The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 1, 2020, 09:16 PM   #1
Mr.RevolverGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 827
357 magnum wadcutter development – bone crusher

Many before me have discussed 38 special wadcutter it’s accuracy and it’s ability to be a crusher. Ed Harris documented the effects of the DEWC (full wadcutter) in 38 special very well for us to reflect upon all of it’s goodness.

This got me to thinking if it was this good and still yet very capable today would it not be better in 357 Magnum? Only one problem stood in my way. I could not find one manufacturer producing 357 Magnum Full Wadcutter today. With the popularity of this round surely there would be loads documented some where for the reloading addict like myself. Google enters here, sure there are a lot of people talking about it but nothing well documented. As a matter of fact some of the loads that was documented is downright scary. I searched hi and low and nothing I would trust, most amazing I could not find any type of load even in reloading manuals dating back to the 80’s. This lack of data inspired me and started me on this journey to create Mr.Revolverguy’s 357 Magnum Bone Crusher.

Being a user of Quickload Ballistics for 5 years or more now and with about 4 loading manuals sprawled across my desk I knew I had all the right tools to be successful in my mission.

This is my first test of this load to chronograph the recipe and get velocity numbers.

Test number two will most likely be testing in ballistics gelatin.

I am also taking suggestions of other test that can be safely completed to prove out Mr.Revolverguy’s 357 Magnum Bone Crusher.

The loads utilized in this video was operated safely but should not be used in your firearm without loading down by 10% and working up. If you elect to utilize any of this data it is at your own risk, you take full ownership and responsibility for your ammunition.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gr4mW7SLdI
__________________
Mr.Revolverguy
http://www.dayattherange.com
Firearms Reviewed and Reported On: An unbiased opinion with real world use.
Mr.RevolverGuy is offline  
Old January 1, 2020, 09:52 PM   #2
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,541
Alliant used to have .357 Magnum DEWC data. I think Bullseye was a really good powder for it; and from memory it was something like 5.7 grains but I don't really trust my memory for things like that and you shouldn't either.
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth
zxcvbob is offline  
Old January 1, 2020, 10:44 PM   #3
Mr.RevolverGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 827
I actually saw someone in my google search mention the exact load but it was a 38 special +p load in 357 Magnum case.
__________________
Mr.Revolverguy
http://www.dayattherange.com
Firearms Reviewed and Reported On: An unbiased opinion with real world use.
Mr.RevolverGuy is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 05:10 AM   #4
Mike / Tx
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 8, 2000
Posts: 1,946
You have followed up on that idea nicely. I corresponded with Mr Harris about which mold might produce the best "fit" for a load such as this and be accurate enough for shots out to possibly 25yds on small game. By "fit" I meant a mold recommendation or a particular type. I've been casting for going on a decade, while just a beginner for some I have learned a ton about alloys and the differences between them.

I have poured up several pounds of a half dozen different bullets in various weights with slightly different profiles to try. So far that's about as far as it has gone. Just have too many irons and not enough fire to get to them all.

Nicely done, appreciate your sharing with us.
__________________
LAter,
Mike / TX
Mike / Tx is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 03:25 PM   #5
stinkeypete
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 22, 2010
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 383
Mr. RG, much respect, I enjoyed your video!

I guess I am an “old guy” as I have the Lyman Pistol and Revolver Reloading Handbook c.1994 with 7 recipes for 141 g no.358495 wc. If you are interested, drop me a private message with your email address and I’ll forward you a copy of that table.

What you’re doing warms my heart- because you are out there doing stuff and recording your data, doing your own science.

I shot .357 magnum long ago in Ruger Vaqueos and a Marlin lever action. I sold those guns off because for me, they did not fit the jobs I had at that time. I would not mind it if those guns magically appeared back in the gun safe, yet a grateful my kid is out of college with no debt, too!

For shooting deer, I decided “Ruger Only” .45 colt from my Blackhawk (stainless Bisley) was the optimal ticket for me. My Savage muzzle loader fired the same bullets but far flatter and farther out, and I had a nice 30-30. The .357’s only advantage is gentle recoil, and I was young and hammerproof back then.

For small game, I still use my bullseye .22- a customized Norinco copy of a TT Olympia which outshot the .22 rifle I had at the time (from sandbags. Now I have a CZ bolt action for genteel show and 10/22 for rain, snow, scratching up and both are tack drivers, the CZ clearly better.) For rabbits and squirrels, it’s hard to beat the .22

My “kit gun” is a Ruger LCRX 3” in .38 special. It’s very light, fairly accurate, doesn’t throw it’s brass in the weeds or snow... I would not feel silly shooting small game with it, or old tin cans, and it’s fun to shoot. But it’s a “close range” gun, by which I mean I practice at the range at 25 yards outdoors or 50’ indoors. I have no intention of getting in to any altercations with human beings, but ain’t no one going to volunteer to stand in front of a 148 g wadcutter and enough 231 to push it around 900 FPS. It’s gentle on my hand, accurate and fulfills all my goals. If I wanted to shoot a deer, back to big bore or a rifle. I got old and maybe smarter or maybe just my eyes lost their eagle edge. By quite a bit!

You say that you want to “improve” the DEWC performance... to make it better.. but in what way better?

More accurate?
Flatter Shooting Trajectory?
More effective on a game animal?
More kinetic energy, just because you like that? (I’m not judging!)

The foundation of science is to have a hypothesis, then do experiments to prove or disprove it. You say in your video that you think that having 90% full remaining case volume will give best accuracy. I suggest you test that hypothesis as I have not found it to be more than a good rule of thumb. Suggestion:
Load 14 of your present load
Load 14 of the same load but the bullet seated less deeply and crimped on a lube band. Pressure will be less.
Load 14 of the same load but seated even less deeply.

Shoot each set from sandbags at 25 yards at NRA 25 yard pistol slow fire targets. See which is most accurate by overlaying the targets and holding them to the light. I found for me, stuffing the bullets all the way in was less accurate in my 3 guns. But then, I wish I had an old model 19 bullseye revolver!

Your velocity is right within 25 FPS of all the ‘hot’ loads I have, if the goal is kinetic energy.
Blue Dot has the highest maximum velocity in my table at 1382 FPS, 2400 at 1376 FPS, HS-7 at 1356 fps... pressure “measurements” mean little to me as now I know how much variation there was in old data and even still in modern data. The DEWC isn’t great because it can go fast, and pushing the max load just isn’t worth it to me. If you want fast, I have used the Hornady 125 g. Hollow points and found them accurate and will get you more speed with less pressure. Or... golly I want a 327 Fed Mag, if only I had the eyes for that. It must shoot flat as a banjo string from a 6” barrel or better yet from a Contender!

The old recipe for “most accurate bullseye load” is 4.8 g of Bullseye, 1.435” oal for a Lyman 358495 Linotype 141g WC. Sipping along at a blistering 730 FPS and 18,000 CUP.

I can tell you that load goes right through any bunny you can find in North America.

Keep up the good work. What works in my gun might not work in yours, we’re in to the black arts at the fine edge of science. The goal is “better” so the method is shoot a group at a standard target, change one thing, shoot again. See which is better.

You might even consider loading every other chamber with loads A, B, A...to compare and shoot left, right, left targets... reload the chambers the other way, B,A,B... shoot again and even out potential variations in barrel leading, heat, and chamber variations...

You got me going there. It must be hard to sell guns. A good one lasts several lifetimes and a Linotype wadcutter with a powder as old as Bullseye is still hard to beat after 100 years.

Kids today can throw 18 9mm cases in to the weeds as fast as you can sneeze, but it’s the first shot that gets the rabbit in to the pot.
stinkeypete is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 05:45 PM   #6
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by zxcvbob View Post
Alliant used to have .357 Magnum DEWC data. I think Bullseye was a really good powder for it; and from memory it was something like 5.7 grains but I don't really trust my memory for things like that and you shouldn't either.
I just looked it up in the 2001 Alliant reloading guide. There are 2 rows for 148 grain DEWC for .357 Magnum. All loads have an OAL of 1.33" and were fired from a 5.6" test barrel. The target load is 2.8 grains, for a velocity of 780 fps and 10 kpsi. The full power load is 5.7 grains of BE (I remembered it right!) for 1475 fps and 33.1 kpsi.

Bullseye gave the 2nd highest velocity of all their powders for this bullet. (first place goes to Herco and third was Unique, and they were all pretty close) HTH
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth
zxcvbob is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 06:54 PM   #7
Mr.RevolverGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 827
Pete,

I just can't bring myself to call you stinkey.pete

Thank you very much for the ideas. I am not a hot road kind of guy I load more for accuracy. So not that I have the numbers the question is can I now push it out to 50 yards to test accuracy.

Most times when wadcutters are talked about they are spoken in the same sentence with 38special and many more qualified than me have shot 38 special with DEWC accurately out to 50 yards. But I have yet to see anyone push it to 357Magnum velocities and maintain the accuracy. Just a fun thing to do for me I love a challenge or safe challenge.

I agree bullseye is the real deal in 38special target loads my data says to achieve 1475 fps with Bullseye you have to go up to 7gr which is WAY ABOVE SAAMI SPEC. I feel like Bullseye is to fast to achieve that sort of velocity.

I will shoot these loads at 25 yards from rest then jump out to 50 and see if they tumble when they hit the paper.

And by the way great job with the kids I right with you on them being graduated with no debt. Thanks Pete.
__________________
Mr.Revolverguy
http://www.dayattherange.com
Firearms Reviewed and Reported On: An unbiased opinion with real world use.
Mr.RevolverGuy is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 06:58 PM   #8
Mr.RevolverGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 827
Mike,

Keep blowing on that fire to keep it lit my friend. Question you think I should be trying these with lead bullets? Some have said I would get way better accuracy but I was worried about barrel leading at 357Mag velocities.

Pete -- Would it be bad to change direction mid stream to lead bullets? Many say Berry's are good for plinking but never good for accuracy.
__________________
Mr.Revolverguy
http://www.dayattherange.com
Firearms Reviewed and Reported On: An unbiased opinion with real world use.
Mr.RevolverGuy is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 06:58 PM   #9
LE-28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 24, 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 697
The 2001 manual that is online doesn't even list .357mag except for Cowboy Action Shooting which are all very week loads.

I looked in my Lyman's cast bullet loading manual and it doesn't even show a wad cutter for the .357 mag. That's pretty pathetic.

Now for 141 gr button nose wadcutters, the Complete Loading Manual for .357 Mag shows this.
This is all I can find at this point in time.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg button nose 141gr wadcutter data.jpg (125.5 KB, 26 views)
LE-28 is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 07:13 PM   #10
Mr.RevolverGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 827
Thanks for sharing LE-28 THANK YOU!
__________________
Mr.Revolverguy
http://www.dayattherange.com
Firearms Reviewed and Reported On: An unbiased opinion with real world use.
Mr.RevolverGuy is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 07:19 PM   #11
LE-28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 24, 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 697
Check this out,
http://marvinstuart.com/firearm/Manu...7%20Magnum.pdf

There are more than one wadcutter loads for .357mag data here. This is where I got my data from.
You can download it to your computer.
If the link doesn't work, pm me and I will send it to you
LE-28 is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 07:21 PM   #12
USSR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 14, 2017
Location: Finger Lakes Region of NY
Posts: 889
The above load data for the Lyman 358495 cast bullet came from the Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook - 3rd Edition.

Don
__________________
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Metallic Cartridge Reloading Instructor
USSR is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 07:27 PM   #13
LE-28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 24, 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 697
Don,
Lyman's cast bullet handbook 4th edition doesn't list that bullet in .357mag.
It doesn't list any wadcutters.

You better hang on to that 3rd edition you have.
LE-28 is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 07:48 PM   #14
David R
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2015
Location: The swamps of WNY
Posts: 704
That same exact data in Lyman 46 th edition. I don't have the last 2, AA 5 and Bullseye.

I load +P for my carry 38, same bullet.

David
David R is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 08:05 PM   #15
LE-28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 24, 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 697
Quote:
That same exact data in Lyman 46 th edition
I'm sure that's where it came from originally. Complete book of Reloading manuals are like Lee's reloading manuals,
It's everyone else's data that's been collected and republished.

I just don't understand why publications like Lyman's cast bullets wouldn't show all the lead bullets they have tested over the years.

I think Lyman should take all the lead bullet loads they have tested with the powders we have today and put them all in one cast bullet reloading manual.

That I would buy,

What I won't buy is another Lyman's cast bullet manual edition after spending money on the 4th edition.
LE-28 is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 08:35 PM   #16
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 20,867
There are things here that if you have taken them into consideration, I missed where its been mentioned.

One of them is not the wadcutter shape, but its construction. I get it, you want a heavy, high speed load with a wadcutter profile to be a "bone crusher" load.

The point is, however, no one else does. Traditionally, wadcutters have always been regarded as a target load. Because the flat nose cuts nice clean holes in paper. Loads have always been only as heavy as needed to be for that use.

That's why there is so little ".357 wadcutter" data, simply put for shooting at such low speeds as expected .38 SPL loads are adequate and also work fine in .357 Magnum cases.

Nearly all commercial wadcutters have, for generations, been swaged, from a very soft lead alloy. Nothing more was needed. And such bullets are not suited to higher velocities. They are just too soft, generally.

They will take a bit more than the target load speeds, but not full .357 Magnum levels.

For that "bone crusher" you are looking at , what you need, first, is the right bullet, in both profile AND construction. Look at what is done with the hardcast SWC bullets. The same alloy with a full wadcutter profile is what you ought to be looking at, given what you say you want.

Again, about no data (from established companies) for such a slug exists. Development of safe loads will be up to you.

its not "pathetic" there is no .357 wadcutter data, its just that there's no real need for it for people shooting paper, and (until now) no demand for a bone crusher/manstopper wadcutter, so no research and no data.

There's no free lunch, and while a soft wadcutter does get benefit from the bore size flat point, and will deform and expand a little, often, you can't drive them very fast. A hard cast one can be driven fast, but won't deform or expand any practical amount. SO a bore size hole all the way through, most likely. Useful, certainly, but is it as effective, defensively, as a JHP?

I suspect not, but since its not something that has any data to judge with, we don't have numbers to compare against JHPs for which we have lots of actual shooting and results to examine.

I played around a bit with the HBWC in .38s seated upside down, and at low speeds, and the results were quite impressive, due to the softness of the slugs and the huge "cup point" hollow of the base being the nose.

Several folks have explained how this is a bad idea, and even dangerous, due to the possibility of the wadcutter "coming apart" at the thin nose section (that was supposed to be the base) and it is certainly possible. My experience is that does not happen if the loads are kept light enough, but many seem incapable of doing that, and just have to keep going in order to get "better" results.

So, if you're looking for a "bone crusher" choose the right hardness of slug for the speed you want, and don't push what shouldn't be pushed.
THEN start looking at loads for the chosen slug.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old January 2, 2020, 10:34 PM   #17
Radny97
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 8, 2015
Posts: 788
Following on 44 AMP’s thoughts, Bayou Bullets offers a button nose wad cutter that is coated in hi-tek and hard cast at 18 bhn. I have run it up to 1200 fps in 357 with no issues. Accuracy was excellent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Radny97 is offline  
Old January 3, 2020, 06:56 AM   #18
jetinteriorguy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 28, 2013
Posts: 1,232
I've been thinking along these lines as well, possibly with either the coated type or the copper plated type that can be pushed up to 1200 fps.
jetinteriorguy is offline  
Old January 3, 2020, 07:44 AM   #19
jmr40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 9,836
The concept hasn't really been lost, but improved upon in my opinion. Instead of light for caliber wadcutters companies like Buffalo Bore, DoubleTap etc., have been loading heavy for caliber hardcast flat nose or semi-wadcutter bullets to faster than normal speeds for a while now.

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.ph...t_detail&p=100


If you're wanting bone crushing penetration these bullets are your huckleberry.
Loads in 9mm, 357, 10mm and 45 are getting around 60" of penetration in gel and have taken down brown bear and cape buffalo by hunters.

Like others have said, I just don't see any demand for the lightweight wadcutters for anything other than punching paper.
__________________
"If you're still doing things the same way you were doing them 10 years ago, you're doing it wrong"

Winston Churchill
jmr40 is offline  
Old January 3, 2020, 10:32 AM   #20
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,541
If you cast your own bullets, look at Lee's 158 grain RNFP bullet. It's not really round-nosed, it's more what I would call a "wide flat nose" bullet, and the front edge is sharp like a full wadcutter. Shooting paper, it punches holes like a .32 wadcutter with a little gray ring around it. And the tapered sides make it a lot faster to load in the cylinder, with or without a speedloader.

I do agree with your original premise about a .36 thru-and-thru hole being better than a .32 hole and this bullet won't give you that unless it deforms a little (or you load it backwards which is probably stupid ) but it meets all your other requirements, and there's lots of 158 grain cast bullet load data available.

BTW, I'm pretty sure Magnus Bullets sells hard cast 148 grain DEWCs.
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth
zxcvbob is offline  
Old January 3, 2020, 12:16 PM   #21
Rapidrob
Member
 
Join Date: January 15, 2006
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 46
I've been loading Wad-Cutters in my .357 Security-Six for decades now. From the hollow base target rounds to the FMJ DEWC at max speeds. The latter is just nasty when it hits something wet and soft. It tumbles instantly as you cannot compress a liquid ( more than 1/10th of one percent) and the damage done is impressive when it hits bone.
I do like the hollow base WC's for their impressive accuracy. As with the Mine Ball, the skirt expands to seal the bore an obdurate into the rifling.
You can however, use too much powder and blow the skirt out and have no accuracy at all.
I have a 1911 pistol in .38 Special and using the HBWC bullets,have won many matches over the years for "Mid-Range" legs of the match.
I only use Bullseye powder for my lead wad cutters.
__________________
President NM MILSURPS
Tonkin Gulf Yacht Club
Rapidrob is offline  
Old January 5, 2020, 12:41 PM   #22
buck460XVR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 4,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by 44 AMP View Post
There are things here that if you have taken them into consideration, I missed where its been mentioned.
^^^Even tho I am only including the first sentence of 44 AMP's post, I agree with all of it, and have only this to add.

In my years of reloading, I have discovered three things, that IMHO, ring true to this thread.

1.) Folks are always looking to be the "first" to try something. Kinda how so many calibers have been developed over the years, especially when it comes to "magnum" handgun calibers. We'd all love to be Elmer Keith, but since that isn't possible, maybe we can come up with a load for a long proven caliber, using long proven components, that no body else has ....yet.

2.) If it's a long proven caliber and you are using long proven components, odds are it's been tried, more than once. With a ton of nuances and variations, even if it's on the extreme ends of bullet weight, velocities or construction.

3.) The reason you do not find volumes of info and recipes for those, is not because they have not been tried or that they do not work, it's that they do not work well, unless a new and completely different application has been found. Ideas die out and reloading manuals do not devote space and time to loads that do not work well. Odds are, and I will bet, that if you cannot find published info out there for a combo of caliber/bullet/powder, etc., it's not that it hasn't been tried, it's that it's not worth the space on the page to mention it. While the specific combo may be unique and may appeal to some, it is not going to become a household name, even if that name is .357 Bonecrusher.

I have a multitude of .357s. I do not need a "bonecrusher" load for paper, nor do I desire a round for SD that has extreme penetration. I'd much rather have the round expand, and make a big hole in one person and not penetrate thru two innocent bystanders in the neighbors house. Same goes for hunting. While I desire a certain amount of penetration for deer, I also want a exit hole larger than .380". If I need to crush the bones of DG animals, believe me, I'll be carrying something bigger than .357.

That does not say, the OPs idea is lame, just that it is going to be very limited in it's applications and that is the reason info is hard to come by.
buck460XVR is offline  
Old January 5, 2020, 03:30 PM   #23
stinkeypete
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 22, 2010
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 383
My two cents:
1. Sometimes, rarely but significantly, I have found that "conventional wisdom" is just plain wrong. One example is seating wadcutters much less than flush and crimping on a lube band. I got a big increase in accuracy in my gun. I also found that my 30-06 really shooting little 125 g plinker bullets quite accurately with just a pinch of 231 in the case, which is such an old recipe that it's long been forgotten except in ancient (1950's) reloading books.

In this case, I agree that pushing very soft wadcutters overfast has little value.

My positive contribution is that if you want a real "bone crushing" .357 load, I have these Cast Performance Hard Cast Heat Treated 180 and 187 g wide nose gas check bullets left over from my .357 experimenting days.

Mr.. Revolver Guy: Check your Email!
stinkeypete is offline  
Old January 5, 2020, 04:29 PM   #24
USSR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 14, 2017
Location: Finger Lakes Region of NY
Posts: 889
Quote:
I'd much rather have the round expand, and make a big hole in one person and not penetrate thru two innocent bystanders in the neighbors house. Same goes for hunting. While I desire a certain amount of penetration for deer, I also want a exit hole larger than .380".
+1. I will only add that I moved on to a larger caliber (.45 Colt) for deer, as I want a much bigger entry and exit hole.

Don
__________________
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Metallic Cartridge Reloading Instructor
USSR is offline  
Old January 5, 2020, 08:59 PM   #25
Mr.RevolverGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 827
Pete shot you a reply back.
__________________
Mr.Revolverguy
http://www.dayattherange.com
Firearms Reviewed and Reported On: An unbiased opinion with real world use.
Mr.RevolverGuy is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 03:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11460 seconds with 9 queries