Carmoney Posted January 3, 2014 Author Share Posted January 3, 2014 Dave......seriously......would I have loaded ten thousand of them if they didn't work well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pskys2 Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 Dave......seriously......would I have loaded ten thousand of them if they didn't work well? You didn't load them, did you? , But I get your point. I'm just looking for some hard data, trying to decide where to go next? Especially if there are any compromises you're willing to accept. Say smooth reloading over accuracy or the reverse? How extensive did your reloader, or you, explore other options such as .356 130 FMJ;s, in relation to accuracy and reloadability? (lot of made up words here, me thinks). I guess what i;m asking is knowing you are pretty thorough, what were some of the downsides of other options that led to this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted January 5, 2014 Author Share Posted January 5, 2014 Dave, I don't have a lot of hard data on this. I got the original load for the 150-gr. Zero from Doug. When I couldn't find those bullets anymore, I went looking for something with a round-nose profile in a jacketed bullet sized .356-.357, and the MG 142-gr. is one of the few options I found on the market. I bought a case of them and my quick and dirty testing confirmed plenty good accuracy--which is exactly what you would expect from a true .357 bullet. I can't tell the difference as far as smooth reloading is concerned--in Hearthco clips they drop in great. The rounds look a little funny, because the cannelures are not used for crimping (brass bulges if you seat them that deep), but who cares. I plan to shoot them this year for USPSA and ICORE. I hope they work well, because I gotta helluva bunch of them sitting down there loaded up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatz Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 The bullet I'm using is the Remington 130 MC sized .357". Sometimes its hard to find on websites, because it could be listed as a 38 super bullet sized .356". Also, the latest supply I got has a canalure in the bullet. My load testing below is with the smooth 130 mc bullet. The Remington packaging #'s are, 130 MC 23568 JC is the smooth bullet 130 MC 23568 SO is the one with the cantilure It's not the perfect pointy round nose bullet because it has a small flat point on the end. They still drop in nice with the Hearthco moonclips. OAL 1.120" Starline 38 Short Colt brass Federal primers 4.1 grs of PB My last chrono run was, 996, 1028, 1036, 1014, 1007, 1014, 1035, 1024 for a 132.9 PF I'm happy with the accuracy and the way they reload and extract from the 627. The only problem is the cost of these bullets. For me its strictly a running match load. I know PB is not the most widly used powder out there, but it works well in 9mm and the 38 SC. and I got 8lbs!!! Its a little hot for an ICORE load, but I knock off the paddles on the Texas Star, while some competitors hit the paddles 2 or 3 times, wasting time and making us all laugh!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pskys2 Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Thanks Mike, just what I was asking. They look good, just wondered about that little flat spot on the nose. I've got close to 3m of the 160 Bayou's which are very accurate with clays. Just concerned they may get sticky on reloads as it gets hot Zero has .357 130 FMJ and what little I've worked with a 356 fmj are good also. But when I run low I'll probably go with the MG bullets. Anyone have any loads with this bullet that uses Clays? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted January 5, 2014 Author Share Posted January 5, 2014 Look at the nice long bearing surface on those 142s! That's what sold me on the bullet. Plus I can finally shoot a true .357 bullet in my .357 barrels, instead of rattling an undersized bullet down the bore and hoping for the best. If spring ever comes, I plan to do some real accuracy testing at 50 yards. From what I have seen so far, I think these bullets are going to shoot very, very well. The little flat spot doesn't seem to be a problem--of course, I always do a little extra chamfer work beyond what the factory provides. Nothing radical, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 --of course, I always do a little extra chamfer work beyond what the factory provides. Nothing radical, though. Picture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pskys2 Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Did a bit of testing over the last 2 weeks, took a long xmas vacation... One of the best accuracy loads from a bench at 25 yds was an MG 355 124jhp with Ramshot Competition. Nice and tight 1.50" and at 50 yds rollover prone it was a concentric 3.50". But that was the only powder to do it, and it leaves chunky granules in the case. Combined with the flat nose, which doesn't load as well with dummy rounds as a RN, doesn't look that good. Next best was the 160 Bayou and Clays 1.75" and 4" (50yd). Tried the 357 xtreme 147 and my 627 just doesn't seem to like even .357 Plated bullets. I like your idea, just that FN worries me (hesitate to get too radical with the the dremel) and hesitate to get 1m (at that price might as well get the case price). Zero has a 357 130 FMJ listed with no pix and it's never in stock. If you do get out and do some serious testing at 50 yds. let us know. Heck get someone else to sit down and do it for you? Tried a handful of .356 130 WW FMU (also had a FN) and they looked promising at 25yds with Titegroup. As a side note, worked up a load with the 625 and GAP brass in Minor for a back up using the 185 JSWC Hornady's and they were fantastic with Clays 1,75@25yds and 4"@50yds. And the dummy rounds I loaded to play with reload as well as the fmj's I have. Might even bring that one up to Iowa for the ICORE MW Regional as my primary gun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted January 6, 2014 Author Share Posted January 6, 2014 --of course, I always do a little extra chamfer work beyond what the factory provides. Nothing radical, though. Picture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWP Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) Look at the nice long bearing surface on those 142s! That's what sold me on the bullet. Plus I can finally shoot a true .357 bullet in my .357 barrels, instead of rattling an undersized bullet down the bore and hoping for the best. Mike, care to share any load data with us? I'm kicking around ordering a case of the MG 142s to try in shorts and specials. That pointy nose caught my eye too.... Edited January 6, 2014 by MWP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted January 6, 2014 Author Share Posted January 6, 2014 I'm loading the 142-gr. MG with 4.3 gr. of N320 at an OAL of 1.140". This runs 930 fps (132 pf) out of my 6.5" 27-7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longbarrel Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 I tried the MG 142's a couple of years ago. Was looking for the "ideal" ICORE and or maybe Action Pistol classic/production load in my L frame. Mediocre accuracy with a more pronounced recoil to make pf was my results from testing. Several of my usual powders were used. Compared them to my 160 Rn of a couple of mfg's . Those loads won easily for accuracy and recoil at 130 pf. Troy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted January 6, 2014 Author Share Posted January 6, 2014 OK fine, but I'm done with lead bullets for competition. I'm at the point in my life where I'm willing to pay a little more to avoid the smoke and dirt and hassle of lead bullets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pskys2 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 For competition I agree. If I can get what I want. But I've also had pretty good luck with some of the Moly/Poly Coated Bullets in my 1911's. Hoping it transfers to the 627. Didn't really work as well as I'd wanted in the 625 though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowrider Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 OK fine, but I'm done with lead bullets for competition. I'm at the point in my life where I'm willing to pay a little more to avoid the smoke and dirt and hassle of lead bullets. I understand this completely. I bought a box of extremes for my 625. Are they ever clean! But they aren't very accurate at all in my gun. They don't tumble, they just flew all over the target in the ICORE postal match. So it's back to coated I guess. They are not quite as clean but vastly superior to plain lead in the cleanliness dept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revoman Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Try Precision Delta 230 grain fmj in the 625. I have had good luck with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revoman Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Precisiondelta.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S&WIowegan Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Hey Mike.....how much does one bin weigh? Who's your ammo bearer? Bob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted January 7, 2014 Author Share Posted January 7, 2014 I carried them down to the basement one bin at a time. With both hands--too dang much weight to trust the handles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanc Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 I'm loading the 142-gr. MG with 4.3 gr. of N320 at an OAL of 1.140". This runs 930 fps (132 pf) out of my 6.5" 27-7. Mike, Just a sanity check, that is 4.3g right, not 3.4? I ask because I have used 4.2 of N320 with a 158 berrys in a 38 special case, 4.3 didn't sound right. sean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted January 12, 2014 Author Share Posted January 12, 2014 Sean, that is correct. It seems like it takes a heavier charge to move any Montana Gold bullet down the tube, as compared with any other jacketed bullet of the same weight, and especially as compared to plated and cast bullets of the same weight. I am also trying to make sure I will always make USPSA minor, with room to spare, out of my slowest revolver. I suspect there is a better powder for this load, but I have an ample supply of N320 laid back, and I am trying to simplify and standardize the components I am using for various calibers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanc Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Sean, that is correct. It seems like it takes a heavier charge to move any Montana Gold bullet down the tube, as compared with any other jacketed bullet of the same weight, and especially as compared to plated and cast bullets of the same weight. I am also trying to make sure I will always make USPSA minor, with room to spare, out of my slowest revolver. I suspect there is a better powder for this load, but I have an ample supply of N320 laid back, and I am trying to simplify and standardize the components I am using for various calibers. Thanks Mike. I am in the same boat wanting to simplify, looking to have 1 load for icore and uspsa. My icore load is marginal, coming in right at 126pf which is way to close. On the same token, I'm working on a little consistency issue with groups with that load and maybe speeding it up(along with crimp possibly) will get things looking a little better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted January 13, 2014 Author Share Posted January 13, 2014 Yeah, plus if you're planning to shoot USPSA matches with it, you really want enough power to reliably take down the various types of steel poppers you will encounter, even if they're set a little heavier than they should be, right? I'm perfectly OK with 132-135 p.f. minor loads, and maybe even a little more. Those who insist on running a pet load that barely makes minor p.f. are asking for trouble! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now