Lee Loading Manual

[Bucksnort1]

For .357 mag, the Lee manual shows recipes for 158 grain XTP bullets. May I assume these recipes are safe to use with other brands and styles of 158 grain jacketed hollow points? What about a 158 grain jacketed flat nose bullet?

[Mauser69]

Kinda... Almost... Maybe...

The only way to be sure is to know the total bullet length and the seating depth. The variable that you need to think about is internal case volume AFTER the bullet is seated, since that controls the pressure of the load if all else is equal.

Here are some bullet variable to consider:

• Within the same weight and type of construction, soft point bullets are generally the shortest, since they have no empty cavities
• Not all hollow point bullets are the same
• Modern hollow "core" bullets tend to be longer than older hollow "point" bullets since the hollow cavity is bigger
• XTP and GDHP bullets are examples of those bigger cavities; therefore, typically longer bullets
• Hornady XTP bullets come in both hollow point and soft point - probably not the same length - the load data does not always specify which one they are using!

To calculate the seating depth for comparison, the best thing is to actually have a sample of the bullet named in the load and the one you want to use - put them side by side and measure from the base to the point where you will seat the bullet at the case mouth. For revolver loads, this is easy - just measure to the height of the cannelure or crimp groove. For pistol bullets, you have more leeway to adjust the seating depth to make bullets "equal".

In general, you are probably OK substituting similar style bullets so long as you stay away from max loads without careful monitoring of pressure signs. Remember - OAL of the loaded round, as specified in the load data, is NOT as important as actual bullet seating depth. OAL is mostly meaningless so long as the round fits and feed in your gun - changing the bullet seating depth WILL change the resulting pressure.

[mikld]

Short answer; K.I.S.S.. Using starting loads for the same size/weight/style of bullet is a safe place to start. A Lee manual is OK, but it's the last one I look at for load data. I would suggest you pick up a manual from the manufacturer of the bullets you choose to use (Hornady bullets - Hornady manual. Speer bullets - Speer manual, etc.) and as a new reloader, stick with what your manual suggests, powder charges, primers and for rifle ammo, OAL.

[Clark]

I am guessing there is a ~1% variation in loads for varying the bullet, and reading a ~38% variation in loads due to load book variation.

1992 Lyman's 47 th 16.0 gr AA#9 158 gr JSP 1719 fps 10 contender
2000 Accurate Arms 13.0 gr AA#9 158 gr XTP 1261 fps 6" revolver
2001 Accurate Arms 15.0 gr AA#9 158 gr XTP 1633 fps 6" revolver
1999 Midway load m 11.7 gr AA#9 158 gr XTP 1365 fps 10" test barrel 35,000 psi

What happens when I try to verify?
CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.
I got (5) Colt Police Positive 38 specials from AIM surplus in May 2001 for $80 each for destructive test. They were police surplus made in 1965.
I reamed the chambers in one cylinder longer by 0.15" so I could put 357 mag brass in it. And I cut 1" off the frame so I could put on Cobra size gripper grips.

≥ 2001 Clark[me] 17.0 gr AA#9 158 gr XTP 4" revolver threshold of sticky cases

With me in the mix the 38% load book to load book variation turns into 45% variation.
What causes the case(s) to get sticky?
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=...0/cBSU4bR2jz8J
Thin chamber walls and wimpy fingertip extraction for 6 cylinders at a time.
The originally 38 special revolver tested above has 0.060" thick chamber walls.
In contrast, my 1954 Colt 357 magnum dual tone has chamber walls 0.099" thick and would take a higher load to get sticky.
Further still, a thicker wall chamber 357 mag single shot rifle with leveraged extraction would take an even higher load to get sticky.

[T. O'Heir]

Yep. You do not require bullet specific data. A 158 is a 158.
However, Lee tests nothing themselves. They use the powder makers data. Usually Hodgdon. Not that it really matters.

[SARuger]

If your loading Hornady bullets, just get the Hornady manual!

I Use Honady and Sierra bullets exclusively (except for plinking, I use cast for that) and I have both manuals. Great info in both.

[SHR970]

Just keep in mind that a Speer Gold Dot is NOT a jacketed bullet.

Otherwise.. you can use any published 158 gr. JHP starting point load data with any brand JHP bullet and even use it with JSP bullets.

In the case of 357's.. the data has been watered down quite a bit over the past 20 years or more.

[steve4102]

As already pointed out above,

Lee has NO data of their own, it is simply a copy of the powder manufacturers data.. Up to date it ain't.

Put the Lee manual in a drawer or someplace so it won't take up any usable space and go to the Powder manufacturers, web sites and get the same (only newer) data for free.

[noylj]

Yes, provided you start at the starting load. Too many folks skips that all important step. I can tell you, not doing so will come back and bite you someday.
You should really check at least two sources and start at the lowest starting load.

[std7mag]

When did Speer quit putting jackets on their Gold Dots???

I use the Lee manual a fair bit, along with Sierra, Hornady, Berger, Nosler, Alliant, Western (Ramshot/Accurate), Hodgdon.

Lee manual will list jacketed hollow points as XTP, while others list as GDHP(Gold Dot hollow point). Sierra's Power Jackets (again, hollow points) seem to have a larger cavity that the Speer's, and Hornady's.

Jacketed bullet info is good for, well, jacketed round nose/flat nose. Just remember that cartridge overall length is going to be different.

Lee also lists different loads for lead and copper plated (Xtreme/Berry's)...

Go slow, do your reading, and don't be affraid to ask questions...

Be safe

[Clark]

If we look a the threshold I found, and remember how Vernon Speer said about about to write a load book in 1956, reduce charge 6% from brass change, then:

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.
1) 6% less of 17 = 16, which is what Lyman 47th says.. right on Lyman at 94%
2) AA 2001 is at 15 = 88%
3) Sierra is at 14.1 = 83%
4) AA 2000 is at 13= 76%
5) Midway is at 11.7= 69%




But out of control variables are chamber wall thickness [stretchiness and extractor leverage]

I measured the threshold with my 0.060" chamber wall, finger tip extraction firearm, not my 0.488" thick chamber wall firearm with leveraged extraction.

I have done work ups with the rifle and 357 mag loads, and the limit is not sticky brass, it is pierced CCI 450 small rifle magnum primers.