RNL vs SWC

G

GyMac

US Veteran
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
1,133
Reaction score
330
Location
SW Washington
In .38 Special, have you found there to be a difference in accuracy potential between the two? I'm talking about the standard 158-160 grain bullet weight. I'm curious about what some of your experiences might be. I've shot a lot of both and seem to lean toward the RNL. Do you have experience with other calibers, such as .45 ACP, that might be helpful.
Thanks,
Chris
 
Register to hide this ad
GyMac,
I am a HUGE 158 Grain RNL fan! I shot wad cutters and semi wad cutters for years, and after spending too much time scrubbing lead out of the cylinders and forcing cone, I gave the RNL bullets a shot. That was about 20 years ago, and I have been using the RNL exclusively since then.

Here's the problem...............
They are getting harder and harder to get! While I love them for punching holes in paper and informal plinking, I would in no way recommend them for defense use. Because most people would agree, they have been dropped by most of the bullet casters. If you are talking about loaded ammunition, the ONLY company ( to the best of my knowledge ) that is still producing a 158 Grain TRADITIONAL shaped bullet is Remington.

Since I reload I am always on the hunt for a good hard cast RNL. I used to buy them from a fella named Gene (Sure Shot Bullets) but he passed away about a year or so ago, so I have been using Meister's bullets. They are RNL, but not exactly the traditional shape. They are a bit less pointed and a bit more rounded, but they are about the closest ones I can find.

I find that the RNL shape bullets shoots to POA/POI in fixed sight guns, are very accurate and are the least leading offender. The other great feature is that with a speed loader, they drop right into the cylinder which gives you an edge when shooting in competition.

That's my .02 cents.

Regards,
chief38
 
Thanks Chief38. I am talking about target shooting. I carry Remington +P .38 SWCHP's for defense. I just like the traditional RNL and like you, are finding them more difficult to find. And they are much easier to load from a speedloader. I've been curious if anyone finds them more accurate.
Chris
 
Before I started casting, I used commercial cast LRN and LSWC. I never noticed any difference in accuracy in the same gun BUT the point of impact was different between the different bullet shapes.

Not sure why, they were both 158gr, they were both loaded over 3.5gr of Bullseye, both shot out of the same M586 6" barrel.

That M586 was my constant companion when I went to the range. I shot it in PPC and let me tell you something, it was the most accurate revolver I have ever shot. Gave it to son #2 when he moved out and he left it in his car and got ripped off. TALK ABOUT UPSET! DUDE, I WAS SOME KIND OF UPSET!

At any rate, the gun was stock out of the box and I never had a problems with the difference in bullet shape when reloading. In the PPC we shot, a small version of it so we could shoot it indoors, the first stage was 7 yards, 12 shots in 18 seconds with a mandatory reload all double action. A perfect score was 120 12x. I got a bunch of those and usually was done in time to look at the range officer when he called time. Somewhere around 14 seconds or so.

Practice is what will make the reloading easier. Bullet shape is a secondary issue, at least in my opinion.
 
I have loaded lots of 38 spl plinking loads over the years. I shoot them
in my 38 and 357 revolvers using a variety of powders. I don't cast so
I rely on cast bullets purchased at gun shows. In light loads I get much
better accuracy with RN than with SWC bullets.
 
In some guns I find RNL bullets to be the most accurate by a good margin. In others the difference is not so noticable. Perhaps it is the individual gun's forcing cone, or cylinder leade/throat/barrel dimensions relation.

But I have never found RNLs to be particularly inaccurate in anything. They seem a natural for the 38 bore. I like Speer's swaged bullets for target use at standard 38 Special velocities. Some of the hardcast RNFPs I've bought locally that are designed for action shooting (CAS) are a little too hard and need to be driven to higher velocities, say around 950fps, to obturate properly and give me decent accuracy w/o leading.
 
For general plinking and casual shooting I prefer them to any other bullet. As others have mentioned, I find them more accurate and flatter shooting for long range shooting and are easier and faster to load in the cylinder, either by speedloader or hand.

I like the Speer LRNs and also use a Lee 358-150-1R mould, which spits out a very nice bullet, and wish I'd had a Lee 358- -2R mould for the different profile. I'm a bigger fan of the .41s and have a couple Lee moulds for .410 LRNs and have a few RN moulds for other cals. as well.

I think they are under rated for what they are capable of and for what they are for.
 
As far as accuracy is concerned, they are the most accurate bullet I've ever used. I load them with Titegroup powder, which has now replaced the Bullseye that I had to used for many years. Titegroup burns a bit cleaner and is less position sensitive in the cases. I just wish they would bring back the "traditional" pointed RNL instead of the more rounded ones the casters are now producing. Why they have done this is unclear to me.

chief38
 
If you cast your own, Lee's 158gr RN has the highest BC of any Lee 358s. They shoot really good, but they are a little long for some guns.
 
I've been curious if anyone finds them more accurate.
Click to expand...

All else being equal, no they aren't any more accurate for me.
On the other hand, it seems easier to get a respectable load with RN with less fuss and bother than with some other shapes. I shoot several thousand RN Berry for IDPA each year, and the RNL are just as good except for the lube smoke. SWC and speedloaders don't mix. I also use RN Berry or lead in .45.
At 100yds, I get better accuracy with a high-quality .357 jacketed hunting bullet than with any lead bullet I've tried.
 
I like RNL for shooting, especially when using speedloaders or moonclips because they will just find the charge holes so much easier than their flat nosed brethren. Round nosed bullets just fall into the cylinder so easily, whereas a SWC will sit on top of the cylinder and usually a good jiggle is needed to get them in there.

Also, I typically try to get very, very soft cast instead of hard cast for these. I'm not going to push these hard at all or use them for anything other than paper punching or perhaps a shot at some vermin- so soft cast is the way to go. After all, why waste perfectly good tin and antimony on paper, when it might be needed for big game- like a coyote? :D
 
I gave a friend a bunch of different .38 bullets to do some accuracy testing in his scoped S&W 586, he tested several varietys of off the shelf lead bullets, LRN, LSWC, .357 and .358 diameter.

The best group he shot at 25 yards was less than 1", five shot group with some of my home cast .358 diameter lead round nose, cast from a Lee "Tumble Lube " groove mold, lubed with liquid Alox, metal was straight wheel weight lead, velocity around 850 FPS. Sized with a Lee "Push Through" sizer.

I am sold on .358 diameter LRN bullets, I use them almost exclusively in my revolvers and Marlin .357 lever rifle.
 
I'm struck by the number of positive responses to RNL. Like I said, I seem to have noticed a bit of a difference in my casual shooting. I always shoot offhand and DA at that, but it seems that, time and again, the REALLY good groups are shot with the RNL. It's easy to discount any one group shot like that, but over the years, the advantage seeems to be with the RN bullet. Thanks for the input.
Chris
 
I noticed that the RNL difference isn't limited to .38 Special. Both my pre-24 and my Blackhawk .44 Special revolvers both prefer the RNL design of the Lyman 429383 over a SWC. Granted, I can only see this off a sandbag at 25 yards, but it is noticeable.
 
OK, now I need a RCBS or Lyman 358311 mould to prove this out! Anyone got one they don't need for a week or two?

:D
 
RNL-38

FWIW -

Dardas Cast Bullets in Michigan (on internet) has been very well regarded by many who shoot lots and lots of cast bullets. He also has RNL in 38 and other calibers.

I am not affiliated with this gentleman but have been impressed with his offerings.
 
My theory is that the RNL bullet does not have the sharp shoulder that leads up the cylinder charge holes and forcing cone, thus lending to its greater accuracy. Now this is a stretch, but..............maybe the RNL shape bullet just flies better than a more blunt nosed shorter SWC or WC bullet does. All I know is that for me they are a bit more accurate out of he same gun than the others.

regards,
chief38
 
I've been a big SWC and WC fan for 38/357 but now you guys have my curiosity up. I'm going to order a Lee tumble lube RN mold.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top