.455 Webley Mk III "Manstopper" v. modern hollow points

[VVelox]

The .455 Webley Mk III "Manstopper" is basically a hollow point wad-cutter bullet, unlike modern hollow points with are derived in shape from a round nose bullet. As it was originally introduced shortly before the Hague Convention of 1899, it saw little us.

Just got curious and researching if there is any performance difference between a wad-cutter based v. round nose based design and I am not really finding any information comparing the two.

Any one know if there is any real difference in performance between the two designs?

 

[forindooruseonly]

Some of what you are asking might be answered here.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=666427&highlight=.455

I guess I'd say that if the wad-cutter based bullet was more effective, we'd see companies offering it. Don't think they'd feed well in an auto, either. Strictly revolver fodder.

 

[Al Thompson]

Let's see if we can get more visibility in Handguns.

 

[ljnowell]

I think one of the most beneficial purposes between the round nose profile hollow points is the fact that they feed in Semi-Autos better and are easier to load quickly in revolvers too.

 

[VVelox]

forindooruseonly, came across that thread when I was looking into it. It unfortunately largely compares the .455 Webley cartridge to other cartridges and not the bullet it is loaded with.

ljnowell, that and around the same time semi-autos were coming starting to come out, which don't play nicely wad cutters, I believe prevented this design from ever being notably explored.

 

[ATLDave]

Hollow-based wadcutters can, and have been for years, turned upside down by loaders to get exactly what you are talking about. At low speed, it seems to work ok, although the flight is unstable from what I have read. At higher speeds, the lack of stability becomes problematic, and the expansion becomes too fast, resulting in inadequate penetration.

That's without even adressing the challenges such a round would pose to autoloaders, which generally count on the bullet to glide up a feed ramp and tilt into a chamber.

 

[Slamfire]

These sort of arguments used to fill magazines back in the 60's and 70's when the 38 Special was the primary Cop round. Was a 148 LSWC better than a 158 LRN?, that sort of stuff.

The consensus was the sharp edged bullet was better, but I don't recall ever seeing any ballistic gellatin tests proving one way or the other.

A Webley is a 500 to 600 fps round, any stopping power it had was due to a big soft lead bullet. I really doubt there was much bullet expansion, other than what happened if you hit bone. Then it would be mushing.