Author Topic: What's the point of the 357 max? (pic inside) (Read 5930 times)

Whiterabbitttttt · « **on:** September 04, 2012, 07:23:20 PM »

So, I've been loading and shooting my 357 max handi and loving it. Then a friend pointed out something rather obvious:

I am indicating the bottom of the bullet. Powder fill density is maybe 85%, very rough guess.

So, looking at a 357 mag case, it'll work. the powder fits, the bullet fits. I don't need a 357 max case? This load shoots a 250 grain bullet at 1700 fps Which I am sure is beyond "typical" 357 mag loads (that and the OA wouldnt fit an a typical cylinder, etc.

Anyways, if the load is the same, the question is why do I need the extra case tension on the bullet? Why can't I just load this in mag cases and move on with my life? What was the point of reaming to max, when all I needed was to get the throat out long enough to use the ultraheavy bullets and just keep using high energy slow pistol powder to get the same velocity?

cwlongshot · « **Reply #1 on:** September 04, 2012, 11:55:06 PM »

There was another post about this some time back...

That posters argument was if he seated a bullet to leave same powder "room" in the case he did not need the maxi case.

The difference is the mag was designed to run at a max pressure of 35k. While the Maxi was designed to run at 40K.

IMHO, it is a dangerous road to travel, should these loads end up out of your control. About four years ago now, I had a heart attack and this kinda changed my out look on some things. I have been a loader for many, many years. I have done such things as this. BUT I no longer do anything like this for fear of someone ending up with something I built and putting "faith" in the loading, simply because it was mine. Simply because they new me and "knew" I was a safe re-loader.

Thats just me, but I wanted to mention it, none of us will be here for ever. Our children and loved ones will likely end up with what ever we leave, be that good and bad.

CW

petemi · « **Reply #2 on:** September 05, 2012, 01:21:03 AM »

I agree with CW. There's lots of room in a .38 special case also to load a magnum load, but you'd be a fool to try it. If it were safe, the magnum case wouldn't exist.

Pete

twoshooter · « **Reply #3 on:** September 05, 2012, 02:05:57 AM »

I don't know that it would be that dangerous pressure wise, if you had new cases etc, but I would be concerned about the web and wall thickness of the case, and with the effective" shortened neck" , would it make for more run out and poor bullet alignment? I would think case life would be pretty short also.

cwlongshot · « **Reply #4 on:** September 05, 2012, 02:29:07 AM »

Quote from: twoshooter on September 05, 2012, 02:05:57 AM

I don't know that it would be that dangerous pressure wise, if you had new cases etc, but I would be concerned about the web and wall thickness of the case, and with the effective" shortened neck" , would it make for more run out and poor bullet alignment? I would think case life would be pretty short also.

I doubt you would see any problems with this in modern firearms. Also, under the control of the re loader as long as they have some common sence likley no problems at all would occur. BUT what if... Someone got there hands on such a load and tried it in a firearm that was not safe for such a load but was chambered for a 357 mag just as the case head and barrel are marked. Safe firearm instruction dictates only use ammo labled the same as the firearm. Someone could be hurt and that would be 100% on the reloader.

My constern is more of a what if senero. It's not a normal thought process for me and one I have only reciently even considered.

I look at it this way. What's gonna happen to your things should you be gone tomorrow? It's kinda like living in the now. Don't let the people in you life know how you feel about them. Don't leave possible problems for them should you be gone. I can almost gaurenty everyone of us has a life insurance policy or $$ set aside if the unfortunate should happen. This is exactly the same.

My opinion is load the 38 with in acceptable perameters. Want more? Load 357 magnum, still need more go Maximum. All within acceptable safe parameters.

I do not mean to push my beliefs on to others. Simply to offer an opinion as asked. Take it or leave it, it's free.

CW

Airsporter · « **Reply #5 on:** September 05, 2012, 03:27:34 AM »

Quote from: cwlongshot on September 05, 2012, 02:29:07 AM

My opinion is load the 38 with in acceptable perameters. Want more? Load 357 magnum, still need more go Maximum. All within acceptable safe parameters.

As someone who owns several 38/357 revolvers in addition to my 357 max handi, I couldn't agree more. I don't want to have to segregate "handgun" loads from "rifle" loads.

Gohon · « **Reply #6 on:** September 05, 2012, 04:31:53 AM »

I might be wrong but it would seem to me if the maximum powder load and bullet were moved over to the magnum case, even though they would fit, the pressure would exceed even the maximum safe level which is far beyond the safe magnum level. As noted in loading manuals, as the bullet weight increases the powder load decreases to maintain pressures. That extra air space in the maximum load probable keeps pressure below even max maximum levels and at the same time allows for a increase in powder in the maximum case for higher velocity and still at or below max maximum allowable pressure......just another reason for going to the maximum over the magnum. I think this is pretty much what CW was getting at and personally it sounds like a pretty dangerous game to play around with. Just my thoughts...........

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #7 on:** September 05, 2012, 05:02:09 AM »

I really don't know the ansewer but did own a contender in 357 max. I seldom loaded below max and most of the time max+ . Seldom set the bullet that far in the case couldn't most of the time. But if you are reasonable and not trying to gain more power to knock over rams at 200 meters you can use bulkier powders in the larger case. The pressure peaks change with case length changes and may be an advantage or not. Also the 357 max was used in revolvers and if I remember factory max ammo was faster than factory mag ammo with same bullet .
Now a question if you go to the trouble to rechamber to 357 max why shoot hand gun bullets ? I shot 35 rem bullets with points and boy they were an improvment !

Whiterabbitttttt · « **Reply #8 on:** September 05, 2012, 05:25:42 AM »

Quote from: SHOOTALL on September 05, 2012, 05:02:09 AM

Now a question if you go to the trouble to rechamber to 357 max why shoot hand gun bullets ? I shot 35 rem bullets with points and boy they were an improvment !

Take a look at the pic. 250 grain spitzer

CW, here's a dumb question for you, because your argument makes the most sense to me. Let's play a game of "what if". What if:

#1 These loads are 35ksi or lower.
#2 These loads have an OAL that won't fit in any revolver, and only fit in long throated (or maxi chamebered) rifles.

If those two what-ifs were met, do you believe your concerns would be alleviated?

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #9 on:** September 05, 2012, 05:33:28 AM »

well alrighty then !

YRUpunting? · « **Reply #10 on:** September 05, 2012, 06:22:19 AM »

So you're trying to shoot the largest bullet made for a 35 Whelen out of a 357 Maximum? Umm, Ok. Good luck!

Gohon · « **Reply #11 on:** September 05, 2012, 06:46:40 AM »

Unless I'm reading it wrong he wants to shoot the bullet out of a 357 magnum case. Shooting that bullet from a maximum case is no trick at all. One thing is for sure and that is at 1700 fps the load certainly exceeds magnum loads and most likely even maxi loads.

Whiterabbitttttt · « **Reply #12 on:** September 05, 2012, 08:46:25 AM »

before I get attacked for shooting over max loads, I hope I can address some of the scoffing here!
----
my powder charges are well under this information:

http://www.reloadammo.com/357max.htm

And it shows whatever it shows from the chrono. Coud be a bad chrono, could be a long throat, could be a long barrel, any number of reasons I measure 1700 fps. I worked up the load and the cases slip right out. So I hope we can move on from the idea that it's way beyond a max load!

-----
As for shooting rifle bullets, I'm still developing loads. But the 250's shoot much more accurately from the bench than 158's. Next will be to try the 190 grain ranch dog. So I have been getting good luck so far!
---------------

I am truly interested in CW's input on my previous question. Thanks for keeping me honest guys!

cjrjck · « **Reply #13 on:** September 05, 2012, 11:02:09 AM »

Are 357 Max cases really stronger than 357 Mag cases? Just curious. If so, I wonder what would be the outcome if you trimmed a Max case to the length of a Mag case and then loaded it to the same OAL with the same charge as you would with a Max case. Would your rifle even know the difference? I wonder. My 357 Handi will chamber my loads with the 180 grain LBT bullet barely in the case. I don't seat them there nor do I load them to Max levels but I guess it could be done if it were safe to do so and I really wanted to do it.

cwlongshot · « **Reply #14 on:** September 05, 2012, 11:08:23 AM »

Hello Whiterabbitttttt!

I would still be conserned as there are other firearms this loading may chamber in. But aside form that, yes that would remove most of the possible dangers one could for see.

As for loading over published maximums. I;ll offer this. Loading manuels are guides, they show what the author got under his conditions. They SHOULD be safe in all guns... But this is NOT always the case.
I personally have had a rifle that would smear the primer and leave a very hard bolt lift. That was with a factory loading from the same company.
On the other hand, my 30-30 load is four full grains + over published maximums.... Now this loading is one that I have used for over thirty five years.
Along these lines, something to remember, recipes/formulations in powder change. So anytime you get a new can of powder or primers its time to lower the charge and work back up.

When I first started proclaiming the 357 maxi here not many guys had used it yet. Our own Bill 9Mr Graybeard) warned me about my loadings based on the velocities I posted. They where accurate chronographed loads and where head and shoulders above what manuels showed as what the maxi "ran " at. He offered and was correct that I did not have pressure testing equiptment and I was treading in dangerous waters. I do not think he took into consideration my longer barrel and the fact that the maxi really comes into its own in a longer rifle tube. All data at that time was from pistol or contender barrels most a full 12" shorter then my H&R. Today, my loading is eclipsed by over two full grains! But I was getting pressure signes in my barrel at .5 grains higher then my loading...

If my post has kept your "eye" on what your doing, no matter what you decide to do I am happy. because "watching" may keep bad things away!

Good luck,
CW

Goatwhiskers · « **Reply #15 on:** September 05, 2012, 12:49:32 PM »

Whiterabbitttttt, FYI I have been using the RD359175 and RD359190 both GC and PP over heavy loads of A1680 with excellent results. This out of a 24" barrel, velocities running 21-2200. Goatwhiskers

gcrank1 · « **Reply #16 on:** September 05, 2012, 01:30:53 PM »

IIRC, Wayne Schwartz and Chas. Dell sectioned 357Mag and 357Max cases and found they measured the same. Anyone here can do the same. What they could not tell was if they were made of different cartridge brass, but from their extensive personal experience it seemed the same. That said, the brass is not the limiting factor, as it just holds the load within the real vessel, the chamber.
The pressure would be comparable using either if the load density were the same and the bullet base above the charge the same. The neck tension of a shorter/longer neck as variable would change it a bit, but not as much as how hard you might jam it into the rifling. Remember that many high pressure rifle cartridges use the long leade to soften pressure.
Now for all of that, if I had a 357Mag I surely would be working it out to my satisfaction before rechambering, all the while knowing that (at least for me) the greatest virtue of same would be for the improved throat condition.

gendoc · « **Reply #17 on:** September 05, 2012, 01:39:40 PM »

Quote from: gcrank1 on September 05, 2012, 01:30:53 PM

IIRC, Wayne Schwartz and Chas. Dell sectioned 357Mag and 357Max cases and found they measured the same. Anyone here can do the same. What they could not tell was if they were made of different cartridge brass, but from their extensive personal experience it seemed the same. That said, the brass is not the limiting factor, as it just holds the load within the real vessel, the chamber.
The pressure would be comparable using either if the load density were the same and the bullet base above the charge the same. The neck tension of a shorter/longer neck as variable would change it a bit, but not as much as how hard you might jam it into the rifling. Remember that many high pressure rifle cartridges use the long leade to soften pressure.
Now for all of that, if I had a 357Mag I surely would be working it out to my satisfaction before rechambering, all the while knowing that (at least for me) the greatest virtue of same would be for the improved throat condition.
'Course, I dont have one, havent had one and ain't done it, so what do I know......

very excellent reply gcrank !!! you got my vote because of fact... not speculation..........

gcrank1 · « **Reply #18 on:** September 05, 2012, 02:50:42 PM »

Thanx Doc,
I neglected to mention that those two gentlemen I mentioned were co-authors of that most excellent tome,'The Modern Schuetzen Rifle'. I learned a lot from it.
Charlie is, sadly, gone now; last I knew Wayne was still helping people find the truth of accuracy.

Shu · « **Reply #19 on:** September 06, 2012, 02:06:32 AM »

The point of the max is case capacity. There is no replacement for displacement. You can use slower powders to fill up that extra space. There is a point of diminishing returns. The longer barrel of a rifle will help to get the velocity up but there is a certain point where the powder will be to slow and velociy will drop off anyway.

Any way if I was shooting that heavy a bullet (250 gr) out of the 357 mag or max I would be looking for subsonic and not care about bullet expansion. A good 180 to 200 grain bullet out of the max andyou can approach 35 remmington territory.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #20 on:** September 06, 2012, 05:59:05 AM »

I don't think anyone has mentioned the fact that the GBO 357 Maxi reamers are PTG rifle reamers and cut a 6º leade into the rifling which can make a big difference is accuracy with any ammo length that's used in it, 38spcl, Mag, 360DW or Maxi.

If anyone has seen a 357Mag chamber cast, you'll see that the chamber is already much longer than needed for the Mag, many times long enough to chamber 360DW or Maxi brass with no or very little trimming.

Tim

(Read the review) http://www.midwayusa.com/product/734226/ptg-solid-pilot-chamber-finish-reamer-357-maximum

http://www.gboreloaded.com/forums/index.php/topic,125780.msg1098446320.html#msg1098446320

rdlange · « **Reply #21 on:** September 06, 2012, 06:35:35 AM »

Lots of good, rational info here. Objectively: Tim's response on better leade and accuracy was probably the best technical selling point for me.

Only, to me it's kinda like, what's the point of a 45-120 when you've got a good enough 45-70? Or why did I AI my Hornet or 30-30?

So honestly, I did mine to Maxi just because I could. It's unique and I like that. I got something exceptional, and I did it myself.

Bottom line, I got a gun that shoots better with an 'improved' cartridge, looks better because I thought it was special enough to put on a Buffalo Carbine stock and my best Leupold scope, and having/using it makes me feel better.

And this post has inspired me enough that, I'm leaving early to go to the range to shoot.

JMHO...

nanuk-O-dah-Nort · « **Reply #22 on:** October 06, 2012, 07:00:00 PM »

didn't Elmer Kieth (or some other ODG) who hotrodded the 38SP and that is why may bullets have two cannelures?

that ODG was getting near 357mag velocities in a suitable revolver....

keith44 · « **Reply #23 on:** October 06, 2012, 09:04:29 PM »

Elmer Keith developed HOT .44 special loads and the proceeded to persuade S&W and Remington to produce guns and ammo in 1958

jeepmann1948 · « **Reply #24 on:** October 07, 2012, 01:13:43 AM »

The Speer Number 10 manual lists a load for 180 grain flat point bullets for 357 mag.This was developed for T/C pistols and the OAL is too long for a revolver.I used this load for to knock down may steel targets. I loaded the bullets to touch the rifling with no crimp and H110 powder and mag primers .Being as how it was used only for target shooting I never chronographed the load, but it showed no signs of pressure or any problem whatsoever.Shooting from a 10" barrel the blast was definitely loud!. With a 14" barrel it was OK.I also used some 150 grain Remington spire pointed bullets when they made them with good results also, but alas they have been out of production for some time now.
Using proper safe loading procedures I personally see no problem loading the bullets long in a case. The finished product will be to long to go in a revolver cylinder,so anyone with more common sense than the average politician will not have a problem.
Benchrest shooters use the long seat method and shoot thousands of rounds as well. Many of their loads only use a bullet diameter of seating depth.
I will however stress the point of working up slow and carefully while developing the load for your rifle and use it only in the rifle it was worked up for.
Have fun and be safe
George

Airsporter · « **Reply #25 on:** October 07, 2012, 01:36:17 AM »

Quote from: nanuk-O-dah-Nort on October 06, 2012, 07:00:00 PM

didn't Elmer Kieth (or some other ODG) who hotrodded the 38SP and that is why may bullets have two cannelures?

that ODG was getting near 357mag velocities in a suitable revolver....

Yes, Keith did extensive experiments loading the 38 Special way beyond its original black powder pressure. A favorite of his was the then new S&W .38/.44 Military model (as they were originally called in 1929). The .44-size frame gave him a safe platform to work with. S&W came out with the first .357 Magnum in 1935 to compete with Colt's .38 Super.

glockky · « **Reply #26 on:** October 13, 2012, 05:41:53 PM »

Where are you all getting the pointed bullets. I see some said they were for 35 rem but all i am finding is .358 bullets.

Has anyone tried the pointed bullets in 360 DW brass?

quickdtoo · « **Reply #27 on:** October 13, 2012, 06:26:21 PM »

Hornady 180gr SSPB.

Tim

http://www.hornady.com/store/35-Cal-.358-180-gr-SP-Single-Shot-Pistol/

cwlongshot · « **Reply #28 on:** October 14, 2012, 02:08:05 AM »

Quote from: glockky on October 13, 2012, 05:41:53 PM

Where are you all getting the pointed bullets. I see some said they were for 35 rem but all i am finding is .358 bullets.

Has anyone tried the pointed bullets in 360 DW brass?

These bullets ARE .358 fired in a .357 Maxi. Its just fine, the .001 is already considered and is not a problem of any kind.
Tim leaves you a Hornady link, AND its also, all in the FAQ.s.

YES, some do just use Dan Wesson cases in a factory maxi chamber and use these bullets.

CW

YRUpunting? · « **Reply #29 on:** October 14, 2012, 02:59:38 AM »

Here's a link for the SSP that are blemished. Work fine if you don't crimp. Search "Blem" at MidSouth and you'll get all the blemished bullets.

http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/item.asp?sku=002853505B100