MBC 158 Grain SWC Match .38 Special

wcwhitey

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2006
Messages
2,814
Just received my order today. I have my regular loads for 158 SWC (normally RimRock) lead. The loads are either Win244 3.8 Grains and Win 231 3.5. Either should work but I thought I would ask to see if anyone has a specific load with that bullet and those powders threat they really like. Just curious! Happy New Year!

Oh and these are coated!
 
Last edited:
Just received my order today. I have my regular loads for 158 SWC (normally RimRock) lead. The loads are either Win244 3.8 Grains and Win 231 3.5. Either should work but I thought I would ask to see if anyone has a specific load with that bullet and those powders threat they really like. Just curious! Happy New Year!

Oh and these are coated!


Did you order the one's without the lube grove?
 
Have no experience with 244.
4.0 of 231 is a great load, light recoil, clean and accurate from just about all of my guns. Can't go wrong with 231. Only taper crimp enough to remove belling enough so they drop in the cylinders, will be better for accuracy and won't overwork the brass.
Have a great new year.
 
I'll be watching this thread.

DannyD has caught my attention in regards to considering these bullets. Great shooting Danny!
 
Did you order the one's without the lube grove?
This is my first order from them. I usually order RimRock 158 SWC with lube and the grove. These are without the lube grove aka their Match version. Seems like a good idea, no grove equals more lubricant while adding bearing surface at the same time. We will see. Dimensionally they are the same as most standard SWC’s I have used. I was just hunting for someone’s specific success story. We will see how they perform.
 
This is my first order from them. I usually order RimRock 158 SWC with lube and the grove. These are without the lube grove aka their Match version. Seems like a good idea, no grove equals more lubricant while adding bearing surface at the same time. We will see. Dimensionally they are the same as most standard SWC’s I have used. I was just hunting for someone’s specific success story. We will see how they perform.

I used those at 25 and 50 yards with no problems at all; they also sold a lubed version of the match bullet too.
 
I have the harder version on the way for 357 Mag loads so we’ll see how that goes. I plan to use them in 38 Special too. I’ve been using some 125 grain bullets that have the higher hardness but they shoot very well in 38 Special with Silhouette powder. I wanted a full power 357 cast load but the powders I use seem to do a little better with heavier bullets.
 
I haven’t even cracked the bottle so I can’t say about the effect. But I will start with the lower end of the load and build a handful to test. I bought the hi tek coated.

Winchester 244 is going to end up replacing HP-38 and 231. It's cleaner burning and meters better plus it is REACH complement. Reach is a new manufacturing standard each letter stands for something.
 
The Reach stands for: Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction. By doing this they can sell to Europe.
 
Winchester 244 is going to end up replacing HP-38 and 231. It's cleaner burning and meters better plus it is REACH complement. Reach is a new manufacturing standard each letter stands for something.
Many of the "legacy" powders will go away, because of the REACH regs.

It's more of an environmental standard than anything else. Certain methods and solvents cannot be used if one intends to sell in EuroLand.

Don't fear, it will come to this side of the pond also.
 
Many of the "legacy" powders will go away, because of the REACH regs.

It's more of an environmental standard than anything else. Certain methods and solvents cannot be used if one intends to sell in EuroLand.

Don't fear, it will come to this side of the pond also.

The powder companies are allowed to change the formula 10% every 10 years or so and keep the same name, so that's mean's Bullseye, Unique and other powders are not even close to what they were 40 years ago.
 
The powder companies are allowed to change the formula 10% every 10 years or so and keep the same name, so that's mean's Bullseye, Unique and other powders are not even close to what they were 40 years ago.

The 10% is from the original lot velocity. NOT year to year. They try to keep it as close as possible or they would have a major problem with published load data.
 
The 10% is from the original lot velocity. NOT year to year. They try to keep it as close as possible or they would have a major problem with published load data.

My mistake, I could not remember exactly what the guy from Hodgdon said. He just told me to always use their latest data.
 
I have wondered about Mr Clean 244 as a replacement for W231, but if it is meant as such, why didn't they make it The Same? Distributors put the same label on powder from year to year and even from manufacturer to manufacturer, so why did they just not make 244 indistinguishable in use and mark it 231 Improved. Like AA did when they changed their No 2.

A Hodgdon rep said here a while back that 231/HP38 was not the cheapest or cleanest but as long as there was a demand for it, they would supply it.
 
I have wondered about Mr Clean 244 as a replacement for W231, but if it is meant as such, why didn't they make it The Same? Distributors put the same label on powder from year to year and even from manufacturer to manufacturer, so why did they just not make 244 indistinguishable in use and mark it 231 Improved. Like AA did when they changed their No 2.

A Hodgdon rep said here a while back that 231/HP38 was not the cheapest or cleanest but as long as there was a demand for it, they would supply it.
Win244 is certainly not cheap. If you count all the components that I have gone through trying to get it to perform the same as 231\HP38 it certainly has not been a good economic choice at this point. I have in a few applications like .45 ACP, some .44 Special, 357 Magnum (light loads), .32 Long found it to be quite good. .38 has been so so still looking for the sweet spot. I bought it because I could not get replacements for 231 and Unique (231 is around now) and did not want to deplete my remaining stock. It may get better but data has been slow to become available except for manufacturer data. It certainly is not a direct replacement for 231 data wise.
 
I received my MBC bullets today. I measured a couple and they measured 0.359”. I assume the extra 0.001” is the coating and won’t be a problem. I ordered some Whitetail #4 too and they’re about 0.0005” over the sized diameter of 0.311”. Again I assume it’s the coating adding a bit of diameter. I’ll call them tomorrow to be sure.
 
Back
Top