compressing H110, spicy 357 mag, safe?

Shadow9mm

New member
So my buddy has been reloading using H110 for a while. He has a rule, NEVER EVER EVER compress it.

I have 2 lee load manuals. One from 2008 and a current 2021 Edition.

Lee manual from both editions, same load data.
For 357 Mag
125g Hornady XTP
H110 Start 21.0c at 1881fps, max 22.0c t 1996fps
barrel length unknow
My barrel length is 6in.
Ruger GP100

This is a published load from lee that is in 2 different editions of the manual. I know its spicy. But it should be safe right?
 

nhyrum

New member
Really? In my experience, h110 PREFERS to be compressed. All my 454 casull loads are compressed. I often shoot for 5-10% compressed. NEVER EVER load it light. Maybe he got those mixed up?

My personal minimum loading density for h110 is 80%. I've found I get better ignition and a cleaner burn using Magnum primers, especially on the low end.

Those loads SHOULD be safe, assuming safe loading practices and the gun is in good, safe condition of course.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

P Flados

New member
Just out of curiosity, I rans some stuff through Quickload.

With a 125, it predicts hitting the SAAMI 35000 psi limit at 105% load density.

With a 158, it predicts hitting the SAAMI 35000 psi limit at 103% load density.

If you are going for anything over 100%, I recommend you make sure your cases are very consistent with capacity. I have found more variation in capacity than I was happy with on a number of occasions.

If I am going compressed at all, I like to carefully figure out what amount of powder is 100% load density at my desired OAL. Then I can confirm what charge it takes with specific bullets and brass to get the desired load density.
 

nhyrum

New member
That is a great point. That's not a great place to be using mixed range brass.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk
 

74A95

New member
The closest thing I put h110 in that's comparable to 357 sig is 9x25 Dillon. Basically same concept, just 10mm based instead of 40. Those loads SHOULD be safe, assuming safe loading practices and the gun is in good, safe condition of course.

The OP is talking 357 Magnum, not 357 SIG.
 

44 AMP

Staff
I know its spicy. But it should be safe right?

Define "safe"....

while this may seem a bit snarky, its actually a serious question. How do YOU define safe??

Obviously, we all use one part of "safe" the same way, if your load does not blow up or damage your gun then it is "safe".

But, beyond that, there are different levels of "safe". There is "safe in your gun" but perhaps not in someone else's. There is "safe, but not suitable" and again, this can be different with different guns. and there is "SAAMI safe" which means loaded to a pressure level SAAMI deems safe in ALL guns in that chambering.
They are not all the same thing.
(the terms are mine, not anyone's official anything, just terms I made up for ease of understanding)

Here's a story to illustrate the differences, from the dark ages of pre-internet (and even pre personal computers) where the high tech was the Chrony brand chronograph, which was new on the market at a price of about $100 which put a chronograph within reach of a lot of shooters who could never afford one before....

.357 Magnum, 125gr JHP bullet
"spicy" charge of Hercules 2400 powder (right out of the middle of the current Speer manual of the day)
CCI 550 small pistol magnum primers.
I think winchester cases but cannot now remember for certain...
Do remember it was all the same brass...not mixed headstamp cases

3 different 6" barrel handguns used to shoot same ammo over the Chrony.
None of the guns blew up or broke, so the ammo was "safe" in that regard. However....
First gun used was a S&W model 19. The owner shot it, and somehow, managed to "double" the gun. He fired two shots when he only meant to shoot once. To this day, I do not understand HOW he did it, but I was there and saw it happen. The chronograph said 1620fps.

With me so far? 6" S&W model 19, 125gr JHP, load right out of the Speer book, displayed velocity 1620fps. Blast and recoil were "stout"..:D
At that point, we decided to stop using the M19 with that ammo. Cylinder opened, four unfired round fell out normally, but the two fired cases (primers were somewhat flattened) could not be removed by hand pressure on the ejector rod. We did get them out, using a small hammer (and wood block to protect the ejector rod).

I'd say that ammo in THAT GUN was safe, but not suitable.

Same ammo, next gun was a 6" S&W model 28 Highway Patrolman. Six rounds fired normally (it was hot stuff) avg MV on the Chrony was 1670fps.

Cylinder open, hand pressure ejects all the cases normally. 50fps faster than the M19 and everything worked normally, nothing stuck.

Next pistol was a 6" Desert Eagle. 9rnds fired (one full magazine). Gun fed, fired and ejected flawlessly. Avg Chrony reading was 1720fps.

So we have 3 different guns all shooting exactly the same ammo and it worked fine in the huge Desert Eagle, and also fine in the N frame model 28 but the stuck cases proved it was not suitable in the lighter K frame model 19. We didn't have a J frame size gun to try, but even if we had, based on what happened with the K frame gun, we would not have used that ammo in it, anyway. We did run some of those rounds through a Marlin carbine and they clocked exactly 2200fps, with normal function.

Now this is just an example of something that happend with those guns and that ammo, that day, and it doesn't mean the same thing is going to happen with any other guns and ammo, but it does illustrate a point you need to consider, and that is, that different guns ARE different, and can do different things with the same ammo.

SAAMI sets their limits for the manufacturing INDUSTRY, and sets them to be both safe and functional in every modern gun you will likely find in each particular chambering. This includes small light guns as well a bigger ones.


SAAMI doesn't approve of "Ruger only" heavy .45 Colt loads, either, but lots of people safely use them, in suitable RUGER Blackhawks. NEVER in Colt SAAs or clones.

so, where do you define "safe"?? Is it the same place SAAMI does? or is it somewhere else??

Some folks adhere to SAAMI specs with almost religious fervor. Others are ok with "works fine in my gun and I don't give a rodent's posterior if it works in your gun or not"....
some of us are also old enough to remember a time before SAAMI lowered the .357 Mag's "acceptable" max pressure to 35,000psi....:rolleyes:

I'm ok, with compressed loads with H110, PROVIDED you work up to them in YOUR gun.

For the .357, 2400 is my go to powder and I rarely use anything else. I have used H110 in .357 but not for a long time now.
 

Nick_C_S

New member
Really? In my experience, h110 PREFERS to be compressed.

I tend to agree.

In 357 Magnum, I have made compressed loads with W296 (which is the same as H-110) in 110, 125, and 158 bullet weights. These days, I don't consider the 110's and 125's to be practical ammo (too much flame and thrust recoil in short barrels - it's just kinda silly), but I still load the 158's - mostly for rifle.

W296/H-110 is kind of a one trick pony. You have to load it up good and stout for it to work properly. And that usually means compressed loads. It's not versatile, but what it does, it does really well. And it smells good at the range :p
 

44 AMP

Staff
What was the psi pressure limit before they lowered it?

The Speer #11 manual says the pressure limit is 46,000 cup.

Same book lists max .44 Magnum pressure as 43,500 cup.

Bear in mind that I say "lowered" and SAAMI says "converted cup to psi"

So, I'm sure they didn't "lower" anything, and its all about how the old pressure measuring systems were inaccurate, etc....(intentional sarcasm) :rolleyes:

Can't say if that's true, but I have observed that some 125 loads that used to be in the 1600fps range today are in the 1400s and some 158s that used to be in the 14s are today in the 12s...so draw your own conclusions...

And be aware that some ammo makers do not adhere to SAAMI specs.
 

74A95

New member
The Speer #11 manual says the pressure limit is 46,000 cup.

Same book lists max .44 Magnum pressure as 43,500 cup.

Bear in mind that I say "lowered" and SAAMI says "converted cup to psi"

So, I'm sure they didn't "lower" anything, and its all about how the old pressure measuring systems were inaccurate, etc....(intentional sarcasm) :rolleyes:

Can't say if that's true, but I have observed that some 125 loads that used to be in the 1600fps range today are in the 1400s and some 158s that used to be in the 14s are today in the 12s...so draw your own conclusions...

The current SAAMI specs show a 357 Magnum CUP limit of 45,000, which is very close to the 'old' 46,000 limit.


And be aware that some ammo makers do not adhere to SAAMI specs.

Which ammo makers do not adhere to SAAMI specs?
 

Nick_C_S

New member
CAUTION: The following post (or a page linked to) includes or discusses loading data not covered by currently published sources of tested data for this cartridge (QuickLOAD or Gordon's Reloading Tool data is not professionally tested). USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assumes any liability for any damage or injury resulting from the use of this information.

I first started loading in 1984. The only reference I had was the Speer manual at the time. I still have the book (two, actually); however, it's packed for moving (to Idaho :) !!), but I'm pretty sure it's #10 with an '82 copywrite. All my W296 (H-110) loads are per that manual (both 357 & 44M). I haven't changed recipes since then.

The newest manual's recipes (#'s 14 & 15, I believe - again, they're packed away) are woefully undercharged - at least, that's my experience. I tried loading W296 under 158's (& 240g 44M) using current recipes and they just didn't cut it. Velocities were way off (lower than using Power Pistol), burns were weak, and SD's were through the roof. Terrible ammo.

None of the preceding is load advice. Always do your own load workups, using reliable load data and common sense.
 

44 AMP

Staff
Which ammo makers do not adhere to SAAMI specs?

From what I've heard, Buffalo Bore is one.

They don't tell their loads or what pressures they are. What they do say is what guns they've tested their loads in and they are safe, and what guns they are not safe in, and they also say their loads are not to be used in any gun they have not tested and approved them in.

Remember that SAAMI specs are voluntary, and no gun or ammo maker is REQUIRED to adhere to them. Most do, its better business to meet the industry standards, but there's no requirement that they have to.

The "M" in SAAMI stands for Manufacturers, and from what I understand, membership and compliance with their standards is voluntary.

I find Buffalo Bore's attitude refreshing, like Ruger's "new" warranty policy. (I say new, its several years old now).

Ruger no longer issues a written warranty. (and, I don't blame them!) They simply say that they stand behind their products.

the explanation I heard back when they changed to no written warranty made perfect sense to me. They simply got fed up with trying to meet dozens of states different requirements of what had to be in a written warranty. SO, they just did away with the written warranty. (and yes, that is legal)
 

74A95

New member
From what I've heard, Buffalo Bore is one.

So you're just spreading the rumor without actual knowledge. Okay. That's all we need to know.


They don't tell their loads or what pressures they are.

Neither does Remington, Federal, Winchester, Speer, Hornady, or any other manufacturer that I can think of. They just list the velocity. Just like Buffalo Bore.

And since compliance is voluntary, the big name ammo makers could be exceeding SAAMi too.
 

Don Fischer

New member
What I learned years ago was that a compressed load means the powder is to slow burning. I never ever load compressed loads because of that. I know a good number of people that do compress loads and seems to work fine with them but, there's a lot of different powder's that don't need it and I stick to those.
 

Shadow9mm

New member
Ok, So I got to test today. Based on visuals from seating, it was not a compressed load or just barely and the velocities were no where near stated

357 mag
125g Hornady XTP
H110
20.0g 1519fps
21.0g 1608 fps


On a side note, I did mage to get some Hogdon Lil-gun
158g Hornady XTP
17.0g 1229fps
18.0g 1432fps
 

P Flados

New member
FYI, concerning your lower velocities, Hodgdon data is for a 10", possibly unvented.

Quickload says 1770 fps for 21 grs of H110 under a 125 XTP at 101% load density (i.e. just barely compressed) with a 7.7" barrel (Quickload is based on breech to muzzle). I had to stretch the OAL way out to get down to 101% load density.

I frequently have found magnum revolver loads shooting 150 fps or so below predicted. I blame cylinder gap, forcing cone, etc. In a TC Contender, my loads shoot a whole lot closer to Quickload predictions (sometimes under, sometimes over).

I tried to run your 158 load, but I got goofy results plugging in the Hodgdon 18 gr Lil Gun / 158 inputs. A 115% load density, very high velocity and 51,000 psi pressure.
 
Last edited:
Top