HBWC vs SBWC vs DEWC

Not sure what a SBWC is but the main concern with the traditional soft lead HBWC is that if you load them too hot the base or "skirt" can break off from the bullet and lodge in the barrel. You can't interchange data from one type to the other or assume anything about pressures. I have some published data for the old Speer BBWC (bevel base) that may be helpful depending on what you are looking to do. GENERALLY DEWC can be loaded quite a bit hotter than HBWC but it's best to find specific data for your bullet type.

Also PLATED HBWC are very different from lead HBWC. I had to load my plated HBWC well above published lead HBWC levels to get them to group. No, I won't share the data. YMMV

1KPerDay said:

Not sure what a SBWC is

Click to expand...

Solid Base WC.

Mr_Flintstone said:

HBWC vs SBWC vs DEWC ... How much does this small difference in case capacity make in the internal pressure if you seat all three flush?

Click to expand...

I am not very familiar with 148 gr wadcutters but here's history and evolution of wadcutter - http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell_Book_Chapter_11_Wadcutter.htm

Even though HBWC may be longer, when loaded flush, produce same case capacity (due to hollow cavity) and since they are made from softer swaged lead (without lube or dry lubed), they are typically driven slower around 800 fps.

Cast wadcutters (SB or DE) are made from harder lead alloy (with lube grooves) and can be driven faster around 1000 fps.

Excerpt from Glen Fryxell's ebook - "Commercial hollow-based wadcutters are also quite accurate. This is only partly due to their being hollow-based (which makes sizing less important since they will swell to fit the bore when fired), but also due to the fact that they're formed under high pressure and therefore have no voids.

It is important to remember that swaged hollow-based wadcutters must be limited to mild pressure loads to prevent "popping the cork" and leaving a lead sleeve in the bore of your revolver."

My guess would be at lower 800 fps powder charges, softer HBWC would perform better than harder SBWC/DEWC as softer hollow base would expand better to seal with the barrel for more consistent pressures while harder lubed SBWC/DEWC may not deform enough to squish the lube ring to seal with the barrel. But many claim SBWC/DEWC at 1000 fps perform as accurate as HBWC at lower velocitiy.

Also, wadcutters come in .357" and .358"+ sizing. So depending on the groove diameter of the barrel, use of .357" vs .358"+ sizing would affect pressures.

If three bullets are the same weight, seated to the same overall length (not sure of the definition of seating depth), and are cylindrical for all of the bullet not seated within the case (button nose WC's will be slightly different), then the case volume for powder will be the same for all three. Basic geometry. Only if part of the hollow base was above the case mouth would there be a difference in case volume for powder.

Skinnedknuckles said:

If three bullets are the same weight, seated to the same overall length (not sure of the definition of seating depth), and are cylindrical for all of the bullet not seated within the case (button nose WC's will be slightly different), then the case volume for powder will be the same for all three. Basic geometry. Only if part of the hollow base was above the case mouth would there be a difference in case volume for powder.

Click to expand...

This is correct. People get fooled by the hollow base. It does not create more space, it simply redistributes the volume.

I pretty much load DEWC and HBWC to about the same although I might push the the DEWC's a bit hotter. I get worried about blowing off the skirt of the HBWC if I drive them too hard.

I just took delivery on an MP Mold 38 caliber HBWC. I am interested to see how they shoot once I get some cast.

For target/plinking level loads, I really do not see any difference between the two bullets. In principal, the common size of the cavity below the bullet for the powder between the two style bullets makes sense.