Need 357/44 B&D info

[Pantera Mike]

All,

I was fortunate enough to buy a Model 27 cylinder in 357/44 Bain and Davis from a fellow forum member yesterday, and soon will be buying a Model 27 to go with it. I have searched the internet and have found the various articles, as well as published load data from Hornady and Accurate Arms.

Now I am hoping to get real-world advice from those of you who load this esoteric and under-appreciated caliber. I thank you in advance for any words of wisdom you can share!

 

[Pantera Mike]

Apparently Bain & Davis used to issue their own load data, four pages worth. As they went out of business, it’s no longer available. Does anybody here have it?

 

[beagleye]

I would try posting this question on the reloading page.

 

[rockquarry]

Might be some limited information and load data in various editions of CARTRIDGES OF THE WORLD.

 

[M29since14]

Apparently Bain & Davis used to issue their own load data, four pages worth. As they went out of business, it’s no longer available. Does anybody here have it?

Mike, I have it somewhere. I will have to dig around to see if I can locate it. The data was not extensive but it did give some starting places. I doubt any of it was pressure tested but it’s been so long since I looked at it I can’t be sure. You might try contacting Lyman, Hornady, and Accurate. It seems to me at one time or another I have seen .357/44 B-D data from those three companies. It was probably Contender data, which I believe was usually reduced by 5-10% for revolvers. Whoever published the data will advise on that aspect. Hodgdon still lists some loads on their website using H4227 and H110. The data is still around. I will look for the original B-D info.

 

[Pantera Mike]

I would try posting this question on the reloading page.

Good advice—I have now done so.

I’m relatively new to the S&W forum and still wrapping my head around how specific the sub forums are. Struggling to avoid posting things in the wrong forums but the moderators are helping keep me straight in that regard.

Thanks!

 

[Pantera Mike]

I have a general question about headspacing and cartridge setback.

One of the knocks against the 357/44 B&D is that under certain circumstances the fired cases can be displaced rearwards in the cylinder and lock up the action as they are pressed hard against the face of the frame. Why does this happen and what can be done to prevent it?

When resizing the cases, where should the shoulder be? Broadly, there are three conditions. If there is negative headspace, the case could headspace on the shoulder, and the rim would not touch the back face of the cylinder. If headspace is neutral, the shoulder and the underside of the rim would both touch the respective parts of the cylinder at exactly the same time. If there was positive headspace, the case would index on the rim alone (as it does with all straight-sided cases) and the shoulder of the case would have some clearance with the shoulder of the chamber.

I presume the first condition is undesirable. But what is the ideal condition—neutral or positive headspace?

 

[29aholic]

You can help minimize set back by neck sizing only and make sure all traces of oil in the chamber and any case lube on the cases is cleaned before firing

 

[flash60601]

My experience from the 70's was that the cases tended to stretch between the rim and shoulder upon firing. The chamber pressure tended to push the case head as far back , and the shoulder as far forward as could be obtained in each individual chamber. Yes, there was some binding by those stretched cases. Extraction was occasionally a bit difficult, too.

Case life was not terribly long, and the dies we had in those days made forming and neck-reaming a bit of a chore.

To make one of these was my reason for buying the Model 28. The hassle firing my buddy's is the reason my 28 is still a virgin 357.

Flash

 

[Pantera Mike]

I wonder if case stretch can be helped by setting a particular headspace, or if it is simply the nature of the beast and there is no combating it?

This will be an interesting technical exercise, that’s for sure!

 

[Torf]

The Smith 27/28 is not the best revolver for this round. You will not get higher velocities than with 357mag loaded to the old pressure standard in the N-frame due to B&D setback.

A Ruger Blackhawk 357/9mm with the 9mm cylinder rechambered to 357/44B&D works much better.

The 357/44B&D died when the 357max was chambered in the Contender and RBH. 357max in Ruger Blackhawk and Dan Wesson is also much better than the 357/44B&D.

I started out in metallic silhouette with a 27-2 83/8" in 357/44B&D under local rules (not a production revolver) in the 70'ies. It did not work well and was soon replaced, at the time, with a 41mag 57 83/8".

 

[Narragansett]

Contact Lyman in Middlefield, CT. They used to publish loading data for this caliber. I know it was in an old manual I had

 

[Pantera Mike]

The Smith 27/28 is not the best revolver for this round. You will not get higher velocities than with 357mag loaded to the old pressure standard in the N-frame due to B&D setback.

A Ruger Blackhawk 357/9mm with the 9mm cylinder rechambered to 357/44B&D works much better.

Interesting. Why do think that is?

Thanks for your insights. Fortunately I’m not permanently modifying the gun, and instead fitting a spare cylinder. If it doesn’t work out, I can always switch back to 357 Magnum and have a lovely Model 27 to play with.

 

[Torf]

It's as simple as multiplying the pressure with the area on the base/bottom of the case = the force that "works" on the frame.

It's much easier to explain how this works out on a top break pistol like a Contender. The 223rem and 308win factory ammo is loaded to app the same pressure. A Contender will handle the 223rem without problem. If you make a 308win barrel to a Contender it will blow up. The only difference is how large the area on the base/bottom of the cases are that press against the frame.

In revolvers the RBH handle the 357/44B&D better simply because it's more rugged than the M27.

The Freedom Arms silhouette revolvers will handle any pressure until the 357mag case vaporizes. That's why there is no need for the 357max or any other trick 357 rounds any more in metallic silhouette for knocking over steel rams at 200m.

 

[Pantera Mike]

It's as simple as multiplying the pressure with the area on the base/bottom of the case = the force that "works" on the frame.

It's much easier to explain how this works out on a top break pistol like a Contender. The 223rem and 308win factory ammo is loaded to app the same pressure. A Contender will handle the 223rem without problem. If you make a 308win barrel to a Contender it will blow up. The only difference is how large the area on the base/bottom of the cases are that press against the frame.

I’m not arguing with you because I have no experience yet. I’m just trying to wrap my head around the situation.

Given that the B&D and the .44 Magnum use a case with the same area at the base/bottom, and the 44 Magnum is loaded to pressures as high or higher than the B&D, then by your reasoning shouldn’t .44 Magnums have the same setback issues?

I’m thinking that the shoulder of the bottleneck case is what’s responsible for the rearward movement of the case in the B&D. I accept the notion that the Ruger is a stronger platform than the S&W, but if one is loading to levels that are safe in the S&W, why would there be a greater propensity for setback in the S&W than in the Ruger with the same ammo?

Or did I misunderstand your point about Ruger vs S&W?

I am still waiting for dies and won’t be able to pick up the Model 27 until next month so it’s all theory for the time being. One of these days I will hopefully get the dies I paid for weeks ago, and then will load up a handful of rounds with increasing amounts of pizzazz and see what happens when the gun is released from the clutches of the 30-day 10-day California waiting period.

Stay tuned!

 

[Torf]

I forgot to mention that if the 357/44BD case streches too much it will make a constant press on the frame after fireing due to the bottleneck. This can/will prevent the cylinder from turning freely. You don't have this problem in a straight walled case.

Regarding the RBH. It was shot and tested side by side with the 27 at the time. It simply handled BD hot loads better.

Also, in a 27/357 vs 29/44mag loaded with hotter and hotter ammo with the same pressure in each step the 29 will fail first. That's why advanced custom gunsmiths don't bother to make 5 shot cylinders to the 29. A 5 shot cylinder will be capable of handling a much higher pressure than the 6 shot cylinder due to the placement of the locking slot. The 29 frame and internals will not handle max loads from a 5 shot cylinder. I'd still like to have one.

Ps: english is not my native language.

 

[tombstonegunsmith]

I was a gunsmith at Bain & Davis from 1978 until they went out of business last year. I also own all of the tooling necessary to perform the 357/44 B&D conversion. I agree with the comments made by 29aholic in regards to sizing and cleanliness of the chambers and cases.
Also, there is good loading data on page 205 in the 2nd edition of Modern Reloading by Richard Lee.

 

[Pantera Mike]

I was a gunsmith at Bain & Davis from 1978 until they went out of business last year. I also own all of the tooling necessary to perform the 357/44 B&D conversion. I agree with the comments made by 29aholic in regards to sizing and cleanliness of the chambers and cases.
Also, there is good loading data on page 205 in the 2nd edition of Modern Reloading by Richard Lee.

Aha! It sounds like you would be better positioned than anybody to address my specific questions above regarding setting up the dies to position the case shoulder properly with respect to the cylinder. I started a separate thread for load data, and have published everything I have come across. There is a lot of duplication (Lee simply publishes Hodgdon’s data for instance), and Hornady is an outlier with starting loads far lower, and max loads far higher than any other data.

Hornady (and others) used the T/C Contender for their test piece, so it stands to reason that it could tolerate much stouter loads than the S&W. The others seem to be conservative in deference to the supposed predisposition for case setback and cylinder lockup in the S&W. But since you literally made the things for years, I have to believe that you figured out how to make them work, while still offering an advantage over standard 357 Magnum. After all, if one is to load to 357 Magnum velocities, what is the point of the 357/44 at all?

I can’t imagine a way to neck-size only with conventional dies. Do you know of anybody making neck-size-only dies?

My Redding dies are enroute and I should have them by the weekend. Next week I will start experimenting with case forming, and would like to have a specific target in mind (i.e. indexing against the shoulder, the rim, or both?)

Thanks!

 

[tombstonegunsmith]

The reamers that we used were designed so that you would index off of the rim. Of course, the shoulder has to be set back a little.
Indexing off of the rim was used on all of the conversions we did including old and new SA Rugers, Redhawks, N frame S&W and single shot barrels. We also made several 1892 Winchesters in 357/44 B&D.

 

[Pantera Mike]

Ack.

After months of searching and waiting I finally picked up my 1967 Model 27-2 today. I went to install the B&D cylinder I had previously purchased, and it won’t fit! The design of the back of the cylinder where the hand turns it is different. The B&D cylinder protrudes more, so it is impossible to close.

Take a look at the photos below. The back of the 357 cylinder almost looks as though it has been machined. Did the cylinder design change between various iterations of the Model 27? What will be necessary to adapt my B&D cylinder to fit? I don’t want to modify the original 357 cylinder that came with the gun.

Any and all suggestions welcome. In the meantime I’m going to the range to shoot plain old 357, which is no bad thing!