358 200 FNGC

[AtlLaw]

I've been doing a lot of thinking about deer vs a 357 Mag from a carbine barrel.  All the positive opinions I've read aside, I still have reservations about the 357 Mag being "enough gun."

Then I read an article in the February issue of "Handloader" about heavy bullets in a 357 Mag Revolver.  It spoke in very positive terms about your 358 200 FNGC bullet in the two areas involved; penetration and wound channel.  The bullet looks like a WFN with 2 crimping grooves and he said it weighed 195 gr. cast from WW's.

This sounds like a great bullet for my 35's: Max, Win, Rem & Whelen and the author, John Haviland, said you designed it for 358 caliber rifles.  But my question is, if this bullet is loaded in a 357 Mag case, will the OAL of the cartridge allow it to cycle through the action of a M73 or M92 clone?

The question arises because Haviland loaded his rounds to an OAL of 1.62 in. and I believe the SAMMI max OAL for the 357 Mag is 1.590.  This concerns me as I have found that these lever guns can get a little finicky when the cartridge OAL approaches Max.

Thanks Veral!

[Mikey]

AtLaw:  I am not responding to your post for anyone but myself, but having used the 200 gn bullet in my Rossi M92 I can tell you it sort of makes the 357 a real 357.  I too read that article in the Handloader Magazine - got it right in front of me and as you may recall I have long used the heavy 200 gn swc slug in both my 38 spls and the 357. 
 
I have a friend (really) who send me some of the LBT in 200 gn sized to .358 and I was impressed.  I liked the way it looked and it just seemed like a much stouter slug than the Keith, althought the later has never failed me.  I compared the accuracy of the LBT to the  Keith style swc in 200 gn, also sized to 358.  Accuracy was comparable, and excellent with both slugs in a open sighted carbine  - almost the same, from the longer barrelled carbine with open Buckhorn sights.  The LBT slug has a wider metplat than the Keith and whether you believe the driving band on the Keith syle gives the slug a full-bore wound creating capability or not, either slug is gonna wallop the everluvin' snot outta the first Whitetail it connects with.  The Keith slug left the old familiar 'square hole' in the target while the LBT hole, seemed almost like a jacketed slug hole, ragged not clean but with a clearly defined hole. And even though the LBT slug  is meant for the heavier rifle cartridges you will want it to shoot through without deformation and that will aid the 357 on Whitetail and hog, too. That's the main reason I use these heavy slugs in both the 38 and 357, to shoot through and not deform.
 
As for overall cartridge length - your 73 and 92 are levers and regardless of book oal you are going to have to find the happy medium that allows the cartdridge to cycle unimpaired through the action  and chambers without extra pressure closing the lever.  I forget exactly but my Rossi 92 will cycle and chamber the 357 loaded with the Keith to the front leading band - case mouth crimped slightly over that front band.  I don't recall how deeply I seated the LBT slug but again, they were comparable and cycled cleanly.
 
As for power - well, from the carbine, either slug over 12.4 of WW296 (factory load) shot through a 10" chunk of pine trunk out to 25m - I wouldn't worry about a Whitetail..  Something else - the article specified 13 gns of H110 under the LBT slug but the velocities from the 6" bbl were just about what I get with only 12.4 gns of the identical powder - I wonder if overcharging with that powder resulted in unburned powder that cost velocity or if the cylinder/barrel gap on the test revolver was large.  I also noted that on the LBT bullet, the full bore diameter goes up past the top crimping groove, which may help when seating the bullet for problem free functioning in the carbine.
 
One other thing you may enjoy about those 357 carbines and heavy slugs is that you can use the same slugs in the 38 case, loaded as long as you want to and in my Rossi92 they are slicker'n stuff and very accurate.  You can have a lot of fun with those..  Hope this helps. 

[Veral]

The 200 gr FN is heavier than optimum weight for 357 mag, whether rifle or revolver .  This in my personal opinion based on many kills by myself, my wife and as reported by customers over the 35 years I've been making molds.  I consider a 180 gran as optimum, because, with both weights loaded to full potential,the 180 gr creats a much larger wound than 200 grains, due to higher velocity potential.

  As for penetration concerns.  The deepest I've been able track a 180 gr FN was through an elk shot quartering from the rear of the ribs, exiting west of thr throat and east of the shoulder muscles.  As it exited, after 30 inches of penetration it was still ripping a one inch diameter wound.  This from a Marlin carbine which starts it at 1800 fps.  The elk walked about 30 yards and folded, dead as a rock by time I got there, any as I recall I shot from about 75 yards.

  The one inch exit wound indicates that the bullet was still moving faster than a revolver will push a 200 grain, which is in the vicenity of 1000 fps.  At that speed the wound diameter will be less than an inch.

  In 34 years of production no one has reported recovering one from game and there have been thousands of deer, hogs, bear and elk taken with the 180 gr.  I would personally feel completely comfortable carrying the 357 carbine in big bear country as a defense gun when loaded with the 180 FN.  I'd be less comfortable with a 200 gr in rifle or revolver, and with either firearm more comfortable with a 160 gr FN than a 200 grain.   

   I DEFINATELY would not use any jacketed bullet, nor any SWC for hunting, whether I made the mold or some other company, and keep in mind that I can make a variety of SWC styles as easily as I can cut the LBT designs.    I've discussed the issue of meplat doing all the work with a hard cast bullet, many times on this forum, and in great technical detail in my Book Jacketed Performance with Cast Bullets.   I have proven without question by anyone who does a little testing that the meplate along does all the work in live targets,

  I suppose that if all the animals my wife and I have killed with the 357 Marlin Carbine were in the box of a full size pickup it would be close to level full.   Almost all of them dropped in their tracks but a very few walked a few steps, slowly,  Not one has run away.

  To come closeat to that performance with a revolver on deer, most hogs, and smaller game, I'd recommend the 160 gr FN, with gas check, loaded hot.  (The gas check increases velocity a good 50 fps, and LBT bullet lube adds about the same compared to any other cast bullet lube that I know of.  This with equal ressure loads..

[cwlongshot]

Hello Richard,
 Now that Veral has answered, I will add my two cents. 

I have much experience with the 35 calibers myself, I have quite a few whitetails and couple pigs with the Mag and even more with the maxi. I think you have probably read my posts on the subject before.

Its always been my opinion that the 180 is too much for the magnum, even in a rifle. Its good in the Maxi tho! I feel much like what Veral has stated that the cases simply don't have the HP to use them on game. Targets, sure! I have shot some of the FTX 200g bullets into some real small groups!!!

Here is whats going on, the magnum can get good weight bullets to respectable velocities and caries a substantial diameter to be a good efficient killer. The trouble is the bullet. Unlike bigger cases you simply have a smaller range of operation. Going too light gets the vel up, but lacks the weight to have energy to carry to ranges needed. In the Magnum, form a handgun I really like the 140g HP Speer bullet. I have had a couple bang flops from my 8'' Colt. But the first deer I shot with one in my Marlin, needed a couple bullets and the first one was placed behind the shoulder. The extra 3-400 fps out of the non vented 18.5'' barrel, was out of the design range for the bullet. I switched to the 158HP and still had some issues, I went to the Remmy 158SP loads and wow I had ''real'' rifle performance. About that time Hornady brought out the XTP line of bullets. I tired the 158 FP XTP as soon as I discovered them. These where even better! They are my #1 choice and recommendation to anyone looking for a 357 Magnum bullet for hunting.

The 357Magnum in a rifle is every bit the 30-30 rifle with 150g bullets. The 30-30 advertises 2400fps, usually rated form a 24'' barrel. In reality, it RARELY achieves 2200fps from a 20'' barrel. The 357 Mag with factory loads will get you to about 1850-1900fps with a 158g bullet. But handloaded, the 158gr bullet exceeds 2100fps. Hornady rates the 158FP to 1850+ fps. I have used it in the mag and maxi for velocities exceeding 2500fps with excellent success.

So as for your concerns, would you think twice about choosing the 30-30 W/150g bullets? Then consider that the magnum will equal it all with a larger and better killing 35 cal bullet, that's a known good performer. The mag is a good bet for jawa critters, if your accurate and you limit your range to under 150-130 yards.

I am also a big fan of the WNF bullets. YES, yes they surely do increase the lethality of a given caliber. A WFN design will make for a shorter bullet, this is good as you don't loose as much powder cap. Most of my mag loadings are not 100% density so its different than a more conventional ''rifle'' caliber. Also I don't think anyone is saying that the 200g WON'T work, there is just better choices.

I feel a 160G WFN GC is a better choice than both the 200 OR 180 WFN in a 357Magnum carbine. This is based on hunting performance experienced on Deer and Hogs over the last thirty years. Not that our deer are any ''tougher'' than yours, but they average a good site larger.

Good luck Richard!

CW

[Veral]

Regardless of what Richard has to say, I'm dead against jacketed in a 357 mag carbine.  The reasona are that I've never been able to set the speed up as high as LBT lead of equal weight, thus power is down, but also because I drilled an elk avout four inches behind the shoulder with a clasic broadside shot at about 40 yards.   I could see the bullet hole when it hit.  The elk went into a lope abd awag with the group it was in.

  Take my advise.  Pistol bullets ARE NOT FOR RIFLE SPEEDS!  Neither will any expanding bullet kill and penetrate deep like I'm telling you about.  The power to push an expanded bullet deep and WOUND DEEP just isn't there  To make the 35 carbines into a BIG performer, the bullet MUST be a wide nose solid, and lead, gas checked, wearing LBT bullet lube to get the horses up.   In the 357 mag we have a minimum cartridge  which DEMANDS an optimum performance bullet in every respect to be turned into a deadly big game rifle.  The LBT 180 gr FN gas checked with LBT lube is mandatory to deliver what I'm talking about.

As for a 150-160 grain.  They fly fast but will not shoot with as graceful trajectory as a 180 gr.   And a 140 gr from a carbine isn't asccurate enough and is worse in the trajectory department at long range. 150-160 is reat for ranges to about 150 yards on deer size, but the 180 is quite eazy to hit with precision out to a solid  200 yards with enough power remaining to anchor an elk ar anything smaller quickly at that range.

  I've paid the price to be dead sure of wyat I'm saying here..

[cwlongshot]

I was on a train of thought and was a little derailed with my wife coming home...

I wanted to continue with the jacketed bullets paragraph. I have always strongly advised against the use of any HP (XTP OK if heavy) for use on big game. The SP bullets of 158 have offered very good performance for me on our deer. Another very good choice is the newer Speer GD now called deep curl 170SP bullet. It has a WFN profile and good construction the GD/DC line if known for. I have not shot many deer with it, maybe 6 so, but very good performance and never recovered one bullet. Always saw quarter sized exits.

Again, I like the 180 range form my Maxi, but prefer the 158/160 from my magnums. That Speer Deep Curl 170 FP, just might be the exception.

Veral is ''the man'' when it comes to lead bullets. Also, I have used far less of them than jacketed in these little 35's. I use them allot more in my 45 Colt.   But I find a better balance of vel/energy/performance backing off that 20 grains of projectile weight. I have yet to recover a 158FP XTP, I have yet to see evidence of one coming apart. Contrarily, I have yet to see ANY .357 HP bullet under 158g STAY together and or completely penetrate one of our deer. Those 140 Speers that worked so well at 1300fps form my revolver BARELY made it into the chest cavity!!! The 158 HP made it in and sometimes produced quick kills, but never exited intact. I like thru and thru and I require my hunting bullets to stay together. I shoot bones with firearms, my shots are inside 150 yards. MANY times a quarter of that distance. Others gauge lethality differently and your results may vary.

CW

[Veral]

  The jacleted bullet information is quite interesting and worth knowing for a knowledgsble hunter, but notice that CW said from a revolver some jAcketed didn't penetrate, or kill welll.  Exactly me reason for being a bit salty  in my response.  But also I don't appreciate it when anyone writes the answer book before I have a chance to answer a question which is asked to me.  I have a very effective delete button which I'm not hesitant to use for such but I COULD read experiance in CW's writing.  But experiance which should be read by the majority of our popultion who can't sort out exactly has been said.

  Flatnosed bullets which do not expand at all deliver their energy with stunning efficiency, turning in penetration combned with  very effective wounding beyond imagination.  I would have no problem with 140 grain cast (LBT FN)  in a revolver running fast, for deer, but would warn that care should be taken to avoid hitting the shoulder joint intentionally.  It will stop a bullet that light, a 160 gr will break it and keep doing damage, while an elk shoulder joint will probably soak up it's effectiveness.   But we are bpimcomg bacl tp revp;ver [erfpr,amce amd tjos [pst os about carbines.

   A 180 gr stsrted at 1800 fps will tear up an elk shoulder joint and still put the kill into the chest cacity.  And though bullets as light as 140 gr can shoot quite accurate in a 357 revolver,  with the huge throats in the carbines, accuracy falls off with bullets as light as 160 fr.  180 gr will print pretty groups at 100 yards.

  If the US hunting world could try the 357 carbines for deer, USING CAST PER MY RECOMMENDATIONS, manufactures wouldn't be able to keep up with demand for the guns, but as long as hunters mess with jacketed pistol bullets in carbines, they will never earn the name they deserve.     

  The 357 magnum Marlin is my wifes favorite big game rifle.  I watched her pop a coyote running full out at about 200 yards, almost straight away.  She doesn't comprehend leade or drop, but just held on his butt ans squeezed off.  The coyote immediately rolled into a ball, and rolled head over tail like a wheel for about 20 feet, straightened out and skidded for anothet 10 or fitteen feet, and stopped stone dead.  The bullet hit a rear cheek and traveled through to exit just behnd the off shoulder.   So the 180 FN started at 1800 fps shoots flat enough for a lady who doesn't comprehend drop out to 200 yards..  When we go ahunting she looks down at the gun or guns laying on the seat, and asks if this is the quiet gun.   Thats what she calls it.  When she points it at an elk or deer, and drops the hammer, I pull my skinnnig knife and go out to the task at hand.  There has been no tracking, yet.  Most animals die without moving their feet.    But did I mention.  DO NOT EXPECT TO GET DINNER WITH JACKETED. 

  But I don't want to deceive anyone.  If 30 years of using the gun on hundreds if animals isn't enough experiance for you to trust, you  might want to seek further advice.

[Mikey]

Veral:  you said - "Exactly me reason for being a bit salty  in my response.  But also I don't appreciate it when anyone writes the answer book before I have a chance to answer a question which is asked to me".   I think you may have directed this statement to me, and I apologize for jumping in with information I felt was appropriate to Richard's question; but since reading your response I am questioning my advise about the overall application of the 200 gn bullet in the 357 magnum.
[/size]
[/size]When I went to the 200 gn slug it was during the metallic silhouette days with targets to 200 yds because the 158 gn cast slugs from 4" 357 revolvers did not always hit hard enough to topple the ram.  The 200 gn slug had the carry to knock the ram over.  With the exception of another Keith design at 168 gns, there wasn't anything most of us knew about that would do the job for us.  Your development and testing of your 180 gn LBT design changed all that and now those of us who prefer shorter barreled 357 revolvers and 357 carbines have a better bullet to use, thanks to you and thank you for all your effort.  Now, if we only knew what powder charges will get this bullet to perform as you indicate it has we would really be in fat city. 
[/size]
[/size]I would also like to ask which particular slug you might recommend for a 4" 44 magnum as I am now wondering if one of your designs in a 270-280 gn range would be a better bullet to use in a shorter barreled revolver than a 240-245 or a 300 gn.  I'm thinking that your findings on the 200 gn bullet performance in the 357 may also apply to the 300 gn slug in the 44.  I would appreciate your response and I would also appreciate your accepting my apology for jumping in when I shouldn't have.  Mikey.

[AtlLaw]

Thank you all!
 
It sounds like that 180 gr 358 RNFP will be just the ticket for all my 35 caliber needs!      Rifle and handgun!!   

[YRUpunting?]

Thank you all!
 
It sounds like that 180 gr 358 RNFP will be just the ticket for all my 35 caliber needs!      Rifle and handgun!!   

Not to hijack the thread, but I've been looking at the exact same issue for my 357 Maxi Handi and 357 Mag revolver.  Would the LFN mold be a consideration too?  It looks like the old Lyman mold the was discontinued in the 90's as I recall.

[TommyD]

How fast do we really need to drive this bullet for deer and other medium size game?


Using Verals 180 FNGC and LBT soft blue lube and staying within Lyman published data for H110 gave me about 1580 fps over my chronograph with no signs of excessive pressure in my Ruger 77/357. Using Veral's displacement velocity formula I calculate a number of 106.


Marshall Stanton of Beartooth Bullets has published a load of H110 a full 2 grains heavier than Lyman's for use with his 185 grain FNGC. (http://www.loadswap.com/comments.php?table=Handgun_Data&id=3)


How fast do I need to drive it?


I've taken 4 deer with 45 cal pistol bullets and 6 with a 308 Winchester. Results were similar. Half dropped on the spot and half ran between 10 and 50 yards across an open field before giving up the ghost. All were double lung hits with large entrance and exit wounds.


What can expect from this 180 grain 357 mag bullet with similar shot placement? Is 1580 fps with a DV of 106 going to do the trick? Veral, you mentioned pushing it as fast as 1800 to break the shoulder bone of an elk and still reach the vitals. Sadly, we don't have any elk in western New York. The biggest things I'm likely to shoot are whitetail deer or perhaps a coyote.


Do I need to do further load development or am I good to go for a 100 yard deer?


Tom

[Veral]

A DV pf 100 will knock a deer on it's fanny immediately with most hits.  I'd say you are at the limit for a 300 grain bullet, which in my opinion is overweight for optimum killing punch with a 357 magnum. 

I was talking about a 180 gr FN when I mentioned 1800 fps.  That's my choice, and we've piled up a stack of game with it.

[cjensen]

I made my decision on this in August. Ordered a .360 180grn GC FN 4 cavity
and a .454 250grn OWG 4 cavity. They arrived and I am ready to sit down and make a big pile of bullets.
Two 4 cavity LBT molds and two pots will run you out of ready to cast alloy real quick.
Thanks Veral, it was worth the wait.