quote:

OK Mike, here's what I'm talking about. In the 2005 IMR data, which I have a hard copy of, the 125 gr bullet is loaded with 6.1 gr of SR 4756 at 925 fps and 15,900 cup. The same bullet is loaded with 8.6 gr in .357 Mag at 1180 fps and 35,800 cup. Now, the .357 has a larger capacity (.135" longer, about 11.5% more when seated at the same depth), so the pressure, with the same load as used in a .38 Special, would be less. In the case cited, it takes 125% more pressure and 41% more powder to develope 255 more fps.

In the real world, it takes however much pressure 8.5 gr of SR 4756 produces in .38 Special brass to generate 1165 fps. I just don't think an 11.5% larger case will generate those kind of numbers with .1 gr more powder than my 8.5 gr .38 Special load.

It's perfectly clear in my mind, but it may not be too clear when I write it out.

Got it now. Thank you for the explanation, Paul.

quote:

I will be glad to help you any way I can. Send me an e-mail and I will give you some load data from the past that might give you a bit of insight in to what used to be done. For much of it I also can give the pressure data that was listed. Of course this is strictly an FYI thing and if you actually use this data it is at your risk not mine.

Perfect! Thanks much, NKJ. Running off to a game now; will email you tonight. Your point about risk is well taken and understood.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Erich:
. . . and we're back to the beginning again!

Ya gotta start somewhere!

pinkymingeo--and others:

When I saw that case capacity in Lee, I checked it it out a bit--and when I called it out as an error in a THR thread, another poster actually did a crude volume check (water) with his cases and found it to be in error.

His measurement was a simple brimful calculation, not a net volume one, I do remember that.

I'll see if I can find the link to that thread....

Jim H.

There is 0.0136 cubic inches additional capacity in the .357 Mag, if you just consider the volume of the additional length.

There is really no need to make anything thicker in the .357 case, just use a different C 260 cartridge alloy for greater strength.

I just posted the .38 Special and .357 Mag loading data from Speer #10 on http://www.bbhfarm.com/gallery/album12

Thought I’d share results of the second round of testing A LOAD and some conclusions I drew for myself.

Following Paul’s advice this time I used regular (not magnum) primers. Makes quite a bit of difference! I made 6 rounds each with 9.0, 10.0, 11.0 and 12.0 gr. of SR4756. Components: 125 gr. Montana Gold JHP bullets (0.356-0.357”), brand new Winchester 357 magnum brass, Remington #1 1/2 primers (would have used CCI but didn’t have any). SR4756 powder was just purchased but I didn’t find any dates or lot numbers on the can. OAL – 1.580”; heavy FCD roll crimp. All shooting was done from same 4” Ruger GP-100.

Accuracy was good for all loads. Here are the targets (21’, off-hand, 6 shots at each target):



I guess the pattern shows a bit of anticipation on this shooter’s part. I wonder what is it exactly he was anticipating?

Primers. Here is a scan of the 3 worst looking cases out of 6 I had for each load. BTW, thank you for the tip, Paul, - scanning is SO much faster than photography!



Some cratering is visible especially at 12 gr. of powder. Probably would have been less (or none?) with CCI primers. Also of note – this revolver has a sizable gap between firing pin and bushing.

Extraction. All cases except one, extracted with ease. Basically, they would either fall out by themselves or needed a very gentle push by extractor. One case (marked with red arrow on the picture above) expanded; I had to hit extractor on the bench to get it out. This case would not fit back into the cylinder and it had a visible bulging in the middle; looks like a pressure spike to me.

My thinking is that with the components I used (especially particular bullet type) 12 gr. is a bit too much for me. With extra attention paid during loading (I spent over an hour checking and rechecking every step) 11 gr. loads work perfectly fine in my Ruger, but I will limit my loads to 10.5 gr. to allow for some imperfections during production run. Some people may find this too conservative; others – too aggressive but these are the conclusions I drew FOR MYSELF.

Finally, I want to say that this thread was a lot of fun for me and I learned a lot here. Thanks, everyone, for sharing you advice and experiences.

Mike

This message has been edited. Last edited by: rozenbem,

As an update, I uploaded the rest of the handgun section of Speer #8 to this site. http://www.bbhfarm.com/gallery/album06?page=1

I also included Speer's velocity data on current commercial ammunition, which includes at least one .38/44 load and some Super Vel loads.

Mike, my normal 125 gr bullet load, with either a Sierra JHC or a Golden Saber, is 14.0 gr of SR 4756. Sometimes I don't load to max and only use 13.5 gr.

quote:

Thought I’d share results of the second round of testing THE LOAD

Mike, thanks for the detailed results (very nicely done), but . . . that's not THE LOAD, son!

No it isn't THE LOAD or anything resembling THE LOAD. Different caliber. Different bullet. Different powder charge.

quote:

SR4756 LOADS (THIRD OPINION!)

is the title of the thread, so Mike's load is consistent within that constraint. I agree, it isn't THE LOAD, as defined locally, but it is a watered down version of what I've used for many years.

I normally use 10.0 gr of SR 4756 in .38 Special brass with a 125 gr Golden Saber for a little less stress on things. It'll average around 1350 fps out of my 4" M66-2.

Well I guess I may be a bit sensitive on this issue. I just had a guy tell me at a gunshow that THE LOAD "you and that lawyer from New Mexico" recomended 14.0 grs of 4756 in a 357 locked up my gun. I explained to him that neither "that lawyer" or I had ever said a word about the load he was using being THE LOAD. I had never even heard of that charge being used in a .357 magnum. But it is apparent that people are too lazy to do the research and even find out what THE LOAD even is. I guess it is easier to just start pouring powder and if you get in trouble blame someone else.

To be honest I don't much care for misrepresentation of facts or being misquoted.

Having said that I guess call THE LOAD anything that suits you.

Jessie,

I can see where 14.0 gr of SR 4756 with a 158 gr bullet might lock up a .357 and that's not even considering a .38 Special!

I really don't know what more can be done, besides posting the actual Speer Data, which I've already done.

I guess some people just never learn to read and and haven't figured out to never depend on memory alone.

quote:

Mike, thanks for the detailed results (very nicely done), but . . . that's not THE LOAD, son!

Love your precise laconic style, F. Erich. Gives away a pro

quote:

But it is apparent that people are too lazy to do the research and even find out what THE LOAD even is.

Okay, Jesse, I am sure this isn't directed at me. Why would it be? On p.19 I asked exact this question - "what is THE LOAD?" The answer I got at the time made me think that some creativity in definitions won't be considered blasphemy. To avoid any hard feelings about semantics my load is hereby renamed and is to be referred to as A LOAD. And so it is decreed.

quote:

Mike, my normal 125 gr bullet load, with either a Sierra JHC or a Golden Saber, is 14.0 gr of SR 4756. Sometimes I don't load to max and only use 13.5 gr.

Paul, it is very possible indeed that differences are due to the bullets design. I will be glad to try Sierra or Golden Saber in the future.

Gentlemen, I too wish that case didn't bulge out. For one thing I would have had much more fun reporting my findings. But it did… And I feel strongly that it would have been unfair to your good selves or to the casual readers (which by now we have more than 8000) not to report it exactly as I’ve seen it.

Mike

quote:

But it did… And I feel strongly that it would have been unfair to your good selves or to the casual readers (which by now we have more than 8000) not to report it exactly as I’ve seen it.

Mike,
I want to make this quite clear, not to you per se, but to others that read this thread.
Truth in reporting what is going to make or break us.
The results given must be actual, factual results. If, while testing THE LOAD, I would have had a negative sign, one, any at all, it would have been reported. I believe I can speak for the other folks that have proofed THE LOAD, they would have posted those negative results as well. They just weren't there.

I know one load I won't be testing though, do you know what it is? 12.0grains of SR4756 under a 125grain JHP!

Thanks for all of your reports, they have been top notch. The photos are great and the commentary professional to a fault.

Gonna' have to come up with something else to "PLAY WITH" and see if we can get another looooooonnnnnnnngggggg thread started!

quote:

I just had a guy tell me at a gunshow that THE LOAD "you and that lawyer from New Mexico" recomended 14.0 grs of 4756 in a 357 locked up my gun.

You have got to be kidding! Can you say "DUH". Like Paul said, read the data!