This is exactly why I do not use Grizzly Ammunition. You don't know what it is loaded with unless you pull the bullets. A few months ago, I tried a box of the Grizzly .357 Magnum with a 200 grain lead SWC GAS CHECK. The ammunition was high quality and shot very well. Velocities from my 4.2" Ruger GP-100 averaged 1,250 fps. The ammo did everything it was advertised to do. The problem is, I recovered some of the bullets and found they had no gas checks. They were heeled bullets, intended for gas checks, but no gas checks were installed. I contacted the company via e-mail, asking what's the deal. The have never responded. Whatever is printed on the box should be what is in the box. Grizzly, apparently, will load whatever components they have on hand.
@@Master...deBater No. But I fired these into dry sand, and into a stack of dry newspapers from just about a foot away and pointing downward. There was no place else for the gas checks to go. I assure you, there were no gas checks. If they had been there, I would have found them. I had the same idea. "Maybe they came off". They didn't. I emailed Grizzly about this. They never responded. I watched another video with someone testing Grizzly 158 grain .357 Magnum ammunition. The velocities were higher than could be obtained with 158 grain bullets. The youtuber pulled some of the bullets and found them to be 125 grainers. Grizzly Ammunition cannot be trusted.
I'm quite shocked that, with the velocity and kinetic energy it generated after each fired round, your 3" Taurus 605 behaves more like a 4" S&W 686. I do have a 3" S&W model 60, also in .357 magnum, but I don't have a chronograph. I'd like to see more of these tests.
This video is gives proof to my argument of why I carry 357mag and not watered down 10mm. Kinda messed up its a 125gn and not 158🤷♂️. Enjoyed the video 👍👍
@@VoyagingVoyager I meant 357sig, but i carry mag too. But if i ever lived anywhere that i had to have 15rnd of 10mm with a backup mag Id move outta the war zone. Unlless you live in Alaska or Rock Mtn, somewhere with lots of bear
I called and spoke with an employee who said they'd have the owner get back in touch with me, which never happened. I sent two follow-up emails over the next week to ten days. No response to any of it. I'm disappointed by their lack of customer service and quality control.
Just picked up wifes Taurus 692 today ! So far have 3 boxes/brands of ammo , fiocchi 357 158, underwood 38 +p125 & norma 9mm 124fmjs to start breaking it in...lol
I agree with other viewers. Alarming loss of quality control, but very good expansion and penetration for .357 Magnum. I do carry a 3" .357 Magnum. If we were to straighten out the mystery here, this is one cartridge that I'd be willing to carry. How was recoil?
I forgot to mention that. I found it to be much more tolerable than I expected. To me it felt more like a solid 'push' and not as 'snappy' as other lighter 357 rounds. Some rounds almost 'hurt' and can result in a flinch, but this one was not bad.
@@NorthwoodsTesting At some point do a follow-up if you can solve the weight/labeling issue. 158 grain recoil in a lighter framed .357 Magnum revolver can cross your eyes and cause excessive swearing. Thanks.
Great velocity from three inch, a three is always a better performer than 2.5, dont think that gun was made for those beefy rounds but it could hold up I guess.
I believe it's steel frame (cerakote finish) so I'm not concerned about it holding up. I am concerned with what the actual pressure of these rounds may be though...
No way they did that by accident, anybody that reloads is gonna be suspicious of those numbers from the jump. Ammo manufacturers know what that window should be before they even make the ammo. Unless your just goin off the map buffalo bore style or messin with lilgun those numbers are a pipedream n you will not find that listed data anywhere for a 4 or 5 inch revolver.
Still an uncertainty in my book. Especially since I couldn't get a call/email back from Grizzly to address the issue. I saw today the 3rd party is again selling '158' grain 357 mag rounds, but my prior review questioning the actual contents is now gone. The other reviews are still there...
This is exactly why I do not use Grizzly Ammunition. You don't know what it is loaded with unless you pull the bullets. A few months ago, I tried a box of the Grizzly .357 Magnum with a 200 grain lead SWC GAS CHECK. The ammunition was high quality and shot very well. Velocities from my 4.2" Ruger GP-100 averaged 1,250 fps. The ammo did everything it was advertised to do. The problem is, I recovered some of the bullets and found they had no gas checks. They were heeled bullets, intended for gas checks, but no gas checks were installed. I contacted the company via e-mail, asking what's the deal. The have never responded. Whatever is printed on the box should be what is in the box. Grizzly, apparently, will load whatever components they have on hand.
Did you pull any bullets...gas checks don't always remain intact after being fired?
@@Master...deBater No. But I fired these into dry sand, and into a stack of dry newspapers from just about a foot away and pointing downward. There was no place else for the gas checks to go. I assure you, there were no gas checks. If they had been there, I would have found them. I had the same idea. "Maybe they came off". They didn't. I emailed Grizzly about this. They never responded. I watched another video with someone testing Grizzly 158 grain .357 Magnum ammunition. The velocities were higher than could be obtained with 158 grain bullets. The youtuber pulled some of the bullets and found them to be 125 grainers. Grizzly Ammunition cannot be trusted.
I'm quite shocked that, with the velocity and kinetic energy it generated after each fired round, your 3" Taurus 605 behaves more like a 4" S&W 686. I do have a 3" S&W model 60, also in .357 magnum, but I don't have a chronograph. I'd like to see more of these tests.
I digest a lot of test data. I’ve come to the conclusion newer Taurus and Ruger 38/357 barrels are generating better velocity’s than the competition.
That is saying a lot for a 3"inch barrel .357 Magnum. I have this gun. I will go look and purchase these rounds 💯
This video is gives proof to my argument of why I carry 357mag and not watered down 10mm. Kinda messed up its a 125gn and not 158🤷♂️. Enjoyed the video 👍👍
Yeah a 10mm is really watered down…🙄. Ill take my 16 “watered down” rounds over your six 357 any day.
@@VoyagingVoyager I meant 357sig, but i carry mag too. But if i ever lived anywhere that i had to have 15rnd of 10mm with a backup mag Id move outta the war zone. Unlless you live in Alaska or Rock Mtn, somewhere with lots of bear
Did you ever hear anything more from Grizzly?
I called and spoke with an employee who said they'd have the owner get back in touch with me, which never happened. I sent two follow-up emails over the next week to ten days. No response to any of it. I'm disappointed by their lack of customer service and quality control.
Even for 125 gr. still pretty warm loaded round.
Just picked up wifes Taurus 692 today ! So far have 3 boxes/brands of ammo , fiocchi 357 158, underwood 38 +p125 & norma 9mm 124fmjs to start breaking it in...lol
I love my 692! It's a poor man's 586 L-Comp. I just wish Taurus (or any aftermarket maker) would offer a night sight or even fiber optic for the 692.
some good expansion
Solid energy transfer on this round
Thanks for the test! I recently purchased an old 4in S&W model 65-3, and I'm looking for some good self defense ammo.
I do have a lot more to test in both 38 and 357 fyi
I agree with other viewers. Alarming loss of quality control, but very good expansion and penetration for .357 Magnum. I do carry a 3" .357 Magnum. If we were to straighten out the mystery here, this is one cartridge that I'd be willing to carry. How was recoil?
I forgot to mention that. I found it to be much more tolerable than I expected. To me it felt more like a solid 'push' and not as 'snappy' as other lighter 357 rounds. Some rounds almost 'hurt' and can result in a flinch, but this one was not bad.
@@NorthwoodsTesting At some point do a follow-up if you can solve the weight/labeling issue. 158 grain recoil in a lighter framed .357 Magnum revolver can cross your eyes and cause excessive swearing. Thanks.
Interesting gr weight 🤔
Great velocity from three inch, a three is always a better performer than 2.5, dont think that gun was made for those beefy rounds but it could hold up I guess.
Great Idea to check that wow..even for 125 that is great from a three but something is fishy for sure.
I believe it's steel frame (cerakote finish) so I'm not concerned about it holding up. I am concerned with what the actual pressure of these rounds may be though...
I have some grizzly in 357 sig and the bullet crimp was horrible and noticed setback on some and after watching your video I will pass on that ammo.
Wow, I'll stick with 158gr HTPs.
No way they did that by accident, anybody that reloads is gonna be suspicious of those numbers from the jump. Ammo manufacturers know what that window should be before they even make the ammo.
Unless your just goin off the map buffalo bore style or messin with lilgun those numbers are a pipedream n you will not find that listed data anywhere for a 4 or 5 inch revolver.
Can't blame Grizzly. I suspect the third party company is at fault. As none of the Grizzly boxes in my possession have the extra label.
Still an uncertainty in my book. Especially since I couldn't get a call/email back from Grizzly to address the issue. I saw today the 3rd party is again selling '158' grain 357 mag rounds, but my prior review questioning the actual contents is now gone. The other reviews are still there...
I’m not surprised from that company. Their loadings are usually slow. The 10 is pathetic.