That's a solid load. I thought I had come up with a super, secret sauce only to find out that I had discovered one of the most common loads for W231.Originally Posted by Inspector71
That's a solid load. I thought I had come up with a super, secret sauce only to find out that I had discovered one of the most common loads for W231.
Men freely believe that which they desire.
Julius Caesar
Is that using currently manufactured W231? I believe there may have been some changes to W231 now that is the same powder as HP-38. I still have an old metal can of W231. It looks physically different than my new can of HP-38.That's a solid load. I thought I had come up with a super, secret sauce only to find out that I had discovered one of the most common loads for W231.
It's my understanding they have figured out the SWC design adds little to a bullets effectiveness. The shoulder above the crimping groove makes little difference, despite what Elmer always claimed.
For a standard bullet in 38 Special (trying to get back on topic) I'm going to this offering from Montana Bullet Works:
https://www.montanabulletworks.com/p...-160gr-lfn-pb/
The large meplat of the LBT design is probably as good as it gets without expansion. If you argue for a full wadcutter you may have a point but they generally don't have the sectional density of this LBT offering, to give deep penetration in tougher targets.
Dave
I know there is much said about the full wadcutters effectiveness cutting a caliber size hole and the sharp edges being a benefit. I also know the LSWC-HP is a favorite but may or may not expand at snub velocities. I wonder how well the LSWC would compare to a full wadcutter?
I bought it within the past six years. I've not noticed any difference in performance compared to the W231 I used previously.
Men freely believe that which they desire.
Julius Caesar
.38 Specials Shooting and LOOTING
This is how my glimpse of the thread title registered in my little monkey brain.
You can tell what kind of a year 2020 has been so far...
Don’t blame me. I didn’t vote for that dumb bastard.
If one used a solid based wadcutter seated flush with the 4.7 gr Unique load, he would have an ultra excess overload. The reason is that the solid base lacks the extra space found in hbwc's. Heavy powder charges with hollow based wadcutters can blow out the sides of the bullet wall. Then this fragment is left in the bore.
I would actually disagree.
A DEWC wadcutter and a HBWC that weigh the same will take up exactly the same amount of case capacity if both are seated flush with the end of the case. 147 grains of lead takes up the same amount of remaining case volume regardless of whether it is hollow base or not.
I agree that 4.7 is excessive unless they are being shot in a 357.
The hollow area within a hbwc adds more internal capacity to that area where gases expand. This increase in area, though slight, adds to the sum total of case capacity. Seating the bullet out further also increases case capacity. Case capacity in this explanation is understood to be that specific internal volume occupied by propellant.
I hate to break it to you but the hollow doesn't "add" anything. 148 grains of lead takes up .85 cubic cm of volume. Period. If both are seated flush with the case mouth with the same powder charge, the free internal volume for combustion will be exactly the same. Period.
Any "space" added by the hollow base is offset by the skirt extending farther back inside the case. Until you can violate the laws of space and time, you'll never magically be able to have more space inside the case without seating the bullet past flush.
The only thing that changes is ever so slightly more bearing surface of bullet touching barrel due to the skirt which I doubt amounts to anything significant.
Reply With Quote