Since I started casting, I've had a 4 bullet mold for 148gr button-nosed wadcutters. Recently, I acquired a 4 bullet mold for 148gr double-ended wadcutters.

I realize that the double-ended wadcutters would be the desirable bullet, if I were loading for a Model 52 Master. However, all of my wadcutters will be fired in my S&W or Colt revolvers. Does one style of wadcutter offer a performance benefit over the other?

As always, thanks in advance for your help!

__________________
Judge control not gun control!

I have never noticed any. I have used the 148 grain hollow base for the British 380/200 cartridge as it is theoretically about a .361 bore and I figured the skirt fans out to seal the bore. Seems to work. For correctly sized bores I have seen no real difference, but then again I am not a hard-core bullseye shooter. Maybe someone who was real serious about it would notice.

Many say the hollow base wadcutter is most accurate, and it may be, but I'd do a lot of experimenting with whatever I had available or could easily try before I'd buy that as gospel. What you have will likely work very well, just try different alloy mixes (hardnesses), maybe a different diameter, and a variety of fast-burning powders if you have them. Shoot benchrested groups of ten or twelve rounds each from twenty-five yards. You'll quickly find out what works and what doesn't.

You won't notice any difference in your solid wadcutters, flat nose or button nose. Soft swaged hollow based wadcutters need to be loaded light to avoid "blowing the skirt off". Early on I purchased HBWCs for my 38/357 revolvers but soon went to cast DEWCs. First mold was a Lyman DEWC, button noes and slight bevel base. Second was a Lee button nose flat base. I purchased a few WC's on line that were flat nose/flat base and I could not tel any difference in performance between the three DEWCs...

BTW all were sized to same diameter as the cylinder throats.

I've done a lot of work with bullet diameters, alloys, etc. over many years. I've found surprisingly that most, though not all S&W revolvers will shoot a bit more accurately with a .357" bullet instead of the far more popular .358" bullet.

.358" bullets are too large for many S&W chamber throats, but, if you play with the load (and alloy) long enough, you can get the .358" bullet to shoot pretty well. Of course, you need an accurate gun to see any benefit. If you're gun doesn't shoot well to begin with, disregard the fine points and shoot anything; there are some advantages to having an inaccurate handgun.

Let me clarify a little. The majority of my wadcutter ammo will be fired in my K38s, which I have been shooting since I got the first one in the early 1980s. Until I started casting, I had been using HBWCs by both Hornady and Speer. I started casting 148gr BNWCs and 200gr SWCs around 2002.

Earlier this year, I came across a DEWC mold at a yard sale, and naturally picked it up. At this point, I am contemplating letting the yard sale mold go if there isn't a significant difference in performance. Considering the current situation with powder and primers, I don't see myself doing much load development for the DEWCs. Hence, my question.

__________________
Judge control not gun control!

Major E H Harrison in Cast Bullets and in the NRA handloading book claimed that after extensive tests button nosed wadcutters were more accurate by a slight amount. I have no reason not to believe him. but feel most shooters cannot tell the difference.
No load development would be needed for a DEWC vs a button nosed one.

__________________
Front sight and squeeze

I am not a target pistol competitor, But my F-I-L was. he taught me a few things about how to make accurate bullets in general and 38 ammo in particular. He always used ammo loaded on a progressive press, so your bullet would need to be conducive to the press type and he also cast and sized on automated equipment, then the bullet design applies to that too. That is where DEWC's shine; they are omnidirectional!

Bullet alloy is as or even more important as wadcutter design! Lyman #2, Linotype, Stereotype, and Wheel weights are too hard to obturate at target velocities! Pure lead is a great hardness, but exact bullet fit is needed to avoid leading, and the team's guns varied enough they needed to be just a bit harder.

Next factor is velocity. This is a sliding scale of powder charge, bullet design and weight, primer strength, and lastly C.O.A.L. I never realized why my F-I-L's ammo was shy 2 tenths of a grain on the standard Bullseye target load. He used Alcan primers and they add about 50 fps over WSP. (His 38 Special DEWC and his 45 ACP SWC load were both 2/10's grain of Bullseye shy, because of Alcan primers!) Wadcutter length really is only critical For consistency and function in semi-auto target pistols (1911's and S&W 52's) His autos used the same ammo as his revolvers!

Something that was of no concern was cartridge brass! He preferred nickel plated, but that was for ease of loading. His brass was and is a mixed bag of real range brass and was reloaded until the case split! Since different lots and brands can very in length, the seating was a separate step than the HEAVY TAPPER CRIMP. Unheard of in the early 1960's when he started.

The last thing he'd insist that I share, has nothing to do with making ammo. THE IS ACTUALLY NO SUCH THING AS A WEAVER STANCE! Weaver was a champion Bullseye Target competitor, and developed the system of shooting named for him. To use the way he stood without the rest of his system is pointless (and why it fell out of favor in the late 80's). My F-I-L competed against and helped him decide to retire from completive shooting, in later years they were friends as judges at regional and national events. So, just what is the Weaver Method of Competitive Shooting? That is the $50,000 question!

Ivan

There could be a measurable improvement with one style vs. another style, but the shooter would probably be a lot better than I will ever be.

HBWC, BBWC, DEWC, I've used them all at one time or another. They are all pretty good for the intended purpose, and I try to avoid stressing myself over such small stuff.

I should be good enough to take advantage of the difference.

I should have a cold beer with lunch every day, too.

__________________
and what his trumpet saith

While DEWC bullets can be loaded either end up, theoretically, I found they perform better if loaded sprue end down. Cast bullets need a square base to shoot best and the sprue end is more likely to be square and totally filled out. Even so, I use DEWC bullets strictly for practice. Only HBWC’s for competition.

I'd wager that unless one was shooting @ 50yds for score & a Master class shooter they wouldn't be able to exploit the difference . In my experience a HBWC if a quality swaged bullet not undersized & loaded around 700fps will most often shoot a better score ( 38 special ) . Cast rather FB button nosed or DEWC of proper alloy / lube & loaded around 800fps sized correctly will be close , assuming culling for imperfect bullets . Most probably because swaged like jacketed are more uniform . If shooting a semi-auto you also have to adjust loads for function . Another hint not every 38 special performs best with 2.7grs Bullseye & a 148 wadcutter .
For the casual plinker the cheapest way to success is the Lee TL WC , tumble lubed , shot as cast .
Master Gunsmith John Giles was hard taper crimping 38 & 45 target ammo back in the 1960's .

I don't cast but I have used a lot of store bought lead bullets over the years.
98% of my target bullets are either 148 or 158 grains in nature, to
make things easier for me and my log books.

When starting out, I used a lot of Speer, "soft" 148 gr. HBwc bullets
in my M19 6" with lots of powders and was happy with the accuracy.
Today my 686 6" does better with a 158 gr. Lswc in a 38 case, pushed with Red Dot at 753 fps.

My little 2" J frame likes the 148 HBwc but my new shipment of BBwc 148 gr. bullets are showing good accuracy with TB, bullseye & GDot at low and full loads......
as well as a 158 LRN design.

A good fit and correct hardness for the job helps a lot but I was
hoping for one "Magic bullet" but looks like I will have to keep at least four bullets in stock for my revolvers that I use for target work, in my 38's.

Other than for the 52 I am on the 148 BNWC side. I cast for 141-148-and 160.

Attached Images

	DSC00505 (2)LYMAN 141-6.jpg (158.5 KB, 31 views)
	DSC04511.jpg (128.9 KB, 30 views)
	DSC00502 (2)LYMAN 141-4.jpg (122.1 KB, 25 views)
	DSC00558 (2)160.jpg (114.7 KB, 27 views)

In my experience the button nose wadcutters shoot better than the DEWC, but I did not go to exhaustive measures with the DEWC. This was back when I had younger eyes and shot off sandbags a lot. I also found if they were cast hard you have to up the load to get them to obturate and shoot accurately. I'm not talking +P but something approaching a standard service load. The old 2.8 gr of Bullseye did not work well.

More importantly your throats should be a full .358. I've found most modern S&W's to be .357-.3575. One late 60's K38 was .355 to .356. Might be why it looked to have been fired so little when it came to me. I did not even try shooting it before reaming it.

It's a relatively simple thing to ream your throats either yourself or just send the cylinder off. Being a big fan of the .38/.357 I have my own reamer.

<One late 60's K38 WAS .355 -356>I would have tried some 9mm bullets in that one.

I too have noticed that with hard cast wadcutters, the button nose appear to do ever so slightly better

When it comes to the Model 52, the projectile to use is a soft swaged Hollow Base Wad Cutter. This projectile will easily out shoot it's hard cast brothers.

As alredy noted, if you are using an automated progressive press, the choice is the DEWC wadcutter. Not because it shoots better, but because it works better with the machinery.

I do not use a bullet feeder with my progressives, I still hand seat the projectile, especially if I am loading for the Model 52

__________________
"Acta non verba"

Given the barrel came leaded to a fare-the-well I'm thinking that would have done the same.

Not with plated. We will never know.

I only shoot cast bullets.

Hands down button nosed wc's in revolvers. Getting the bullet's body up into the leade of the cylinders is huge/extremely important for accuracy.

A cut-a-way of a revolver cylinder. The top round is seated too deep and the shoulder of the bullet is back from the angled step/leade in the cylinder. The bottom round has a longer oal and the shoulder is in the leade. This aids in bullet alignment/accuracy.


I shot countless 1000's of h&g #50's sized to .357 in different S&W revolvers. Countless 1000's ='s 100,000+ H&G #50 wc bullets

It's a shame that they didn't make tapered nosed wc's for the 38spl/357's like they did for the 44cal's. They are extremely accurate in a wider range of firearms then their button nosed and double ended counterparts. The different wc bullets I use in the 44cal's.


162gr lee button nosed wc
175gr is a custom bullet that is a double ended bullet. It has a short nosed crimp groove on 1 end and a long nosed crimp groove on the other. It's designed that way so you can use the same load in either 44spl or 44mag brass.
200gr is a tapered nosed cramer bullet
220gr is a hbwc
245gr is a lyman tapered nosed bullet 429352

Those tapered nosed wc's can use the same reloading data as the swc's & the nose of them aligns well in the leade of any revolver cylinder. Typical 6-shot 25yd groups with the tapered nosed wc's in a 44mag/target load. Groups like these are easily duplicated with several different powders and that 200gr bullet combo.


With revolvers it's all about getting the nose of the bullet out into the leade of the cylinders. Bullets on the left (Mihec 359640's) are sized to .358" and are crimped in the bottom crimp groove in 38spl cases to be used in a 357/686. Bullets on the right (H&G #50) are sized to .357" and crimped in the middle lube groove in 38spl cases to be used in a 357/686. The Mihec bullet is seated so it aligns in the leade of the cylinders. The #50 is seated so it not only is aligned in the leade of the cylinders. The oal is just short of full cylinder length meaning the top and 1st drive bands are in the leade's. And the 3rd drive band is just starting in the leade.


Typical 6-shot groups @ 50ft with those loads pictured above in a S&W 686.