Old pressure data vs. new pressure data

[Will H]

So far I have only loaded moderate .357 magnum and 38 spl loads off Alliant's website.  It's been fun, but very tame.

 

I did not know they reworked the max loads a few years ago and ended up following a Lyman load from the 90's, as I have an older reloading manual.

 

158 grain JHP and 8.3 grains of Unique...  I think it will wake up my revolver when I test it Wednesday.

 

Anyone know just how much they have reduced the load max over the last few years?

Edited March 30, 2013 by Will H

[Guest K7Sparky]

I'm a newbie to this board, but not reloading.

 

Unique is a poor fit for the 357 mag and JHP.  OK for light loads with lead, but then use 38 special.

 

Your 8.3 grains is above anything I find listed.  Sierra #1 is the closest and I scanned the Hercules data page from 1985.

From what I see there is not much change in charge level.  Batch to batch of powder and pressure barrel variances is about it.

 

That said:

Here is some old data for the 357 mag with 158JHP

 

Sierra #1 1985 7.2 to 8.2

Sierra #3 1990 Serial # 52 Signed by Jim Hull - not listed

Richard Lee #2 2003 7.2 to 7.8

Hornady #3 1983 not listed

Speer #8 1970 not listed (158 lead 7.0 to 8.0 lead & jacket data are not generally interchangeable  just FYI)

Speer # 10 1979 7.7 to 7.8

Speer # 12 1994 6.9 to 7.7

Pocket Manual P.O. Ackley 1967 doesn't say lead or jacket both the 155g & 160g are the same at 6.5 to 7.0

Ken Waters Pet Loads - if you can tell me the issue of Handloader I will check as I have almost all of them

Hercules Reloaders' Guide  freebie 10-85 8.0 attached

 

Edited March 31, 2013 by K7Sparky

[Will H]

Thanks for posting that.

 

Yeah, I know Unique is not ideal for magnum loads, but for right now it's not as simple as run down to the LGS and get a different powder.  I think the 8.3 grains will prove to be a very stout load indeed, and not one I would test in a Taurus or something like that.  

 

Really it will be a limited use hiking load until I can get something heavy from Buffalo Bore.  

 

It looks like the drop from older load data to newer is pretty substantial.  Again, thanks for posting that data. 

[Dolomite_supafly]

Might be the powders are more efficient now than back then and that is why they do not need as much powder.

 

Look a Lil'Gun, it has pressures much less than any of the other powders. The reason? I was told by Hogdon that it is because of a new technology that allows them to get the same velocities with less pressures.

[Will H]

I will check that one out.  Thanks.

[glockster157]

Save yourself a lot of trouble trying to reinvent the wheel. Look up six gun loads of Elmer Keith (father of the 44 Magnum) and buy a pound of 2400. Unless you have a really long barrel and are using heavy bullets don't worry about H110/W296(same powder BTW) as they are tempting because the books make them look better but in my experience they give a lot more blast, are not as accurate and do not work well as an all around powder in the 357.. As to mid range loads I use to use tons of Unique but I switched to 231 years ago....just worked well in  lot of mid range calibers and was cleaner....you shoot hundreds of cast bullet loads with Unique in a SS revolver and it will be black LOL!

I have used the old Lyman +P load of 5.2 grains of 231 and 158 grain lead semiwadcutter for years and years and all my 357's have shot it well.