Is lead better?

[jouesdeveau]

I have a pre-Model 10 M&P (1946) snubbie, and it is my first revolver. I'm just getting used to it and usually use FMJ. By mistake I bought a box of lead, and my range performance improved noticeably.

Is this just my imagination?

A friend of mine says that those barrels were designed to take lead and that the projectile "obturates" in the barrel, taking on the shape of it grooves and all. According to him all that "obturating" increases the rpm of the projectile, increases stability and so increases accuracy.

Is this too much physics?

I've gotten into the habit of thinking that lead is bad for guns and people, so stick with FMJ. BUT... ??

 

[Ironhand]

I don't know about obturating, but if it shoots better, then why not use lead? It's probably cheaper, too. Find a box of LHP for fightin' ammo, and shoot as much LRN as you can.

 

[moxie]

Your friend is pretty smart. At .38 Spl. velocities, likely around 650-700 fps out of a snubbie, obturation is probably slight, but enough to seal the base of the bullet against the bore and maximize the available pressure. Hence stability increase, and possibly some velocity increase. On the other hand, your range performance could be simply due to this being more consistent ammo, or simply due to the fact that you've got a few more rounds under your belt and are thus a better shooter. Who knows? The sample size is really too small to make an accurate assessment.

 

[Alk8944]

A little lesson for everyone. Obturation. In spite of the fact that the term is used incorrectly nearly 100% of the time by the firearms media, obturation does not mean to expand!

A bullet will slug, bump up, expand, or a few other descriptive words, but this is not obturation. When a bullet expands radially under firing stress the result is obturation, a sealing in the bore to stop gasses from blowing by the bullet and causing gas cutting.

Likewise, often seen is "Obdurate". This is not a synonym for obturate. To be "obdurate" is to be stony, hard, unyielding. Not at all the same.

Now, for jouesdeveau's original question, and the "friend's" comments. Yes, lead bullets will obturate (seal) better in the bore of any gun. Being soft and pliable, assuming the right alloy is being used, it will better conform to the internal shape of the bore. Any bullet will spin at the same rate as the rifling in the barrel, no faster, no slower, assuming it "takes" the rifling as it should. The truth of it is that lead bullets will usually obtain higher velocity than a jacketed bullet. Because of the greater velocity the rate of rotation will be higher which will result in greater stability.

The other side of accuracy, in this case, is that the 158 gr. lead bulleted ammunition is what the gun was designed to use. The 130 gr. FMJ copies of the Air Force M-41 ammunition are about the sorriest excuse for ammunition ever foisted upon the shooting public. It generally isn't very accurate, the velocity is low. Absolutely the only advantage to this stuff is that it is cheap and relatively inexpensive. (I hope you know the difference) Do yourself a favor and shoot lead bullets out of any revolver built before ca. 1965.

Yes, you will get leading. Carry a cleaning rod and a few new, clean, sharp bronze bore brushes. Every 2-3 cylinders full run the brush through the barrel and charge holes a few strokes and leading will never be a problem. Personally I use .375 rifle brushes for .38/.357, works wonderfully!

 

[Ironhand]

A little lesson for everyone. Obturation. In spite of the fact that the term is used incorrectly nearly 100% of the time by the firearms media, obturation does not mean to expand!

A bullet will slug, bump up, expand, or a few other descriptive words, but this is not obturation. When a bullet expands radially under firing stress the result is obturation, a sealing in the bore to stop gasses from blowing by the bullet and causing gas cutting.

Likewise, often seen is "Obdurate". This is not a synonym for obturate. To be "obdurate" is to be stony, hard, unyielding. Not at all the same.

Now, for jouesdeveau's original question, and the "friend's" comments. Yes, lead bullets will obturate (seal) better in the bore of any gun. Being soft and pliable, assuming the right alloy is being used, it will better conform to the internal shape of the bore. Any bullet will spin at the same rate as the rifling in the barrel, no faster, no slower, assuming it "takes" the rifling as it should. The truth of it is that lead bullets will usually obtain higher velocity than a jacketed bullet. Because of the greater velocity the rate of rotation will be higher which will result in greater stability.

The other side of accuracy, in this case, is that the 158 gr. lead bulleted ammunition is what the gun was designed to use. The 130 gr. FMJ copies of the Air Force M-41 ammunition are about the sorriest excuse for ammunition ever foisted upon the shooting public. It generally isn't very accurate, the velocity is low. Absolutely the only advantage to this stuff is that it is cheap and relatively inexpensive. (I hope you know the difference) Do yourself a favor and shoot lead bullets out of any revolver built before ca. 1965.

Yes, you will get leading. Carry a cleaning rod and a few new, clean, sharp bronze bore brushes. Every 2-3 cylinders full run the brush through the barrel and charge holes a few strokes and leading will never be a problem. Personally I use .375 rifle brushes for .38/.357, works wonderfully!

Good point!


My 28-2 HATES this load, even though it's pleasant to shoot and cheap. It also carbons the **** out of the cylinder, as well. I try to shoot only .357 ammo, but I may try some lead 158gr to see if I get better accuracy. There must be warehouses full of the old 130gr components for them to keep loading such a sorry load.


Or maybe it's just me....

 

[brucev]

I have a pre-Model 10 M&P (1946) snubbie, and it is my first revolver. I'm just getting used to it and usually use FMJ. By mistake I bought a box of lead, and my range performance improved noticeably.

Is this just my imagination?

A friend of mine says that those barrels were designed to take lead and that the projectile "obturates" in the barrel, taking on the shape of it grooves and all. According to him all that "obturating" increases the rpm of the projectile, increases stability and so increases accuracy.

Is this too much physics?

I've gotten into the habit of thinking that lead is bad for guns and people, so stick with FMJ. BUT... ??

Lead is good. Use lead. Jacketed is good. At .38 Special velocities, jacketed hollow point/soft point ammunition will seldom give really good expansion. Maybe some selected loads will, but at .38 Special velocities, such expansion is unlikely to be uniformly reliable. However, a .38 lead semi-wadcutter bullet with a nice wide nose will at .38 Special velocities drive deep and cut a .38 hole through the target.

In a properly constructed revolver, either lead or jacketed bullets will properly obdurate to seal the bore. Lead will do so at lower velocities. For target shooting lead hollow based wadcutters routinely produce outstanding accuracy. The same can and is often done with lead SWC's. But either lead or jacketed, rate of spin is purely a function of the pitch of the rifling in the barrel. The composition of the bullet in immaterial. JMHO. Sincerely. bruce.

 

[m1gunner]

The standard ammo for that revolver when it was built was the 158 gr lead round nose. It should shoot very well from your gun.

I like the 158 gr SWC as it cuts a cleaner hole and offers penetration as mentioned above. It should shoot to the same point of impact as the round nose bullet in your gun.

To me, a lead bullet is preferable in my revolvers as they offer better velocity than jacketed with less wear on the barrel (not much, but less than jacketed bullets).

 

[JohnnieB]

As others have said: If lead shoots better, use lead.

Personally, I prefer lead because it's cheaper, either off the shelf or reloading, and shoots just as well, if not better, in every .38spl, .357mag and .45acp I own.
I carry 158gr LSWCHP (Federal 38G) and practice with 158gr LSWC.
SWMBO carries a jacketed HP (Speer 135gr SB-GD), but practices with 148gr LWC.
Except for a few .380auto and .32acp bottom feeders, all of our other guns are fed a steady diet of LSWC, LWC and LRN.
Perhaps I'm just lucky, but the only thing I've had a significant leading problem with was a Colt Ace conversion kit for a 1911A1.
Of course I don't shoot soft lead fast or hard lead slow and I use a brush and/or Boresnake at the range while the barrel is still warm.

 

[cjwils]

I'm sure many of you know this, but use of lead depends to a large degree on where you shoot. All of the indoor ranges that I know of now prohibit lead except for .22 rimfire, due to environmental and health reasons. Some of us who live in cities have little choice but use indoor ranges.

 

[G-ManBart]

A little lesson for everyone. Obturation. In spite of the fact that the term is used incorrectly nearly 100% of the time by the firearms media, obturation does not mean to expand!

A bullet will slug, bump up, expand, or a few other descriptive words, but this is not obturation. When a bullet expands radially under firing stress the result is obturation, a sealing in the bore to stop gasses from blowing by the bullet and causing gas cutting.

You've got your geometry/physics a little bit backwards. Modern bullets don't bump up, or expand at all with smokeless powder. Very soft bullets (like what the BPCR shooters cast with very little tin...1:10 or 1:20 etc) over black powder will bump up, and this is factored into how they're loaded, but nothing modern is loaded that way.

SAAMI specs for a .38/.357Mag shows a land diameter of .346" and groove diameter of .355". Well, we're normally putting either .357" or .358" bullets down those bores, so the bullet actually gets smaller radially when it's forced into the rifling, and that's why/when it obturates. This is also why we measure throats and forcing cones...we want both of those to be larger than the bore diameter, so the bullet isn't squeezed down too small before it hits the rifling. R,

 

[GyMac]

I shoot only lead..except for the one time I happened upon half a box of those 130 grain FMJ's at the range. I was all over the target...and at 15 yards! I then returned to my lead handloads and the groups were much better. I couldn't believe the difference. I know guns sometimes don't like a particular load, but this was ridiculous. Maybe that's why they were left behind. Since then, I've heard of others who have had a similar experience. Part of the problem may be that load.

 

[LouisianaMan]

Add my voice to the pro-lead chorus.

As others note, that is specifically what your gun was designed for. Of course it can shoot jacketed ammo, too, and if you were to test every possible lead and/or jacketed load, you'd find many your gun "liked" and some it didn't, whether lead or jacketed.

AFAIK, the original purpose of adding a jacket to bullets was to allow stabilization of small-caliber rifle bullets at high velocities, around the turn of the last century. We're talking vels above 2000 fps, though, and that's not applicable in the case of a .38 SPL revolver. In other words, lead can do anything a .38 SPL needs. If you punch paper with your M&P, bullet composition doesn't matter per se--either lead or jacketed will do. For defense or hunting purposes, however, time & experience have proved that lead will be somewhat more effective than jacketed at .38 SPL vels (i.e. 600-900 fps), other factors being equal, because (a) the effectiveness of this caliber is dependent upon permanent wound channel; (b) LHPs of a given weight/vel are more likely to expand than JHP, and non-HP bullets of either composition are unlikely to expand; (c) soft lead is noted for crushing its way thru bones it impacts, rather than simply drilling a hole thru them like jacketed or even hard-cast lead bullets.

I'm far less experienced as a shooter, reloader, and bullet caster than many on this forum, but in my experience with assembling .32, .38 and .45 at low to moderate velocities for revolvers, actual leading is very rare. As long as bullet-to-bore fit, velocity, and lead hardness are relatively well-matched, you won't have much of a problem with leading. Fouling, OTOH, will depend on other factors such as powder selection, but fouling is much easier to clean than the much-feared leading. (And should you actually experience any leading, wrap some Chore Boy all-copper kitchen scrubber material around a bore brush and you'll quickly solve that problem.)

 

[scooter123]

A little lesson for everyone. Obturation. In spite of the fact that the term is used incorrectly nearly 100% of the time by the firearms media, obturation does not mean to expand!

A bullet will slug, bump up, expand, or a few other descriptive words, but this is not obturation. When a bullet expands radially under firing stress the result is obturation, a sealing in the bore to stop gasses from blowing by the bullet and causing gas cutting.

Likewise, often seen is "Obdurate". This is not a synonym for obturate. To be "obdurate" is to be stony, hard, unyielding. Not at all the same.

Now, for jouesdeveau's original question, and the "friend's" comments. Yes, lead bullets will obturate (seal) better in the bore of any gun. Being soft and pliable, assuming the right alloy is being used, it will better conform to the internal shape of the bore. Any bullet will spin at the same rate as the rifling in the barrel, no faster, no slower, assuming it "takes" the rifling as it should. The truth of it is that lead bullets will usually obtain higher velocity than a jacketed bullet. Because of the greater velocity the rate of rotation will be higher which will result in greater stability.

The other side of accuracy, in this case, is that the 158 gr. lead bulleted ammunition is what the gun was designed to use. The 130 gr. FMJ copies of the Air Force M-41 ammunition are about the sorriest excuse for ammunition ever foisted upon the shooting public. It generally isn't very accurate, the velocity is low. Absolutely the only advantage to this stuff is that it is cheap and relatively inexpensive. (I hope you know the difference) Do yourself a favor and shoot lead bullets out of any revolver built before ca. 1965.

Yes, you will get leading. Carry a cleaning rod and a few new, clean, sharp bronze bore brushes. Every 2-3 cylinders full run the brush through the barrel and charge holes a few strokes and leading will never be a problem. Personally I use .375 rifle brushes for .38/.357, works wonderfully!

Most of this was once true. However, time and technology has moved on. S&W, Glock, and many other makers are using newer technology rifling methods that offer superior performance with jacketed bullets and do NOT work well with lead bullets. I'll also point out that some of these newer technologies offer performance in accuracy that is a distinct improvement over the older methods.

Point is, if you have cut rifling in your barrel, lead is just fine. However, if you have a newer S&W that features rifling that has the edges rounded over and a barrel finish that resembles melted glass, you're better off shooting jacketed bullets.

 

[flash60601]

A little lesson for everyone. Obturation. In spite of the fact that the term is used incorrectly nearly 100% of the time by the firearms media, obturation does not mean to expand!

A bullet will slug, bump up, expand, or a few other descriptive words, but this is not obturation. When a bullet expands radially under firing stress the result is obturation, a sealing in the bore to stop gasses from blowing by the bullet and causing gas cutting.

The grammar-nazi within wishes to suggest that "upset" may be the exact word you seek, describing this "shortening and radial expansion" that projectiles undergo in firing.

Flash

 

[wbraswell]

Lead is good for guns, but bad for people. Especially when coming out of a rifled barrel.