quote:

Originally posted by casingpoint:
The standard pressure 150 grain Buffalo Bore wadcutter (868 fps/251 me) looks like somebody's huckleberry.

Wadcutters are such great penetrators that pushing them past standard pressure velocities would be pointless and, in fact, a very dangerous overpenetrator IMO. A +p wadcutter would have more recoil and slower follow up shots with little, if any gain in stopping power. One of the best things wadcutters bring to the table is their machinegun-like speed in practiced hands. You'd think someone set the selector switch on the side of your revolver on "auto". I think that Buffalo Bore load makes a lot of sense. I'd love to see how it behaves in gelatin.

quote:

Originally posted by WayneM:What I'm looking for is a similarly accurate standard pressure hollow point round to use for personal defense (not +P).

Winchester offers a standard pressure Silvertip. Give those a try.

Coincidentally, the November issue of "Combat Handguns" has a few articles about J frame revolvers and other "snubbies" including a detailed discussion of what .38 special ammo is best suited for self-defense use. I thought that the article on ammo was well written and the author seemed to know what he was writing about.

The article reached a number of conclusions (I'm paraphrasing, so read the article to make sure that I didn't make any mistakes in the translation): (1) If you want accuracy, use a full metal jacketed bullet; (2) The heavier the full metal jacket, the more accurate; (3) Most of the so-called personal defense rounds that are supposed to expand don't when fired from a snubbie (including +P+ Treasury load); (4) the only bullets that shoot to point-of-aim were 130gr or 158gr lead round-nose ; and (5) Given a choice between shooting to point-of-aim and the available alternatives, the author prefers those that shoot to point-of-aim.

I find both 1 and 3 to be not true.

Evan Marshall's website has a great deal of bullet testing data out of short barreled revolvers. Definitely worth spending some time there.

Number three is BS. My own testing with four layer denim/Perma-Gel from a 360 PD says so. 38 +P DPX and Corbon JHP expand well. Any decent .357 should set up nicely.

#1 for my money is totally wrong.
#3 has such a wide array of ways to be wrong, that it's info is nearly useless.
Did the article make any mention of a lead (either SWC or H/P) bullet, with some nice sharp angles on it's leading edges?

Hi, Guys. Don't shoot the messenger! I only was pointing out what I thought the article said. In fact, I didn't buy everything either. A number of other magazines that I recently read were advocating lighter rounds for greater accuracy. In fact, that was one of the reasons that some folks favor .32 instead of .38 or a .45 (if you can't hit the target, what good is stopping power?). I just thought it might be worthwhile to share.

quote:

Originally posted by flop-shank:

quote:

Originally posted by casingpoint:
The standard pressure 150 grain Buffalo Bore wadcutter (868 fps/251 me) looks like somebody's huckleberry.

Wadcutters are such great penetrators that pushing them past standard pressure velocities would be pointless and, in fact, a very dangerous overpenetrator IMO. A +p wadcutter would have more recoil and slower follow up shots with little, if any gain in stopping power. One of the best things wadcutters bring to the table is their machinegun-like speed in practiced hands. You'd think someone set the selector switch on the side of your revolver on "auto". I think that Buffalo Bore load makes a lot of sense. I'd love to see how it behaves in gelatin.

Well, here ya go... BB Wadcutter Gel Test

rd

Thanks, RD! Like I said, wadcutters penetrate deeply. IMO they could slow those down some. Also notice the straight tracking. That's what I saw in my tests too.

Yer welcome flop!

Spot sent me a box, so expect a "behind the barn" test soon.

rd

MX,
Far from shooting the messenger, I'm grateful you took the time to bring out the articles contentions! No info, is bad info! It just allows folks to (hopefully) make a more educated guess as to what's best for them. This, without having to rely on who's magazine ad is the most strikingly attractive.
Well reasoned and constructed arguments, can always withstand a challenge. This place, and the folks therein, will flog something unworthy like a red headed step child. But sometimes our minds are changed as well?
Well, at least what passes for my mind can change?

Hi, Spotteddog. Thanks. I didn't mean to appear overly sensitive. I don't have the firearms experience to comment authoritatively based on personal knowledge. So many of my comments are based on what I've heard or read. Unfortunately, if I write anything controversial (or repeat something that turns out to be incorrect), I may not have anything in reserve to respond to a follow-up question or comment.

quote:

Originally posted by MX-5:
I don't have the firearms experience to comment authoritatively based on personal knowledge. So many of my comments are based on what I've heard or read.

All of us started out at that point. However, the accuracy of anything contained in the "gunzines" is highly suspect. Look for works by persons with a reputation for accuracy/expertise in the specific field. Charley Petty is good place to start with regard to ammunition.

Cultivate a BS alarm.

quote:

Originally posted by WR Moore:

quote:

Originally posted by MX-5:
I don't have the firearms experience to comment authoritatively based on personal knowledge. So many of my comments are based on what I've heard or read.

All of us started out at that point. However, the accuracy of anything contained in the "gunzines" is highly suspect. Look for works by persons with a reputation for accuracy/expertise in the specific field. Charley Petty is good place to start with regard to ammunition.

Cultivate a BS alarm.

Sometimes there is so much BS that you could cultivate ANYTHING! lol

I know the original question related to non +P loads, but, for what it's worth, the Speer "short barrel" load shoots very close to POA in my 642. It also groups very well.

PC