Atomic reverse wad cutters

Register to hide this ad
It is my understanding that the skirts tend to blow off on reversed hollow base wadcutters. My GUESS is that they would tend to give inadequate penetration, but that Is only a guess. It was a common roll our own SD load way back when.
 
Looks like a great idea. Granted years ago folks may not have had uniformly stellar results loading HBWC backward. Doubtless the skirts on those bullets are not uniformly sized, there are bound to be some brands that are more heavily designed than others. Certainly using a bullet with a more substantial skirt would be a good idea. If you anticipate having to shoot through assorted car windshields, refrigerators, etc., then this is not the bullet you want to use. But used in a SD/HD incident, these bullets loaded to an effective velocity would be a good choice. Will be interested to see what results folks obtain using this AA load.
 
IIRC the sometimes problem was that the center of the bullet would blow thru and leave the rest stuck in the bbl.
The center was very thin on some as the cavity was very deep.

Most of the 38 W/Cs bought were sweged and were very soft lead. They were fine for what they were intended for,,light target loads.
When trying to pump them up into something like a +P , the reletively thin center of the very soft alloy bullet blasted through.
That occured whether they were loaded upside down or not.

The problem never caught much attension until the craze of upside-down loading them started to catch on.
It was supposed to be an easy way to make your M36 or D/Sp into a real stopper.

Hard cast alloy HBWC bullets don't have the tendency to blow through, but the word was out,,and most shied away from using the loading procedure no matter which W/C.

Much better bullets & powder choices available now than there was in the early 60's when I first recall a lot of talk about it in the gun rags.. I'm sure there were those loading the HBWC backwards before that too.
 
With the ones I played with several every many years ago, both cast and swaged, you had to keep the velocity down (650 - 750fps IIRC) or the nose would fragment on impact with the target. At the lower velocities the expansion was very good and consistent but penetration was marginal. I never tried any hard cast but I suspect the results would be a smaller expansion and more likelihood that the nose would fragment on impact with the target.
I was never able to get any kind of reliable performance at +P velocities which was really OK by me because part of the reason I was playing with the load was for recoil sensitive folks and air-weight guns.
I will say that when done right the results are impressive with a VERY light recoil and blast.
Chip King
 
Last edited:
If such rounds were effective SD loads, don't you think that every major ammo manufacturer would have introduced such a product?

It goes to show you that there are still novice and ill-informed shooters that believe that reverse HBWC bullets are adequate SD loads.

There are plenty of street proven SD loads in 38Spl available on the market that people don't have to buy such unproven gimmick ammo.
 
About like how my Cherokee compares to a Stryker. In this age of high perfomance hollowpoints there is no need for workarounds like that.
 
OKFC05 said:
This was new and exciting---30-40 years ago. Any of the modern defense loads are vastly superior.
Click to expand...

That's about how long ago I remember reading about using HBWC bullets backwards, I seem to remember that they started to keyhole after a short distance and the skirt separation was also an issue.
 
CTG_COLLECTOR said:
If such rounds were effective SD loads, don't you think that every major ammo manufacturer would have introduced such a product?

It goes to show you that there are still novice and ill-informed shooters that believe that reverse HBWC bullets are adequate SD loads.

There are plenty of street proven SD loads in 38Spl available on the market that people don't have to buy such unproven gimmick ammo.
Click to expand...


I bought two boxes last Summer in Ft. Worth and have shot one box. In my 442 they were super accurate out to 15 yds. with zero keyholing.

Remember that the ammo cos. are in business to make money first. That trumps anything else they may say. The last engineer I talked with at ATK was a functional idiot IMO. As well, Jim Cirillo used a WC type bullet with great success in some of his lauded shootouts. I don't see it so much as "gimmick" ammo, but yet another arrow in the quiver of those who are not 100% sold on "short barrel" .38 ammo. At its worst it's going to act like a WC on flesh which is no bad news. Since it's soft lead it would in all likelihood act like the Rem. +p LSWCHP. Just my two cents.
 
I think it would be the ultimate HP. If they work well for you, I dont see any reason for not using them. Esp if they're priced more attractively than the whizbang JHP stuff.
I tried loading some of my own "lead hollow points" by reversing Speer HBWC's over a stout charge of W231, but I got some indications of bullet yawing at the target so didn't pursue it. If the cavity of Atomic's bullets isn't too deep, they wouldn't be as tail-heavy as the reversed Speers and therefore might not have the same instability issues.
 
Pisgah said:
Actually, more like 50-60 years ago...
Click to expand...

Now wait a minute - really? I remember Dean Grinnell writing about this when I was a lad. He must have thought he was a real devil with some of the goofy stuff he came up with, but I enjoyed it. :D He was an entertaining writer.

I'd much prefer more modern ammunition. If relying on a handload, the old H&G 051 style bullet with the wide, flat nose running along at about 900 FPS would be nothing to sneeze at.
 
At $38.99/50 from Midway, I wouldn't call them attractively priced, not when you can get 50 Golden Saber 125+Ps for $31.94/50 from ammunitiondepot.com.

And they are unproven.

Just a pricy gimmick.
 
They have worked over the years............
the bullet in their picture looks like a water or gel test, only.

They did not state that that bullet went through the 4 layer Levi test. Some times this load will plug.... but at over 800 fps it still is a load with lots of energy and have enough penetration.

If all you have is a 148gr HBwc for a SD load, it still beats tossing rocks.
 
I made some of those back in the 70s',yes I'm old. Used a 'duplex' powder load to drive them as wasn't much space left in the 38sp case. Had a problem with leading due to 'ablation'( a term you don't see anymore) solved by putting a very thin foam disc between powder and bullet. Never had a problem with accuracy with either a S&W M36 3" or S&W M19 6".
 
No thanks, I'll stick with the forty-year success record of the FBI load. I hope to try the Speer short-barrel stuff, but until I find and can afford it, the Remington FBI stuff makes me feel secure.
 
I haven't play with those since the 70s',no reason to as ammo has improved compared to back then. Back then it was FMJ and lead RN for revolvers and FMJ for pistols. Lee Jurras started the performance ammo with the 'Super Vel' line. Soon all the manufacturers followed his lead and the ammo we have today is great.
 
If my butt is on the line I am not going to put my trust in some cobbled up home-brew load. There is too much quality ammunition of proven quality on the market today.
 
I think too many people put altogether more faith in ANY .38 HP than is deserved out of a snubbie.
 
M29since14 said:
Now wait a minute - really? I remember Dean Grinnell writing about this when I was a lad. He must have thought he was a real devil with some of the goofy stuff he came up with, but I enjoyed it. :D He was an entertaining writer.

I'd much prefer more modern ammunition. If relying on a handload, the old H&G 051 style bullet with the wide, flat nose running along at about 900 FPS would be nothing to sneeze at.
Click to expand...

Dean Grennell was (is) one of my all time favorite gunwriters.
Amongst the new cool stuff, was a solid base of excellent ballistic fundamentals. And some of the 'new cool stuff' from the old GunWorld days is standard protocol nowadays.
That guy was way ahead of his time.
 
I experimented extensively with reversed HBWC loads during the 1970's and 1980's. Never once did I experience a "blow-through" or bullet lodged in the bore. I did find that accuracy declined rapidly as pressures and velocities were increased. Also, the soft lead swaged HBWC bullets are prone to heavy leading (bore, forcing cone, cylinder face, frame interior, cylinders), particularly with heavier charges of powder. A final observation was that these loads can be quite difficult to load rapidly, having no tapered bullet surface to guide the rounds into the chambers.

My conclusion was that the reversed HBWC loads were very useful in the short-barreled revolvers, which cannot make use of the ballistic potentials of higher pressure loads anyway and are thus limited to relatively low velocities. I found that the standard target load of 3.0 grains of Bullseye, standard primer, and bullet seated nearly flush with a firm roll crimp, always gave excellent accuracy and provided very impressive expansion in any media tried. Shot 5 rounds from a Model 36 into the chest cavity of a dead antelope at about 6 feet range, then dressed the animal normally. Recovered all 5 bullets from the lungs, retained weight was consistently 90%-plus, and expansion was consistently to .700"-plus.

I was also present for an autopsy performed by a very experienced pathologist, subject was a grown man shot once in the lower abdomen with one round of reversed HBWC fired from a Model 36 at about 4 to 6 feet. Doc described it as one of the most devastating handgun wounds he had ever seen.

I still load these for use in my J-frame revolvers. Very modest recoil, minimal muzzle flash or blast, and very good performance at close ranges.
 
I don't know much about Atomic Ammo as a company, but in this era of excess lawyers, I suspect they tested their load so it wouldn't separate and lodge in the barrel.

As to effectiveness, I figure figured a reverse WC would be at least as effective as the FBI load which many here use. It seems like pretty much the same thing.
 
Atomic Ammo

Hi folks, Atomic Ammo here. I want to share a little info with you experts so that you can all be in the know.

First off, thank you all for your interest in our products. Our 38 Special is top notch and I carry a J frame loaded with upside down wadcutters almost everyday. I will not give out any of our proprietary information- it took quite a while and thousands of dollars to resurrect and improve this classic load, but I will confirm the following.

As an FFL-6 ammunition manufacturer- we are able to work with other ammunition and bullet manufacturers or their distributors and load almost any bullet that we want in almost any caliber.

We have access to various lab equipment, programs and test materials including various ballistic media ranging from the newest and most modern simulants to old fashioned 10% gel and wet newspaper.

After considerable research and development we found that very few, if any of the SUPER HIGH TECH MODERN JACKETED HOLLOW POINT MANSTOPPER bullets from the biggest companies were able to expand in the most modern gels when fired from REAL WORLD SNUB NOSED REVOLVERS. This is why we also tested and decided to use effective LEAD bullets.

Performance was further diminished if several layers of denim were draped over the test media to simulate heavy clothing. Performance from our competitors ammo was only acceptable by our standards when fired from 4 inch revolvers or larger guns. Even then, most of our competitors loads were roughly equal to our Atomic Ammo loads from snubbies- the revolvers most popular for concealed carry.

The ATOMIC 38 SPL+P load was the ONLY 38 SPL+P load we tested from SNUB NOSED revolvers that would reliably expand in our modern test materials.

The factory 38SPL+P loads from several well respected makers lacked the oomph to expand when fired from snub nosed/short barreled revolvers. Their smaller hollow cavities, thick, mega super expensive high tech jackets and lower velocities and lower weights kept them from opening. These other companies' bullets did however penetrate considerably. Perhaps so much that they would likely OVERPENETRATE and risk striking unintended persons or property behind them. They had similar effect to a full metal jacket bullet, at considerably more cost and risk.

Our bullets have been tested and loaded at 357 magnum pressures and velocities and do NOT blow the centers out and do NOT blow the skirts off in the barrel. They are excellent performers and have been loaded in such a manner as to keep the bullet hollow point forward without key-holing at the most common self defensive shooting distances. We average over 90% of our bullets remain hollow base forward at distances of 25 yards/75 feet from snub nosed revolvers.

For more info please check out our website then tell your friends about us!

Atomic Ammunition - Precision Crafted Match Grade Ammunition
 
ATOMIC AMMO said:
Hi folks, Atomic Ammo here. I want to share a little info with you experts so that you can all be in the know.

First off, thank you all for your interest in our products. Our 38 Special is top notch and I carry a J frame loaded with upside down wadcutters almost everyday. I will not give out any of our proprietary information- it took quite a while and thousands of dollars to resurrect and improve this classic load, but I will confirm the following.

As an FFL-6 ammunition manufacturer- we are able to work with other ammunition and bullet manufacturers or their distributors and load almost any bullet that we want in almost any caliber.

We have access to various lab equipment, programs and test materials including various ballistic media ranging from the newest and most modern simulants to old fashioned 10% gel and wet newspaper.

After considerable research and development we found that very few, if any of the SUPER HIGH TECH MODERN JACKETED HOLLOW POINT MANSTOPPER bullets from the biggest companies were able to expand in the most modern gels when fired from REAL WORLD SNUB NOSED REVOLVERS. This is why we also tested and decided to use effective LEAD bullets.

Performance was further diminished if several layers of denim were draped over the test media to simulate heavy clothing. Performance from our competitors ammo was only acceptable by our standards when fired from 4 inch revolvers or larger guns. Even then, most of our competitors loads were roughly equal to our Atomic Ammo loads from snubbies- the revolvers most popular for concealed carry.

The ATOMIC 38 SPL+P load was the ONLY 38 SPL+P load we tested from SNUB NOSED revolvers that would reliably expand in our modern test materials.

The factory 38SPL+P loads from several well respected makers lacked the oomph to expand when fired from snub nosed/short barreled revolvers. Their smaller hollow cavities, thick, mega super expensive high tech jackets and lower velocities and lower weights kept them from opening. These other companies' bullets did however penetrate considerably. Perhaps so much that they would likely OVERPENETRATE and risk striking unintended persons or property behind them. They had similar effect to a full metal jacket bullet, at considerably more cost and risk.

Our bullets have been tested and loaded at 357 magnum pressures and velocities and do NOT blow the centers out and do NOT blow the skirts off in the barrel. They are excellent performers and have been loaded in such a manner as to keep the bullet hollow point forward without key-holing at the most common self defensive shooting distances. We average over 90% of our bullets remain hollow base forward at distances of 25 yards/75 feet from snub nosed revolvers.

For more info please check out our website then tell your friends about us!

Atomic Ammunition - Precision Crafted Match Grade Ammunition
Click to expand...

Well then...
 
Re: AA reply. Thank you for this post. Doubtless developing narrow task oriented ammunition requires some issues/concerns to considered primary with others rendered secondary. No one single bullet/load combination is going to ever be the one be all to end all load that will satisfy the concerns of everyone in every possible situation imaginable. Wish you every success in this as well as your other developments.
 
reversed HBWC loads

LoboGunLeather said:
I experimented extensively with reversed HBWC loads during the 1970's and 1980's. Never once did I experience a "blow-through" or bullet lodged in the bore. I did find that accuracy declined rapidly as pressures and velocities were increased. Also, the soft lead swaged HBWC bullets are prone to heavy leading (bore, forcing cone, cylinder face, frame interior, cylinders), particularly with heavier charges of powder. A final observation was that these loads can be quite difficult to load rapidly, having no tapered bullet surface to guide the rounds into the chambers.

My conclusion was that the reversed HBWC loads were very useful in the short-barreled revolvers, which cannot make use of the ballistic potentials of higher pressure loads anyway and are thus limited to relatively low velocities. I found that the standard target load of 3.0 grains of Bullseye, standard primer, and bullet seated nearly flush with a firm roll crimp, always gave excellent accuracy and provided very impressive expansion in any media tried. Shot 5 rounds from a Model 36 into the chest cavity of a dead antelope at about 6 feet range, then dressed the animal normally. Recovered all 5 bullets from the lungs, retained weight was consistently 90%-plus, and expansion was consistently to .700"-plus.

I was also present for an autopsy performed by a very experienced pathologist, subject was a grown man shot once in the lower abdomen with one round of reversed HBWC fired from a Model 36 at about 4 to 6 feet. Doc described it as one of the most devastating handgun wounds he had ever seen.

I still load these for use in my J-frame revolvers. Very modest recoil, minimal muzzle flash or blast, and very good performance at close ranges.
Click to expand...


:eek:
 
Mr. Atomic Ammo,

I sent your co. an e-mail last Summer but there was no reply. Your ammo shot/shoots great in my guns, BUT there is one point of concern. Some of your ctgs. would not chamber completely in my J Frame nor my Colt Det. Spcl. and required a superhuman shove to chamber the last 1/8". I sorted out the ones that were like this and it was approx. one third of the 2nd box I had bought. I shot those up in a .357 Mag. revolver. I did not mike the rounds so I am unsure if it was a matter of the cases not being sized properly or perhaps your WC bullets perhaps being over spec. Just a heads up on QC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mojave30cal
Appropriate ammo for a 1962 S&W 36 no dash
Replies
6
Views
235
DWalt
DWalt
Jeff423
LE Wilson shell holder problem
Replies
6
Views
516
Jeff423
Jeff423
P
686-6 For Bullseye Shooting
Replies
13
Views
503
Amp
Amp
cougar015
M-52 Ammo
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Pantera Mike
P
sjmjax
Wadcutter target load in 357 brass?
Replies
24
Views
3K
Kevin Wolfe
K

Latest posts

Back
Top