Loading the 356 Winchester

Tabacco Brook

Tabacco Brook

Regular
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Location
Nova Scotia
Hey there,..
I am wondering how hot, or what your pet loads are for the 356win. Most all the data I have read, (which is not much, very little info out there), seams to be rather anemic. Some of the max load data is only listed at maybe 2/3s of the listed SAAMI Pressure of 52000 CUP. Winchester 200gr factory loads are listed at 2450fps, I'm sure that load must be producing more pressure than the data I have read. Hoping you guys can help clarify this a bit for me,.. and/or share some info.

Thanks
 
My Speer #12 lists 180gr bullets at up to 2654fps w/AA2015BR, 2577 w/N133, and 2569 w/H322.

I don't have 200gr loads in this book, but it has 220s. Fastest load is again with AA2015BR for 2344fps, 748 gets you 2328fps and IMR4064 gets 2301.

All of these velocities are for max loads in my book, test firearm is a Win 94AE with a 20" barrel.

If you tell me what specific powders you have on hand, I can check my book to see if its listed here.
 
Suther said:
My Speer #12 lists 180gr bullets at up to 2654fps w/AA2015BR, 2577 w/N133, and 2569 w/H322.

I don't have 200gr loads in this book, but it has 220s. Fastest load is again with AA2015BR for 2344fps, 748 gets you 2328fps and IMR4064 gets 2301.

All of these velocities are for max loads in my book, test firearm is a Win 94AE with a 20" barrel.

If you tell me what specific powders you have on hand, I can check my book to see if its listed here.
Click to expand...



Thanks,... I have on hand,.. IMR 3031,.. WIN748,.. IMR 4895,.. IMR 4350.

Out of the powders I have tried I find IMR3031 works best in my BLR 358win, but I haven't seen it listed for the 356.
From what I have read Hodgdon 4198 gives the 356 more speed than most, but accuracy remains to be seen.
 
Ganderite said:
You could use 358Win data as a guide. But the limit may be more the rifle than the ammo. A 356 in a Mauser or rem700 is different than in a Win94.
Click to expand...


I hear ya,.. but what seems odd to me is the 356win was designed for, and introduced in the Model 94. The 358 and 356 are both listed as 52000CUP, but 356 data is way weaker than 358. I know the 358 was designed and introduced in some pretty robust rifles, but still, it dosen't make sense for a cartridge to be introduced in a rifle that is not capable of handling the pressure.
 
I used Winchester data and Winchester powder when I had my .356. I could get factory load performance out of it. I remember trying both W748 and W760 in mine, but don't remember which one I figured was best. I sold my load records along with the rifle a few years ago. I remember also liking the 220 Speer bullets which took some moose, elk, and deer.
 
Longwalker said:
I used Winchester data and Winchester powder when I had my .356. I could get factory load performance out of it. I remember trying both W748 and W760 in mine, but don't remember which one I figured was best. I sold my load records along with the rifle a few years ago. I remember also liking the 220 Speer bullets which took some moose, elk, and deer.
Click to expand...


Ok Longwalker, thanks for the info.
 
you can not really compare a 30 cal pressure to 35 cal pressure ..... the 35 will always (almost always) be lower .... but... there are exceptions to every rule

when you get in to the 35 / 44 /45 /50 cals bullet weight goes up, so energy goes up

you can get a 22 cal to go 3000fps and have fun doing so ...... you can get a 350g to go 3000fps ..... but it WILL NOT BE FUN ..... one of those... not me, Im OK I will just watch you do it :)
 
just having some fun said:
you can not really compare a 30 cal pressure to 35 cal pressure ..... the 35 will always (almost always) be lower .... but... there are exceptions to every rule

when you get in to the 35 / 44 /45 /50 cals bullet weight goes up, so energy goes up

you can get a 22 cal to go 3000fps and have fun doing so ...... you can get a 350g to go 3000fps ..... but it WILL NOT BE FUN ..... one of those... not me, Im OK I will just watch you do it :)
Click to expand...


Maybe I am misunderstanding your post, but I am not comparing 30cal to 35cal pressure. The 358 and 356 are pretty much identical 35 calibers. The 356 is pretty much just a rimmed 358.
But thanks for your reply.
 
Sorry, I have not yet loaded for either of my 356's (Marlin and Winchester). But will be using the Speer 220 gr when I do, as i have those on hand. Have only used the Winchester factory ammo to date.

In my 358 Win (BLR), I use 50 gr of W748 with the 220 gr Speer, in WW cases and WLR primers, and get a chronied 2209 fps out of the 20" barrel, producing 1" groups @ 100 yards. It has accounted for moose, elk and bear over the past 19 years. (Rifle fitted with a Leupold Vari-X III 1.5-5 scope)
In the same rifle I get slightly larger groups (1.2" @ 100 yards) with 225 gr Nosler Partitions over 47.5 gr of W748. Unfortunately, I have not chronied this load, so am not certain what the actual velocity was. With Re-7, I got slightly tighter groups (1.1") in this rifle, but published data showed less velocity (approx. 240 fps less). IMR 4895 published data listed gave higher velocities (60 fps faster than W748), and also produced 1.1" groups. Again, did not chrony to verify actual velocities in my rifle. Went with Speer load as it produced the slightly better accuracy, and on game bullet performance proved to be excellent.

FWIW: As a comparison, Speer Reloading Manual #14 lists max load of W748 for 356 Win for 220 gr bullet @ 49.5 gr, producing 2328 fps out of a Model 94 w/ 20" barrel, and 52.0 gr max of W748 for the same bullet, producing 2481 fps out of a Model 99 w/ 22" barrel. Take off 50-70 fps from 358 velocity for more accurate comparison due to barrel length. This would equate to 2328 fps vs 2411-2431 fps. Main difference would be case dimensions/capacities between two cases and SAAMI specs for pressure.
At the end of the day, no deer, bear, moose or elk is going to be able to tell the difference of which cartridge it was shot with at most reasonable distances either of these cartridges was fired out of, or by which make of rifle.

The end result with proper bullet placement, is meat on the table!
 
Last edited:
BlackRam said:
Sorry, I have not yet loaded for either of my 356's (Marlin and Winchester). But will be using the Speer 220 gr when I do, as i have those on hand. Have only used the Winchester factory ammo to date.

In my 358 Win (BLR), I use 50 gr of W748 with the 220 gr Speer, in WW cases and WLR primers, and get a chronied 2209 fps out of the 20" barrel, producing 1" groups @ 100 yards. It has accounted for moose, elk and bear over the past 19 years. (Rifle fitted with a Leupold Vari-X III 1.5-5 scope)
In the same rifle I get slightly larger groups (1.2" @ 100 yards) with 225 gr Nosler Partitions over 47.5 gr of W748. Unfortunately, I have not chronied this load, so am not certain what the actual velocity was. With Re-7, I got slightly tighter groups (1.1") in this rifle, but published data showed less velocity (approx. 240 fps less). IMR 4895 published data listed gave higher velocities (60 fps faster than W748), and also produced 1.1" groups. Again, did not chrony to verify actual velocities in my rifle. Went with Speer load as it produced the slightly better accuracy, and on game bullet performance proved to be excellent.

FWIW: As a comparison, Speer Reloading Manual #14 lists max load of W748 for 356 Win for 220 gr bullet @ 49.5 gr, producing 2328 fps out of a Model 94 w/ 20" barrel, and 52.0 gr max of W748 for the same bullet, producing 2481 fps out of a Model 99 w/ 22" barrel. Take off 50-70 fps from 358 velocity for more accurate comparison due to barrel length. This would equate to 2328 fps vs 2411-2431 fps. Main difference would be case dimensions/capacities between two cases and SAAMI specs for pressure.
At the end of the day, no deer, bear, moose or elk is going to be able to tell the difference of which cartridge it was shot with at most reasonable distances either of these cartridges was fired out of, or by which make of rifle.

The end result with proper bullet placement, is meat on the table!
Click to expand...

Thanks Blackram
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom