148 DEWC Practice Load for 642-2

[sonofthebeach]

I've finally got some decent MBC 148 DEWC (10 BNH) bullets to load some .38 Spl practice loads for my 642. They're sized .358, and I don't expect any of the dreaded leading/accuracy problems that I had with a bunch of 18 BNH .357 dia. DEWC bullets I tried a few months back.

I'm ready to drop charges of BE into my primed cases, and was wondering what advice/experience any of you have had with paper-punching loads out of the 1-7/8" barrel of the 642. I'm not concerned with recoil or anything, but just want some decent, consistent loads for practice (7-10yds).

I used to load 3.0 gr BE for my 4" model 19, and that worked out pretty well. I could just work up some loads, experimenting as I go along. But I'd sure appreciate any suggestions of loads that worked really well for you out of a similar short-barreled j-frame.

I also have some Clays, 231, or Unique that I could use, but was hoping to begin with BE.

I have different sources of load data for these bullets, with OAL's of 1.165-1.252". Do you people seat your DEWC's flush, or put a light roll crimp on the bottom of the top groove?

Thanks for your help here.

---Andy

 

[alwslate]

For a carry load in my 1 7/8" 37 I worked up to 3.8 grs BE with a 148
DEWC crimped in a top groove, leaving about 1/8" bullet sticking out.
Gives about 800 fps in my gun but this might be a bit heavy for your
objective. I wanted an effective standard pressure load for my alloy gun.

 

[sonofthebeach]

Alwslate,

Thanks for your reply. I'll think I'll try loading 25 rnds each of 3.0gr, 3.2gr, 3.4gr, and 3.6gr BE, and see how the loads compare. If I see a pattern of improvement as loads increase, I'll keep working upwards until the performance seems to drop off.

Thanks again.

 

[OKFC05]

Unless you just enjoy pain, load 3 gr and go to the range.
No reason to go heavier for a practice load.

I recommend finishing practice with 5 rounds of carry ammo.

 

[acl864]

......................

 

[sonofthebeach]

OKFC05, no, I'm not a really big fan of pain. The slightly modified (cut shorter) Hogue rubber grip that's on my 642 tames a lot of the recoil, but since I'm not looking for a carry load, I'll start with the 3.0 gr BE. I guess the only reason I was considering heavier loads was because of the bad experience I had with that batch of hard, .357" sized cast bullets which needed heavier charges of powder to prevent heavy bore-leading and key-holing.

I'll start out with the 3.0 gr BE...that might be all I need for what I want to do at the range. I'll end the range session with 5 rnds of the Gold Dot 135 SB's. When I've found a good "light" practice load for my 642, I might work on slightly heavier loads behind either a 148 WC or 158 SWC. At $1.25+ a round for factory SD ammo, the cost of practicing with carry ammo is getting prohibitive for me. Yet I still feel that factory ammo, while awfully expensive, might be ultimately more reliable...I've never had a handload fail to ignite, except when I started changing out hammer springs on revolvers, but I still think I'd trust factory ammo that I've tested in my guns more completely than my handloads.

And acl864, that load of Unique behind a 148 DEWC does seem pretty stiff, and is more than I'd want to practice with. But I bet it would be a really effective round for SD, as long as the loading process was pretty carefully done, and the alloy was hard enough keep leading down. I haven't found a powder measure that would throw charges of Unique more accurately than +/- .2 grain. I'm currently using a Redding Competition model 10X-Pistol Powder Measure, which is the most accurate measure I've used, and even this measure has its days with Unique. If I was working with near top-pressure loads of Unique, I would probably pull out the powder trickler and weigh individual charges.

Sometimes I wish that I had a chronograph...that would help me to work up loads for different purposes more efficiently. But that's one of the great things about this forum...I can always draw on the experiences of others, which usually puts my thinking in perspective, and keeps me from making decisions that aren't realistic for me.

Thanks again all.

---Andy

 

[acl864]

.....................

 

[S&WPete]

2.8 Gr. of Bullseye under a 148 Gr. Wadcutter has been a traditioal low recoil target load for eons. Try it you might like it in your gun.

 

[Dale53]

I have found that I get better results with dbl ended wadcutters if I up the powder charge over the same loads with a hollow base wadcutter.

Currently, I am taper crimping on the rear of the first band (having the first band nearly out of the case helps reduce the jump to the throat). I get excellent accuracy (well under 1" at 25 yards off a rest) and they shoot well at fifty yards, also. Here is a post I made on the Cast Bullet Assn Forum:

Here's what can happen if you listen to Ed Harris... - Hand Guns - Guns & Shooting - The Cast Bullet Association Inc. Forum

Notice that I am loading 3.5 grs of Bullseye but with the first band almost out of the case. Further, to guarantee perfect bases (often considered the steering end of the bullet) I seat the bullet "sprue up". It is a bit ugly but I am interested solely in performance - that is to say, accuracy.

This load works very well for me in my 642, also (I just don't shoot it quite as well as my Model 14 with Bomar Rib nor with my 6" 686). The longer sight radius DOES make a difference>)).

It is illuminating to watch a good shooter with a snubbie at twenty five yards. They will surprise you.

FWIW
Dale53

 

[alwslate]

When it comes to SD loads for carry I may differ from some in that I have more confidence in my handloads than I do in factory loads.

 

[TSQUARED]

For a practise load in my S&W642 I use my old bullseye pistol load - 2.8 gr. Bullseye, Rem 1.5 behind the 148 gr. Remington LHBWC. Easy on the wrist.

 

[bluetopper]

You've got some great Bullseye info...also, 2.7 of Clays is as accurate a wadcutter load as I've ever loaded.

 

[nitesite]

I shoot far more cast DEWCs because I cast them myself and they are quite inexpensive. But those Remington swaged hollow base wadcutters are truly some of the most accurate bullets to ever leave a barrel. I have a few hundred that I am saving. For what, I really don't know. I just don't want to say I shot all of them up!

 

[sonofthebeach]

I want to thank you all for all of your help. I'm going to try out most of what you all have suggested, until maybe i can get to shoot my 642 into less than 1" at 25 yards.

I've read that these snubs can really shoot...that it's mainly the difficulty that shooters have in overcoming the challenges associated with the light weight and short sight radius that results in the "poor accuracy" reputations of the guns.

Even with a longer sight radius and more weight, I'd still have a problem with focusing my eyes on iron sights. And, to add to the frustrations of shooting at distances greater than 10 yards, I'd need a spotting scope to confirm that I didn't miss the paper...ahh the joys of entering the golden years.

By the way, I've seen a lot of load data that exceeds some of the loads in the 2000 editions of the "one book/one caliber" reloading manuals that I now have...I guess it's better to have data that's too conservative rather than the other way around, but some of the loads suggested or cited on several forums exceeds the maximum load data in my literature, and yet is claimed to work really well for the people who quote it.

In addition to the various dated single-caliber manuals, I have Lyman's 48th Reloading Handbook, and Sierra's 50th Anniversary Edition handgun reloading manual. I think if I want to keep up with contemporary reloading wisdom, I'm going to have to find some online data that I can trust, or else update some of my older literature.

Thanks again.

 

[bluetopper]

A lot of the old 1911 style semi auto bullseye guns made for the 38 wadcutter needed a charge that exceeded todays max loadings to even cycle the action. To go a bit over max of the low pressure 38 I don't think hurts one bit, and in a lot of instances helps accuracy.