Bear Loads

[bigbob]

Can I use Bear Loads in a 1970 Blk Hawk 357Cal 3 screw
Can I use Bear Loads in a 1980 S&W 686 357 Cal
Bear loads are HSM 180 Grain Lead RNFP: Gas Check

Thanks in advance

 

[hittman]

I wouldn't in a Smith.

They're not known as Rugged, Reliable Firearms.

 

[Bear Paw Jack]

I wouldn't have a problem with any of those. The 686 Smith is an L frame gun and plenty stout. I've used HSM ammo, but not that particular round so I can't say on that one.
I'm more of a proponent of Buffalo Bore Ammo.

 

[WAYNO]

Yes, the .357 HSM (brand name) Bear loads would be fine in a 686 or Blackhawk.

The HSM rounds are anemic in comparison to some other stout loads.

 

[Bear Paw Jack]

I have to agree with Wayno. HSM 1200 FPS vs Buffalo Bore 1500 FPS. Plus I like LBT style bullets vs the RNFP. That's more of a cowboy style bullet.

 

[powder smoke]

I wouldn't in a Smith.

They're not known as Rugged, Reliable Firearms.

I wouldn't either I learned the hard way! hittman speaks the truth! ps

 

[WAYNO]

I don't know where this stuff comes from. A 686 is incapable of firing SAAMI standard .357 ammo? :wink:

 

[unionprez]

If you look closely, somewhere on the HSM website, they say that the only Ruger handgun that will safely fire their bear loads is the Blackhawk. I actually called them and asked about shooting their bear loads out of my Redhawk and the guy on the phone told me that the Blackhawk was the only model that they approve to shoot their bear loads from. If they say that only a Blackhawk will safely shoot their product, that pretty much leaves the rest of the handguns out of the picture.

 

[Heliman]

Read this.....

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=100

I have fired HSM, Federal, and Buffalo Bore "Bear Loads" in my 686. No issues. The Buffalo Bore is much stouter than
the HSM load. 200' per second faster than HSM with the same weight bullet.

Oh, and by the way, in bear country without a rifle I am packing my 5" 629 44 Mag. Not a .357.

 

[Bear Paw Jack]

If you look closely, somewhere on the HSM website, they say that the only Ruger handgun that will safely fire their bear loads is the Blackhawk. I actually called them and asked about shooting their bear loads out of my Redhawk and the guy on the phone told me that the Blackhawk was the only model that they approve to shoot their bear loads from. If they say that only a Blackhawk will safely shoot their product, that pretty much leaves the rest of the handguns out of the picture.

I believe I would call them and have them confirm that. A redhawk is every bit as strong as a blackhawk. Are they not using SAAMI shooting standards? I absolutely have a difficult time believing you talked to a knowledgeable gun person at HSM. When it gets down to 357 magnum an L frame model can certainly handle any factory ammo in the industry. That's why Smith brought it out. I know Buffalo Bore used to use Hornady for testing pressures of their ammo. Not sure if they still do, but I can't imagine an ammo manufacturer taking a risk like that when the gun manufacture produces a gun that is for that cartridge. I know their ammo is dirtier than most, but I'm hard pressed to believe the pressure exceeds SAAMI regulations. Not questioning you. I'm questioning what someone who picked up the phone there said, and why they would say it.

For what it's worth Buffalo Bore says you can shoot their Heavy Outdoor 357 mag ammo out of a J frame. For those that don't know. Smith came out with (smallest to largest) and I frame, J frame, K frame (which at one time was the police gun even with 357 magnum) and L frame (mine will shoot 7 357 mags out of the cylnder), N frame, and X frame.

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Read this.....

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=100

I have fired HSM, Federal, and Buffalo Bore "Bear Loads" in my 686. No issues. The Buffalo Bore is much stouter than
the HSM load. 200' per second faster than HSM with the same weight bullet.

Oh, and by the way, in bear country without a rifle I am packing my 5" 629 44 Mag. Not a .357.

From that link . . .

"Our 357 mag. ammo adds more power than ever before to the 357 Mag. This ammo is safe to shoot in ANY all steel 357 revolver - this includes J frames. This ammo is no harder on your gun than any other normal 357 ammo. Please don't phone or email us and ask if this ammo is safe in your gun. It is, providing your gun is in a safe condition for use with any normal 357 ammo."

My only comment would be that they carefully avoid any mention of SAAMI. They may feel that they have covered themselves with the "any normal 357 ammo" expression, but that's a pretty fine point.

Full disclosure: I never use any ammo that makes it a point to use the above manipulation when discussing their product's suitability. May be fine, may not . . . personal discretion involved. Your gun, your money, your choice. JMHO

 

[WAYNO]

Don't know how HSM got such a bad rap. They simply market a fairly priced cartridge with a decent bullet. The velocity of their 180 grain .357 load is far less than Underwood, Buffalo Bore, and even less than the Federal Cast Core cartridge. Now folks repeat that these cartridges are somehow nuclear powered and will blow up guns.

Really?

 

[Biggfoot44]

I know this is a Ruger Forum , and predisposed to extol the virtues of Rugers , and disparage the short comings of the various other brands . But the S&W L frame is indeed a plenty stout revolver . ( I could insert accounts of my one shooting partner's L frame loads , as tested over my chrono , but I won't publicly repeat his load data .) Heck , even the internet horror stories about K frame .357 have grown exponentially in the retelling .

I am not HSM management , nor their in house ballistician . But unless they are deliberately stupid , it is entirely credible for that ammo to be well within the CUP pressure standards for .357 Mag . ( I worded that sentence deliberately .)

 

[Bear Paw Jack]

Biggfoot44 {Heck , even the internet horror stories about K frame .357 have grown exponentially in the retelling .}

Boy is that ever a fact.

 

[unionprez]

Take it easy, guys. I'm just saying what the guy at HSM told me. I use their products and I use Buffalo Bore too. I shoot both BB heavy loads and HSM bear loads in my Blackhawks, Redhawk, and 4" Speed Six and Service Six. They don't got shot much, just enough to check accuracy and then used for carry depending where I'm at. The loads we're talking about are too expensive to use for plinking or target practice.

 

[jpickar]

Ammo companies say certain things a certain way. It is a lawyer making them say it. A S&W 686 or 586 is plenty stout enough to handle any 357 load. Now if you are talking about the K frame guns like the 66 or 19 then you are asking for trouble in the long run. The very first 357 made was a S&W on the N frame in 1935. I have shot a couple of the first 357 rounds made in the 1930's for the new S&W 357. They are by far the most stout 357's I have ever shot. So much so I said no I think my blackhawk doesn't need that abuse.
These first 357's used large pistol primers and hot enough loads to shoot through a engine block to stop a fleeing crook in a car, like Bonnie and Clyde, John Dillinger, etc.

I use a 629 with hot loads for bear protection.

 

[smith1961]

I've been watching this thread for a while........

"the guy on the phone told me that the Blackhawk was the only model that they approve to shoot their bear loads from" subsequent to stating "If you look closely, somewhere on the HSM website, they say that the only Ruger handgun that will safely fire their bear loads is the Blackhawk."

I must be missing something. The Ruger Redhawk is arguably at least as strong, if not stronger than a Blackhawk in .357 magnum. I have HSM "bear loads" in .41 mag and .45 Colt. I can't find any printed warnings regarding "use only in Ruger Blackhawk" on either load. :?
In regard to the S&W 686, it certainly isn't a Redhawk, but it IS safe to shoot any commercially produced and retailed ammo.

Come on folks......... :lol:

 

[unionprez]

To smith 1961:
I'm the guy that talked to a rep from HSM on the phone. Do me a favor and go to the HSM website and go to the home page. Scroll all the way down and open the FAQ tab. Then open the question about what firearms are safe to shoot HSM loads in and look at what they say about the .45 caliber. I never said you couldn't shoot them out of a Redhawk, they say not to shoot them out of a Redhawk.

 

[smith1961]

To smith 1961:
I'm the guy that talked to a rep from HSM on the phone. Do me a favor and go to the HSM website and go to the home page. Scroll all the way down and open the FAQ tab. Then open the question about what firearms are safe to shoot HSM loads in and look at what they say about the .45 caliber. I never said you couldn't shoot them out of a Redhawk, they say not to shoot them out of a Redhawk.

Easy now,

I'm only taking this thread on the whole. Even with HSM claiming what's safe, it not exactly scientific. Freedom Arms and BFR's aside too. I referenced the weak 686 crowd as well. There's no attack on you personally, just looking at some of the stuff being perpetuated here.

 

[magpouch]

I believe Handloader (or another magazine, I don't remember exactly as I get a lot) did an article showing that the Redhawk in .45 Colt was the strongest production revolver made, even over the Blackhawk. The cylinder is larger in diameter and has more meat all around. Logically it would have the same advantage over other smaller calibers as well, say .44 Mag or .357.

Lots of opinions out there on what is what, and most of what is printed is just that.

 

[wildcatter]

I've read most of what has been stated here, some fact, and some obvious bs!

Is a 686 or 586 as strong as a Redhawks or blackhawk, ,,, only someone with no experience or some terrible information would believe they are!

Are the 686 and 586 reliably safe for any standard pressure 357 load, yes absolutely!

But anyone who knows anything about the Redhawks super Redhawks or blackhawk knows the Redhawks will take anything the blackhawk can!

As far as any n frame or l frame smit,,,, trust me they won't handle this load and hold their tolerance for long! Those velocities are out of 5.5" barrel, and I will assure you the load is safe in this gun, and well over standard pressure for the 357. I have also ruined enough smits to know the difference!

 

[unionprez]

To smith1961:

I didn't take offense at your post, just trying to show where I got the information and that HSM really says what I posted. I don't agree with it either. Every thing is good, not upset with your post at all, sorry if it came off that way. Have a good one.

 

[smith1961]

To smith1961:

I didn't take offense at your post, just trying to show where I got the information and that HSM really says what I posted. I don't agree with it either. Every thing is good, not upset with your post at all, sorry if it came off that way. Have a good one.

Two of the best folks I have known are from Wisconsin, make that three now! 8)

 

[AJGUNNER]

Just my 2 cents--- does anyone really think there is a stronger 357 cylinder on the face of the earth than this Redhawk cylinder?

 

[jgt]

That is a bold statement. Yes, I believe there is one. It may be expensive, but all it takes is money. On the face of this earth? Sure, I think that is likely or could be If I wanted one.

 

[Onty]

That is a bold statement. Yes, I believe there is one. It may be expensive, but all it takes is money. On the face of this earth? Sure, I think that is likely or could be If I wanted one.

I guess:

 

[dougader]

FWIW, the Redhawk is MORE stout than the Blackhawk. There have been pressure tested rounds shot in the Redhawk that are only for that gun because it may damage a Blackhawk. Handloader magazine published Redhawk only data based on the testing.

A S&W 686 is plenty strong for any all SAAMI spec ammo.

 

[Nomosendero]

FWIW, the Redhawk is MORE stout than the Blackhawk. There have been pressure tested rounds shot in the Redhawk that are only for that gun because it may damage a Blackhawk. Handloader magazine published Redhawk only data based on the testing.

A S&W 686 is plenty strong for any all SAAMI spec ammo.

Yes, you are right, the Redhawk & SRH is stronger, I thought that was common knowledge. I sounds as though they say this only because they only tested it in the Blackhawk & their Lawyers are likely saying to advise customers to use only in the Blackhawk. It is crazy how Lawyers run companies and everyone runs scared. And now masks may not be enough, don't forget your faceshield.
Yea, whatever

 

[Rclark]

Compare the cylinder walls of the .44 Magnum Redhawk/BlackHawk to .357 RH/BH.... Both have approximately the same SAAMI pressure (.44Mag is 1K 'higher' BTW) specifications. Even a layman can make a 'judgement' call here .... Nothing to argue over.

 

[Nomosendero]

And then of course we can't look at the Cyl. & Know the composition of the metal and then there is the front ant back lockup of the RH/SRH & things like difference in freebore, yada yada, but then we have alot of variations of .357, for a company to say only one type of revolver can use their ammo is nuts. Again, I think they were being lazy and driven by a lawyer.
On a side note my SRH 44 mag loves the HSM "Bear Load" 300 gr. XTP. I do not think that load is made today, wow is it accurate!!