Hunting with a CP 180 gr. LWFNGC

passtime · September 17, 2015, 09:32 PM

I have been working up a 357 mag hunting load for my 4" SS GP100 using Cast Performance LWNFPGC bullets over 2400 powder. My chrono's velocity results were a little lower but close to the Lyman 4th Cast Bullet Handbook. The most accurate and closest grouping string at 15 yards was with the charge weight of 11.6 gr. My question is to those who have used this combination of components or close to it for hunting purpose. Is the 11.6 gr. charge weight velocity of 1074 fps. decent enough for hog/deer hunting or should I work on fine tuning one of the other loads listed below. I hunt in a dense wooded area where a long shot would be 50 yards. My main weapon here is a 12 gauge 870. The 357 mag is for a just in case I get the opportunity type situation. My chrono results are as follows:

Charge
Weight gr. Velocity/fps ES SD

11.0 1029 96 39
11.3 1076 41 23
11.6 1074 41 15
11.9 1093 74 27
12.2 1094 58 21
12.5 1110 88 33

Wyosmith · September 17, 2015, 11:37 PM

Sent you a PM

stubbicatt · September 18, 2015, 01:48 AM

Passtime, how would you describe the recoil on that 180 grain bullet? Is it noticeably greater than the generic 158 grain bullet?

passtime · September 18, 2015, 03:26 PM

Your in luck stubbiocatt. Right after I shot the last string of 6, 180gr. with 12.5 gr of 2400. I shot 6, 158gr. LSWCs with 14.5gr of 2400 which is my go to load for that bullet. The recoil is definitely noticeable but nothing unmanageable or uncomfortable to shoot as far as I'm concerned. All rounds listed above were hitting within the 9,10 rings and bullseye of a standard 12", 6 ring target at 15 yards. I am very happy with the weight and design of the bullet. All I need to do now is fine tune the velocity to get the optimum performance out of the bullet design. Optimum meaning accuracy and penetration.

stubbicatt · September 19, 2015, 05:29 AM

Sometimes it is an affliction.

I have this foolish idea that shooting from a rifle, with a 357 magnum, I *should* be able to topple the 80 pound ram at 200 yards in our cowboy silhouette matches.

I single load of course, and I have been looking at the Saeco 180 and 200 grain bullets, which, with the 200 grainer, one would pretty much have to single load to get the case mouth in the crimping groove.

It is a whole lot of money to buy one of those moulds, so I don't do it right now. It might be interesting to load up a few of those bullets you are describing to see how it all comes together. Or maybe get a 200 grain mould with a relatively long bore riding nose, and 3 smaller driving bands, for single loading. That way I could retain a little bit more powder capacity.

Maybe this thought exercise is simply a way for me to control that one small aspect of this great big world full of boogie men dreamed up by the press and created by the government. Sigh.

sghart3578 · September 20, 2015, 07:03 AM

To Stubbicatt,

I know those Saeco molds are nice but I use a mold from N.O.E. I shoot a Marlin 1894CS in 357 mag and I bought a two cavity mold that drops a 180 gr wide flat nosed bullet with a plain base. It shoots great for me. I don't shoot in competition but I regularly shoot gongs at 150 yards with this bullet.

I only suggest this because the NOE mold may be more affordable. That is a big consideration for me.

And it cycles through my rifle.

stubbicatt · September 21, 2015, 06:42 AM

Good idea on the NOE mould. Might be a better choice.

DWFan · September 22, 2015, 05:13 AM

Design your own bullet to custom fit your cylinder/chamber....
http://www.mountainmolds.com/
passtime, I'd be working with the 12.5gr load.

passtime · September 22, 2015, 08:22 PM

Thanks for your post DWFan. I ordinarily load 158gr LSWC over 2400 for general use. I picked up the 180gr. WNFPGC for defense ( hogs/black bear) while hunting or I may take a shot at some mid-sized game if the opportunity arises. I do not have any experienced with the 180gr bullets. My concern is with the velocities I recorded. They seem a little low compared to some of the data I have seen with my listed combination of components. I am curious as to what others think would be an appropriate velocity with that bullet and powder combo for the purposes I mentioned above.

sghart3578 · September 22, 2015, 10:20 PM

I shoot both 158 gr and 180 gr cast bullets myself, in revolvers and a rifle. I have done extensive load testing with several powders and I can tell you that I find very little difference in muzzle velocity between the two.

If you like I will get out my notes and post some results for you. When I first recorded the figures I was surprised but I have seen it over and over. The 180 gr bullet is slower of course but not by as much as I had guessed it would be.

passtime · September 23, 2015, 02:54 AM

Thanks sghart3578. I would be very interested in your results.

sghart3578 · September 23, 2015, 06:51 AM

All readings from a Marlin 1894 CS, 18.5" barrel. Chronograph was 10' from muzzle.

The loads that I shoot most are from two bullets: A Lee 358-158 RF that has been lapped to drop at .362". And a NOE 360-180 WFN that drops at .362". Both are then sized to .360" and tumble lubed with two or three coats of 60/40 lube. The following numbers are from my equipment. Your results may vary. My methods are far from scientific, I just load a bunch of rounds and go shoot.

9.1 gr A #7:

158 gr avg 1438 fps
180 gr avg 1398 fps

10.1 gr A #7:

158 gr avg 1502 fps
180 gr avg 1458 fps

10.7 gr A #9:

158 gr avg 1499 fps
180 gr avg 1452 fps

11.4 gr A #9:

158 gr avg no record
180 gr avg 1504 fps

12.3 gr A #9:

158 gr avg 1652 fps
180 gr avg 1587 fps

4.0 gr Bullseye (in 357 mag cases):

158 gr avg 1023 fps
180 gr avg 1007 fps

11.1 gr 2400:

158 gr avg 1406 fps
180 gr avg 1355 fps

There are many more in my records but these were the most accurate according to my notes.

Hope this helps.

stubbicatt · September 23, 2015, 07:01 AM

sghart, maybe I missed it, but were those loads you mention shot thru a rifle or a revolver? Do you remember barrel length perchance?

That 180 is looking better and better.

sghart3578 · September 23, 2015, 07:11 AM

Sorry,

They were shot through my Marlin 1894. I believe the barrel is 18.5" long.

The NOE mold comes in a plain based and a gaschecked version. Or you can get one that drops both. I went with the plain based mold. I have shot them up to 1700 fps with no leading. But in my rifle I have found the best accuracy at 1400-1450 fps with several powders.

I can't answer much on the revolver question. I don't shoot the 180 gr in my handguns for some reason. I don't know why I don't. I may have to spend a day running the 180 gr loads through my chronograph.

One another unscientific note:

I rarely shoot paper any more. I have two AR500 steel gongs that I set up at 80-90 yards and 125 yards. Maybe it is me but the 180 gr slugs seem to hit much harder, even at comparable speeds.

passtime · September 24, 2015, 08:22 PM

Thanks for posting your results sghart3578. Yesterday I worked up a load that I am happy with for now. I fine tuned the load a bit from my previous attempt with 12.5 gr. Results listed below.

Projectile: Cast Performance 180gr. LWFNGC
Powder: Alliant 2400
Charge weight: 12.5
Average velocity: 1133 fps
ES: 50
SD: 15

Notes: Accurate at 15 yards, moderate recoil, little to no smoke, small amount of powder residue in fired case.

USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.
Neither the author of this post, The Firing Line Forums, nor the staff of The Firing Line Forums assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

September 17, 2015, 09:32 PM	#1
passtime Senior Member Join Date: August 15, 2013 Location: NC Posts: 237	Hunting with a CP 180 gr. LWFNGC I have been working up a 357 mag hunting load for my 4" SS GP100 using Cast Performance LWNFPGC bullets over 2400 powder. My chrono's velocity results were a little lower but close to the Lyman 4th Cast Bullet Handbook. The most accurate and closest grouping string at 15 yards was with the charge weight of 11.6 gr. My question is to those who have used this combination of components or close to it for hunting purpose. Is the 11.6 gr. charge weight velocity of 1074 fps. decent enough for hog/deer hunting or should I work on fine tuning one of the other loads listed below. I hunt in a dense wooded area where a long shot would be 50 yards. My main weapon here is a 12 gauge 870. The 357 mag is for a just in case I get the opportunity type situation. My chrono results are as follows: Charge Weight gr. Velocity/fps ES SD 11.0 1029 96 39 11.3 1076 41 23 11.6 1074 41 15 11.9 1093 74 27 12.2 1094 58 21 12.5 1110 88 33 Last edited by passtime; September 17, 2015 at 10:16 PM.

September 17, 2015, 11:37 PM	#2
Wyosmith Senior Member Join Date: December 29, 2010 Location: Shoshoni Wyoming Posts: 2,713	loads Sent you a PM

September 18, 2015, 03:26 PM	#4
passtime Senior Member Join Date: August 15, 2013 Location: NC Posts: 237	Your in luck stubbiocatt. Right after I shot the last string of 6, 180gr. with 12.5 gr of 2400. I shot 6, 158gr. LSWCs with 14.5gr of 2400 which is my go to load for that bullet. The recoil is definitely noticeable but nothing unmanageable or uncomfortable to shoot as far as I'm concerned. All rounds listed above were hitting within the 9,10 rings and bullseye of a standard 12", 6 ring target at 15 yards. I am very happy with the weight and design of the bullet. All I need to do now is fine tune the velocity to get the optimum performance out of the bullet design. Optimum meaning accuracy and penetration. Last edited by passtime; September 18, 2015 at 06:06 PM.

September 22, 2015, 05:13 AM	#8
DWFan Senior Member Join Date: April 25, 2008 Posts: 305	Design your own bullet to custom fit your cylinder/chamber.... http://www.mountainmolds.com/ passtime, I'd be working with the 12.5gr load. Last edited by DWFan; September 22, 2015 at 05:20 AM.

September 23, 2015, 06:51 AM	#12
sghart3578 Member Join Date: August 30, 2015 Posts: 64	All readings from a Marlin 1894 CS, 18.5" barrel. Chronograph was 10' from muzzle. The loads that I shoot most are from two bullets: A Lee 358-158 RF that has been lapped to drop at .362". And a NOE 360-180 WFN that drops at .362". Both are then sized to .360" and tumble lubed with two or three coats of 60/40 lube. The following numbers are from my equipment. Your results may vary. My methods are far from scientific, I just load a bunch of rounds and go shoot. 9.1 gr A #7: 158 gr avg 1438 fps 180 gr avg 1398 fps 10.1 gr A #7: 158 gr avg 1502 fps 180 gr avg 1458 fps 10.7 gr A #9: 158 gr avg 1499 fps 180 gr avg 1452 fps 11.4 gr A #9: 158 gr avg no record 180 gr avg 1504 fps 12.3 gr A #9: 158 gr avg 1652 fps 180 gr avg 1587 fps 4.0 gr Bullseye (in 357 mag cases): 158 gr avg 1023 fps 180 gr avg 1007 fps 11.1 gr 2400: 158 gr avg 1406 fps 180 gr avg 1355 fps There are many more in my records but these were the most accurate according to my notes. Hope this helps. Last edited by sghart3578; September 23, 2015 at 07:13 AM.

September 18, 2015, 01:48 AM	#3
stubbicatt Senior Member Join Date: September 15, 2007 Posts: 1,707	Passtime, how would you describe the recoil on that 180 grain bullet? Is it noticeably greater than the generic 158 grain bullet?

September 19, 2015, 05:29 AM	#5
stubbicatt Senior Member Join Date: September 15, 2007 Posts: 1,707	Sometimes it is an affliction. I have this foolish idea that shooting from a rifle, with a 357 magnum, I should be able to topple the 80 pound ram at 200 yards in our cowboy silhouette matches. I single load of course, and I have been looking at the Saeco 180 and 200 grain bullets, which, with the 200 grainer, one would pretty much have to single load to get the case mouth in the crimping groove. It is a whole lot of money to buy one of those moulds, so I don't do it right now. It might be interesting to load up a few of those bullets you are describing to see how it all comes together. Or maybe get a 200 grain mould with a relatively long bore riding nose, and 3 smaller driving bands, for single loading. That way I could retain a little bit more powder capacity. Maybe this thought exercise is simply a way for me to control that one small aspect of this great big world full of boogie men dreamed up by the press and created by the government. Sigh.

September 20, 2015, 07:03 AM	#6
sghart3578 Member Join Date: August 30, 2015 Posts: 64	To Stubbicatt, I know those Saeco molds are nice but I use a mold from N.O.E. I shoot a Marlin 1894CS in 357 mag and I bought a two cavity mold that drops a 180 gr wide flat nosed bullet with a plain base. It shoots great for me. I don't shoot in competition but I regularly shoot gongs at 150 yards with this bullet. I only suggest this because the NOE mold may be more affordable. That is a big consideration for me. And it cycles through my rifle.

September 21, 2015, 06:42 AM	#7
stubbicatt Senior Member Join Date: September 15, 2007 Posts: 1,707	Good idea on the NOE mould. Might be a better choice.

September 22, 2015, 08:22 PM	#9
passtime Senior Member Join Date: August 15, 2013 Location: NC Posts: 237	Thanks for your post DWFan. I ordinarily load 158gr LSWC over 2400 for general use. I picked up the 180gr. WNFPGC for defense ( hogs/black bear) while hunting or I may take a shot at some mid-sized game if the opportunity arises. I do not have any experienced with the 180gr bullets. My concern is with the velocities I recorded. They seem a little low compared to some of the data I have seen with my listed combination of components. I am curious as to what others think would be an appropriate velocity with that bullet and powder combo for the purposes I mentioned above. Last edited by passtime; September 22, 2015 at 08:30 PM.

September 22, 2015, 10:20 PM	#10
sghart3578 Member Join Date: August 30, 2015 Posts: 64	I shoot both 158 gr and 180 gr cast bullets myself, in revolvers and a rifle. I have done extensive load testing with several powders and I can tell you that I find very little difference in muzzle velocity between the two. If you like I will get out my notes and post some results for you. When I first recorded the figures I was surprised but I have seen it over and over. The 180 gr bullet is slower of course but not by as much as I had guessed it would be.

September 23, 2015, 02:54 AM	#11
passtime Senior Member Join Date: August 15, 2013 Location: NC Posts: 237	Thanks sghart3578. I would be very interested in your results.

September 23, 2015, 07:01 AM	#13
stubbicatt Senior Member Join Date: September 15, 2007 Posts: 1,707	sghart, maybe I missed it, but were those loads you mention shot thru a rifle or a revolver? Do you remember barrel length perchance? That 180 is looking better and better.

September 23, 2015, 07:11 AM	#14
sghart3578 Member Join Date: August 30, 2015 Posts: 64	Sorry, They were shot through my Marlin 1894. I believe the barrel is 18.5" long. The NOE mold comes in a plain based and a gaschecked version. Or you can get one that drops both. I went with the plain based mold. I have shot them up to 1700 fps with no leading. But in my rifle I have found the best accuracy at 1400-1450 fps with several powders. I can't answer much on the revolver question. I don't shoot the 180 gr in my handguns for some reason. I don't know why I don't. I may have to spend a day running the 180 gr loads through my chronograph. One another unscientific note: I rarely shoot paper any more. I have two AR500 steel gongs that I set up at 80-90 yards and 125 yards. Maybe it is me but the 180 gr slugs seem to hit much harder, even at comparable speeds. Last edited by sghart3578; September 23, 2015 at 07:16 AM.

September 24, 2015, 08:22 PM	#15
passtime Senior Member Join Date: August 15, 2013 Location: NC Posts: 237	Thanks for posting your results sghart3578. Yesterday I worked up a load that I am happy with for now. I fine tuned the load a bit from my previous attempt with 12.5 gr. Results listed below. Projectile: Cast Performance 180gr. LWFNGC Powder: Alliant 2400 Charge weight: 12.5 Average velocity: 1133 fps ES: 50 SD: 15 Notes: Accurate at 15 yards, moderate recoil, little to no smoke, small amount of powder residue in fired case. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the author of this post, The Firing Line Forums, nor the staff of The Firing Line Forums assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.