Powder for accurate load for 357 JHP 4"

[smith57]

I am looking for a clean burning powder that is very accurate and can achieve around 1300 fps to load in a 4" Md 66 with the 158 gr Speer GD-JHP bullet . My current load with this bullet is 11.4 gr AA#7, which is extremely accurate, but the velocity is 1140 fps from the 4" bbl. I would like to get the velocity up to around 1300 fps and maintain excellent accuracy.
I have been considering trying AA#9 and 296.
Any suggestions before I invest in more powders would be much appreciated. Thanks.

 

[shadowrider]

AA #9 should get you closer than #7, I like #9 a lot. But, 296 has always been one of the fastest powders for full house magnum loads. Another one to try would be VV N110, the data in the manual shows it to be a screamer. Any of these should outrun the #7. Accuracy? Don't know, you'll just have to try it out but I've had the best luck with the loads towards the upper end of the load data with 296. 2400 is a good magnum powder too.

Don't back off the charge weight with 296 follow the factory data!

And use magnum primers.

 

[Dale53]

To gain the maximum safe velocity in your revolver, a relatively slow burning powder in indicated. A#9, Hodgdon's Lil Gun, H110, or Win 296 will all do the best that can be expected in your revolver. Whether or not you can safely attain 1300 fps depends on the revolver and bullet combination. Use the powder manufacturers data and work up closely preferably with the use of a chronograph ( which you apparently are doing).

I have used a LOT of H110 in various magnums (most notably .44 Magnums with excellent results).

Dale53

 

[Paul5388]

About 5 years ago I loaded some 158 gr XTPs with 12.5 gr of new Alliant 2400 in .38 Special brass and checked it in three different guns, a 4" M66, a 6" M686 and a 6" Security Six (SS). The instrumental velocities were 1212 fps average for the SS, 1194 fps average for the 686 and 1191 fps average for the M66. The longer barrels don't always produce an appreciable increase in velocity.

If you use 13.5 gr of 2400 and a 168 gr LSWC in .38 Special brass, it'll get up around 1230 fps average instrumental (1270 fps MV), but that's out of a slower 6" M28.

If you switch to a 158 gr LSWC, the 4" M66 will clock 1260 fps average (1300 fps MV) with 13.5 gr in .38 Special brass.

In .38/.357 size brass the medium burning powders will out perform the slower powders many times.

 

[canoe on the yukon]

I am looking for a clean burning powder that is very accurate and can achieve around 1300 fps to load in a 4" Md 66 with the 158 gr Speer GD-JHP bullet . My current load with this bullet is 11.4 gr AA#7, which is extremely accurate, but the velocity is 1140 fps from the 4" bbl. I would like to get the velocity up to around 1300 fps and maintain excellent accuracy.
I have been considering trying AA#9 and 296.
Any suggestions before I invest in more powders would be much appreciated. Thanks.

What you want is achievable but just barely and not without cost in the sense that it's hard on the gun if used steadily.You'll be loading to about max and the K frame Smith is not the best platform for this.My advice is to work your load up carefully while watching for excess pressure signs such as stiff case extraction,etc.Even then I'd use such a load sparingly out of empathy for your gun.

The original maximum pressure specs for the 357 magnum was 46,000 CUP.Industry standards have reduced this a good bit from it's original capability down to 35,000 PSI.The K frame S&W 357 has been in use since about 1955 (long time before the aforementioned reduction).They didn't start saying,"okay,lets make the guns weaker now".The durability (or lack of) which is the subject of so much discussion is NOT about catastrophic failure such as a blown cylinder,etc but rather the ability of the revolver to stand the stress and pounding without shooting loose soon.

"AGAIN......CHECK FOR EXCESS PRESSURE SIGNS AS YOU WORK UP GRADUALLY....NO EXCUSE FOR IGNORING THIS!!!!!!!!".....Also,I don't guarantee the results.I'm relaying data but nothing more.

Moving along.........

The Speer #11 manual does not pussyfoot around when it comes to it's magnum revolver loading data.It was first printed in 1987 and I'm giving you data from it that's a good bit above anything you're likely to find currently printed.I'll use three powders (H110 and W296 which are actually the same powder and 2400).

Speer 158 grain JHP or JSP..........CCI#550 magnum primer throughout

296.....starting load-15.8gr....1241 fps.....max 17.8.....velocity 1326fps
H110.... " " -15.8 gr...1263 fps.....max 17.8...... " 1330fps

Printing the two above is actually redundant as either would suffice for the other as well.I list them both because the manuals do.


2400....starting load-13.9gr...1208 fps....max 15.9.....velocity...1335 fps

These loads are HOT.Some of the fellows who are only used to modern data may get a little red-faced over them.Remember what I said about working up.

About getting 1300 fps from your 4" barreled revolver....you may and may not.The ballistics quoted from above were taken from a 6" Ruger Security Six and when all else is equal,the longer tube will burn more propellant.Only way to know is with a chronograph.

Personally,I'd pack a heavier frame revolver and with a longer barrel if I wanted these ballistics.Work up carefully and use sparingly.These will be hard on the gun.

Just so you'll know...the usual max you'll encounter in most modern data will be closer to.........15.0 gr 2400.......16.5gr H110/W296 (many will show less)

 

[smith57]

Thanks all for the info. I have been shooting/carrying the 158 gr Speer Gold Dot with 11.4 gr AA#7 since it is so accurate in my Md 66 ... and, even though I don't know what the pressure is, I figured at a velocity of 1140 fps I wasn't beating the gun up. A friend of mine gave me some factory Remington 158 gr SJHP 357 mag to chronograph, since he doesn't have a chronograph. I shot those out of my 4" Md 66 and the avg velocity was 1301 fps , with a SD of 11. They were extremely accurate as well. Actually they were just as accurate as my handload, which puts 6 shots into just under 1.5 inches at 15 yards from a 2-hand rest. The Remington cases extracted easily, and showed no pressure signs (bulged heads, flattened primers, backed out primers, firing pin primer flow, etc.). So, my intent was to try to duplicate this load, if possible, without getting into excessive pressure and beating up my Md 66. I do have access to borrow some 296 to play with before I run out and buy powders, so I'll start there, and work up with the chrono and see what happens velocity/accuracy wise.
Thanks again for the info.

 

[Hook686]

I load 158 grain Magtech SJSP bullets with 13.6 grains of Alliant 2400. I use CCI 550 primers and a tight crimp with the Lee Factory Crimp Die. I get 1230 fps from my S&W 627PC, 5" barrel. Clean ? Well I do not consider it particularly clean, but then I clean my handguns after each use anyway.

Alliant indicates a 14.8 grain maximum load with the 2400 for about 1265 fps with a 6" barrel and CCI 500 primers.

I do not like Win. 296, or H110 simply because I find it messey. It seems to leak all over the place when I try to reload using it. It is just too fine a powder I guess. Anyway the minimum load is shown to yield over 1300 fps

158 GR. HDY XTP Winchester 296 .357" 1.580" 15.0 1418 28,600 CUP 16.7 1591 40,700 CUP

158 GR. HDY XTP Hodgdon H110 .357" 1.580" 15.0 1418 28,600 CUP 16.7 1591 40,700

http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp


If you follow through, please post your results.

 

[michael thornton]

14.8 gr of 2400 is my hot 357 load, most of my 357 like it pretty good, but not the best accuracy overall, but you cant have it all,

 

[buck460XVR]

The Speer #11 manual does not pussyfoot around when it comes to it's magnum revolver loading data.It was first printed in 1987 and I'm giving you data from it that's a good bit above anything you're likely to find currently printed.I'll use three powders (H110 and W296 which are actually the same powder and 2400).

Speer 158 grain JHP or JSP..........CCI#550 magnum primer throughout

296.....starting load-15.8gr....1241 fps.....max 17.8.....velocity 1326fps
H110.... " " -15.8 gr...1263 fps.....max 17.8...... " 1330fps

Printing the two above is actually redundant as either would suffice for the other as well.I list them both because the manuals do.


2400....starting load-13.9gr...1208 fps....max 15.9.....velocity...1335 fps

These loads are HOT.Some of the fellows who are only used to modern data may get a little red-faced over them.Remember what I said about working up.

not redfaced, but the new Speer # 14 manual has a max of 15.5 for H110 and 14.7 for W296(why there's a difference since it's the same powder I don't know.) It also list the max of 2400 @ 14.8. Magnum primers for the Hodgdon/Winchester powders and standard for the 2400.

I don't have a Md66, but my 686 shoots 158s the best with H110/W296. Lil' Gun shoots 'em well also and even a little better than H110/W296 with 170s and 180s. My favorite range load with H110 is 15 grains, but I bump it up with the 158s for hunting. I use the same loads outta my .357 carbine with similar results.

 

[mkk41]

Hmmm , first of all , H-110 aka W-296 are SLOW burning pistol powders. It's fast for a rifle powder. I believe it was originally designed for .30 M-1 carbine ammo. In sixguns , it work best with longer tubes than 4in , unless ya like great big fireballs. 2400 is only a tick faster according to most burn charts. I like Blue Dot , but Unique and stuff in the HP-38/W-231 and HS-6 & 7 might do ya better.

 

[canoe on the yukon]

buck,

The slight differences you note are because of different lots which is normal.If you doubt they are the same powder,a phone call to Hodgdon will clear that up.

 

[canoe on the yukon]

Hook,

The data you're showing is taken from a pressure barrel.Not a revolver.

 

[canoe on the yukon]

Mkk,

The slower powders give higher velocity even in the shorter barrels.This has been demonstrated time and again.If someone wants velocity,that's the issue I address.If they want reduced muzzle flash,that is a seperate issue.

 

[n4zov]

"What you want is achievable but just barely and not without cost in the sense that it's hard on the gun if used steadily.You'll be loading to about max and the K frame Smith is not the best platform for this."

Canoe on the Yukon is exactly right! You are going to have to push your K-frame pretty hard to consistently achieve 1300 fps with 158 grn bullets. It can be done, but you cannot expect the gun to handle these loads without some mechanical issues after 2-3K rounds. I did exactly what you are proposing with a M-19 6" and it developed end shake pretty quickly. The first thing you will notice is that cases become increasingly difficult to extract and shortly you have to drive them out of the gun. Then it is past time for a trip to your favorite gunsmith. It is a matter of deciding if you want to put that much wear and tear on your M66 or if you want to extend the life considerably by using lighter loads.

 

[3five7]

Hook,

The data you're showing is taken from a pressure barrel.Not a revolver.

The data was also taken from a 10 inch barrel. I don't believe their website states the barrel length, However, the 2009 Hodgdon Reloading Manual shows the barrel length as 10 inches.

If you want max velocity you are going to have to use the slow Pistol powders, 296, H110, Lil Gun, 2400, #9 etc. even in a short barrel. Just be careful with using reduced loads of 296 and H110. IIRC Both Hodgdon and Winchester cautioned not to reduce the max load more than 3% and to use a heavy crimp or you could get incomplete powder burn and a squib load. Note that in Hodgdon Data their start loads are reduced more than 3% from the max load and I am sure that since this is published data it would be safe to use their start load. I personally use 296 in my max velocity 357 Magnum loads and it normally is very accurate. As others have said if you use the high end loads in your 66 you will eventually beat it to death.

 

[smith57]

Thanks for all the input. I have decided to abandon this idea, and just buy a box of Rem 158 gr SJHP for concealed carry purposes, and stick with my original recipe of 11.4 gr AA#7 for hogs, skunks, etc. My Md 66 is one of the older ones with the stainless front & rear sights, and it is still extremely accurate and very tight lock up. I'd really hate to loosen it up. So, based on the advice I have read on this forum, I think I may be better off carrying factory ammo anyhow for concealed carry, and keep my 66 from getting loosened up. But, if I do decide to try 296 over the chronograph I will post the results. Thanks !

 

[bnitch]

I must be a woose I'm always looking for the lightest load that will be accurate, and usually find its in the middle of the road of loads.

 

[oldRoger]

I became consumed with an unbearable itch to push a 158gr FMJ out of my 27 at warp speed some years ago; I went off, bought New Norma Cases, Norma Bullets, and #1 of 2400. I had read someone who put some unimaginable amount of 2400 and a small rifle primer behind the 158 gr Norma Bullet. This scribe claimed that the bullet went so fast it melted on impact, or something like that.
Sanity slowly returned, the Norma Brass is still circulating among my brass. The 2400 dated 1967, has never been opened, I keep it to remind my self that insanity is never far away.

 

[buck460XVR]

buck,

The slight differences you note are because of different lots which is normal.If you doubt they are the same powder,a phone call to Hodgdon will clear that up.

I know they're the same powder, my question was why Speer(and several other manuals) lists different Min/Max loads since they are the same.

 

[canoe on the yukon]

I know they're the same powder, my question was why Speer(and several other manuals) lists different Min/Max loads since they are the same.

Buck,

The W296 and H110 they used in their data development was obviously from different lots.Some sources,such as Hodgdon will show identical figures for the two,for obvious reasons.

About why different manuals will list the two seperately....I suppose it's because not everyone knows they are the same.....also.....I suspect they don't want to seem partial to either company.If a manual only listed H110,sales for W296 would drop and vice-versa.