25-2 accuracy better with hardball...?

[Kurt kaBOOM]

I bought a really nice 25-2 y, a month or so ago, mainly to shoot bullseye along with my 17-4 and 14-4. I've read a lot about the oversize throats and how they may not shoot LSWC very well, and might do pretty good with FMJ. I've shot a lot of both now, using Wilson gr. LSWC reloads and Freedom Munitions 230 gr FMJ rounds...I'm not presently reloading. I shoot well enough to say it does shoot noticebly better with the hardball. Great! Question is why? Same size bullet, as far as I know, but the FMJ really groups tighter. How's come? Thanks!
Kurt

 

[Art Doc]

I've heard the rifling is shallow and that was to work with FMJ military type ammo. Maybe a hold over from the 1917? Who knows. I have not seriously tested what bullets work well in my 25-2. Now I have a new project...

 

[keithherrington]

I shot them in Bullseye for many years and got the best accuracy by far with 200 grain H&G #68 SWC lead bullets. Hardball never performed worth a darn for me. 200 grain SWC from Laser Cast provided very consistent accuracy, but other manufacturers as well provided good quality bullets, for example: Missouri, Meister, and Rim Rock. If 200 is too heavy for you in terms of recoil, then the H&G #130 195 grain SWC is good as well. I found that flat base worked better than bevel base.

Keith

 

[1955joe]

from what i gather a leady will expand slightly and seal better. also read that round nose can allow bullet to rock slightly before entering bore. have shot both thru mine. think the wc is more accurate

 

[mike campbell]

How's come?

Only the gun knows.

If you did handload, you'd soon find there are a near infinite number of combinations of bullets and powders. Some would be accurate in your gun...many would not.

You've tested only two and this particular LSWC load beats this particular FMJ load. How can we conclude it's the lead vs jacket and not a difference in bullet diameter? or the primer? powder? bullet weight? velocity? It could well be, if you tested a variety of SWC and FMJ loads, you'd find in the majority of cases your gun actually prefers FMJ's....or not. That's part of the fun of testing, learning the vagaries of a particular gun.

 

[BUFF]

At one point a few years back, I had four of them, one six incher, the others six and a half. I had a Ransom Rest. My shooting buddy had another one. One day, a long day, we shot all five from the rest with about ten kinds of ammunition and there was not a single load that all of them shot best. Each had it's favorite. We tried Federal match 230 hardball, W-W 185 grain jacketed match, swaged SWC, cast SWC, even 250 grain SWC cast.

I have no idea why this is so. There was probably twenty years age difference between the oldest and youngest guns.

About all I can recommend is to try everything you can.

 

[H Richard]

There is a variance in the chamber throats, and depending on your particular gun it may or may not like lead bullets. My particular 25-2 does seem to prefer 230 JRN. I have tailored some H&G 68 bullets to it and they shot satisfactorily, but not any better then the hardball.

 

[keithherrington]

A case of apples and oranges...

Some of those posting don't seem to realize that many (possibly most) of the loads discussed (bullets and bullet/powder combinations) were designed specifically for the 1911. But the old timer's knew that the requirements for an accurate load for a revolver were significantly different. Most important seemed to be the need for a longer bearing surface vs the head length of the bullet. The longer bearing surface aided in the transition from the cylinder to the rifling. Bullets like the 185 grain Remington jacketed wadcutter had bearing surfaces so short that transitioning into the rifling without canting was problematic at best. If you do some research you'll find that the H&G #16 was originally designed for the 45 Auto Rim in the 1917 revolver, and improved upon the original 230 RN design (like the H&G #34) by having a slightly longer bearing surface. However, many old timers swore by the H&G #78, also known as the Rowland bullet. In comparison, the current industry standard, the H&G #68 is designed for use in the 1911.

Here is a picture of the H&G #78. You'll notice the longer bearing surface and the flat base. Nominal weight is 215 grains.


Keith