Parden my ignorance. A gun shop clerk told me that 158 grn .357 ammo should not be used in a 2" barreled (all steel)j-frame. Is this so? And while I'm displaying my lack of bullistic knoweldge, why would a 125 grn round be referred to as a "full house" load while the heavier 158 would not?
School's open.
Thanks

It's fairly easy to explain what the clerk told you. He doesn't know what he is talking about. The 158gtr .357 won't hurt the gun.

As for the 125gr "full house" that is probably referring to any of the 125gr slugs that is supposed to chrono 1450fps from a 4" pipe.

quote:

He doesn't know what he is talking about.

+1

Unfortunately, many gun shop clerks fit that description....

When the J-Frame Model 36 was introduced to the shooting public, it was the 158-gr bullet that was accepted as the standard load for that gun.

Now that newer versions of these revolvers can handle .357 Magnum, the 158-gr load is still quite viable. Accepting the fact that penetration is second only to good shot placement, then the logical conclusion is that the heaviest bullets are the preferred load from a snubbie.

The gun shop clerk is obviously working from very bad information.

If I understand this correctly, the lighter bullet will generate more speed in any barrel size and thus produce more recoil. This then makes the round penetrate deeper into the target than the heavier bullet.

quote:

Originally posted by MarkL:
If I understand this correctly, the lighter bullet will generate more speed in any barrel size and thus produce more recoil. This then makes the round penetrate deeper into the target than the heavier bullet.

Not necessarily. You have to factor in bullet design. But for the same design, I'll place my bet on the heavier bullet penetrating further than the lighter bullet.

People debate the merits of light/fast vs slow/heavy ad nauseum on this and other forums.

quote:

Originally posted by MarkL:
If I understand this correctly, the lighter bullet will generate more speed in any barrel size and thus produce more recoil. This then makes the round penetrate deeper into the target than the heavier bullet.

Penetration is more related to sectional density and momentum than to energy.
Terminal ballistics is very complicated.

To simplify, short-barrel guns will work with any SAAMI standard load. Avoid loads on either the very light or very heavy, and tend to medium bullets in cartridges and faster powders. Loads using very slow powder designed for long barrels do not work as well in short barrels.
A 158gr standard load should work fine. Personally, I like the 135gr Short Barrel Gold Dots.

Here's a souce of information (use the calculators):
http://www.handloads.com/

quote:

Originally posted by MarkL:
If I understand this correctly, the lighter bullet will generate more speed in any barrel size and thus produce more recoil.

You're not understanding that correctly.

Recoil is the change of momentum of the gun caused by the change of momentum of the bullet and expanding gasses.

Momentum is a linear function (mass x velocity), not an exponential one like energy (mass x velocity^2).

If you reduce bullet weight by 20% and increase velocity by 20% their product (momentum) will remain the same and so will recoil.

The clerk may have simply been expressing himself poorly and simply trying to suggest that using lighter bullets may have been his preferred suggestion for a carry load. A lot of people like the 125s for the .357 for carry, and consider the 158s and heavier bullets to be for hunting. I have no opinion either way as to the veracity of that advice, but it is common enough.

The fact is that most gun store clerks DON'T know what they are talking about. "Seldom right but never in doubt".

But GatorFarmer has a good point, the 158 gr loads frequently don't expand well in humans and can over penetrate, especially from a shorter barrel. The 125 gr JHP usually expand very well from any barrel length.

quote:

Originally posted by Centenniel:
Unfortunately, many gun shop clerks fit that description....

Most of them, in my considerable experience...

I prefer 125s out of a .357 snubby, but consider that weight iffy out of a .38. I'll echo the chorus of gunshop commando alerts.

What all of the above have already said.
As an aside, do the .357 Magnum fixed sighted guns have their sight regulation based on a 158 grain bullet loading, as the .38 Special chambered one's do? I've long suspected, yes.

quote:

Originally posted by Spotteddog:
What all of the above have already said.
As an aside, do the .357 Magnum fixed sighted guns have their sight regulation based on a 158 grain bullet loading, as the .38 Special chambered one's do? I've long suspected, yes.

Spot, that question has many answers. I've had to file down more than a couple of sights on fixed-sight .357s to tune them to 125-135gr. bullets, but I have a few that seem to have come from the factory regulated for 125gr. screamers. One of my 3" 681+ Camfour PC guns had to have quite a bit of front sight (over .025") removed to tune it for 125s, but the other is close enough that I've not felt compelled to touch it yet. My Colt Magnum Carry 2-incher is spot-on at 15 yards with 125gr. Remington Golden Sabers, right from the factory. Neither of my 3" 65s are low enough at 15 yards with 125 grainers to justify filing on the front sight, and both are dead on with Speer 135gr. Short Barrel loads. I have an old Colt Cobra that is a foot high at 10 YARDS with 158gr. bullets, and only shoots Glasers and Mag-Safe loads to point of aim, so go figure...