In another thread, hardcast lead ammo was recommended for woods carry in 10mm, with the idea being it would penetrate better. Why would a hardcast lead bullet be better than a full metal jacketed (non-hollow point) bullet with respect to penetration and woods carry?
10mm ammo question regarding woods carry
- Thread starter Balrog
- Start date
- Status
Polar Express
Member
Thanks for asking this, I was about to ask this myself.
PE
PE
Deaf Smith
Member
Match your ammo to the situations you expect in the woods.
Bears? Alligators? Moose? Two legged? Four?
Deaf
Bears? Alligators? Moose? Two legged? Four?
Deaf
JTQ
Member
This is a rifle bullet article, but it explains the theory behind the deeper (and straighter) penetration of flat nosed bullets vs round nose bullets.
GS Bullets Big Game Solids http://www.gsgroup.co.za/articlepvdw.html
GS Bullets Big Game Solids http://www.gsgroup.co.za/articlepvdw.html
JTQ
Member
This does seem to not have completely registered with the OP in that other thread. Those big hardcast bullets that are preferred for thumping big animals are also not known for reliable function in Glock 10mm guns.
Four comments. First, what with the recent news stories it seem "alligator" threads may out strip "bear" threads. Who knew!
Second, with regard to hard cast in Glocks. The bull stuff one reads on the internet about problems with it's use are greatly overblown. Properly hardened and properly designed hard cast works just fine in any fire arm, even those with polygonal rifling.
Third, in an semi auto, with exception of the Automags and Wildeys, the 10 mm is probably the best cartridge available.
Lastly, a semi auto is a very poor second to a large caliber revolver for "animals". I include two legged ones in this comment.
Second, with regard to hard cast in Glocks. The bull stuff one reads on the internet about problems with it's use are greatly overblown. Properly hardened and properly designed hard cast works just fine in any fire arm, even those with polygonal rifling.
Third, in an semi auto, with exception of the Automags and Wildeys, the 10 mm is probably the best cartridge available.
Lastly, a semi auto is a very poor second to a large caliber revolver for "animals". I include two legged ones in this comment.
This partly describes the answer. Most fmj pistol bullets arent designed to be tough, just cover the core and function in the gun, especially the economy grade ammo. The so-called hard cast (pretty much all commercial cast bullets would qualify for the name) are a tougher bullet, though many feel the hardness can be overdone and end up being brittle rather than tough.
JTQs comment needs to be factored into the question. I think its either ignored or overlooked too often. Just because some boutique (or mainstream) ammo makers produce a load doesn't automatically mean its going to reliably function in any given model or individual example of a gun. I don't see many comment that they shot a couple hundred expensive loads to determine reliability. The idea seems more like "Hey, XYZ makes this load, just get them, and all your troubles are over". The common internet habit of just repeating what was heard, or making recommendations on things one has no firsthand use of or knowledge of, is often taken as a solid referral. Not all opinions are valid, unfortunately, however freely given.
Thats a pretty definitive statement. Perhaps you could explain that to the people that actually had problems with them. PM-ing his contact info.
Edit: I agree with the part about cast should work in different barrels, and a "properly designed" bullet should work, but we don't know if any given bullet or load has such a bullet until its tried in a particular gun. Its also one thing if individuals with an example of ONE gun has great success with a certain load, when it comes to light that others, with more than an example of one, have problems, its worth paying attention and taking the time and expense to vet the load in your particular gun before going in harms way so to speak. It may be overblown, but that doesn't mean it should be ignored. Its not a coincidence that most bullet designs for self loaders tend to be rounded nose profiles, they simply function better. Flat nosed bullets work better on game, and theres the rub. What works best on game isn't what functions most reliably in self loaders.
Last edited:
Polar Express
Member
JTQ, as the OP in 'the other thread', the recommendation of hardcast bullets did register with me just fine. Thankfully, this OP asked my next question for me. 
Hardcast means something; and Shakey offered a quick, concise explanation. Made total sense to me. Now, we all have a better understanding of just what that means. There are still more details to clarify, such as exact size, (grain weight) and exact shape. I haven't read that link just yet, but it's on my list very shortly.
With regards to a kind of bullet material not working well in a Glock, those Glock fan-boys might consider those "fightin' words"
Malamute's comments mimic my opinion. I may run a bunch of target grade ammo through a gun to get a nice break-in. But, I have ZERO intention to run any load in any gun for defensive purposes, without testing a BUNCH of those said rounds in my gun to make sure they work. Is your life worth a some boxes of the 'hot stuff' to make sure it works in your 'life defending' gun? Mine is. So, Glock or not.. I'm making sure my gun runs well, is broken in, and then can reliably handle the rounds I wish to defend myself with. Overkill to some, simple to others, but that's my perspective.
Personally, I am thankful for everyone's input here, cuz I learn something every time! (even if what I learn is where I can find more data/info)
PE
Hardcast means something; and Shakey offered a quick, concise explanation. Made total sense to me. Now, we all have a better understanding of just what that means. There are still more details to clarify, such as exact size, (grain weight) and exact shape. I haven't read that link just yet, but it's on my list very shortly.
With regards to a kind of bullet material not working well in a Glock, those Glock fan-boys might consider those "fightin' words"
Malamute's comments mimic my opinion. I may run a bunch of target grade ammo through a gun to get a nice break-in. But, I have ZERO intention to run any load in any gun for defensive purposes, without testing a BUNCH of those said rounds in my gun to make sure they work. Is your life worth a some boxes of the 'hot stuff' to make sure it works in your 'life defending' gun? Mine is. So, Glock or not.. I'm making sure my gun runs well, is broken in, and then can reliably handle the rounds I wish to defend myself with. Overkill to some, simple to others, but that's my perspective.
Personally, I am thankful for everyone's input here, cuz I learn something every time! (even if what I learn is where I can find more data/info)
PE
JTQ
Member
It's not that I don't think you understand the advantage of hardcast bullets. I think you do. It's that I don't think the potential mismatch of the wide-meplat hardcast bullets designed to thump big game and trying to shoot them reliably out of a G20 has fully registered.
dragon813gt
Member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2011
- Messages
- 1,137
Glad to hear that, and glad someone will see that, and not just assume any load will work in any gun without running some through it.
I don't recall anyone saying heavy cast positively don't work, just not to assume they do without trying some before loading up and heading out into bear brush and thinking all will be well.
Wreck-n-Crew
Member
Exactly.
Take a hammer to both. See which one smashes flatter faster.
I've cast both hard and softer lead. Now that i use pc, i use softer lead for pistol calibers.
Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk
Wreck-n-Crew
Member
Glock is not the only 10mm out there and if they are powder coated they would work just fine. One more reason many 10mm owners load their own. That and cost. Plus there are aftermarket barrels that shoot hard cast just fine.
In fact several are making 10mm hand guns including Tanfoglio, RIA, Colt, CZ/Dan Wesson, and Sig.
Tanfoglio and Glock have been the top 2 makers for a few years. Tanfoglio has some nice Competition and target guns. Great triggers.
Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk
Wreck-n-Crew
Member
Reliable function is a broad statement. Covers feeding and leading and even pressure/ recoil.
But if your having problems feeding its not the lead..its the gun or bullet profile.
Maybe they made them too short when loading, maybe the profile is not optimum for feeding in that gun. But they make different profiles that will feed.
As far as a glock and 175gr swc they feed just fine in a glock. At least mine do.
Hope this helps.
Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk
JTQ
Member
The context of the discussion is Polar Express's choice of a Glock 20 and wide-meplat hard cast bullets. They may work fine for him, they may not. He won't know until he try's them.
Polar Express
Member
For what it's worth, I haven't decided if to Glock, or not to Glock....yet. Yes, I'm close, but haven't purchased anything so far. I certainly haven't decided on, or purchased any ammunition yet either. Does anyone make a 'plated' bullet (as opposed to a jacketed one) that is plated hardcast? Would that solve the concerns that some are having with uncoated hardcast?
Malamute,
In an effort to keep this positive, and educational, it reads like you have personal experience with 10mm hardcast loads not working in a Glock platform. If this is accurate, would you be so kind as to share the specifics of what you have tried, please?
Brand? Bullet weight? Bullet shape? Powder charge? What malfunctions did you experience?
If you tried some, and they worked, would you please share that as well?
Thanks,
PE
Malamute,
In an effort to keep this positive, and educational, it reads like you have personal experience with 10mm hardcast loads not working in a Glock platform. If this is accurate, would you be so kind as to share the specifics of what you have tried, please?
Brand? Bullet weight? Bullet shape? Powder charge? What malfunctions did you experience?
If you tried some, and they worked, would you please share that as well?
Thanks,
PE
This is not my experience.
I have a G20.4, and have run T&B 38-40, T&B 215gr .410 swaged down, & Beartooth 200s through the stock 4.6, LW 5.15", & LW 5.2" comped.
No feed issues.
Smaller meplat 200s I've run BBI, Bayou, SNS, Blue, Ibejiheads, ACME...
Out of the 75 bullets I've loaded, from 1.240 to 1.280, precisely 1 has failed to feed. Bayou's 175 SWC.
.02
wild cat mccane
Member
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2009
- Messages
- 977
Lehigh Defense Extreme Penetrators. Full copper round. Copper is physically harder than lead or hard cast lead.
Hard cast can fragment too. Youtube it.
Hard cast can fragment too. Youtube it.
My understanding is that it has to do with the meplat, which is sharp-edged and stays that way longer in hard-cast ammo. The FMJ ammo will deform and form a wider blob which, with a reduced sectional density, and will not penetrate, especially through bone, as well.
Snowdog
Member
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2002
- Messages
- 4,608
wild cat mccane said:
That's the round I'm going with. I purchased 80 rounds from Underwood as they are on the expensive side. 40 rounds fed flawlessly through my RIA 1911. After seeing what they do against gel yet still not deforming against harder barriers (such as against "bullet proof glass" on youtube), I think they offer the best of both worlds (being reactive yet non-expanding).
Not perfect for bear (or alligator) by a long shot, but 10 rounds might offer some protection from black bear.
Snowdog
Member
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2002
- Messages
- 4,608
Since there were no flaws in the performance of those 40 rounds rounds, that would qualify those particular 40 rounds as having been "flawless".
Would #41 have hung up? Who knows. It could have failed on #199, but I'm not firing 200 of these.
Of course I'm aware 40 rounds is not an ideal round count to qualify something as being reliable. However, as those 40 rounds cost over $70 after shipping, that's about what I can afford.
My hope is that if these rounds where going to cause chronic problems, it would have manifested some symptoms within those 40 rounds.
However, I wasn't expecting feed issue as the profile is the same as FMJ.
My concern was the potency of Underwood ammunition since the FPS and main spring are still stock.
The recoil was stout, but the pistol ran just as well as it does with Remington UMC.
Would #41 have hung up? Who knows. It could have failed on #199, but I'm not firing 200 of these.
Of course I'm aware 40 rounds is not an ideal round count to qualify something as being reliable. However, as those 40 rounds cost over $70 after shipping, that's about what I can afford.
My hope is that if these rounds where going to cause chronic problems, it would have manifested some symptoms within those 40 rounds.
However, I wasn't expecting feed issue as the profile is the same as FMJ.
My concern was the potency of Underwood ammunition since the FPS and main spring are still stock.
The recoil was stout, but the pistol ran just as well as it does with Remington UMC.
- Status
