Load book questions : 357 Mag

Tony Cam · March 2, 2002, 01:59 AM

Hi guys
I picked up Midaways load map on the 357 mag. Shows a lot of different stuff for a ton of different bullets. Problem is they all seem to be light loads.
Example : They list a Rem 357 jhp using 2400 powder max load at 13.3 grains. Now i load out of the Speer load book and i get the same bullet using 2400 powder, max load listed at 17.5 grains. Now i loaded up about 800 rounds using 17 grains of 2400 and boy oh boy , they are hot !! I was at the indoor range today < which i hate by the way, shooting indoors, that is.> and i had about 5 people come over and say : What are ya shooting, a 44 ?? lol
Anyway, the beginning load for the midway load is 11 grains and the beginning load for the speer book is 16.5 !!! What the hell gives ?? Why is the midaway book so low ?? I mean they do make the 357 more pleasant to shoot and all but its a magnum round, if i wanted pleasant i would shoot .38,s.
Anyway, i just wanted to see what some of you guys thought about it.
I did load some 158gr jhp,s at 11 gr of 2400 and they shot really well, just no real bark. I also shot some plated wad cutters from rainiers and berrys, real nice rounds.

Bill Adair · March 2, 2002, 03:31 AM

Tony,

I suspect that a lot of the current load data, is reduced on recommendations from the manufacturers legal department.

They know from experience, that some people will ignore the warnings, and try those maximum loads in guns designed for lower pressure.

My first hot 2400 loads in .357 magnum, also drew quite a bit of attention. I don't remember the exact load of 2400 I used, but if I recall correctly, it was said to produce almost 2000 fps with a 125 gr bullet!

Bill

WESHOOT2 · March 2, 2002, 06:57 AM

I have published data that gives these extremes.

Why do you think that's possible?

Is it perhaps because "all guns are always different?", or maybe because of the difference in specific components? Or even different lots of the same components? Or test environment?

It ain't lawyers; it's modern test equipment.

Please start low and work up slow IN YOUR GUN. Then if you want to KNOW test in YOUR GUN.

That's reality LOL.

C.R.Sam · March 2, 2002, 12:18 PM

WESHOOT2 speak true.
Start low and work up...in your gun.
Loads that may be just fine in a full sized Ruger, Dan Wesson or blued N frame Smith can totally gut a lesser sized stainless gun.

And each gun is different, even from its itentical twin.

Sam

Tony Cam · March 2, 2002, 04:47 PM

Now that i think about it the more sense it makes, all guns are different.
Nowwwww, truth be told, i am sorry i loaded so many rounds with 17 gr of 2400 as they really are uncomfortable to shoot. After about 25 i start getting the flinchies,lol.
I shot those other rounds, the 158,s with only 11 grs and they were so much more comfortable and pleasant to shoot. I just hate like hell the thought of disamntling 800 rounds and reloading them. Now that would be a major pain.
Anyway, thanks for the input fellas.

BIGR · March 3, 2002, 12:47 AM

Tony,

I also loaded some blaster .357 rounds using a Speer loading manual years ago. I was loading some 125 GR. bullets and was using Blue Dot powder. I did have some of my buddies ask me what kind of cannon was I shooting. When the pistol was almost jumping out of my hand and cases started sticking in the cylinder i knew it was time to back up and regroup on my loads. When I looked at some of the newer manuals they showed that load as well over the max. That is one reason i have about 5 different reloading manuals these days so i can compare. An ol timer once told me to never rely on just one loading manual and I have to say that he was right. Be safe and happy shooting........

C.R.Sam · March 3, 2002, 01:41 AM

Nuther reason for second sourcing.....typos are not unheard of.

Sam

E357 · March 3, 2002, 05:39 AM

Tony, I know what you mean about the .357 loadmap. Some of the listed MAX loads are BELOW other books mininum safe starting loads. The writers of the loadmap really should have made some sort of reference to these loads, maybe even tried to give an explanation or something. The only safe thing (if you have any faith in the loadmap) is not to use that powder at all.

Even with all the high power confusion, I found the target load data to be pretty accurate.

Elliot

March 2, 2002, 01:59 AM	#1
Tony Cam Member Join Date: December 6, 2001 Posts: 22	Load book questions : 357 Mag Hi guys I picked up Midaways load map on the 357 mag. Shows a lot of different stuff for a ton of different bullets. Problem is they all seem to be light loads. Example : They list a Rem 357 jhp using 2400 powder max load at 13.3 grains. Now i load out of the Speer load book and i get the same bullet using 2400 powder, max load listed at 17.5 grains. Now i loaded up about 800 rounds using 17 grains of 2400 and boy oh boy , they are hot !! I was at the indoor range today < which i hate by the way, shooting indoors, that is.> and i had about 5 people come over and say : What are ya shooting, a 44 ?? lol Anyway, the beginning load for the midway load is 11 grains and the beginning load for the speer book is 16.5 !!! What the hell gives ?? Why is the midaway book so low ?? I mean they do make the 357 more pleasant to shoot and all but its a magnum round, if i wanted pleasant i would shoot .38,s. Anyway, i just wanted to see what some of you guys thought about it. I did load some 158gr jhp,s at 11 gr of 2400 and they shot really well, just no real bark. I also shot some plated wad cutters from rainiers and berrys, real nice rounds.

March 2, 2002, 06:57 AM	#3
WESHOOT2 Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 1999 Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country) Posts: 14,324	'BOOK' vs 'REAL' (NO LAWYER TESTS LOAD DATA) I have published data that gives these extremes. Why do you think that's possible? Is it perhaps because "all guns are always different?", or maybe because of the difference in specific components? Or even different lots of the same components? Or test environment? It ain't lawyers; it's modern test equipment. Please start low and work up slow IN YOUR GUN. Then if you want to KNOW test in YOUR GUN. That's reality LOL.

March 2, 2002, 03:31 AM	#2
Bill Adair Senior Member Join Date: April 19, 2000 Location: Seattle/Tacoma, WA USA Posts: 345	Tony, I suspect that a lot of the current load data, is reduced on recommendations from the manufacturers legal department. They know from experience, that some people will ignore the warnings, and try those maximum loads in guns designed for lower pressure. My first hot 2400 loads in .357 magnum, also drew quite a bit of attention. I don't remember the exact load of 2400 I used, but if I recall correctly, it was said to produce almost 2000 fps with a 125 gr bullet! Bill

March 2, 2002, 12:18 PM	#4
C.R.Sam Senior Member Join Date: October 30, 1999 Location: Dewey, AZ Posts: 12,858	WESHOOT2 speak true. Start low and work up...in your gun. Loads that may be just fine in a full sized Ruger, Dan Wesson or blued N frame Smith can totally gut a lesser sized stainless gun. And each gun is different, even from its itentical twin. Sam

March 2, 2002, 04:47 PM	#5
Tony Cam Member Join Date: December 6, 2001 Posts: 22	Now that i think about it the more sense it makes, all guns are different. Nowwwww, truth be told, i am sorry i loaded so many rounds with 17 gr of 2400 as they really are uncomfortable to shoot. After about 25 i start getting the flinchies,lol. I shot those other rounds, the 158,s with only 11 grs and they were so much more comfortable and pleasant to shoot. I just hate like hell the thought of disamntling 800 rounds and reloading them. Now that would be a major pain. Anyway, thanks for the input fellas.

March 3, 2002, 12:47 AM	#6
BIGR Senior Member Join Date: June 14, 2000 Location: Mountains Posts: 1,385	Tony, I also loaded some blaster .357 rounds using a Speer loading manual years ago. I was loading some 125 GR. bullets and was using Blue Dot powder. I did have some of my buddies ask me what kind of cannon was I shooting. When the pistol was almost jumping out of my hand and cases started sticking in the cylinder i knew it was time to back up and regroup on my loads. When I looked at some of the newer manuals they showed that load as well over the max. That is one reason i have about 5 different reloading manuals these days so i can compare. An ol timer once told me to never rely on just one loading manual and I have to say that he was right. Be safe and happy shooting........

March 3, 2002, 01:41 AM	#7
C.R.Sam Senior Member Join Date: October 30, 1999 Location: Dewey, AZ Posts: 12,858	Nuther reason for second sourcing.....typos are not unheard of. Sam

March 3, 2002, 05:39 AM	#8
E357 Senior Member Join Date: August 27, 2001 Location: SE Florida Posts: 152	Tony, I know what you mean about the .357 loadmap. Some of the listed MAX loads are BELOW other books mininum safe starting loads. The writers of the loadmap really should have made some sort of reference to these loads, maybe even tried to give an explanation or something. The only safe thing (if you have any faith in the loadmap) is not to use that powder at all. Even with all the high power confusion, I found the target load data to be pretty accurate. Elliot