0gr as his self-induced maximum but does mention the 13.5gr load from the Lyman manuals. LoadData.com also lists up to 13.0 or 13.5gr, depending on which bullet is used.

In Lyman's 48th, 13.5 grains of 2400 is the max load in .357 Magnum brass with bullet number 358429. The pressure listed is 41100 CUP. (that's much higher than where my brass failed, which was loaded to about 38000 CUP) If you use .38 Special brass the pressure will climb tremendously unless you seat the bullet really long to give the same 1.553" OAL as with .357 brass.

CraigC · July 13, 2008, 12:04 AM

How did you come up with the 11.0gr Blue Dot load? I suspect you might have had something else going on with either the brass or the sixgun. Did you work up to it slowly? The only cases I've had a problem with are the nickel plated Remington cases with the crimp cannelure. Mostly neck splits. I haven't had any sticky extraction issues, even with Ruger's rough chambers.

I also found another reference, this one in Dave Scovill's "Loading the Peacemaker". He states his preferred load was 12.0gr but that the published data in the mid-`50's was in the 30,000psi range. It doesn't really concern me that the 13.5gr load is at maximum for the same bullet in the .357 in some manuals. Both the .357 and the .44 magnums have been watered down over the years.

zxcvbob · July 13, 2008, 12:25 AM

Quote:

How did you come up with the 11.0gr Blue Dot load?

I pulled it out of my ass. Which is fine, but I should have worked up to it rather than starting there. BTW, it's a safer load than your 13.5gr 2400 load.

Quote:

It doesn't really concern me that the 13.5gr load is at maximum for the same bullet in the .357 in some manuals. Both the .357 and the .44 magnums have been watered down over the years.

That's exactly what I was trying to replicate -- but the brass I was using was weak.

13.5 grains is a good load in .357 brass. (I use .35" seating depth in my calculations because that's where the crimp groove on several of my bullets is. The 173's seat about the same depth, they just have a more massive nose.) But if you seat the bullet .145" deeper, like you would with .38 Special brass, and the pressure climbs by about 15000 psi. We're at the point where the bullet seating dept is critical. Reduce the powder a little and it's a lot more stable.

WESHOOT2 · July 13, 2008, 10:46 AM

First, 'QuickLoads' is a "toy", not a "tool".

Second, there are currently places that will perform actual pressure-testing of your ammo (unless they deem it unsafe).

Third, I am unable to ignore the historical fact that many 'famous' pioneers used AND recommended this and similar loads.

Fourth, I have a fair supply of 38 Special cases, and they vary WILDLY as to weight, thickness, and internal volume; WILDLY.

Lastly, I have a 357 Redhawk, so I don't care.......

REAL knowledge is never using Blue Dot in 38 or 357 Magnum cases.

CraigC · July 13, 2008, 11:06 AM

Quote:

...it's a safer load than your 13.5gr 2400 load.

I'm not trying to be argumentative but how did you reach that conclusion? "My" load is not mine at all, rather it was set forth by the pioneers of modern sixgunning and is continued in use today by folks who have forgotten more about the subject than I will ever know. It's been around over 70yrs and at one point, was published in Lyman's manual. PROVEN! I've used it for about ten years and never had a problem with the brass. As I said before, some cases used up to 20 times without sign of failure. Yet, your 11.0gr Blue Dot load that you admittedly pulled from your posterior is blowing off case heads. Trying to duplicate a high velocity load with a faster burning powder, I'm not surprised. So either the pressures are sky high, your brass was weak or your sixgun has excessive headspace and/or generous chamber dimensions.

Sounds to me like it's a lot more dangerous to listen to a computer program than it is to read a 50yr old book.

WESHOOT2 · July 13, 2008, 11:19 AM

........what factors are required to blow the head off a case.

No, really, stop and think about it.

I mean, I'm admittedly a screw-SAAMI sort, but even I have survival instincts.......I have been loading since 1976, starting with the 38 and 357 Magnum (4" Security Six).

WESHOOT2 · July 13, 2008, 11:24 AM

Is that a paper or fiber gasket? Or a copper gasket? Or a magic gasket?
LOL

"Quickload" is what happens to my shorts after lighting off a 38 Special / 173g / 1,000,000g Blue Dot load. Ay?

"This is my brain with a side order of bacon"

I rest my case.

Peter M. Eick · July 13, 2008, 06:35 PM

I agree the brass varies a lot. I am matching the starline brass in quikload. I also agree it is just a tool to use to compare to real world results. It is an interesting program though.

For example, if we take alliant reloading guide and go to the 158 grn lead load LSWC for 2400 they say the max is 7.5 grns at 990 fps with 15,500 psi. Ram that same load into quickload it comes back with 15,227 psi and 939 fps out of a 5.6" barrel (matching alliants distance) with the correct cartraige col.

Now take the max load for the +p 38 of 7.8 grns of 1035 fps and 17,400 psi and quickload comes back at 16,941 psi and 980 fps. A bit low. Now 7.9 grns gets us 17,553 psi and 994 fps, and 8.2 grns gets us 19,516 psi at 1035 fps.

Quickload works pretty well in the when you calibrate it. It is sure interesting to play with (toy factor) and study the results.

zxcvbob · July 13, 2008, 08:22 PM

Quote:

For example, if we take alliant reloading guide and go to the 158 grn lead load LSWC for 2400 they say the max is 7.5 grns at 990 fps with 15,500 psi. Ram that same load into quickload it comes back with 15,227 psi and 939 fps out of a 5.6" barrel (matching alliants distance) with the correct cartraige col.

Now take the max load for the +p 38 of 7.8 grns of 1035 fps and 17,400 psi and quickload comes back at 16,941 psi and 980 fps. A bit low. Now 7.9 grns gets us 17,553 psi and 994 fps, and 8.2 grns gets us 19,516 psi at 1035 fps.

I get better predictions in Quickload if I add about an inch to the barrel length for revolvers -- so the "bullet travel distance" is approximately equal to the gun's barrel length. (In an autoloader, single-shot, or bolt action, the chamber is part of the barrel.) HTH

mec · July 13, 2008, 10:43 PM

Those loads were Keith and Skelton standbys. They were lighter than .357 magnum loads of that period but probably hotter than the current SAAMI maximum for the .357. When Keith started with them in the Heavy Duty, Outdoorsman and the Colt SA, there weren't any 357 cases yet. During part of Skelton's time, .357 cases were somewhat scarce and expensive but 38's were common. A lot of people even back when the practice was common warned against it because the loads could find their way into a light to medium framed .38 Special. Skelton told his hot special loads from his others by seating the thompson bullets out to the lower crimp groove.
I don't recall if this kept them from chambering in a 38 special or not.

SL1 · July 14, 2008, 08:11 AM

1. CASE MATERIAL STRENGTH IS NOT THE SAME AS ACCEPTABLE CHAMBER PRESSURE

The tensile stregth (psi) numbers for cartridge brass that were posted by Nate45 seem to have been misconstrued. These values do NOT equate to pressure in the case. They are related to STRESS in the CASE WALL. You need to calculate that from the pressure in the case and the dimensions of the case. For example, in a 38 Special case, the inside diameter is .357", so the area is .357 x .357 x pi / 4 = 0.100 sqare inch. Lets say the case wall is about 0.03" thick back near the web where it does not expand agaist the chamber wall. That makes the cross section of the metal case wall around the circumference of the case = .357" x pi x 0.03" = 0.0336 square inches.

Now, as Nate 45 wrote, the maximum tensile stress for very hard cartridge brass is 86,000 psi, and I just calculated that there is 0.0336 square inch of brass, so the maximum force that part of the case wall can take in the axial direction is 86,000 psi x 0.0336 square inch = 2894 pounds. An internal pressure of 28,940 psi in a case with a 0.1" cross section area will produce 28,040 psi x 0.1 square inch = 2894 pounds of force trying to stretch the case. So, THAT is the chamber pressure that will cause the case to stretch as far as the headspace will allow, NOT 86,000 psi.

Before somebody tries to use that result to "calculate" the "max pressure for a 38 Special case", I need to point out that the wall thickness of the case tapers from about 0.012" near the mouth to maybe or more 0.050" near the web. The internal pressure causes the case wall to expand against the chamber from the mouth to a point where the case gets thick enough to resist the internal pressure. It takes another equation to estimate where that is, and, it obviously depends on the pressure. So, the higher the internal pressure, the higher the thickness of the case where it is NOT against the chamber wall. AND, even when it is against the wall, it may still slip along the wall unless the chamber is real rough or the pressure is much higher than needed to just get the brass to the wall. IF the brass slips, then it will not stretch. SO it is very DIFFICULT to calculate the pressure that will cause the brass in a STRAIGHT-WALLED case to stretch. Experience shows that it depends A LOT on the smoothness of the chamber and SOME on how much lube is on the case.

2. QUICKLOAD IS EASY TO USE IN A MISLEADING WAY

Before accepting a QuickLoad calculation as useful, it is necessary to check it against published pressure-tested load data. I have found that it does much better with rifle cartridges than handgun cartridges in that respect. And, remember that there are a LOT of variations in revolvers that cause pressure differences that are not relevant in SAAMI test barrels (e.g, cylinder throat to barrel alignment). So, be VERY careful when I or anybody else starts posting QuickLoad results.

SL1

WESHOOT2 · July 14, 2008, 09:40 AM

Two crimp grooves; 'long' 38's only fit in some long-cylinder 38's.

**Mal H** · July 14, 2008, 10:25 AM

... as did SL1.

brickeyee · July 14, 2008, 12:21 PM

Quote:

1. CASE MATERIAL STRENGTH IS NOT THE SAME AS ACCEPTABLE CHAMBER PRESSURE

The tensile stregth (psi) numbers for cartridge brass that were posted by Nate45 seem to have been misconstrued. These values do NOT equate to pressure in the case. They are related to STRESS in the CASE WALL. You need to calculate that from the pressure in the case and the dimensions of the case. For example, in a 38 Special case, the inside diameter is .357", so the area is .357 x .357 x pi / 4 = 0.100 sqare inch. Lets say the case wall is about 0.03" thick back near the web where it does not expand agaist the chamber wall. That makes the cross section of the metal case wall around the circumference of the case = .357" x pi x 0.03" = 0.0336 square inches.

Now, as Nate 45 wrote, the maximum tensile stress for very hard cartridge brass is 86,000 psi, and I just calculated that there is 0.0336 square inch of brass, so the maximum force that part of the case wall can take in the axial direction is 86,000 psi x 0.0336 square inch = 2894 pounds. An internal pressure of 28,940 psi in a case with a 0.1" cross section area will produce 28,040 psi x 0.1 square inch = 2894 pounds of force trying to stretch the case. So, THAT is the chamber pressure that will cause the case to stretch as far as the headspace will allow, NOT 86,000 psi.

Before somebody tries to use that result to "calculate" the "max pressure for a 38 Special case", I need to point out that the wall thickness of the case tapers from about 0.012" near the mouth to maybe or more 0.050" near the web. The internal pressure causes the case wall to expand against the chamber from the mouth to a point where the case gets thick enough to resist the internal pressure. It takes another equation to estimate where that is, and, it obviously depends on the pressure. So, the higher the internal pressure, the higher the thickness of the case where it is NOT against the chamber wall. AND, even when it is against the wall, it may still slip along the wall unless the chamber is real rough or the pressure is much higher than needed to just get the brass to the wall. IF the brass slips, then it will not stretch. SO it is very DIFFICULT to calculate the pressure that will cause the brass in a STRAIGHT-WALLED case to stretch. Experience shows that it depends A LOT on the smoothness of the chamber and SOME on how much lube is on the case.

+1
Understanding how to correctly set up the problem is always a good step.

there is NOWHERE NEAR a square inch of brass available to take the chamber pressure.

nate45 · July 14, 2008, 12:54 PM

All very interesting, but what is the bottom line? Are those opposed saying that after all these years of the 13.5 grains of 2400 with the 173 gr. KT bullet being loaded in .38 cases, with no reported problems, that now its dangerous?

I know from my own personal experience of over 20 years of having fired several hundred rounds of it, I have never experienced a case failure. I also have no reason to doubt all the noted handgun experts who have used this load and report the same.

Quote:

there is NOWHERE NEAR a square inch of brass available to take the chamber pressure.

Is it or is it not the steel of the cylinder chamber that 'takes' the pressure?

It has been demonstrated that the decreased capacity of the, .38 case can and will cause chamber pressure to rise. It has not been proven that this increased pressure will cause a problem unless it exceeds the strength of the cylinder walls. Nor has in been proven that a .357 case is dramatically stronger or radically different from a .38 special case.

Those opposed to the practice of loading what today are considered .357 level loads in .38 special cases have done a lot of calculating, speculating and hypothesizing, you have however not demonstrated a sound reason or sited a source that shows that any of the .38/.44 HD loads that were the forerunners of the .357 Magnum are dangerous when fired in a large frame .38 special or a .357 Magnum revolver.

mec · July 14, 2008, 01:39 PM

There is a frequently reported notion that current 2400 produces more pressure than in past decades. It may (or may not) be that there is very little difference in performance with present alliant 2400 when compared to the hercules from the 1960s-solidly within the time frames of Keith and Skelton.

This is inconclusive due to the unknown effects of time on the powder but I have checked two cans from that period against current 2400. both had been opened and stored in resonably normal temperature/humidity indoors. Performance from the two, slightly different cans were close together. The powder from one can weight the same as the identical volume of alliant as set on the powder measure. the one below threw .2 grain more at the same setting. I checked them out loaded with the same measure setting as alliant 2400 and then with the exact weight. Results are very close across the board.
I repeated the observation with 21 grains of 2400 with a 250 grain .44 bullet. that time, the newer alliant powder showed a 60 fps advantage.

Whether using magnum or special cases, with any combination of components I would approach these loads from a ten percent reduction and would not be surprised to find the results commiserate with what was reported by Keith and Skelton- particularly Keith as he was known to send his loads to the H P White Laboratory for chronographing. I think that Skelton's access to chronographs was occasional if he had access to them at all.

July 11, 2008, 07:50 PM	#28
Swampghost Senior Member Join Date: April 18, 2008 Location: Florida, east coast Posts: 2,106	I'd be very careful when uploading .38's especially with a Smith. I would mark the boxes well just in case you get hit by a garbage truck tomorrow and the cartridges end up in other hands. After I had cracked the reciever on my Mini-14 I split the cylinder on my Super Blackhawk in .44 Mag., my gunsmith showed me what could happen and used a Smith for an example. He produced a revolver with about 3/16-1/4" missing from the active cylinder, the rear of the topstrap had seperated and been raised about 3/4". Any idea of where all of that metal went? Ever since I've bought firearms for the job at hand. If you think that you need something more powerful, BUY it. There are hundreds of rounds out there, be safe and get the right one. __________________ NRA Patron Member

July 12, 2008, 07:54 PM	#32
Peter M. Eick Senior Member Join Date: August 3, 1999 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 2,991	Quikload says that a 168 grn lyman lead swc (I could not find a 173 so close enough). Now if we load 13.5 grns of 2400 at 1.550 col then we peak out a 55,644 psi! That would be NASTY! Now if we do the same to 1.525 (brian pearce's col) we get 62,926 psi. If we drop back to 13.0 grns at 1.525 we are at 54,791 psi. Lets be a bit more sane about this: Lets load this to 1.575 (357 magnum distance). Now we are down to 44,105 psi. Still pretty darn hot. Lets try 11 grns back at 1.555 this gives us 28,515 psi 1224 fps out of a 6" barrel. 10 grns at 1.555 at 1.555 gives us 21,851 and 1106 fps out of a 6". Mike V's max load with 2400 and a 158 goes at 28,540 psi and leaves at 1290 fps with a 6". Bottom line? 13.5 grns of 2400 with a 173 loaded to normal 38 special lengths? That is a proof load and I am truly impressed that your gun can take it day in and day out. Bottom line 2? This is why I bought Quikload so I could test some of the things I read about on the net. It is surprisingly accurate program. Especially when you tweak it to your gun! __________________ 10mm and 357sig, the best things to come along since the 38 super!

July 12, 2008, 10:23 PM	#33
Terry_t63 Junior Member Join Date: March 6, 2008 Location: Alabama Posts: 3	I would be very careful I found this thread and tried not to get in the fray but, I can’t help my self. If you shorten the case or up bullet weight you increase case presser. Might work with some loads but I would be very careful and do a very slow workup to make sure. I also would make sure I used a newer gun Ruger, Thomason Contender. That’s just me. I want to make sure I am not over time ruining my gun or pulling trigger on a handgranad with a handle. Terry

July 13, 2008, 10:46 AM	#38
WESHOOT2 Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 1999 Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country) Posts: 14,324	ooh ooh I wanna play First, 'QuickLoads' is a "toy", not a "tool". Second, there are currently places that will perform actual pressure-testing of your ammo (unless they deem it unsafe). Third, I am unable to ignore the historical fact that many 'famous' pioneers used AND recommended this and similar loads. Fourth, I have a fair supply of 38 Special cases, and they vary WILDLY as to weight, thickness, and internal volume; WILDLY. Lastly, I have a 357 Redhawk, so I don't care....... REAL knowledge is never using Blue Dot in 38 or 357 Magnum cases. __________________ . "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"

July 13, 2008, 11:19 AM	#40
WESHOOT2 Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 1999 Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country) Posts: 14,324	Please consider, for a moment, if you will......... ........what factors are required to blow the head off a case. No, really, stop and think about it. I mean, I'm admittedly a screw-SAAMI sort, but even I have survival instincts.......I have been loading since 1976, starting with the 38 and 357 Magnum (4" Security Six). __________________ . "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"

July 11, 2008, 08:06 PM	#29
jaguarxk120 Senior Member Join Date: February 28, 2008 Location: Michigan Posts: 2,620	In a few post people have stated 38 special brass is designed for 18,000PSI and 357 magnum brass is designed for higher pressures. Please state your references, in other words WHO says so other than your opinion!! The pressures you state are the working pressures of the revolver weather it is a 38 or 357. The brass case can take much higher pressure as long as it is supported by the cylinder walls. Where not supported by the steel of the firearm the brass will begin to flow in the openings not supported by steel as pressures increase! Again please state your reference! Tom F.

July 13, 2008, 12:04 AM	#36
CraigC Junior member Join Date: November 28, 2001 Location: West Tennessee Posts: 4,300	How did you come up with the 11.0gr Blue Dot load? I suspect you might have had something else going on with either the brass or the sixgun. Did you work up to it slowly? The only cases I've had a problem with are the nickel plated Remington cases with the crimp cannelure. Mostly neck splits. I haven't had any sticky extraction issues, even with Ruger's rough chambers. I also found another reference, this one in Dave Scovill's "Loading the Peacemaker". He states his preferred load was 12.0gr but that the published data in the mid-`50's was in the 30,000psi range. It doesn't really concern me that the 13.5gr load is at maximum for the same bullet in the .357 in some manuals. Both the .357 and the .44 magnums have been watered down over the years.

July 13, 2008, 11:24 AM	#41
WESHOOT2 Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 1999 Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country) Posts: 14,324	....."merely a gasket"..... Is that a paper or fiber gasket? Or a copper gasket? Or a magic gasket? LOL "Quickload" is what happens to my shorts after lighting off a 38 Special / 173g / 1,000,000g Blue Dot load. Ay? "This is my brain with a side order of bacon" I rest my case. __________________ . "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"

July 13, 2008, 06:35 PM	#42
Peter M. Eick Senior Member Join Date: August 3, 1999 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 2,991	I agree the brass varies a lot. I am matching the starline brass in quikload. I also agree it is just a tool to use to compare to real world results. It is an interesting program though. For example, if we take alliant reloading guide and go to the 158 grn lead load LSWC for 2400 they say the max is 7.5 grns at 990 fps with 15,500 psi. Ram that same load into quickload it comes back with 15,227 psi and 939 fps out of a 5.6" barrel (matching alliants distance) with the correct cartraige col. Now take the max load for the +p 38 of 7.8 grns of 1035 fps and 17,400 psi and quickload comes back at 16,941 psi and 980 fps. A bit low. Now 7.9 grns gets us 17,553 psi and 994 fps, and 8.2 grns gets us 19,516 psi at 1035 fps. Quickload works pretty well in the when you calibrate it. It is sure interesting to play with (toy factor) and study the results. __________________ 10mm and 357sig, the best things to come along since the 38 super!

July 13, 2008, 10:43 PM	#44
mec Junior member Join Date: December 6, 2001 Posts: 1,536	Those loads were Keith and Skelton standbys. They were lighter than .357 magnum loads of that period but probably hotter than the current SAAMI maximum for the .357. When Keith started with them in the Heavy Duty, Outdoorsman and the Colt SA, there weren't any 357 cases yet. During part of Skelton's time, .357 cases were somewhat scarce and expensive but 38's were common. A lot of people even back when the practice was common warned against it because the loads could find their way into a light to medium framed .38 Special. Skelton told his hot special loads from his others by seating the thompson bullets out to the lower crimp groove. I don't recall if this kept them from chambering in a 38 special or not.

July 14, 2008, 08:11 AM	#45
SL1 Senior Member Join Date: November 8, 2007 Posts: 2,001	2 points of correction 1. CASE MATERIAL STRENGTH IS NOT THE SAME AS ACCEPTABLE CHAMBER PRESSURE The tensile stregth (psi) numbers for cartridge brass that were posted by Nate45 seem to have been misconstrued. These values do NOT equate to pressure in the case. They are related to STRESS in the CASE WALL. You need to calculate that from the pressure in the case and the dimensions of the case. For example, in a 38 Special case, the inside diameter is .357", so the area is .357 x .357 x pi / 4 = 0.100 sqare inch. Lets say the case wall is about 0.03" thick back near the web where it does not expand agaist the chamber wall. That makes the cross section of the metal case wall around the circumference of the case = .357" x pi x 0.03" = 0.0336 square inches. Now, as Nate 45 wrote, the maximum tensile stress for very hard cartridge brass is 86,000 psi, and I just calculated that there is 0.0336 square inch of brass, so the maximum force that part of the case wall can take in the axial direction is 86,000 psi x 0.0336 square inch = 2894 pounds. An internal pressure of 28,940 psi in a case with a 0.1" cross section area will produce 28,040 psi x 0.1 square inch = 2894 pounds of force trying to stretch the case. So, THAT is the chamber pressure that will cause the case to stretch as far as the headspace will allow, NOT 86,000 psi. Before somebody tries to use that result to "calculate" the "max pressure for a 38 Special case", I need to point out that the wall thickness of the case tapers from about 0.012" near the mouth to maybe or more 0.050" near the web. The internal pressure causes the case wall to expand against the chamber from the mouth to a point where the case gets thick enough to resist the internal pressure. It takes another equation to estimate where that is, and, it obviously depends on the pressure. So, the higher the internal pressure, the higher the thickness of the case where it is NOT against the chamber wall. AND, even when it is against the wall, it may still slip along the wall unless the chamber is real rough or the pressure is much higher than needed to just get the brass to the wall. IF the brass slips, then it will not stretch. SO it is very DIFFICULT to calculate the pressure that will cause the brass in a STRAIGHT-WALLED case to stretch. Experience shows that it depends A LOT on the smoothness of the chamber and SOME on how much lube is on the case. 2. QUICKLOAD IS EASY TO USE IN A MISLEADING WAY Before accepting a QuickLoad calculation as useful, it is necessary to check it against published pressure-tested load data. I have found that it does much better with rifle cartridges than handgun cartridges in that respect. And, remember that there are a LOT of variations in revolvers that cause pressure differences that are not relevant in SAAMI test barrels (e.g, cylinder throat to barrel alignment). So, be VERY careful when I or anybody else starts posting QuickLoad results. SL1

July 14, 2008, 09:40 AM	#46
WESHOOT2 Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 1999 Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country) Posts: 14,324	Mr. Cumpston hits a homer! Two crimp grooves; 'long' 38's only fit in some long-cylinder 38's. __________________ . "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"

July 14, 2008, 10:25 AM	#47
Mal H Staff Join Date: March 20, 1999 Location: Somewhere in the woods of Northern Virginia Posts: 16,955	... as did SL1.

July 14, 2008, 01:39 PM	#50
mec Junior member Join Date: December 6, 2001 Posts: 1,536	There is a frequently reported notion that current 2400 produces more pressure than in past decades. It may (or may not) be that there is very little difference in performance with present alliant 2400 when compared to the hercules from the 1960s-solidly within the time frames of Keith and Skelton. This is inconclusive due to the unknown effects of time on the powder but I have checked two cans from that period against current 2400. both had been opened and stored in resonably normal temperature/humidity indoors. Performance from the two, slightly different cans were close together. The powder from one can weight the same as the identical volume of alliant as set on the powder measure. the one below threw .2 grain more at the same setting. I checked them out loaded with the same measure setting as alliant 2400 and then with the exact weight. Results are very close across the board. I repeated the observation with 21 grains of 2400 with a 250 grain .44 bullet. that time, the newer alliant powder showed a 60 fps advantage. Whether using magnum or special cases, with any combination of components I would approach these loads from a ten percent reduction and would not be surprised to find the results commiserate with what was reported by Keith and Skelton- particularly Keith as he was known to send his loads to the H P White Laboratory for chronographing. I think that Skelton's access to chronographs was occasional if he had access to them at all.