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!

 

[steelslaver]

The 357 cylinder is recessed and the B&D is not. That is why the ratchet sticks out farther on the B&D. But that is not the problem. I suspect the yoke tube on your gun is a bit to long for your B&D cylinder. Cylinders sometime just fit, but often do not and require some adjustment.

With the yoke removed from frame does the B&D cylinder, with extractor rod and star, fit between recoil shield and barrel? If so how much clearance between barrel and cylinder face?

You need a good revolver smith. It is possible that things can be adjusted so both cylinders work, but it is possible that you may have to chose only one.

 

[Pantera Mike]

Ah, excellent suggestion, thanks!

First, I shot the Model 27 for the first time today with stout 357 SWC handloads and found it to be a dream shooter. Really nice gun.

I just now followed your suggestion. The later B&D cylinder will fit with the yoke removed, and locks up and functions perfectly. The cylinder to barrel gap is ever so slightly less than the original cylinder. (See photo).

It's possible that the front center of the B&D cylinder, where it rests against the yoke, needs to be shortened ever so slightly. This would allow the cylinder to move just a hair forward on the yoke. Although upon further inspection, it seems the forward movement of the cylinder on the yoke is controlled internally, where either the front or the tapered shoulder of the yoke touches the cylinder. Since I don't want to modify the gun at all, this would suggest that the indexing point on the inside of the cylinder needs to be moved rearwards a hair.

Gunsmith, here I come!

 

[shouldazagged]

Ps: english is not my native language.

I would never have guessed. You write it perfectly.

 

[steelslaver]

That could be done using a special reamer. Another method is to shorten the yoke tube, but the end must be kept square. Plus, if tube is shortened shims must be placed in original 357 cylinder to make up for the length and make function correctly. The little tube sticking out of the front center of the cylinder is the gas ring and while it is possible it might be riding on the raise area of yoke, but actually it should not. There should be a tiny space between it and the raise part of yoke right in front of it.

Unless you are good with tools and willing to do some studying by reading something like Kuhnhausen's Shop Manual, I suggest you have the cylinder fit by a revolver smith. Besides the fit into the frame and barrel to cylinder gap, headspace should be checked along with timing. I have learned a lot by doing things myself, but. I have also made some mistakes. I should have read more at first.

I have thought of a 357 B&D and might make one some time. I have several shooter model 28s. I have a 22 Jet and a 22 Kay Chuck, Would like to make a hot rod 30 caliber bottle neck N frame. But, reality is I can easily beat a 357 B&D by simply using my 41 Mag or a 44 mag with light bullets.

 

[Pantera Mike]

Thanks—I will be bringing it to a gunsmith in the upcoming weeks.

The point of this project is to do something fun and different. It remains to be seen how successful it will be. It has the potential to be extremely speedy, not to mention flat-shooting compared to a 44 or a conventional 357 Magnum.

IF it works...which is by no means a foregone conclusion.

 

[steelslaver]

Oh, I get the just interesting thing to do part for sure. LOL,

If I could get my hands on a blank N frame cylinder I would ream it drill and ream it to take a shortened 30-30 case with a blown out body and a 30 caliber bullet. A slightly shorter version of the 30 Herret that OAL fits a 44 mag length cylinder.

 

[Pantera Mike]

Okay, three steps forward, two steps back. After buying a new (used) yoke and yoke retention screw and having my gunsmith fit them, the gun seemed to mechanically function perfectly.

Until I got home and attempted to chamber rounds.

It seems the recoil shield is a little further forward on the right side of the frame than the left side. All rounds easily drop into the cylinder, but as the cylinder turns, they drag badly on the right side, to the point of virtually locking the gun up. This is before even firing, mind you.

Some of my newly formed (empty) brass seems to work fine, while others drag. I cut down an old 44 Special case andnthat one has no issues at all.

I suppose it may be possible that the case shoulder is too far forward (even though the Redding sizer die was kissing the shellplate pretty hard), and the case rim isn't indexing properly on the back face of the cylinder. It's also possible that primers are sitting ever so slightly proud of the back of the cases. But the problem is clearly limited to only the right side of the gun. My feeler gauges tell me clearance between the back of the cylinder and the recoil shield is .068" at the top left (and much more at bottom left) but only .064" at top and bottom right.

I was fortunate to be able to buy a second set of dies (RCBS this time) so I will re-re-form some cases and literally give it another whirl.

If it becomes a consistent problem, I may have to have the back of the recoil shield clearanced somewhat.

Stay tuned.....

 

[Pantera Mike]

Good news. My new (used) RCBS sizer die is noticeably smaller than the Redding die. Cases which were already resized in the Redding die passed again through the Redding die with almost no resistance, but then took noticeable additional effort to run through the RCBS die. Once passed through the RCBS sizer, they then dropped easily into the cylinder, and the cylinder rotates freely, as it should. I suspect the RCBS die bumped the shoulder down a bit, enabling the cases to fit in the cylinder properly.

I'm in business. Hoping to do some test firing with chronograph on Friday....

 

[Pantera Mike]

...and we're back.

I'm happy to report my first range trip with my 357/44 B&D Model 27 was an unqualified success!

It was the first time I ever played with a chronograph. I was therefore not so concerned with pinpoint accuracy as I was with load functioning, and not blowing my new chronograph to smithereens.

I used the Hornady data (published in my other thread on 357/44 load data) with the expectation that I would not get to go all the way up to their max load, since their data was tested in and intended for the T/C Contender. I was using new Midway cases, WLP primers and WW-296 powder, with Hornady 158gr XTP bullets, and my Model 27 has a 6.5-inch barrel. The average velocity for five-shot strings was:

20.0 — 1469
20.5 — 1485
21.0 — 1472
21.5 — 1546
22.0 — 1552
22.5 — 1585

I started getting adverse pressure indications at 22.5, in the form of slightly flattened primers and difficult case extraction, so I stopped there although I had loaded rounds through 24.0 (24.9 was max published).

It is very fun to shoot, although one could make the case that similar results could be achieved more easily by simply ignoring published 357 Magnum data and overloading those cases, to bring them up to 1935-era pressures and performance. I suspect if you were to find a box of 357 Magnum factory ammo from the late 1930s it would deliver similar performance to the B&D, but these days the cartridge has been downloaded due to the preponderance of revolvers having smaller, lighter frames. The max load for 357 Magnum using 296 in the Hornady book is 1250 FPS.

Now that I know where the limits are, I will likely brew up a few batches of 21.5 and 22.0 and shoot for accuracy next time. I have a feeling it will be very effective.

Thanks to all who offered words of wisdom. I heard privately from several people who said they had B&D revolvers (or cylinders) gathering dust in the back of their gun safes. I hope this inspires you to get them out and enjoy them!

As an aside, I was also shooting 357 Auto Mag with the same bullets and almost the same loads, with both 6.5 and 8.5-inch barrels. Here are those results:

6.5-inch:

21.5 — 1632
22.0 — 1631
22.5 — 1686

8.5-inch:

22.0 — 1770
22.5 — 1788

The Auto Mag gets about 75-100 FPS more with the same load and barrel length, likely due to the lack of the barrel/chamber gap. Barrel length is slightly misleading because automatic barrels include the chamber as part of the barrel length. So the 6.5 inch auto barrel is really more like 5 inches of actual barrel.

Fun stuff!

 

[steelslaver]

Glad you got it running and are having fun with it. Be interesting to see what kind of velocities you get from the same frame and barrel shooting the same bullet from 357 mag cases, running the original cylinder.

Just how much was gained by the Bain and Davis