357 magnum wadcutter development – bone crusher

I've been loading Wad-Cutters in my .357 Security-Six for decades now. From the hollow base target rounds to the FMJ DEWC at max speeds. The latter is just nasty when it hits something wet and soft. It tumbles instantly as you cannot compress a liquid ( more than 1/10th of one percent) and the damage done is impressive when it hits bone.
I do like the hollow base WC's for their impressive accuracy. As with the Mine Ball, the skirt expands to seal the bore an obdurate into the rifling.
You can however, use too much powder and blow the skirt out and have no accuracy at all.
I have a 1911 pistol in .38 Special and using the HBWC bullets,have won many matches over the years for "Mid-Range" legs of the match.
I only use Bullseye powder for my lead wad cutters.
 
44 AMP said:
There are things here that if you have taken them into consideration, I missed where its been mentioned.
Click to expand...

^^^Even tho I am only including the first sentence of 44 AMP's post, I agree with all of it, and have only this to add.

In my years of reloading, I have discovered three things, that IMHO, ring true to this thread.

1.) Folks are always looking to be the "first" to try something. Kinda how so many calibers have been developed over the years, especially when it comes to "magnum" handgun calibers. We'd all love to be Elmer Keith, but since that isn't possible, maybe we can come up with a load for a long proven caliber, using long proven components, that no body else has ....yet.

2.) If it's a long proven caliber and you are using long proven components, odds are it's been tried, more than once. With a ton of nuances and variations, even if it's on the extreme ends of bullet weight, velocities or construction.

3.) The reason you do not find volumes of info and recipes for those, is not because they have not been tried or that they do not work, it's that they do not work well, unless a new and completely different application has been found. Ideas die out and reloading manuals do not devote space and time to loads that do not work well. Odds are, and I will bet, that if you cannot find published info out there for a combo of caliber/bullet/powder, etc., it's not that it hasn't been tried, it's that it's not worth the space on the page to mention it. While the specific combo may be unique and may appeal to some, it is not going to become a household name, even if that name is .357 Bonecrusher.

I have a multitude of .357s. I do not need a "bonecrusher" load for paper, nor do I desire a round for SD that has extreme penetration. I'd much rather have the round expand, and make a big hole in one person and not penetrate thru two innocent bystanders in the neighbors house. Same goes for hunting. While I desire a certain amount of penetration for deer, I also want a exit hole larger than .380". If I need to crush the bones of DG animals, believe me, I'll be carrying something bigger than .357.

That does not say, the OPs idea is lame, just that it is going to be very limited in it's applications and that is the reason info is hard to come by.
 
My two cents:
1. Sometimes, rarely but significantly, I have found that "conventional wisdom" is just plain wrong. One example is seating wadcutters much less than flush and crimping on a lube band. I got a big increase in accuracy in my gun. I also found that my 30-06 really shooting little 125 g plinker bullets quite accurately with just a pinch of 231 in the case, which is such an old recipe that it's long been forgotten except in ancient (1950's) reloading books.

In this case, I agree that pushing very soft wadcutters overfast has little value.

My positive contribution is that if you want a real "bone crushing" .357 load, I have these Cast Performance Hard Cast Heat Treated 180 and 187 g wide nose gas check bullets left over from my .357 experimenting days.

Mr.. Revolver Guy: Check your Email!
 
I'd much rather have the round expand, and make a big hole in one person and not penetrate thru two innocent bystanders in the neighbors house. Same goes for hunting. While I desire a certain amount of penetration for deer, I also want a exit hole larger than .380".
Click to expand...

+1. I will only add that I moved on to a larger caliber (.45 Colt) for deer, as I want a much bigger entry and exit hole.

Don
 
Semi wadcutters were developed to match the square shoulder of a full wadcutter, but with a better ballistic co-efficient.

If you want a hard cast bone crusher, just load a semi wadcutter. They also punch nice clean holes in paper just like a full wadcutter.
 
Another reason I just remembered for loading wadcutters in .357 Magnum is they feed just fine in a Marlin (and presumably other) lever-action carbine, and you can fit one extra round in the magazine. But you really want those to be jacketed bullets or cast from a hard alloy.

I don't know what the long-range ballistics is like, probably sucks. At close range they work just fine. If you try loading .38 Special wadcutters in a Marlin, they are too short and jam.
 
While I'm not interested in pushing true wadcutters to high velocities, I do like to use Magnum brass for target level loads, thereby avoiding the crud ring that develops after using .38 Special brass for the same purpose in Magnum length chambers.

In my guns (a M27, 2 M19's, 2 M66's, and a M60 3"), I've found that 4.0 gr of Bullseye in Magnum brass gives me sub-2" groups at 25 yds with Lyman's 35891 wadcutter. This is a 3-lube groove, solid base wadcutter, (very similar to 358495), with a crimping groove resulting in ~1/8" of lead bullet wadcutter shaped nose above the brass.

In my guns, with Magnum brass in use, accuracy is superb and leading is minimal. I have found that any significant crimp, degrades accuracy...so I taper crimp only as needed to prevent the bullet from moving forward during recoil...essentially, just removing the bell necessary for seating.

I cast a wheel weight alloy + 1-2% tin, air cooled, size to 0.359" and lube with 50/50 alox/beeswax. But I also tumble lube with Lee Liquid Alox prior to sizing.

Accuracy is the same using either special or magnum brass with adjusted powder charges of Bullseye (current production). My load, adjusted for my guns is 4.0 grains of Bullseye in magnum brass. Again, no appreciable leading either way. I estimate this load at 800 fps based on Quick Load and an old Lyman manual...vintage unknown (missing its cover) but I've had it since 1972.

Checking that manual, I find that Lyman started with 3.0 gr. Bullseye for 764 fps, then went up to 4.5 grains of Bullseye, (Maximum & also their most accurate load) & getting 1011 fps, all from a 5" bbl'd Smith M27. The bullet used was Lyman's 358495 at 141 grains, when cast from Lyman's #2 alloy. My 35891 is very similar and weighs 145 grains as cast. While 1011 fps is no "bone crusher", it's certainly a good mid-level velocity for small game or SD if you're interested.

Were it me, looking for a load similar to your "bone crusher" specifications, I'd opt for a LSWC with gas check. The 'check' will allow velocities well over 1200 fps, give you superb accuracy at the same time and allow use of cheap lead/wheel weight alloy bullets that will exhibit some expansion if you keep the alloy mix to roughly 50/50.

Lyman's excellent 358156GC does all this and gives me similar sub-2" groups at 25 yds from my guns, and is also an excellent choice for Marlin's 1894 C carbine in .357 magnum (when sized 0.359" or larger due to groove dia.). This same bullet, with two crimping grooves, allows .38 Special brass to be used for truly Magnum level loads by matching the internal magnum powder space with the lower crimping goove. Use of the SWC w/GC also avoids the murky aspects of working up high pressure loads where no current data is available.

As always, the above load should be approached with caution, with due regard to pressure indications. They have proved safe in my usage, and are in compliance with the aforementioned aged Lyman loading manual.

HTH's Rod
 
Last edited:
I have some old Lyman loading books from the 40's and 50's... let me see what they have for a 357 load if any in a dewc
 
"...The target load is 2.8 grains..." That's the standard .38 Special WC load of Bullseye. Works like hot dam in a .357 case. You still must work up the load just like any load though. Used cast and swaged(much better than cast) 148 grain WC's in .357 cases for eons when I shot in a bullseye league.
There's not really any advantage to .357 WC loads. You can't drive 'em at .357 velocities.
"...the FMJ DEWC at max speeds..." It'll expand to flat or very nearly flat.
 
Checking that manual, I find that Lyman started with 3.0 gr. Bullseye for 764 fps, then went up to 4.5 grains of Bullseye, (Maximum & also their most accurate load) & getting 1011 fps, all from a 5" bbl'd Smith M27. The bullet used was Lyman's 358495 at 141 grains, when cast from Lyman's #2 alloy. My 35891 is very similar and weighs 145 grains as cast. While 1011 fps is no "bone crusher", it's certainly a good mid-level velocity for small game or SD if you're interested.
Click to expand...

Rod,

That would be the Lyman 44th Edition published in 1967.

Don
 
No load data available........ no problem. Use 158 Gr. SWC data for a 148 gr. DEWC and work up from the starting load. With faster powders you can simply start between 38 +P and 357 starting loads; once you hit middle to slower powders you will need to look more to 357 starting loads.

Personally I use 5.4 gr. W231 with a plated DEWC seated out to mimic the shoulder of a 158 gr SWC for a range load. I can go much hotter but this load works for my SP 101 well enough that I just leave well enough alone.
 
USSR, thx for the info...the cover's been gone since I last had all of my hair and no glasses! Best regards, Rod
 
...the cover's been gone since I last had all of my hair and no glasses!
Click to expand...

Ah, yes, I remember those days. Waiting for the Guns & Ammo and Shooting Times magazines to arrive.:)

Don
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top