|
|
Post by Bullshop on Dec 28, 2021 10:57:18 GMT -7
 WARNING !!! this data is for use only in 357 magnum chambered and +P+ rated 38 special chambered revolvers This summer past I had a bad experience with contaminated alloy from a mystery ingot that must have been Zink. I filled the pot with ingots I got from our most local Pasific recycling then went to prep my mold. When I got back to the pot all but one ingot had completely melted, a bad sign. I quickly scooped out the remaining un-melted portion of the mystery ingot but about half had melted. I stirred and skimmed and it looked OK but maybe was not so. I had a large order of 35-200 FN-GC to cast so set to working on that after I thought the melt was clean. I cast up the order of 500 bullets then because they were quench hardened I spread them out to dry. Usually at this point I inspect several for flaws. If in a hand full I find no flaws I accept the batch as good. On inspection of this batch I found some small flaw in nearly every bullet. What to do! I dont want to remelt them because they will continue to contaminate even more alloy. I completely emptied the pot and with saddened heart scrapped it entirely. Looking at the bullets they looked fair but not good certainly not good enough to sell but maybe good enough to shoot, Instead of dumping the bullets with the scrapped alloy I decided to try them and that is what brought me to the subject of this thread. The 200gn FN-GC is a design I like to use in the 357 magnum. Since these were quench hardened and contained some Zink the bullets are plenty hard to use in a 357 without gas checks. I wanted to go without gas checks so that if they didnt shoot good I would not have added to the loss. So here I am loading these 200gn bullets in 357 magnum cases and they are shooting good and I am having fun shooting them in a Ruger Bisley and a Marlin 94. This is really kind of a good thing because seldom do I ever cast 500 bullets for myself to shoot. To be compatible with over all cartridge length for both guns I have to seat past the crimp groove and crimp somewhere on the neck of the bullet which is OK but doesn't really get quite the grip on the bullet as crimping in an actual crimp groove. So I am going along having fun when suddenly I had this thought, sometimes dangerous. The thought was, I wonder where the crimp groove would be at the same OAL in a 38 special case. Bingo!!!! At the same OAL when the same bullet is loaded in a 38 special case the crimp groove is precisely located at the case mouth. Awesome!!! So after this revelation I couldn't help but wonder if since the same OAL is being used the internal volume should be the same so both cartridges loaded to the same length with the same bullet and powder charge should produce about the same pressure and velocity. Well that turned out to be about spot on in practice. So I went happily on shooting the same load in 38 special cases in the Ruger and Marlin 357 mag guns. Then it happened again, I had another thought. I have a version of the S&W model 10 that has been with us for over a century. This version is in 38 special with heavy barrel at 4". This K frame size frame has been chambered for both the 38 special and the 357 mag in the same size cylinder so the length and cylinder wall thickness is there for the 357 mag pressures. I tried putting a 357 mag so loaded as mentioned and as expected that 1/10" difference in case length would not allow it to fully chamber. Now going to the 38 special with the same load and same over all cartridge length and bingo like a charm. Now I have been shooting up those 500 bullets loaded in 38 special cases but containing a 357 mag load in this case 16 grain of WC-680 with a mag primer. The load produces a bit over 900 fps from the 4" barrel revolver and about 1300 fps from the Marlin carbine and shoots quite well in both. The WC-680 powder is maybe a bit too slow burning for the short 4" revolver but excels in the sealed breach and carbine length barrel of the Marlin. So there you have it as the title of this thread says , 357 mags in a 38 special , maybe sort of! |
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Dec 29, 2021 6:05:08 GMT -7
Good morning
Another well written informative solution. Thank you !! I would be keeping that batch of lead for personal use..... unless those 500 cast used it all up.
It also brought up a memory. Back in 82 I was shooting Silly-Wets with our Dan Wesson revolver. Started with the 6" barrel that was on it when we bought it in Chattanooga in 78. It was accurate enough out to the 150 meter but after that it was tough. So I bought a 10" barrel. Got a good velocity increase and with the longer barrel much better consistency smacking the rams.
So as long as I hit the rams the top 1/3 they would go down with the 160 gr GCSW. Then the brain kicked in and and started with a 180 grGC. That improved knockdown. Then one day looking at the cast the thought dawned on me I could seat that cast out to the first lube groove. DW revolvers have a long cylinder so I gave it a try. With the new available space the 296 load was increased to the same compression level.
The end result was I could now smack the rams anywhere above the belly 1/3 up.
So I wrote the NRA handgun column with my findings. Received a nice letter back (in some file somewhere) where the author stated similar to your above fine information. The author was also using a DW 10" and was loading a 200 grainer in 38 +P cases with H110 and slamming rams with those.
Well I never tried it as my load was very accurate and I never lost another ram. Except for one I shot in the head / nose once and it spun like a weather vain nearly one complete turn. Happily it did not change any results who won that AA Match.
So again thank you for a fine write up.
|
|
|
|
Post by grasshopper on Dec 29, 2021 22:23:22 GMT -7
Hello my friend! What a great and informative article! Sometimes those bright ideas work out great after all eh? I was curious, did you notice any marketable difference in accuracy going from the 357 case to the 38 special case? I just thought you might have gotten slightly better accuracy out of the 38 special case since the crimp would seem to be more consistent from round to round and I also thought less “free space” in the cartridge case might have helped a little with accuracy as well. I know these are for your own personal use and if you have more left over than you use at your shooting session they will be kept separate and marked as to what they are as well. I just wouldn’t want one of those 38 special loaded round to find it’s way into a revolver not designed to handle a load like that, in the summer lots of times I tend to carry a Smith 642 air weight in 38 special and I may be wrong but I don’t think it would hold up very well with that load, please correct me if I’m wrong or you have any thoughts on it. Also I hope you don’t take this as me saying you are doing anything you shouldn’t be, that’s not my intent at all I promise!😁
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Dec 30, 2021 9:37:10 GMT -7
I haven't really noticed any difference in accuracy between the two loads. Both are at 100% density with the powder being slightly compressed in both.
The OAL of the loaded cartridges is quite long so I suspect maybe too long for smaller frame guns such as the 5 round S&W J frames with a shorter cylinder length than on the larger frames,
I must admit though that I never gave any thought to what you have mentioned since any guns in our home that will chamber these would be safe with this ammo.
Too the load is using a powder burn rate that is perhaps on the too slow side of optimum. That allows the 100% density but at a lower chamber pressure than faster powders that are closer to optimum burn rate for the highest achievable velocity for the bullet weight. I would consider the chamber pressures as about equal to 38 special +P+ factory ammo for which they warn should not be used in the smaller frame guns not rated for such ammo. I feel that any +P+ rated 38 special revolvers will be fine with this load as long as they have the cylinder length to accommodate the OAL of the 38 specials I have loaded in this manner.
|
|
|
|
Post by grasshopper on Dec 30, 2021 21:09:09 GMT -7
Oh Brother! I was really afraid I was gonna open a can of worms after my last post and I really wondered if I should of said anything or commented at all really. I sure wasn’t trying to throw any rocks or be critical of your experiment. I have total confidence in anything you do concerning Guns or Ammo my friend. I just really didn’t want someone stopping by the forum to somehow misread your post and think it was ok to load 38 special cases to 357 mag specs that’s all. I’m glad to hear that the load density filled the cartridge case so it would be difficult to overcharge them and also the overall length would be too long for a J frame. I just want to apologize once again if I caused any confusion or created any headaches for anyone! Hope you guys have a wonderful day!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Dec 30, 2021 21:43:52 GMT -7
No worries mate! After you mentioned it I realized that in a way I was kind of partly naked because the point never entered my mind. It was a point I never mentioned but certainly should have. I really appreciate you pointing it out so that it led to a full explanation. I think I should/will go back and edit the first post to add a warning. We make a good team, thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Dec 30, 2021 21:47:22 GMT -7
OK its done go check it out.
|
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Dec 31, 2021 5:40:35 GMT -7
Steel sharpeneth steel....
|
|
|
|
Post by grasshopper on Dec 31, 2021 11:30:09 GMT -7
You know it’s always a good idea to cover your butt my friend!!😁
|
|
