W231 .38 and .357 Magnum loads.

[TheTinMan]

MY experience loading for a Colt Model 3-5-7 with 6" barrel. Win 231, Starline .357 Magnum brass & CCI small pistol primer:

Hornady 158gr LSWC
4.8 grains of Win 231 averaged 890 fps - too fast for this soft swaged bullet according to Hornady manual

Penn 158gr lead truncated cone
4.8 grains Avg 924 fps S-D 15
5.1 grains Avg 975 fps S-D 11
5.4 grains Avg 1,001 fps S-D 17
5.7 grains Avg 1,049 fps S-D 15

5.4 grains had the lowest extreme spread (53) and seemed like a nice target load but 5.7 grains produced the best groups.

I found some old Winchester data for 158 grain lead bullets over 231 which showed 6.7 grains as the MAX with muzzle velocity of 1,275 and maximum pressure for .357 Magnum. (file attached with older Winchester data)

Please work up carefully if you want to follow any of this data.

 

[GCF]

MY experience loading for a Colt Model 3-5-7 with 6" barrel. Win 231, Starline .357 Magnum brass & CCI small pistol primer:

Hornady 158gr LSWC
4.8 grains of Win 231 averaged 890 fps - too fast for this soft swaged bullet according to Hornady manual

Penn 158gr lead truncated cone
4.8 grains Avg 924 fps S-D 15
5.1 grains Avg 975 fps S-D 11
5.4 grains Avg 1,001 fps S-D 17
5.7 grains Avg 1,049 fps S-D 15

5.4 grains had the lowest extreme spread (53) and seemed like a nice target load but 5.7 grains produced the best groups.

I found some old Winchester data for 158 grain lead bullets over 231 which showed 5.7 grains as the MAX with muzzle velocity of 1,275 and maximum pressure for .357 Magnum. Obviously I didn't reach that muzzle velocity, and there were no pressure signs of any kind. However, I'm stopping there. (file attached with older Winchester data)

Please work up carefully if you want to follow any of this data.

Am I misreading, or does the attached data show 6.7 (not 5.7) of 231, under a lead 158 bullet?

 

[m657]

can't speak for others, but I've NEVER had any significant advantage with bevel base over plain base....other than ease of inserting prior to setting into case at loading station....

Results from gas check decades ago didn't show any advantage in hot-loaded IHMSA rounds; repeat last fall with some 41 mag 215 g SWC did not show any advantage. As always, YMMV.

As much as I struggle to find otherwise, my favorite rounds tend to be of the 41 mag persuasion...and again, 900-1100 fps work best for me.

Not to high jack thread about 38/357....

The hot loads of 20-30 year old manuals make today's listings seem so tame. Don't know what to make of it.

I know my goal circa 1980 was to find a 357 mag load that would approximate 1500 fps with great accuracy and no barrel fouling.

Along the way I've found LOTS of loads that meet all my goals except the velocity factor, which may not have been all that rational an expectation in the first place.

But the 1100 fps 357 loads seem to be pretty mild even now.

 

[TheTinMan]

Am I misreading, or does the attached data show 6.7 (not 5.7) of 231, under a lead 158 bullet?

No, you didn't misread it. I was hurrying and trying to do three things at once. The old Winchester data shows a MAX of 6.7.

My apologies to all. Load data is not something to take lightly.

 

[GF1]

You can make lots of powders work for "efficiency" at the loading bench, in terms of stretching less than optimum powders across a number of calibers. I don't buy into that, however, as there are too many compromises and for the time and trouble I put in I want it optimum.

There's no money difference, as you're putting the same amount of powder down range for the same money.

For the .357 through .44 Magnums, including the .41 Magnum which is my darling caliber, I really like and get the best results with Alliant 2400. It's not picking about lighting off, standard primers work fine (magnums OK too), as does a normal roll crimp. I've had great success with the heavier for caliber bullets, both hard cast and jacketed; for the .357, they are 158 grains.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Current load data is anemic at best. They claim it's because new testing methods show the old data was way overpressure. I would accept that if they didn't try to claim a load that is reduced by as much as 20% is generation the same velocities. I may not be an engineer but I'm not stupid either. They are talking out of both sides of their mouth and another place to that on the other side of the body.

 

[MMA10mm]

I am a huge fan oh W231, but there are just certain limitations where we try to drive it too far. Jeep - I do the same as you. W231 is my primary pistol "stockpile" powder, and it is at least as good as average, if not ideal, in many loads and calibers. I use it in the following:

380 ACP (practice & full-power loads)
9mmP (practice loads)
38 Spl (practice & full-power loads)
357 Mag (practice loads)
10mm (practice loads)
44 Russian (practice loads)
44 Spl (practice & full-power loads)
44 Mag (practice loads)
45 ACP (practice, target, & full-power loads)

In particular answer to your question, Jeep, load 4.0grs W231 w/ 158gr SWCs in either 38 or 357 and you'll have great results. I find this to be VERY accurate in most guns, and its at the top end of power for the 38 without having to worry about alloy-frame guns. Its powerful enough to let you feel you're shooting something, but light enough to let most people focus on accuracy.

I've tried W231 in the higher ranges which are "certified safe" in the older loading manuals. My opinion is that they've eliminated these loads NOT out of safety, nor out of laziness - just publishing the cowboy loads... I believe they experienced, or got enough questioning querries, or both, about the change in combustion characteristics with W231 at "magnum levels."

I've found in 357 & 44 Magnums that as the pressure approaches or exceeds 25-30k (even though still in the "safe zone"), W231 is no longer a pleasant, accurate, nor ideal powder. I've noted substantially increased recoil and muzzle blast, lower accuracy, and a different smell to the consumed powder under these circumstances.

I've noticed similar but less-pronounced issue in 10mm. Even at high pressures in the 9mm, I don't notice the problem at all. I've theorized from this experience that case volume, or more-accurately: unused space inside the case, when combined with higher pressure for this powder is the causal factor.

The bottom line is that W231 CAN be safely loaded for a medium-power 357 load, but I think you'll be dissatisfied with the results.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

A lot of good information here already. I agree W231 has it's limitations on magnum calibers, that's why I use 3 powders mostly. The original "Powder Trinity" before there were a lot of powders available was Bullseye, Unique and 2400. My powder trinity is W231 (HP-38), W540 (HS-6) and W296 (H110) I haven't found anything I can't load with those 3 powders or the other powder trinity either.

When I reach what I feel is the limit of W231 I go to HS-6. When I want full power magnum loads I turn to W296. Those 3 powder never fail me. Yes, I do have about 8 or more other handgun powder on the shelf but that's because I like to try new stuff. I always seem to come back to those 3. (Trail Boss, Clays, Universal, AA#5, Power Pistol, 2400, Lil'Gun, Longshot and maybe some I forgot)