Tremendous post and thread of responses!!! Very very much appreciate it in its entirety. Sincerely. bruce.
.38 wadcutter load
- Thread starter rockquarry
- Start date
Thanks for the links...some good reading there. I do appreciate it...hal'
OP
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 9,201
- Reaction score
- 11,415
Anything written by Glen Fryxell is worth reading if you have a real interest in cast bullets.
skwchock
US Veteran
I live in no. Virginia, there are few places where you can shoot -- The couple of shooting ranges I go to are 50+ minutes away in drive time. The indoor range is fairly expensive (about $40 month). They are always crowded. It is a real hassle to "have fun shooting" -- It is not something you do at the "spur of the moment" -- because the journey will take about 1 hr travel and only 1 hour of fun (that's the limit for shooting at the range).
4barrel
Member
If you have a gun that shoots a consistent 1.5'' 10 shot group --a good hbwc will do better. In my findings a 38 special auto will be a better testing tool, <like a model 52 S&W>
4barrel
Member
This is a great and timely thread. I just got 500 148gr DEWC's from Acme. Once I finish with my 158gr SWC loads I'm going to make some wadcutters. I've got 700x and Titegroup for super fast powders. Think I'm going to try 3.1gr of Titegroup as that's Lyman's accuracy load. I'll be testing them out from my 67 no dash and Diamondback (ewwww! A Colt!)
4barrel
Member
I think 3.1 grains of 700x will group better. Let us know. I think the Colt has a 1 in 14 twist and may like them better if both are 6''. I found this old Colt-S&W wad cutter chart for what it's worth.
Attachments
Last edited:
OP
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 9,201
- Reaction score
- 11,415
I've been curious about the hollow base wadcutters and have wanted try them but never got around to doing it. Instead, I've always used the conventionally designed H&G #50.
According to the Glen Fryxell article, he's seen no accuracy advantage with the hollow base wadcutter over other wadcutter bullets. Fryxell's a recognized cast bullet expert with the credentials, not the YouTube type, so he probably knows what he's talking about. I'm not implying his is the final word; we still need to do our own testing to verify what works for us in our guns, but Fryxell's advice is worth following up on.
4barrel
Member
I managed this bench group at 25 yards a few years ago using 700x with a friend's model 19-4. I don't really like it but It looks new and nickel 6'' and shoots like a target gun. He refuses to sell the gun but he doesn't shoot it. Using an H&G 50 mold I like American Select 3.2-3.8 with a wheel gun. It doesn't do better than Bullseye but it's cleaner. Berry's bullets makes a plated 148 hbwc that's accurate. To me Star and 3D made the better 148 hbwc. They measure .358 with a thin grease groove in the middle. Zero makes a good one. Remington makes a messy one that's oversize and soft.<.361>. When I size then to .358 for one of my auto's they distort a bit. I got a couple pair of new glasses yesterday so maybe I can pick up a little.
Attachments
Last edited:
OP
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 9,201
- Reaction score
- 11,415
I've had an H&G #50 flat base 4-cavity mould for over forty years. It's the only wadcutter mould I have, so I have not made accuracy comparisons with other wadcutter designs.
However, it seems to me there are other designs that would shoot just as accurately, maybe even better, though that's only a guess.
FWIW, the theory is that the skirt of the HBWC will expand (obturate) to more fully engage the rifling of the barrel, thereby increasing the spin on the bullet and (in theory) resulting in greater accuracy.
Personally, I have avoided HBWC bullets, because of all the cautions I have read about loading them too hot and unintentionally "blowing the skirt off" of them. Leaving a skirt in the barrel is just almost as bad as having a squib stuck in the barrel.
Not something I've ever been willing to risk, since I am not enough of a crack shot to actually take advantage of the potential accuracy benefit of the HBWCs. If I were a serious competitor where fractions of an inch in group size would make a significant difference, then it might be worth it to load HBWCs vs the less risky "button" or DEWC designs.
Since I'm not, I figure the risk isn't worth the reward. For me "the juice isn't worth the squeeze" - but YMMV.
Last edited:
Thanks BC38, I have no interest in hot loads as these old wrists don't do well with recoil and I'll stick with my standard loads. I do appreciate your explanation.
Paul in Nevada
Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2021
- Messages
- 870
- Reaction score
- 1,020
Well, then... Don't load them too hot. There's hardly a lack of safe load data for this bullet style.
4barrel
Member
Here is a Remington HBWC with the base still in the case going too hot. I was shooting a 10 shot group at 25y and had a spotter. I had two flyers and checked the brass. This was 3.2 American Select. It was printing high but grouping ok.<Trying new powder with a hbwc> THAT'S a piece of lead I dug out of the board behind the target. at 1 0clock. You can see the slit hole in the paper.
Attachments
Last edited:
StrawHat
Member
I love it.
Alternatively, you could load them upside down, like some of the old timers used to do. 
4barrel
Member
Well --Dummy me loaded a few more and it did it again with American Select but Bullseye powder was ok. Maybe A.S. takes off too fast? Remington's were the only ones to separate. Star and 3D was ok. I learned not to use A.S. with a hbwc but is super with other wad cutters 3.2-3.8 with 38 special. <VERY LIGHT roll crimp.>just enough to take the flare out.
Last edited:
Well, my concern has always been "what is TOO hot?"
Look at 4barrel's post. He didn't think he was loading too hot - but the skirts blew off anyway. Lucky for him they stayed in the brass rather than lodging in the barrel.
All it takes is just a touch too much powder, or a flaw in the bullet casting, or even an alloy that turns out to be too soft.
Like I said, FOR ME, the juice ain't worth the squeeze.
