92 and pugnose?

Extend your shooting experience while reducing the cost of your ammunition!
Post Reply
Redleg11B
Posts: 9
Joined: 05 Dec 2019 16:27
Location: PA

92 and pugnose?

Post by Redleg11B »

https://missouribullet.com/details.p...5&secondary=10

This is the bullet style I am wanting to try for hunting in my Rossi 92. It is a 20" barrel 357 Mag that I just got a week ago used. Has anybody had experience with this design in the 92? SWC sometimes catches the mouth when feeding, WC will not chamber at all from the mag, and I really do not want to shoot just jacketed in this thing. The JSP rounds I have shot in it feed and shoot amazingly well. I want a heavy full power load for hunting, and a reduced RN (probably 125gr) for general plinking and small vermin-both lead or coated lead.
Ohio3Wheels
1000 Shots
1000 Shots
Posts: 1599
Joined: 31 Jul 2014 15:18
Location: Dayton Oh
Has thanked: 227 times
Been thanked: 328 times

Re: 92 and pugnose?

Post by Ohio3Wheels »

I use Mo Bullets but have not shot that one. I shoot a Penn Bullet 180gr that looks like Mo Bullet's Zinger. The Penn bullet cycles fine in both my '92 and in my 35 Rem 336. YMMV

Make smoke,
Curt... makin' smoke and raising my carbon foot print one cartridge at a time Image
Archer
2000 Shots
2000 Shots
Posts: 3942
Joined: 04 Feb 2014 05:30
Location: SoCal Loco
Has thanked: 137 times
Been thanked: 610 times

Re: 92 and pugnose?

Post by Archer »

I haven't tried it but I like it.
To be honest in .357 I'd probably start with either the Pugnose. I like the looks of the Striker but I don't load 180s much.

If the Pugnose feeds in the 92 I'd think it would have better impact at shorter ranges and tear out a bigger hole in paper.

I like that truncated cone profile the Zinger has in a semi auto. Looks like they call it a Fathead in .45.

I've been loading a lot of jacketed and plated over the years with just a smattering of lead.
I may have to pump up some coated rounds.
Ohio357MagFan
Posts: 152
Joined: 27 Jan 2015 20:27
Location: Akron Ohio
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: 92 and pugnose?

Post by Ohio357MagFan »

Actually I just recently got that bullet and started my research and development with it in regards to loads, feeding, pressure signs and velocity. I really like the wide flat nose, it hits like a hammer and I do a lot of bowling pin shooting and knock down steel for recreation. Thus far, here are the loads I worked up and I've tested them in the Rossi, single shot break action 357 and a Ruger SP-101 4 inch barrel revolver. With the polymer coated version and starline brass, I have made these loads and took them to an indoor range, fired them in the rifles and SP-101 and no pressure signs (although the recoil was VERY stout from the handgun with all loads to the point my finger bled a little and I have the bigger hogue grips on the handgun). Load #1- 13, 13.2 and 13.5 gr Wincheter W296 with CCI 550 Magnum primers. Load #2 a series of ten shots each wtih 14, 14.5, 15, 15.5 and 16 gr Alliant 300MP with CCI 500 Standard primers. I believe I can push the Alliant 300 MP a bit more because Handloader Magazine and Rifle magazine have loaded the very similar Cast Performance brand 187 gr Wide Flat Nose bullet in the range of 16-17.5 gr 300MP with standard primer and the 17.5 gr loads were clocking 1400 from handgun and 1800 from rifle (a duplicate of the Buffalo Bore 180 gr hard cast factory ammo).

I'm sorry I don't have chronograph data yet, the reason why is I went to the indoor range which is a short drive from my home to just shoot them to test for pressure first, and the outdoor ranges are a much further drive for me, but when I make it to one of them I'll follow up with my chronograph data
Redleg11B
Posts: 9
Joined: 05 Dec 2019 16:27
Location: PA

Re: 92 and pugnose?

Post by Redleg11B »

Thank you for all the responses. This gives me hope for when I pick some of these up.
Ohio357MagFan
Posts: 152
Joined: 27 Jan 2015 20:27
Location: Akron Ohio
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: 92 and pugnose?

Post by Ohio357MagFan »

Redleg11B wrote:Thank you for all the responses. This gives me hope for when I pick some of these up.

Welcome, glad to help! By the way, I think Alliant 300MP is the powder for this particular bullet that will get the highest velocities (and match velocities of factory ammo from the botique companies like Buffalo Bore and Double Tap while staying in OK pressures), especially from longer barrels. Do some internet searches for 300MP loadings, and Handloader magazine had a couple good write ups about it with 357 magnum loadings and they were able to get 158 gr bullets up around 1500 fps from handguns, a 187 gr cast bullet moving 1400 fps from a GP100 and Rifle magazine loaded the same load with same bullet and got 1800 fps from a Marlin 357 mag rifle. 300MP is a notch slower burning then the H110/W296 twins (the charge ranges are typically about 10 percent higher grain wise compared to W296/H110), and unlike other ball powers, 300 MP does well with compression. Also, use standard non-magnum primers with 300MP and I actually called Alliant and asked their powder technician about this, he verified with me to use standard primers. Oh, also do a search on this forum for a number of workups with chronograph data DonHuff did with 300MP from his 357 mag rifle
User avatar
GasGuzzler
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2745
Joined: 02 Nov 2015 19:54
Location: Cooke County, TX
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 451 times

Re: 92 and pugnose?

Post by GasGuzzler »

300MP might but L'ilGun has an edge IMO. W296/H110 doesn't really need magnum primers.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
I've always been crazy but it's kept me from going insane.
Redleg11B
Posts: 9
Joined: 05 Dec 2019 16:27
Location: PA

Re: 92 and pugnose?

Post by Redleg11B »

I will look into the 300MP. I need to wait for nicer weather to really get into load development, so I have some time.
Post Reply