.357 mag ballistic test: Remington 180 gr SJHP fired from revolver and carbine

Andrew Wiggin · August 2, 2014, 02:34 PM

*This post might be better placed in the handgun forum because it is handgun ammunition but it involves a rifle too. Mods, please let me know where this fits best.

.357 mag Remington 180 gr SJHP video link

.357 mag Remington 180 gr SJHP fired from S&W Model 13 4" revolver and from Rossi M92 16" carbine through four layers of denim into calibrated gelatin.

BB: 597.8 fps, 3.2"

Revolver data

Impact velocity: 1,193 fps
Pentration: 17.8"
Retained weight: 181.7 gr
Max expansion: 0.557"
Min expansion: 0.534"

Carbine data

Impact velocity: 1,563 fps
Penetration: 18.1"
Retained weight: 151.3 gr
Max expansion: 0.600"
Min Expansion: 0.587"

2damnold4this · August 3, 2014, 09:02 AM

Thanks for the information. How do you think the carbine would stack up against a 30-30 load?

Andrew Wiggin · August 3, 2014, 10:14 AM

It's not a "real" rifle but it looks like out could certainly do the job for small deer out to a hundred yards or so. I'm no expert, though.

**44 AMP** · August 3, 2014, 11:15 AM

Quote:

BB: 597.8 fps, 3.2"

What does this mean?

I am a little surprised at the relatively small difference in velocities. Penetration is about the same, again, a small surprise.

Might just be the 180s and the guns used, though.

Andrew Wiggin · August 3, 2014, 11:27 AM

It's the calibration result. Ballistic gelatin requires a .177 steel BB to fired into it to ensure the proper density. The acceptable range is 590 fps +/- 15 fps and 2.95"-3.75" of penetration. Calibration results that fall just outside that range can be adjusted by the McPherson method, if you subscribe to that belief. Test results that fall within that range can be taken at face value. Test results that claim calibration but do not give figures should be taken with a grain of salt.

Andy Blozinski · August 3, 2014, 12:08 PM

I doesn't seem like much of a change in penetration.

Andrew Wiggin · August 3, 2014, 12:16 PM

I'll bet that at 1,300 or 1,400 fps there is a substantial difference. The bullet fired from the rifle shed a lot of weight.

**44 AMP** · August 4, 2014, 10:16 AM

First off, thanks for explaining about the "calibration" of the gel.

These are the results from a single round from each, pistol and carbine?

The rifle round lost approx. 30gr. 17% (rounded off) of its weight. And in doing so only penetrated 0.3" deeper, and expanded 0.05" more than the round fired from the pistol.

I consider these amounts effectively insignificant. Despite the 350ish fps difference in velocity, the results were nearly identical.

Based only on the data you give, there is no practical difference between the rifle and the revolver with that load.

Andrew Wiggin · August 4, 2014, 11:23 AM

That's correct on the surface of things but there is more to the story. The round from the rifle and the one from the handgun both arrived at nearly the same place but they took a different route to get there. Because the rifle shot fragmented more, it also produced greater disruption in the first few inches of "tissue". It at least produced a larger temporary cavity. I believe that the projectile would penetrate less at some velocity between 1,200 fps and 1,560 fps where the projectile expands to a greater degree but not to the point that parts break off. It might also penetrate more deeply when fired from the revolver at greater distance because the impact velocity would be low enough that the bullet would expand less.

If anything, this underscores the difference between amateur testing by laypeople like myself and proper laboratory testing. If I had the time and the resources, I'd like to test this load at a variety of distances, with and without denim and other barriers, and with a minimum of five shots for each test. I believe that my testing gives a reasonable indication of performance (else I wouldn't bother) but it doesn't give a comprehensive picture over a wide range of circumstances.

Some day I might choose some of my favorite loads and do a comprehensive battery of testing. One thing that has interested me is the idea of using a reduced powder charge and shooting the block at a distance of 100 yards or so. That should simulate the effect of even greater range.

Unlicensed Dremel · August 7, 2014, 10:33 AM

Excellent work, thank you.

Buffalo Bore has 180s that they claim top 1800 fps from an 18" or 18.5" bbl (not 16" like your test), and ditto but with 158s and over 2000 fps they claim.

Amazing how much penetration that handgun bullet gets.

Andrew Wiggin · August 27, 2014, 12:36 PM

I'll have to check those out. A friend has a 180 gr Ranch Dog mold and we plan on experimenting with various lead/tin alloys and possibly drill shallow cavities in the nose. I'd like to find something that will expand only a little from the handgun and still be able to push reasonably deeply from the rifle. I want my cake and to eat it too. This SJHP is almost exactly what I'm looking for but I'd like to be able to roll my own and get close to this performance.

August 2, 2014, 02:34 PM	#1
Andrew Wiggin Senior Member Join Date: December 22, 2012 Posts: 516	.357 mag ballistic test: Remington 180 gr SJHP fired from revolver and carbine *This post might be better placed in the handgun forum because it is handgun ammunition but it involves a rifle too. Mods, please let me know where this fits best. .357 mag Remington 180 gr SJHP video link .357 mag Remington 180 gr SJHP fired from S&W Model 13 4" revolver and from Rossi M92 16" carbine through four layers of denim into calibrated gelatin. BB: 597.8 fps, 3.2" Revolver data Impact velocity: 1,193 fps Pentration: 17.8" Retained weight: 181.7 gr Max expansion: 0.557" Min expansion: 0.534" Carbine data Impact velocity: 1,563 fps Penetration: 18.1" Retained weight: 151.3 gr Max expansion: 0.600" Min Expansion: 0.587"

August 4, 2014, 10:16 AM	#8
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,795	First off, thanks for explaining about the "calibration" of the gel. These are the results from a single round from each, pistol and carbine? The rifle round lost approx. 30gr. 17% (rounded off) of its weight. And in doing so only penetrated 0.3" deeper, and expanded 0.05" more than the round fired from the pistol. I consider these amounts effectively insignificant. Despite the 350ish fps difference in velocity, the results were nearly identical. Based only on the data you give, there is no practical difference between the rifle and the revolver with that load. __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

August 3, 2014, 09:02 AM	#2
2damnold4this Senior Member Join Date: August 12, 2009 Location: Athens, Georgia Posts: 2,526	Thanks for the information. How do you think the carbine would stack up against a 30-30 load?

August 3, 2014, 10:14 AM	#3
Andrew Wiggin Senior Member Join Date: December 22, 2012 Posts: 516	It's not a "real" rifle but it looks like out could certainly do the job for small deer out to a hundred yards or so. I'm no expert, though.

August 3, 2014, 11:27 AM	#5
Andrew Wiggin Senior Member Join Date: December 22, 2012 Posts: 516	It's the calibration result. Ballistic gelatin requires a .177 steel BB to fired into it to ensure the proper density. The acceptable range is 590 fps +/- 15 fps and 2.95"-3.75" of penetration. Calibration results that fall just outside that range can be adjusted by the McPherson method, if you subscribe to that belief. Test results that fall within that range can be taken at face value. Test results that claim calibration but do not give figures should be taken with a grain of salt.

August 3, 2014, 12:08 PM	#6
Andy Blozinski Senior Member Join Date: August 31, 2013 Posts: 525	I doesn't seem like much of a change in penetration.

August 3, 2014, 12:16 PM	#7
Andrew Wiggin Senior Member Join Date: December 22, 2012 Posts: 516	I'll bet that at 1,300 or 1,400 fps there is a substantial difference. The bullet fired from the rifle shed a lot of weight.

August 4, 2014, 11:23 AM	#9
Andrew Wiggin Senior Member Join Date: December 22, 2012 Posts: 516	That's correct on the surface of things but there is more to the story. The round from the rifle and the one from the handgun both arrived at nearly the same place but they took a different route to get there. Because the rifle shot fragmented more, it also produced greater disruption in the first few inches of "tissue". It at least produced a larger temporary cavity. I believe that the projectile would penetrate less at some velocity between 1,200 fps and 1,560 fps where the projectile expands to a greater degree but not to the point that parts break off. It might also penetrate more deeply when fired from the revolver at greater distance because the impact velocity would be low enough that the bullet would expand less. If anything, this underscores the difference between amateur testing by laypeople like myself and proper laboratory testing. If I had the time and the resources, I'd like to test this load at a variety of distances, with and without denim and other barriers, and with a minimum of five shots for each test. I believe that my testing gives a reasonable indication of performance (else I wouldn't bother) but it doesn't give a comprehensive picture over a wide range of circumstances. Some day I might choose some of my favorite loads and do a comprehensive battery of testing. One thing that has interested me is the idea of using a reduced powder charge and shooting the block at a distance of 100 yards or so. That should simulate the effect of even greater range.

August 7, 2014, 10:33 AM	#10
Unlicensed Dremel Junior member Join Date: February 13, 2014 Location: Flathead Valley, MT Posts: 2,187	Excellent work, thank you. Buffalo Bore has 180s that they claim top 1800 fps from an 18" or 18.5" bbl (not 16" like your test), and ditto but with 158s and over 2000 fps they claim. Amazing how much penetration that handgun bullet gets.

August 27, 2014, 12:36 PM	#11
Andrew Wiggin Senior Member Join Date: December 22, 2012 Posts: 516	I'll have to check those out. A friend has a 180 gr Ranch Dog mold and we plan on experimenting with various lead/tin alloys and possibly drill shallow cavities in the nose. I'd like to find something that will expand only a little from the handgun and still be able to push reasonably deeply from the rifle. I want my cake and to eat it too. This SJHP is almost exactly what I'm looking for but I'd like to be able to roll my own and get close to this performance.