Any C357B Ballistics Gel tests from 2.5" barrel?

[bigwheelzip]

My wife uses the Federal C357B cartridge in a 4" L-frame for HD duty, along with a 12ga.
I got her the 2.5" 686PC that she wanted to carry CWP, but have not found a good comparison study of cartridges from a 2.5" barrel.
I have seen phenomenal data sets comparing more common personal defense calibers, but only limited .357 info.
Peoples gut feelings and muzzle velocity are fine, but bare gel and denim gel penetration with projectile expanded diameters would be more helpful.
Anyone have a link to that kind of data?

 

[Doug M.]

As long as the velocity is within the performance envelope of the specific load, barrel length in isolation is not a real factor. Thus, you need to know the velocity range at which the bullet is designed to perform, and what the velocity is of the load in question from the revolver in question.

Making your quest for information worse is that the .357 Magnum is not a common service round, so there is not near the level of testing that is done with the 9mm/357Sig/40/45ACP. In fact, it's darned rare. I am not at all surprised that you are not finding anything to assist you. There may well be no such research out there, at least by credible experts.

Based on the Federal website's info at Federal Premium Ammunition - Handgun, I am going to guess that at a relatively typical self-defense range, it will work well enough. Placement and other skill issues are likely to be bigger variables than the 1.5" reduction in barrel length. The noise/blast and recoil might be counterproductive, so if she is overcoming those, I would say she can carry it with confidence in either revolver.

 

[bigwheelzip]

Thanks, but still curious...

As long as the velocity is within the performance envelope of the specific load, barrel length in isolation is not a real factor. Thus, you need to know the velocity range at which the bullet is designed to perform, and what the velocity is of the load in question from the revolver in question.

Making your quest for information worse is that the .357 Magnum is not a common service round, so there is not near the level of testing that is done with the 9mm/357Sig/40/45ACP. In fact, it's darned rare. I am not at all surprised that you are not finding anything to assist you. There may well be no such research out there, at least by credible experts.

Based on the Federal website's info at Federal Premium Ammunition - Handgun, I am going to guess that at a relatively typical self-defense range, it will work well enough. Placement and other skill issues are likely to be bigger variables than the 1.5" reduction in barrel length. The noise/blast and recoil might be counterproductive, so if she is overcoming those, I would say she can carry it with confidence in either revolver.

Having seen video of the performance of other caliber rounds, I feel like gel testing is the only way to know for sure if a given round will expand and penetrate sufficiently and consistently from a given barrel length.
Her BUG is a 9MM Shield, and the 124gr HST that she carries is superb at penetration and expansion, as evidenced in video. I am spoiled by that kind of data. I may have to mix up some gel and take it to the woods with an old pair of jeans.
About that noise/blast, she loves it. I would hate to hear it without protection though.

 

[drummer007]

A lot of that kind of video is available on Youtube, you just have to search for it. I can recommend the Buffalo Bore 38 Special +P 158 gr soft LSWCHP-GC (BB item #20A). Various gel test shows it penetrates well, expands to .60"-.70" and retains most all its weight. Also with that short ejection rod on the 2.5" 686, a 38 Special case is more likely to get ejected during a reload.

 

[686-380]

Sorry, no. This is where I purchased my 10% balistic dummy and mold: Clear Ballistics - Ballistic Gel Manufacturer - Manufactures 100% clear reusable synthetic ballistic gelatin. We distribute to consumers, businesses, research facilities, and law enforcement agencies for recreation and research.

 

[Doug M.]

The making of gel that is appropriate for testing (meets the standard, and repeatable) is an unholy pain in the backside. I've read how they make and calibrate it. I don't have the patience to develop the skill set, let alone use it, and would have to pay someone to do it. I suppose if you have the will and the cash, you could reach out to one of the very few people who does it right and delegate the work if they are willing.

 

[Fastbolt]

My wife uses the Federal C357B cartridge in a 4" L-frame ...

Back in the 80's & 90's you could still come across magazine articles where someone chrono'd this load, as it was a popular one during the waning days of the .357 Magnum service revolver, which meant it got used in detective & off-duty revolvers with 2 1/2" barrels.

I remember reading assorted chrono results where this load often produced velocities in the 1200-1300+ fps range out of some snubs (Pythons, K & L-frame S&W's). I often carried it in my Ruger Security & Speed-Sixes back then.

Being an old-style JHP, it's probably safe to consider that its performance is probably dependent on velocity.

Over time I used a number of other duty & off-duty loads in my .357's, eventually coming to prefer the excellent W-W 145gr STHP.

FWIW, the Remington SJHP bullet design in the Magnum loading was reported to exhibit deformation and expansion (and sometimes fragmentation), and the scalloped jacket design probably helped as velocities become reduced. I still keep some boxes of that 125gr load for use in my 2.25" Ruger SP101DAO, and my 4" Service-Six, although I also still have a couple boxes of the W-W 145gr STHP left over, which I also use in those revolvers. Not everyone lauded the 125gr JHP, however, and I remember one popular author of that time offering concerns of over-penetrations (perforations).

Since the heyday of revolvers is long past for LE work, the typical intermediate barrier/gel testing - often done for LE/Gov testing & sales - is probably less likely to see done by the major American ammo makers. Takes time and money to do it right, under strictly controlled conditions, after all.

I remember a couple of wound ballistics seminars several years ago, taught by a former DOD agent, where it was said that the 125gr Magnum JHP's were observed to be pretty devastating as far as wounding potential capabilities. One particular morgue x-ray showed some nasty wounding, including some obvious fragmentation.

As I recall, it was the personal opinion of the retired agent that if the service revolver had remained in general use for at least a few more years, that the 140-145gr JHP Magnum loads had stood a very good chance of eclipsing the 125gr loads for defensive use.

Having long liked the 140gr-145gr bullet weights in .357 Magnum, myself, I'd not have bet against him.

Just some thoughts.

Controllability & muzzle blast are a couple other things to consider when selecting defensive loads, though. I've had someone fire a .357 Magnum service revolver very close to my head inside a house. Unpleasant, to say the least.

I also used to use the all-lead 158gr LSWCHP/LHP +P loads in my Magnum revolvers, too. Those are still fairly viable loads, and a lot more controllable than many Magnum offerings, but we've also seen a lot of development in .38 SPL +P loads in recent years, too.

When I used to leave a .357 available for my wife many years ago, I took the Magnum loads out of it and left it loaded with 158gr LSWCHP +P.

Just some thoughts.

How well does your wife shoot 125gr Magnum for rapid shot strings when it comes to controllability and consistent accuracy?

 

[bigwheelzip]

Nothing on youtube

A lot of that kind of video is available on Youtube, you just have to search for it. I can recommend the Buffalo Bore 38 Special +P 158 gr soft LSWCHP-GC (BB item #20A). Various gel test shows it penetrates well, expands to .60"-.70" and retains most all its weight. Also with that short ejection rod on the 2.5" 686, a 38 Special case is more likely to get ejected during a reload.

Thanks for the ammo suggestion. As for YouTube and the internet in general, turned up nothing for my specific search.
The ejection of shells so far has been very slick. Her PC edition 686 uses Moonclips, which seems to aid shell extraction.

 

[bigwheelzip]

I guess I can stick with the Federal C357B?

Back in the 80's & 90's you could still come across magazine articles where someone chrono'd this load, as it was a popular one during the waning days of the .357 Magnum service revolver, which meant it got used in detective & off-duty revolvers with 2 1/2" barrels.

I remember reading assorted chrono results where this load often produced velocities in the 1200-1300+ fps range out of some snubs (Pythons, K & L-frame S&W's). I often carried it in my Ruger Security & Speed-Sixes back then.

Being an old-style JHP, it's probably safe to consider that its performance is probably dependent on velocity.

Over time I used a number of other duty & off-duty loads in my .357's, eventually coming to prefer the excellent W-W 145gr STHP.

FWIW, the Remington SJHP bullet design in the Magnum loading was reported to exhibit deformation and expansion (and sometimes fragmentation), and the scalloped jacket design probably helped as velocities become reduced. I still keep some boxes of that 125gr load for use in my 2.25" Ruger SP101DAO, and my 4" Service-Six, although I also still have a couple boxes of the W-W 145gr STHP left over, which I also use in those revolvers. Not everyone lauded the 125gr JHP, however, and I remember one popular author of that time offering concerns of over-penetrations (perforations).

Since the heyday of revolvers is long past for LE work, the typical intermediate barrier/gel testing - often done for LE/Gov testing & sales - is probably less likely to see done by the major American ammo makers. Takes time and money to do it right, under strictly controlled conditions, after all.

I remember a couple of wound ballistics seminars several years ago, taught by a former DOD agent, where it was said that the 125gr Magnum JHP's were observed to be pretty devastating as far as wounding potential capabilities. One particular morgue x-ray showed some nasty wounding, including some obvious fragmentation.

As I recall, it was the personal opinion of the retired agent that if the service revolver had remained in general use for at least a few more years, that the 140-145gr JHP Magnum loads had stood a very good chance of eclipsing the 125gr loads for defensive use.

Having long liked the 140gr-145gr bullet weights in .357 Magnum, myself, I'd not have bet against him.

Just some thoughts.

Controllability & muzzle blast are a couple other things to consider when selecting defensive loads, though. I've had someone fire a .357 Magnum service revolver very close to my head inside a house. Unpleasant, to say the least.

I also used to use the all-lead 158gr LSWCHP/LHP +P loads in my Magnum revolvers, too. Those are still fairly viable loads, and a lot more controllable than many Magnum offerings, but we've also seen a lot of development in .38 SPL +P loads in recent years, too.

When I used to leave a .357 available for my wife many years ago, I took the Magnum loads out of it and left it loaded with 158gr LSWCHP +P.

Just some thoughts.

How well does your wife shoot 125gr Magnum for rapid shot strings when it comes to controllability and consistent accuracy?

Wow, great historical context there. Short of having video, this kind of expertise makes choosing a cartridge less troublesome.
I am probably being ridiculous about this choice, but I thought it worth a try. Ever since I saw a YouTube series called AmmoQuest, where a huge assortment of popular SD rounds failed to perform well, I have my doubts.
I agree about the 145gr over the 125gr, all things being equal. That Ammoquest video compared those weights in 9mm HST, and given sufficient penetration, the choice is obvious (except 147 HST is LE and hard to find).
She handles the magnum loads great. We go to the range at least once a week. She puts a full box of ammo through each of the handguns she brings (2 or 3) and finishes each session firing a full load rapid fire at the target as I pull the retrieval switch and make it "charge" at her from 18' feet away.
She empties all her 7 and 8 shot weapons in the 5 seconds before the target arrives and is consistently center mass. She plinks with 38sp but does the "charge" with 357. Range rules dictate "drawing" from the bench, not the holster though. She dry practices with the holsters at home.
About once a month we Skeet shoot with a 12ga and she rarely misses more than once per box and has shot as many as 75 rounds per day.
Our son-in-law is NYPD and she gets very competitive with him.

She leaves the technical research up to me, so for now, I have no reason to switch ammo from the 4" revolver load.

Thanks for your help.

 

[bigwheelzip]

Heaven forbid it should be easy!

The making of gel that is appropriate for testing (meets the standard, and repeatable) is an unholy pain in the backside. I've read how they make and calibrate it. I don't have the patience to develop the skill set, let alone use it, and would have to pay someone to do it. I suppose if you have the will and the cash, you could reach out to one of the very few people who does it right and delegate the work if they are willing.

Thanks for the heads up. I was hoping it would be like making a cooler full of jello to spec.

 

[Hapworth]

Gel has its limitations, too, in real-world translatability. It's great virtue is simply being a controlled, uniform medium against which different rounds can be compared.

That said, I like the gel tests, too. A cursory search yields nothing on Federal C357B as gel-tested from a snubby. Indicating what kinds of research you've already done can help in others not retracing old ground.

Alternately, since there are many modern self-defense hollow points with extensive, documented testing with gel, chronos, etc., why not consider a switch to one of those and have the added peace-of-mind?

 

[aurora40]

It's not helpful in your particular case, but FYI, Federal publishes this sort of data as well:

Law Enforcement - Federal Premium LE, Speer LE, BLACKHAWK!, Eagle - Federal Premium Law Enforcement

Some will have FBI test results when you click on the details, and some will not. Your Federal Premium .357 load is not even listed, though.

As an aside, if you find ballistic gel testing to be comforting, why don't you find some ammo whose test results you approve of, and then buy that ammo. Instead of buying some ammo, and then trying to find out if anyone tested it. If the problem is available selection, then it doesn't really matter how it performed, does it? If it sucks and is all you can find, it's still all you can find.

 

[bigwheelzip]

Great Info

Sorry, no. This is where I purchased my 10% balistic dummy and mold: Clear Ballistics - Ballistic Gel Manufacturer - Manufactures 100% clear reusable synthetic ballistic gelatin. We distribute to consumers, businesses, research facilities, and law enforcement agencies for recreation and research.

Thanks for the heads-up. Great looking product. This is the way to go if I can't find someone who has already posted the results I am looking for.
I might get a kit anyway so I can test different cartridges. The re-useability is fantastic.

 

[bigwheelzip]

Thanks for trying

Gel has its limitations, too, in real-world translatability. It's great virtue is simply being a controlled, uniform medium against which different rounds can be compared.

That said, I like the gel tests, too. A cursory search yields nothing on Federal C357B as gel-tested from a snubby. Indicating what kinds of research you've already done can help in others not retracing old ground.

Alternately, since there are many modern self-defense hollow points with extensive, documented testing with gel, chronos, etc., why not consider a switch to one of those and have the added peace-of-mind?

I hope my wife never needs to translate these gel results into real world results, but short of lining up cadavers, I just feel its due diligence to look at what is available.
I have searched YouTube and Google using the terms"2.5 357 gel test" & "2 1/2 357 gel test" & "snub 357 gel test".
I am not wedded to the C357B, its just that she has alot of it for her 4" L-frame. I would buy any SD round if I could see multiple (5+) rounds expand well consistently and penetrate 12 to 18 inches w/wo denim out of a 2.5 inch barrel.
Another member linked me to a clear gel manufacturers site that looks like the way to go for self testing.

 

[Triathloncoach]

I know Speer makes short barrel 38 and 357 ammo. I know its difficult to find too. Less flash allegedly from faster burning powder. Honestly, I would think a few full metal jacket target rounds of 357 would do the job. Not that I don't load fancy-schmancy ammo in all my SD weapons. Even my 12 gauge has SD Loads. Like that is necessary for a room distance hit from a 12 gauge.

 

[Fastbolt]

Revolver cartridges other than .38 S&W Spl +P aren't exactly mainstream service cartridges anymore.

ATK lists their Speer 125gr GDHP Magnum load, but the common test condition results probably aren't what some Magnum shooters might expect.

You can use this link to go to the handgun tests, and then select the 125gr GDHP Magnum, and compare it to any other loads that might interest you. (No Federal Magnum loads listed.)
Law Enforcement - Federal Premium LE, Speer LE, BLACKHAWK!, Eagle - Load Comparison

Now, while they don't list Wound Ballistics results for the regular 125gr JHP (C357B) & 130gr Hydra-Shok (PD357HS2H) Magnum loads, you can look at the ballistics and draw some comparisons between them regarding simple velocities & paper ME calculations. Scroll down through the pages and check the 2 loads (and any others) which interest you. Federal Premium Ammunition - Handgun

Dunno how the Premium Personal Defense Reduced Recoil 130gr Hydra-Shok bullet might act compared to the other middle weight loads in ballistics gel/barrier testing, but it's demonstrated itself to be a nicely accurate load when tested in one of my M&P 340's. (Still an older style JHP design.)

If it's a reduced recoil Magnum load, though, it's not evident when being fired from my lightweight M&P 340 snub. On the other hand, it was one of the Magnum loads that didn't exhibit any signs of 'bullet pull' (crimp jumping during recoil) in my M&P 340, fired in my hands, when I did some testing for it. Probably feel a lot different when fired from a 4" 686.

I think I may have some remaining speedloaders also filled with Federal 125gr JHP's from my revolver days, as well as some boxes of W-W 145gr STHP, Rem 125gr SJHP and a little of the Federal 130gr HS.

I used up the Rem 125gr HPJ/BJHP (Golden Sabre) and Speer 125gr GDHP in my testing of my first M&P 340, and I'm in no particular hurry to replenish those rounds.

I haven't tried any of the new Speer Short Barrel .357 Magnum, but I've been using a lot of their 135gr .38 Spl +P in my snubs (as it's been an issued load off & on, when available).

Bottom line? Personally, I'd not be concerned to use any of the remaining Magnum loads I have on hand, and I've not been in any particular hurry to try and find further gel testing of those relatively 'proven' (in earlier LE service use) loads I have remaining.

I remember when we were told to stop using Magnum loads in our issued 686's back when the firing pin bushing & hammer nose revision program was in effect. We were restricted to only using whatever +P loads we could find/buy for duty. I carried either W-W 158gr LSWCHP +P or the older Federal Nyclad 158gr LSWCHP during that time, and I didn't lose that much sleep.

 

[bigwheelzip]

Helpful feedback

Revolver cartridges other than .38 S&W Spl +P aren't exactly mainstream service cartridges anymore.

ATK lists their Speer 125gr GDHP Magnum load, but the common test condition results probably aren't what some Magnum shooters might expect.

You can use this link to go to the handgun tests, and then select the 125gr GDHP Magnum, and compare it to any other loads that might interest you. (No Federal Magnum loads listed.)
Law Enforcement - Federal Premium LE, Speer LE, BLACKHAWK!, Eagle - Load Comparison

Now, while they don't list Wound Ballistics results for the regular 125gr JHP (C357B) & 130gr Hydra-Shok (PD357HS2H) Magnum loads, you can look at the ballistics and draw some comparisons between them regarding simple velocities & paper ME calculations. Scroll down through the pages and check the 2 loads (and any others) which interest you. Federal Premium Ammunition - Handgun

Dunno how the Premium Personal Defense Reduced Recoil 130gr Hydra-Shok bullet might act compared to the other middle weight loads in ballistics gel/barrier testing, but it's demonstrated itself to be a nicely accurate load when tested in one of my M&P 340's. (Still an older style JHP design.)

If it's a reduced recoil Magnum load, though, it's not evident when being fired from my lightweight M&P 340 snub. On the other hand, it was one of the Magnum loads that didn't exhibit any signs of 'bullet pull' (crimp jumping during recoil) in my M&P 340, fired in my hands, when I did some testing for it. Probably feel a lot different when fired from a 4" 686.

I think I may have some remaining speedloaders also filled with Federal 125gr JHP's from my revolver days, as well as some boxes of W-W 145gr STHP, Rem 125gr SJHP and a little of the Federal 130gr HS.

I used up the Rem 125gr HPJ/BJHP (Golden Sabre) and Speer 125gr GDHP in my testing of my first M&P 340, and I'm in no particular hurry to replenish those rounds.

I haven't tried any of the new Speer Short Barrel .357 Magnum, but I've been using a lot of their 135gr .38 Spl +P in my snubs (as it's been an issued load off & on, when available).

Bottom line? Personally, I'd not be concerned to use any of the remaining Magnum loads I have on hand, and I've not been in any particular hurry to try and find further gel testing of those relatively 'proven' (in earlier LE service use) loads I have remaining.

I remember when we were told to stop using Magnum loads in our issued 686's back when the firing pin bushing & hammer nose revision program was in effect. We were restricted to only using whatever +P loads we could find/buy for duty. I carried either W-W 158gr LSWCHP +P or the older Federal Nyclad 158gr LSWCHP during that time, and I didn't lose that much sleep.

Thanks for feedback. It seems that those "in the know" agree that her current load is fine. Its very rare that specifics elude me on the "net", but so be it. If the experienced people on this board can't access it, then I probably don't need it.
For now I will be satisfied that she loves her wheel gun and is proficient. Our behavior is low risk, as well as our Community. In the seven years we have been here I can recall only one instance of gunfire in our usual haunts. Oddly, it was two Uzi toting out-of-town hoods passing through who chose out-of-town tourists to rob. One of the tourists was a female FBI agent, and one of the hoods wound up dead and the other captured.

 

[Hapworth]

...I would buy any SD round if I could see multiple (5+) rounds expand well consistently and penetrate 12 to 18 inches w/wo denim out of a 2.5 inch barrel.

There are several excellent, dependable currently available self-defense rounds I'd have no problem carrying (and do), but the one that to my research meets, exceeds or comes closest to satisfying your criteria is CorBon DPX.

Another member linked me to a clear gel manufacturers site that looks like the way to go for self testing.

Your own gel tests in the properly calibrated media, with the specific round from the specific lot carried, shot from the specific revolver carried, are ideal conditions for testing. Strongly suggested if it's something you're able to do. Throw a chronograph in while you're at it.