Mid-Range 110 and 125 gr .357 Mag suitability for '80's K-frames?

[.455_Hunter]

I understand there is a school of concern with using the hot 125 gr .357 Mag loadings at ~580 fpe in K-frames with the flat on the bottom of the barrel extension, like a 66-2 snub.

What about the various 110 and 125 gr "Mid-Range" loadings at ~400 fpe, such as the 110 gr WWB and Rem SJHP or 125 gr Rem Golden Saber and Win Defender?

Thanks!

 

[JohnRippert]

Even hot loads with smaller bullets are not a problem if used sparingly. I expect that mid range loads like you are talking about would be fine if used in moderation.

 

[cmj8591]

You should be able to give your 80's K a steady diet of those mid range loads. Back in the day, those 125, 357 loads were at the top of the pressure apex. These days the factory 357's have been throttled back and use powder that doesn't burn quite as hot and shoot red hot particles out of the B/C gap but I still wouldn't subject my 80's gun to a steady diet of them.

 

[stansdds]

The issue was primarily the 125 grain full power load, but full power 110 grain ammo could also cause significant erosion of the forcing cone and crack the forcing cone along the thin spot at the bottom of the forcing cone. Reduced power loads are not going to be using the very slow burning ball powder that is used in the full power loads, so any reduced power 357 Magnum load should be fine as would any 38 Special +P load.

 

[.455_Hunter]

What was the "full-power" 110 gr loading? All of the FedRemWin products of that grain weight I have ever seen were at the reduced level.

 

[H Richard]

On any of the Prior to 2000 K or J Frame guns I wouldn't use anything lighter than 140 gr. to avoid frame cutting.

 

[cmj8591]

What was the "full-power" 110 gr loading? All of the FedRemWin products of that grain weight I have ever seen were at the reduced level.

They used to advertise the 110g load at about 1500fps. The regular l110 oad now is advertised at about 1300. I think it's a combination of lightening up to keep it from beating up guns and the availability of consumer chronographs keeping them honest.

 

[Rpg]

I suspect that any 357 mag loads at 38+p performance levels will be just fine.

 

[.455_Hunter]

I suspect that any 357 mag loads at 38+p performance levels will be just fine.

The factory .357 mid-range loads indicated are 100-150 fpe higher than normal .38 Special +P loads.

 

[Alk8944]

Apparently you are asking about moderate loads. Wrong You are using the wrong terminology.

When a cartridge is referred to as "Mid Range" it is referring to distance. At the time the term was originated it referred to mid-range bullseye target shooting, 25 yards. This was opposed to Long Range, which at the time for target shooting referred to 50 yards. Most frequently mid range ammunition referred to loads specifically intended for 25 yard bullseye competition, the .38 Special 148 grain wad-cutter loads. Ammunition for 50 yard shooting was considered as full power, or normal loads at the time.

 

[.455_Hunter]

Apparently you are asking about moderate loads. Wrong You are using the wrong terminology.

When a cartridge is referred to as "Mid Range" it is referring to distance. At the time the term was originated it referred to mid-range bullseye target shooting, 25 yards. This was opposed to Long Range, which at the time for target shooting referred to 50 yards. Most frequently mid range ammunition referred to loads specifically intended for 25 yard bullseye competition, the .38 Special 148 grain wad-cutter loads. Ammunition for 50 yard shooting was considered as full power, or normal loads at the time.

Actually, your use of "mid-range" for the target shooting community is correct, and my utilization of the term for less than full-power .357 loads is also in common usage. Take, for example, the commentary by the late Stephen Camp...

hi-powers--handguns: Can Less be More? A Look at .357 Mid-range Magnums

or the fact that Remington specifically called their lower performance .357, .41 and .44 Magnum loadings "mid-range" in the 70's, 80's and 90's ammo catalogs and box labels.

 

[66L72]

I have a 66-2 3 inch K Frame. I recently bought and used Sig Sauer .357 Mag ammo in it. 125 grain FMJ. Advertised 1450 ft/sec at the muzzle and 584 ft-lbs.

Am I good to keep using in limited quantities or should I stop using to avoid beating up the gun and cracking the forcing cone?

Thanks

Pat

 

[DanGee]

I have a pre-M&P from 1902 that has a milled space in the top strap in line with the barrel-cylinder gap. I wonder why that wasn't carried over to more recently built guns as it seems to prevent the flame cutting associated with high pressure loads.

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

I have a 66-2 3 inch K Frame. I recently bought and used Sig Sauer .357 Mag ammo in it. 125 grain FMJ. Advertised 1450 ft/sec at the muzzle and 584 ft-lbs.

Pat, why FMJ and not JHP?

You are good to go, unless you planning on shooting 1000s of 357 Magnum.

 

[stansdds]

I have a 66-2 3 inch K Frame. I recently bought and used Sig Sauer .357 Mag ammo in it. 125 grain FMJ. Advertised 1450 ft/sec at the muzzle and 584 ft-lbs.

Am I good to keep using in limited quantities or should I stop using to avoid beating up the gun and cracking the forcing cone?

Thanks

Pat

A 125 grain bullet at 1450 fps is a full power load. I'd be careful using it in a model 66-2.

 

[66L72]

Thanks Stansdds. The last thing I want is to crack the forcing cone on it. I think I will play it safe and go with .38+P rounds.

Pat

 

[stansdds]

Thanks Stansdds. The last thing I want is to crack the forcing cone on it. I think I will play it safe and go with .38+P rounds.

Pat

38 Special +P certainly will do no damage at all. For magnum ammo, 158 grain full power is ok as are reduced power 110 and 125 grain loads. For reduced power 110 grain loads, the velocity should be around 1300 fps, 125 grain loads should be around 1200 fps, both measured from a 4 inch barrel.

 

[rockquarry]

The light bullets have comparatively poor ballistic coefficients and sectional densities in comparison with more practical and effective bullets. Unless they provide an incredible increase in accuracy (doubtful), it's hard to see what advantage the light bullets would have over the 158 grain bullets the cartridge was designed for.

You can load the heavy bullets up and and down just like the light ones. You can use 158 jacketed bullets as well, but these offer no benefit over the right cast bullet for the load.

 

[mike campbell]

If you've never shot a 110/125 JHP at 1400+fps into a gallon milk jug full of water at 25yds ... you haven't experienced "magnum" fun. For added attraction put some food coloring in them and shoot them on snow.

Heavy cast bullets are for destroying cinder blocks ...another form of magnum fun.

I can't think of any reason to own my magnums except to have magnum fun. I haven't worn one out in the last 50 years. if I did, I'd buy another or two.

 

[Model19man]

If you've never shot a 110/125 JHP at 1400+fps into a gallon milk jug full of water at 25yds ... you haven't experienced "magnum" fun. For added attraction put some food coloring in them and shoot them on snow.

Heavy cast bullets are for destroying cinder blocks ...another form of magnum fun.

I can't think of any reason to own my magnums except to have magnum fun. I haven't worn one out in the last 50 years. if I did, I'd buy another or two.

Agree. I think "internet experts" have promulgated this story. I bought a model 19-5 around 1983 and proceeded to put thousands of 110 grain and 125 grain handloads through it propelled by Elmer Kieth memorial loads of W296 or 2400. It eventually wore the nickel plating away on the top strap but never did it crack a forcing cone.