Rossi Rifleman

Has anyone here used the .357 magnum rifle for hunting hogs? If so, what has been your experience? Also, what loads are best?

massmanute wrote:Has anyone here used the .357 magnum rifle for hunting hogs? If so, what has been your experience? Also, what loads are best?

It is more than enough medicine. I use my 175-grain bullet.

All typos courtesy of DROIDX!

Ranch Dog wrote:

massmanute wrote:Has anyone here used the .357 magnum rifle for hunting hogs? If so, what has been your experience? Also, what loads are best?

It is more than enough medicine. I use my 175-grain bullet.

All typos courtesy of DROIDX!

Thanks for the info.

What alloy do you like for hog hunting?

Also, I don't suppose the 175 grain mold is available in a 2-bullet format is it?

I use a Lyman #2 clone made of WW/tin, water quenched. I only sell the six-cavity mold, sorry.

All typos courtesy of DROIDX!

Ranch Dog wrote:

massmanute wrote:Has anyone here used the .357 magnum rifle for hunting hogs? If so, what has been your experience? Also, what loads are best?

It is more than enough medicine. I use my 175-grain bullet.

All typos courtesy of DROIDX!

Can't get any better proof than that.
I know for a fact that the cartridge will knock whitetails over within 100 yards also.
The FTX ammo might extend that max effective range a bit if you believe Hornadys sales pitch.
The Hornady ammo is quite accurate at the range out of my Rossi Puma (16" bbl).
The .357 Mag is a much nastier critter out of a 16" closed receiver/barrel system than from a vented 4-6" barrel revolver.
Kinda reminiscent of days of old when the cowboys rifle and his side arm shot the same ammo.

The 175 grain bullet mold looks mighty tempting, and I am thinking about going for it.

How close do you all think a person can get to the performance of the Buffalo Bore 180 grain load in a safe hand load?

massmanute wrote:The 175 grain bullet mold looks mighty tempting, and I am thinking about going for it.

How close do you all think a person can get to the performance of the Buffalo Bore 180 grain load in a safe hand load?

The 158s are fine with me cause everything I've shot with them became dead immediately & stayed that way.
If I wanted to do go with a 180 grain bullet I'd need to find one that would expand at the lower .357 Mag velocities as compared to say a 180 grain bullet designed for .35 Rem , .358 Win. or .35 Whelen velocities.
I presume that Buffalo Bore sells their 180 grain bullet for hand loaders???
I don't think there is a lead bullet that you could push fast enough to compete with the Buffalo Bore ballistics........I defer to the forum cast bullet and bullet metallurgy gurus on this issue.
Assuming a number of qualifying 180 grain bullets were found then you'd need to find a cartridge OAL that would cycle through the 92s action and yet leave enough case capacity for an appropriate charge of powder without raising pressure into the red zone.
In order to get a start I'd fall back on research that has already been done.......ie. hand loading manuals.
That Jeff Quin GunBlast website sometimes publishes some pretty useful data on various calibers for guns they've tested.......I got a few .454 Casull loads I'm currently using in my Rossi 92 from there.
I have at least a dozen reloading manuals kicking around & the first place I'd go before even going near the reloading bench would be to those manuals to conjecture some ballpark loads from the data contained therein that would appear to meet the bullet weight & design, cartridge OAL (for action cycling), pressure & velocity criteria needed to approach the Buffalo Bore ballistics.
Looking at Lyman loading manual #46 I see a load using H-110 pushing the Hornady 180 grain jacketed HP bullet to 1100 fps in a 4" revolver.......extrapolating that to a 16" closed receiver/barrel rifle would probably add 300-400 fps to that figure.......only range testing will tell but it seems pretty zippy to me.
One thing in the developers favor is the ultra strong Rossi 92 action.

The rifle in the photo is a Marlin 1894C, I do not have a R92 yet, still looking for one in the same configuration as my 44 Mag I recently bought. Anyway, my load is:

• My TLC359-175-RF cast 95/5, wheelweights/tin with a trace of #8 shot for the antimony, water quenched to deliver a BHN of 21.
• 15.7-grains of Lil' Gun
• 1750 FPS
• 1205 FPE
• 31.0K PSI.

I haven't looked at the ammo you referenced but there is no doubt the R92 has a stronger action than the 1894.

The hog in that picture was one of 11 I killed on St. Patrick's Day last year. I come across the sounder and stayed with them all day and killed every one of them with that rifle. Here on the ranch we refer to it as the St. Patrick's Day Massacre! Oh, the kid with the deer on the home page of my store was using my rifle and this load.

Ranch Dog wrote:The rifle in the photo is a Marlin 1894C, I do not have a R92 yet, still looking for one in the same configuration as my 44 Mag I recently bought. Anyway, my load is:

• My TLC359-175-RF cast 95/5, wheelweights/tin with a trace of #8 shot for the antimony, water quenched to deliver a BHN of 21.
• 15.7-grains of Lil' Gun
• 1750 FPS
• 1205 FPE
• 31.0K PSI.

I haven't looked at the ammo you referenced but there is no doubt the R92 has a stronger action than the 1894.

The hog in that picture was one of 11 I killed on St. Patrick's Day last year. I come across the sounder and stayed with them all day and killed every one of them with that rifle. Here on the ranch we refer to it as the St. Patrick's Day Massacre! Oh, the kid with the deer on the home page of my store was using my rifle and this load.

Over 1200 foot pounds of muzzle energy from a .357 Mag...........impressive !
I presume this load is causing no barrel leading problems or you wouldn't be using it.
That would definitely be in P+ territory and would give the BB load a run for its money.
The Rossi R92 wouldn't have a problem digesting this ammo if the Marlin can & there'd be no "micro groove" rifling in the Rossi to get leaded up like there is in some Marlins.