I ordered some Armscor 125 grain 357 magnum ammo because I wanted some practice with full boat 357 magnum.

Maybe I made a mistake and ended up with the most nuclear powered ammo out there.

The manufactures specs read:

Muzzle Velocity: 1,875fps
Muzzle Energy: 984ft/lbs

I read some posts saying shooters thought it had the largest muzzle blast of any 357 magnum they have ever used.

I was planning to use it in my GP-100 4" and my 6" 28-2, but maybe I shouldn't use it in the n-frame.

I figure if I have trouble with the Ruger, I can send it back to the mother ship because I bought the gun new. But the 25-2 would cost me money to repair.

Maybe I'll try it in my Henry Big-Boy lever gun also.

Has anyone used this stuff?

1875fps?? I know that is what they list, but the most I have ever seen was a compressed load of win 296 over 125gr SJHP, 6" k frame and that was consistently 1500 +/-. I have not fired this load, But I have shot their ammo without problem. Fire-Balls are more dependent on barrel length and type of powder than the quantity. I have never seen a 357 that would 1800-1900 fps from a 6" handgun. Show me the chony results, because, what it felt like, looked like, sounded like are all subjective and are an educated guess at best. If you do get 1800 out of the 4", I want some of their powder. Just like buffalo bore advertises +p 44 magnums & 40 S&W if you read the small print it states- all loads are with in SAAMI limit. BB is not going to blow up your gun regardless of the advertising hype. Shoot,Enjoy!! Be Safe,

__________________
I BACK OUR BLUE

I'm not a reloader and don't own a chrony, but that velocity seems impossible out of a .357 revolver. Maybe it's a typo, or maybe that's the velocity for a .357 rifle, like a Marlin leveraction.

__________________
low speed, high drag

I really hate it when some boutique loader tests their ammo out of a 10" test barrel and uses THAT chrono data for their ads. FOR SHAME!

You aren't going to get anywhere NEAR that speed out of a real gun, certainly not one with a BC gap and a 4" barrel.
And remember, all that powder burning in the THREE FOOT FIREBALL in front of your barrel does not affect the target or your gun.

__________________
Science plus Art

enjoy, thats a hot load

thewelshm

I think they use a 10" test barrel for the numbers.

The true velocity number out of a 4" barrel is probably in line with other manufacturers.

I did find one post on another site by a user that claimed he chrono'ed it at 1600 fps out of a 6" 686.

Still sounds hot, but more realistic.

They must have used a 10" test barrel for specs.

I bet it will be something out of a 20" Carbine.

I just sent an email to Armscor since 1875 is very, very unlikely out of 4-6" revolver. Be Safe,

__________________
I BACK OUR BLUE

I call BS, maybe filled with a compressed Bullseye load ( never seen one) and only one round since the gun would have become pieces!! Be Safe,

__________________
I BACK OUR BLUE

I can get 1500 + fps with SR 4756 and 2400 out of my 686 6"
with 98% loads..........

1800 + fps has to be out of a rifle or as mentioned a 10" test barrel, I would think.

What ever the fps.............. the company HAS to keep their loads within the pressure limits, to stay out of the courts.

A few companies might "Fudge" a little on their data to sell their ammo.......... you just have to read the fine print or look for the (*) some where on the box.

Good shooting.

If you look at the little ammo booklet S&W used to put in boxes with the guns, there was one .357 load that went 2001 FPS. Wishful thinking from S&W trying to sell ammo. Joe

__________________
Wisdom chases me; I'm faster

That's faster than most of the 357 MAXIMUM loads I've seen from a pistol.

Long barrel, misprint, or cow pies... Pick one.

BEWARE.

A while back I bought a 50 round box of Armscor 125 grain FMJ .357 magnum ammo to hopefully provide cheaper training for Federal 357B (a hot round) but what I got was .38 special recoil and muzzle blast. I was VERY disappointed. If they are still loading the ammo this way, I'm sure you will be disappointed to when you touch some of this stuff off. That velocity number is either from a rifle or an elongated test barrel, because I can assure you the stuff I shot probably wasn't getting over 1200 FPS from my 6" Ruger GP100.

OP, when you shoot this load please report back describing it's power, and if you have a chrono that would be great because I was very much NOT impressed with this load when I shot it.

I do prefer a heavier bullet in .357 that can be loaded hot but just not get nearly that velocity.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

For a brief time Atomic Ammunition was selling a very warm .357 158 grain JHP. (Now they only carry a 158 grain Nosler.) It was every bit of 1400 fps out of my 686. YMMV

__________________
I believe in the wadcutter.

11/28/2014- No response to my email to Armscor about testing protocol. Have you gotten any of it and fired it?? Be Safe,

__________________
I BACK OUR BLUE

If Armscor is a SAAMI compliant manufacturer the ammo will not damage your S&W N frame.Here is what is happening. Most large companies like Remington and Winchester have been loading anemic ammo for a long time so when a company comes along and loads the ammo where is should be, everyone thinks it's "A HOT LOAD". In reality it's what we should be getting from all manufacturers. BTW, the N frame is a very strong revolver and could handle .357 Magnum ammo that's over 35,000 PSI if you shot it.

__________________
Freedom is never free!!
SWCA #3437

I am a reloader with a chronograph and I have actually tried a well stoked load featuring H110 and a 125 grain Hornady XTP. The load used 21.5 grains of powder, which was 1/2 grain under the Lyman's maximum. As for why, a matter of curiosity after reading about a 125 grain 1400 fps 357 Magnum being the finest one shot man stopper ever created. As for velocity, 1450 fps out of my 4 inch model 620. It also featured a muzzle blast an estimated 4 feet in diameter and about 8-10 feet in length. In addition the load was LOUDER than a S&W model 500. As a result I called it the HMFBMEAR 357 Magnum, for Holy Muzzle Flash Batman My Ears Are Ringing. Yeah, doubled up on hearing protection as normal and the load was loud enough to ring my ears for about a half hour.

Now, a couple of points. That chronograph data was with the chronograph 25 feet downrange, because I knew this load would have a lot of muzzle flash. It's also one single reading, because the other 4 loads spewed enough debris down range to cause false readings of more than 2500 fps. Second, I know from other chronograph testing that my 620 has a "slow" barrel, typically about 75-150 fps slower than my 6 inch Dan Wesson.

As for harm, all loads extracted easily and showed no signs of over pressure. However, on cleaning the 620 there was noticeable gas cutting on the top strap from just 15 rounds fired. Not enough to be considered damage in any way but enough I won't repeat the experiment. I now load those 125 Grain XTP's with 10.0 grains of Accurate #5 at much more sedate 1200 fps. from the 620 and 1320 fps from the Dan Wesson.

Conclusions.

First, 1875 fps. from a 125 grain bullet in a revolver is NOT at all possible. I have a 357 Magnum load using a 140 grain XTP that routinely clocks 1875 fps. but it's from a 20 inch Rifle. At a guess a 16 inch Rossi M92 was used to generate these numbers, not a Revolver of any description.

Second, I believe those reports of 1400 fps. 125 grain 357 Magnum loads being the best manstopper ever invented are Urban Myth. Because these loads are Hearing Destroyers and there isn't a Police Agency anywhere that would permit the use of a load that puts their officers on Lifetime Disability with just one single incident of use. Yeah, they would be that loud. My estimated is that 1450 fps load I cooked up probably exceeded 165 Decibels. At an indoor range they are the loudest load I have EVER heard.

Years ago, I was loading max loads for .357's, I finally decided yea you can do it, but after trashing a couple of Ruger Super Black Hawks, wasting a lot of powder and cases and my hands and ears it's just wasn't worth it.
I now load about 90% loads, every thing last longer, the rounds are more accurate and my hands,ears,guns and wallet aren't subject to the abuse. If you want more energy get a larger like a.44 mag gun and shoot 90% loads. My humble opinion for what its worth.

Old thread, I know, but useful information. I have a box of this coming, but after reading this I might just use it in my Rossi 16" barreled carbine. Thanks for the post.

The industry standard for years has been a 10 inch sealed breech test barrel for hand gun ammunition evaluation.
Shorten the barrel and throw in a cylinder/throat gap and you will have a much reduced velocity.

+1 with post #17;

I always wondered what a watered down "New Safe" PSI loading of 35,000 PSI
would need to be pumped up to to match the old 1970's ammo of...
42,000 CUP..............
in Remington or Winchester ammo?

"And remember, all that powder burning in the THREE FOOT FIREBALL in front of your barrel does not affect the target...."

Well, actually, I think it depends on the distance!
The fireball will make the target look like the "Roadrunner" on a bad day! I think all days are bad days if you are the "Roadrunner".

Best,
Rick

I have shot a fair amount of the 158g Armscor 357mag. I chrono it around 1350fps consistently out of my Colt Trooper 8".

I would call the recoil significant at that level. Too much for me to shoot all day. I like my handloads at 1000fps much better.

I have found the Armscor to be one of the hotter factory rounds today.


Prescut

The 124g might get up to 1500fps in my gun. You might get 300fps more with a closed breech and longer barrel?

l have a box of Super Vel ''POLICE'' 357Magnum, 110gr JHP @ 1940 FPS.

Samples anyone? ;-/ l think l recall Remington loading their 90gr JHP @2000+

l have 300 of their .357 90gr JHP bullets... Just cant find load data for them:-(

I remember getting a couple boxes of this ammo during the ammo shortage ( about the time of the OP if I remember correctly.) It was the only thing I could find at the time. It was very hot and loud and uncomfortable for me. No chrono but I have avoided it ever since. Now I load my own mostly mild loads.

__________________
Accuracy supercedes Speed

I wanted some practice with full boat 357 magnum.
http://smith-wessonforum.com/images/smilies/wink.gif
Maybe I made a mistake and ended up with the most nuclear powered ammo out there.

I read some posts saying shooters thought it had the largest muzzle blast of any 357 magnum they have ever used.[/QUOTE]

Unless trying to blow up a gun, the wanting the hottest loads out there (NOT saying that is you) escapes me. Use it in the Ruger first.

I went through the " Magunitius " phase when young also . The toll it took on guns, hands , hearing and the wallet just weren't worth it. I have grown older and wiser and now fully understand why the 38 Special is , well , special. So much more enjoyable range time .
Gary

"First, 1875 fps. from a 125 grain bullet in a revolver is NOT at all possible".

Maybe not 1875, but a S&W model 686 with a 8 3/8" barrel, 125gr JHP bullet and a heavy charge of bluedot powder chronographed an average of 1810 fps. My brothers load and my gun.
And, if you Google 353 casull (safe in the Freedom Arms 357 Magnum only) you will find loads that go 1750 fps with a 160gr bullet, 1650 fps / 180gr and 1500 fps with a 200gr bullet.

Jim

Having started shooting 357 back in the 70s',I remember the Remingtons and SuperVels. Large muzzle blast/flame. Shooting a cylinder full (6) required more than normal force for ejection.
I started reloading back then and made up 'nuclear' loads for 'photographic/attention getting' purposes.

Attached Images

221 landscape 8 11 A&A S.jpg (262.2 KB, 108 views)

Buy a Thompson Center .357 mag barrel 14" long. They will take anything reasonable. I used published TC data from 1974 that stretched the barrel lug on a 30 Herrett. Oh, it also fired 800 rounds of that published load killing 500+ prairie dogs at long range for a handgun back then. Muzzle velocity was measured with a chronograph at ~ 2,000 fps with a 100 grain bullet, quite brisk load.

__________________
S&WHF 366

I note the Hornady Superformance .357s will do 2000fps from a rifle.

Guys have squeezed 1800fps+ with 125grs from Coonans (5") while not exceeding max pressure, so it can be done.

__________________
Psalm 27:2

I haven't tried the Armsor 357, but I shot a whole box of nuclear-hot reloaded rounds out of my 28-2 today.
14.7gr of 2400 under a 158gr LSWC - Alliant says the max charge is 14.8gr
I didn't chrono them, but all i can say is I'm glad I was shooting them from an N-frame. I can just imagine what they would have been like in a K-frame, or God forbid, a J-frame!

Which guys have gotten 1800 fps with 125 from 5"??? Since you are giving the velocity, bbl length, bullet weight, only question is what powder and how much??? I do not even care if you exceeded 35K psi, the gun will break up before you get 1800 fps in 4-5 revolver or pistol. Show me the numbers , otherwise it it just " cocktail chatter". Be Safe,

__________________
I BACK OUR BLUE

While the pics are broken (thanks Photobucket), the text of the review is still there. Buffalo Bore ammo you can get just about anywhere, not some cleverly crafted handload.

Coonan Classic buffalo bore 125 grain results. - The Firing Line Forums

How can the Coonan do this out of a 5" barrel (in which a significant percentage is the chamber) when a 5" or 6" revolver cannot? Guess the cylinder gap is more of a velocity thief than we all thought.

__________________
Psalm 27:2

That ammo would be just fine in a K frame or even J frame, what's with all the "fear?" A 158gr LSWC over less than a full charge of 2400 will not harm and .357 Magnum revolver in good operating condition.

You want hot? Go with full charges of W296/H110 or 300-MP.

Go back and read what I said in Post #17, it still holds true.

__________________
Freedom is never free!!
SWCA #3437

I have gotten 1400+ fps from a 140gr Sierra JHP out of my 686-6 6" using 2400. It's a boomer load for sure, very loud and a lot of flash BUT just as accurate as any heavy load. Surprisingly no signs of pressure but it is definitely an over book load. The published loads for 2400 seem a little low.

Not concerned about what an in-spec load like that would do to the gun. I was referring to what it would feel like for the SHOOTER.

I'm not at all recoil-shy, but those rounds had some whallop - even in an N-frame that weighs in at over two pounds...

Post #18 was an enjoyable read but there is one part I have to call BS on -- cannot convince me that a 35k PSI round from a .357" bore will match, exceed or hell, even approach a 60,000 PSI max load from a .500" bore that burns 2-3 times the volume of propellant.

Physics says "No."

The purely impossible dream:

a discussion about what is safely possible inside SAAMI guidlines with modern firearms in solid working condition without at least ONE participant in the discussion that must point out how it makes more sense to use a different (larger) round.

It isn't about trying to accomplish something outside the scope of a given chambering... it is quite simply about exploring what is safely possible and ENJOYING the ever-constant learning and experience.

This is a hobby you know. We aren't hunting a T-Rex with a K-frame, we are simply working within the confines of the round and platform. It isn't bad, evil or worthless.

It is extremely interesting and enjoyable.

I know it's a heavy duty revolver, but how do you feel it would compare to a Ruger Blackhawk in this respect?

Using Quickload, and assuming a 6" .357 barrel, there is no way using any powder (starting with Clays and going up to include slow powders such as 2400, H110, and H4227) that a 125 grain bullet can be driven beyond the 1500 -1600 ft/sec MV range (depending upon the powder used) without exceeding the SAAMI maximum chamber pressure. I believe (but do not know) that the Quickload calculations assume use of a solid unvented test barrel, not a revolver. If so, a revolver's highest MV would necessarily be somewhat less than 1500+ ft/sec before SAAMI peak chamber pressure is exceeded.

If the Armscor .357 125 grain load does produce a MV of 1,875 ft/sec from a revolver, the peak chamber pressure would have to be horrendous. Or else they are using some magical propellant that no one else has ever heard of OR firing it from a longer-barreled rifle.

I have never compared the two side by side so i really can't say. I do know several shooters who have shot the M28 for 30-40 years with heavy loads without any ill effects. The N frame is very sturdy.

__________________
Freedom is never free!!
SWCA #3437

Of course, both the Ruger and the N-frame Smith are capable of handling loads which produce chamber pressures considerably in excess of the SAAMI maximum. But to what end would anyone who is not a complete imbecile knowingly risk their gun's integrity and their own tender bodies wish to do that?

I never said anyone should shoot excessive pressure loads, only loads that were considered "hot" by the feel yet still within SAAMI limits. Heavy loads do not translate into over pressure loads. I only participated in the discussion agreeing they "can" be shot instead of changing the subject to something else.

__________________
Freedom is never free!!
SWCA #3437

I owned a model 28 Highway Patrolman for a number of years, but then exchanged for a model 19 K frame for the faster lock time. I was not concerned with how hot the loads could be made as much as I was concerned with accuracy, which the 19 gave me in spades.
The reason for my question relates to the older Speer manual that had a section in the 45 LC loading that was designated for Ruger and Thompson Center only. S&W makes it's model 25 chambered in 45 LC, and is an N frame. Why was that one not included? Do they know something about S&W N frame vs Ruger that I don't?

Anyone remember the 357 Atomic?

How about the .357/.44 Bain & Davis?

There is something uniquely interesting about a medium bore, high velocity handgun that can score hits at 100-200 yards or more with a good shooter pulling the trigger. It also seems to be uniquely American as, in other places, one would just carry a carbine.

__________________
Psalm 27:2

Yes, for the old Great Western SA revolver (basically a reproduction of the Colt SAA). I don't think I ever read exactly what the .357 "Atomic" cartridge was, and always assumed it was GW's name for the .357 Magnum.
---------------------------------
Doing a little research, it seems that the .357 "Atomic" cartridge was more or less advertising fiction on GW's part to appeal to those customers who wanted the most powerful revolver possible (in the pre-.44 Mag days). Apparently it refers to a hotter .357 Magnum handload (sort of like a +P+ load) that could be handled by the GW SA revolver, possibly with its bullet seated out slightly further to allow more powder capacity. There does not appear to have ever been any factory loadings of the .357 Atomic cartridge, and I could find no evidence that the GW company sold such ammunition even on a custom basis.

I still have a couple of boxes of Remington 125 gr., scalloped jacket, that consistently chrono over 1600 fps, out of my 6" 686.

This lot is from the 60's-70's era.

I reserve it for 686, or N frame guns, not my 19's, or 66's.

__________________
NRA Instructor