LHBWC's seated backwards?

Vulcan Bob

Vulcan Bob

Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Messages
5,335
Reaction score
2,494
Location
central pa
Hi all, was loading the standard .38 special LHBWC's the other day and got to thinking. Way back I remember there was a bit of a trend to seat the HBWC backwards with the hollow base up, makeing it a huge hollowpoint. Does anyone have any real world experiance or data on this? It does look rather formidable and at snubby velocitys would it be better than the modren JHP's? Boy I tell ya the weird thoughts you get while reloading!
 
Register to hide this ad
Not weird thoughts at all. Certain handloading themes and "tricks" keep showing up as a new generation of reloaders develop "new" ideas and re-discover old results. The backward-HBWC .38 is an old one, and often repeated as the solution for getting bullet expansion out of a snubnose revolver.

However, a couple of generations of experienced reloaders and authorities non other than the NRA Technical Advisor say not to use these loads for the following reasons: 1. The hollow base skirt tends to blow off the bullet, leaving it stuck in the forcing cone as a bore obstruction. 2. Counting on the expansion of a backward-loaded HBWC is still as iffy as that of a lightweight JHP. 3. The HBWC is typically cast or swaged from soft lead, and designed for conventional loads at target velocities. Loaded much hotter, accuracy falls off unacceptably, and if cast much harder, the same problem as in (1) applies.
 
Hey John, thanks for the responce. Now I know why I never did it! I had my doubts about the skirt but never really heard about the results. Now what about the media dust left inside your caseings after tumbleing? Harmfull to the bore or not? Told you I get weird thoughts whilst reloading!
 
Years ago, I tried loading the HBWCs backwards. They made huge holes...because they tumbled. Accuracy beyond a few feet was zilch.
I had satisfied my curiosity and never tried it again.
 
The original 'Hydra-Shok' round was just that. A 148gr HBWC , with the familiar post in the center. I have a box or two around here. I'll dig 'em out and post a pic.
 
Tumbling media dust is mildly abrasive of course. What do you think polishes the brass cases? The media (granulated corn cobs, walnut hulls, grain, etc. rubbing against the brass surfaces with the polishing compound (auto polish, rouge, etc) providing the abrasion.

It's a non-issue. Firing residue simply polishes the bore when shooting. No measurable wear or harm done even after tens of thousands of rounds fired.
 
I load HBWCs backwards for my Model 36.
I use W231 loaded to full charge in most load manuals with
a Hornady 148gr HBWC. Velocity was 740 fps from a 1 7/8" barrel. I find it to be superbly accurate to 25 yards - just as much so as when loaded correctly. They seem to expand very well in soft mud that I tested it in and expanded to the largest diameter from a snub rather than a 4". Out of the 4", the bullet pealed back farther and got smaller.

Loading ammo like this used to be very popular for self defense
given that the 158 grain lead round nose "Police Service" cartridge
used to be the main loading in the 38 Special. The cops that used it
said it was very effective, however I heard the load was inaccurate.
I was really amazed at how accurate the loads were from my guns.
Honestly, I would rather have these old loads than some 110gr HP that underpenetrates. Hope that helps. Never heard about the lead skirt causing a problem with barrel obstructions though.
 
john traveler said:
1. The hollow base skirt tends to blow off the bullet, leaving it stuck in the forcing cone as a bore obstruction.
Click to expand...

This applies only in two circumstances: First, the bullet is loaded normally, base down, and, Second, to higher than standard pressure for a target load.

If the bullet is loaded hollow base forward, with the solid nose now forming the bullet base, how would you suggest the shirt could pull off and the solid base, being behind the skirt, be blown out leaving the skirt in the bore????????

Yes, they will lead. Expansion is spotty. Other than these go ahead and try it, it has been done for many, many years with no particular problems. Just be sure to only seat the bullet as deep in the case as a 158 semi-wadcutter would be, approximately the center cannellure. Don't try full loads with the bullet seated flush with the case mouth, it will give excessive pressure with even standard loads to do so.
 
I just read an article on this very subject a month or so ago. I think it is in an issue of Handloader, but can't say for sure. I'll see if I can find it. (That's the trouble with getting tooo many gun rags:D). It also says not to do it, but I don't remember all the reasons. One I do recall, is that the hollow base will fill up quickly making it in effect a solid, and with the heaviest portion being to the rear, it will tumble, providing very poor penetration. A lot of low velocity hollow points do the same thing.
 
Back in the 70's - way, way back before reliable hollow point bullets were manufactured, it was considered the better hollowpoint for short-barreled revolvers.

Now that good jacketed hollowpoint bullets are available, it is no longer practical. Modern JHPs are far superior for the purpose. Hornady 125 or 140 XTP JHP will far outperform swaged lead hollow based wadcutters seated backward for penetration, expansion, and weight retention.

Speer's Gold Dot (p/n 4014) 135 gr Short-barrel bullet is well thought of, as well. Same advantages.

Flash
 
Vulcan Bob said:
Hi all, was loading the standard .38 special LHBWC's the other day and got to thinking. Way back I remember there was a bit of a trend to seat the HBWC backwards with the hollow base up, makeing it a huge hollowpoint. Does anyone have any real world experiance or data on this? It does look rather formidable and at snubby velocitys would it be better than the modren JHP's? Boy I tell ya the weird thoughts you get while reloading!
Click to expand...

Many years ago before the current rage with hollow point peformance ammo a number of LEO's and their families used a load consisting of the 148 gr. LHBWC seated backwards with a gas check on the base. It was reputed to be a round which would not penetrate walls, etc. and still do significant damage to an assailant. I do not remeber the specifics of the load beyond that.
 
Thanks for the info fella's! Think I'll give it a pass and stick with the 158 LSWC-HP's for social work. John I was just goofing about the tumbler dust, but I did give some thought a few times!
 
It seems that a lot of people are missing the point of the reversed hbwc loads. Thirty years ago and to some extent today these were/are popular loads for close range self defense in j-frame and Detective Special revolvers. Their main attraction was that they were only loaded to target load velocities making them very easy to shoot in these light weight guns. If they keyholed at 25 yards, who cared. We are only talking about using them at 7 to 10 yards anyway. I have never experienced nor ever heard of one of these loads causing a barrel obstruction. The only problem I ever did hear of with these loads was that if you shot a perp wearing heavy clothing the bullet would clog and not expand. In this case they would be no worse than a solid and you would rely on your shot placement. My wife carries these in her no dash model 60 with no concerns.
 
It amazes me what the gun writers will print to get a paycheck, but not as much as the people that repeat it without thinking.

Any hollow point can get clogged and turn it into a solid point, even the most expensive name brand over rated JHP. So the backward HBWC is no worse.

HBWCs are designed to shoot at very low velocities, their back end will obturate at lower velocities, (it's the same design idea as HPs), and will fly front forward at lower velocities than standard bullets, which are back heavy. Turning them around and shooting them at higher velocities is no different than shooting a hollow point, except they are a real bugger to load in a hurry.

And if they do tumble, they are way better than any JHP. Because even if they do clog, a keyholed bullet will make a devastating wound.
 
I think it strange that if I said I was going to load a JHP to my own specifications, I would quickly be warned of the horrific legal consequences of shooting a crook with a handload.

But a reversed wadcutter seems to be acceptable to the Internet Legal System.
 
Jim, let me get my fishing poles and tackle box before you open that can of worms.
 
Have loaded/do load them. Have not had keyholing at 15 yards or less but they are less stable after impact than the standard orientation and they do tend to tumble after impact as any uneven resistance tips them.

The key is to keep the presures and velocities down. I don't load them above 700 fps. And yes, they are a pain to chamber quickly. The advantage I see is reduced penetration. They seem no better or worse than modern hollow points within these parameters.
 
I once attended an autopsy of a bad guy who took a 148 HBWC at about 5 or 6 feet range, fired from a S&W Model 36. Very experienced coroner did the post, commented that it was about the most destructive handgun wound he had ever seen. Recovered bullet was a near-perfect mushroom measuring a little over 1/2" diameter with nearly full weight retention.

Since then I have loaded many of these and tested them extensively. I remember settling on a load of 3 grains Bullseye, bullet seated fully and heavily crimped. Fired from revolvers with 2" to 4" barrels accuracy was comparable to same bullets seated conventionally out to 25 feet. Beyond that distance accuracy dropped off considerably, and tumbling was diagnosed via "keyholes" in the targets.

Heavier powder charges might conceivably blow through the bullet at the center, with a possibility of leaving the tubular remnants of a bullet in the bore (although I did not experience that, I did not wish to push the limits).

One gallon milk jugs filled with water are utterly destroyed by hydraulic force, and the bullet seldom penetrated fully to the backstop. Cans of tomatoes erupt in an impressive manner, again with bullets seldom penetrating to the backstop. Various clothing items, up to leather jacket material, was tested with no discernable difference in performance.

Penetration through car doors was less than 50%. Penetration through auto side windows was good only when the angle was dead-on, any deviation resulted in deflection. Penetration through car windshields was nearly impossible to achieve.

Rapid reloading is very difficult, even with speedloaders, as the blunt cartridge end must be fed straight into the chambers of the cylinder.

My conclusions: a very effective round when used at short range against soft-tissue targets, diminished accuracy beyond 25 feet, unreliable penetration against any target offering significant resistance, significantly longer time required to reload.

My old S&W Model 37 remains loaded with these to this day.
 
I just loaded a test batch with a few backwards just to see. Load is LHBWC over 3.0gr Bullseye, Federal SP primer, seated 1/16" over the case rim with a good crimp. I plan to take these to the range tomorrow to test fire and will report back on the results.

Bill

Update: FWIW
Went to the range today with the loads above and my non-scientific results were...

6" K38 @ 25 yds from a bag - (Loaded Normally) Shots were 6" low on both my reloads and factory loaded ammo indicating that the velocity versus the bullet weight is too low for that distance. Accuracy was spotty as well.

6" K38 @ 10 yds offhand - (Loaded Normally) - Shots were dead on to POA and grouped within 1" on three shot groups. Exactly the same with the backwards loads.

3" Model 10 @ 10 yds offhand - (Loaded backwards) - Same results as in the K38.

2" Model 442 @ 10 yds offhand - Loaded backwards) - Accuracy was poor and the final shot of a three shot group showed signs of keyholing from the short barrel.

No signs of leading in any of the revolvers.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top