Ed Harris--Revisiting the Full Charge Wadcutter

[Malamute]

Apologies if this has been posted already. I didn't go back through the thread but I didn't remember seeing it. This is from a 1944 Gun Digest showing Winchester using the 'Full Charge' designation.

Attachment 71918

Thanks for that.

I have a 1940s wartime period Shooters Bible that has similar ballistics tables from Remington and Winchester. Its interesting to see how things have changed. The early 357 loads were pretty hot, as were the heavy duty 38 spl loads, up to 1175 fps with 158s. Actually, Im curious what the recent vintage full power Remington 357 158 gr sjhp loads do in an 8 3/8" Smith, they kept using shorter barrels for test data to make the info more relevant to most users, which is fine, but it makes me wonder if the standard full power loads were reduced in power as much as has been often reported.

Edit: I dont recall if this was brought up in this thread or another, but the wadcutters in that period were not the flush seated or nearly so thats common now.

[revchuck38]

@Malamute - That would've given about the same seating depth as SWCs and RNs, and if factory loaded, would've enabled the manufacturers to use the same powder charges for the "full charge" WC loads.

[03RN]

Thanks for that.

I have a 1940s wartime period Shooters Bible that has similar ballistics tables from Remington and Winchester. Its interesting to see how things have changed. The early 357 loads were pretty hot, as were the heavy duty 38 spl loads, up to 1175 fps with 158s. Actually, Im curious what the recent vintage full power Remington 357 158 gr sjhp loads do in an 8 3/8" Smith, they kept using shorter barrels for test data to make the info more relevant to most users, which is fine, but it makes me wonder if the standard full power loads were reduced in power as much as has been often reported.

Edit: I dont recall if this was brought up in this thread or another, but the wadcutters in that period were not the flush seated or nearly so thats common now.

Thats an interesting point. I need an 8" gun now

https://www.defensivecarry.com/threa...dloads.125541/

But then again, all guns are a story unto themselves

https://www.defensivecarry.com/threa...-tests.107972/

[BN]

I found this in a Speer Manual #10 published in 1979. Looks like they were getting over 900fps from a 148 WC. Sounds like a full charge to me.

[Salamander]

A little wadcutter accuracy testing from earlier this evening:

Smith & Wesson 14-3, six inch barrel, 15 yards resting on a bag. Only had time to shoot a single six-round group with each load, bright late afternoon side light, so take it for the limited set of data points that it is.

Precision Delta 148gr HBWC, 2.9 Bullseye, 1.55"

SNS Casting 148gr coated DEWC, 3.5 Bullseye, 1.95"

SNS casting 148gr coated DEWC, 4.6 BE-86, 3.37" (but throw out the one flyer that was probably my fault, and the remaining five were in 1.73")

Perhaps not enough difference to matter much for off-hand shooting.

Recoil was of course practically non-existent with the first load, very modest with the second, and a little sharper with the BE-86 load but only in comparison to the others.

I'll try to get to the 25 yard range soon when I have time to shoot multiple groups.

[entropy]

It’s been my general observation as well that coated bullets (specifically SNS or Acme) are just not “quite” as accurate as the same style conventionally lubricated. Almost not enough to be a real difference in a non-competitive environment, but there nonetheless.

[MandoWookie]

I just remembered my favorite part of that edition:

Attachment 71924

I have never figured out what I'm supposed to do with the slotted tip in any cleaning kit I've used.

[JWintergreen]

I have always preferred having dedicated 38 & 44 Special revolvers to shoot those cartridges and dedicated Magnum revolvers to shoot Magnums. For years (like 50 + -) I've been told I was foolish, that there is no loss of accuracy or performance with Magnum chambers in your cylinder, and then there's all that versatility.

A number of posts here seem to indicate that I might have been on to something. And yes, there have been other 'voices crying in the wilderness' who've also preached 'Special guns for Special cartridges'. We tend to get drowned out by the clamoring of the versatility crowd. (smiley face goes here)

Dave

I am a younger guy and I prefer "Special Only" revolvers as well. I started handgun shooting with a bad case of magnumitus. Heck, a friend's 29-2 with healthy 240 grain magnums is what made me realize I am a revolver guy. I quickly found that full power .38 or.44 Special loads will do anything I need a handgun to do with less noise, recoil, and muzzle flash of a magnum. However, I have also realized that I hate dealing with scrubbing those carbon rings out of the chambers. Throw in the other potential downsides, and I now believe in shooting magnums in a magnum and specials in a special. Sadly, the great versatility argument and the allure of sheer power has made the special only revolver go the way of the dodo bird. Even the once ubiquitous S&W model 64 and 67 revolvers got the axe this year. Maybe this new trend of small frame, six shot .38/.357 D frame sized revolvers being offered by several companies will allow others to see the light.

[Bruce in WV]

The 3rd Edition of the Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook (1980) lists a MAX Bullseye load for a 148gr wadcutter at 950fps. The OAL for the loaded bullet at 1.317" looks like it must be seated to/crimped in the crimping groove and sit slightly proud of the case mouth.
I'm getting ready to load 500 of the Hy-Tek coated Acme DEBBWC, which has a similar crimping groove, and will experiment with small lots of this load in both my pre-15 4" Masterpiece and a modern 1 7/8" 642 before loading the entire batch. Pressure in the table is listed at 16,200 C.U.P.; it should be safe in both guns, and give me a useable alternative for the 135gr SB GD if I should run out of that load.

[camsdaddy]

A little wadcutter accuracy testing from earlier this evening:

Smith & Wesson 14-3, six inch barrel, 15 yards resting on a bag. Only had time to shoot a single six-round group with each load, bright late afternoon side light, so take it for the limited set of data points that it is.

Precision Delta 148gr HBWC, 2.9 Bullseye, 1.55"

SNS Casting 148gr coated DEWC, 3.5 Bullseye, 1.95"

SNS casting 148gr coated DEWC, 4.6 BE-86, 3.37" (but throw out the one flyer that was probably my fault, and the remaining five were in 1.73")

Perhaps not enough difference to matter much for off-hand shooting.

Recoil was of course practically non-existent with the first load, very modest with the second, and a little sharper with the BE-86 load but only in comparison to the others.

I'll try to get to the 25 yard range soon when I have time to shoot multiple groups.

Im curious if you have had a chance to shoot any more of these