the actual speed of sound varies with a whole bunch of factors such as altitude, temperature and other barometric measurements, but to keep it simple we can say that it is about 1,100 fps at sea level,so it's a obvious thing that bullets can be misunderstood.
misunderstood bullets?
- Thread starter Nicodemus38
- Start date
- Status
The 148/150 grain DEWC is a great bullet to use for a lot of purposes.
I used to load it over 2.8 grains of Bullseye for PPC competition. I also loaded it to about 900 fps for small game. When I put that load on paper, it shot as good or better than the target load so I eliminated the target load. And based on the results of shooting game animals, I think it a good enough SD round that when I carry a 38, that is what is in the cylinder.
I used to load it over 2.8 grains of Bullseye for PPC competition. I also loaded it to about 900 fps for small game. When I put that load on paper, it shot as good or better than the target load so I eliminated the target load. And based on the results of shooting game animals, I think it a good enough SD round that when I carry a 38, that is what is in the cylinder.
schnarrgj
Member
Go to part 4A 1. It explains that only the met plate makes contact.
woad_yurt
Member
We're talking .38 SPL. That's a "popgun?"
I'm talking about unexpanded. A wadcutter removes tissue like a 3 hole paper punch removes paper and a round nosed bullet, whether it's a LRN or unexpanded hollowpoint, separates tissue by pushing it aside. Just look at target paper after being shot with both. I shot wet newspaper bundles and 2X4s and the wadcutter hole was open and clear, a tunnel. Round nosed profiles left a hole that was fairly closed up; a wire coat hanger had to be wiggled (with some pressure) to get it through the wood.
900 fps isn't fast enough for reliable and penetration and that's about what one gets from a .38 SPL short barrel. Even mighty Buffalo Bore's short barrel +P only gets 1040 FPS from a 2" barrel.
Last edited:
Gryffydd
Member
Ah, it was on another page...
I can see how that would make sense, especially at higher velocities. By the time the shoulder gets there things have already been too disrupted by the nose. Still, I always wonder about research done by people that supports the product they're selling
On the other hand, if you look at the cavitation table, the wound channels are all much larger than the meplat in any case. While the shoulder may not be doing the cutting, it's still not like we're getting meplat sized channels, so that's a good thing.
Oh, and it's "meplat"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meplat
I can see how that would make sense, especially at higher velocities. By the time the shoulder gets there things have already been too disrupted by the nose. Still, I always wonder about research done by people that supports the product they're selling
On the other hand, if you look at the cavitation table, the wound channels are all much larger than the meplat in any case. While the shoulder may not be doing the cutting, it's still not like we're getting meplat sized channels, so that's a good thing.
Oh, and it's "meplat"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meplat
Last edited:
Ed Harris
Member
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs12.htm
From airweight snubbies not suited for use with +P loads .38 Special wadcutters outperform JHPs which don't expand.
"None of the Federal 110-grain JHP bullets expanded. Each bullet retained its pre-fired truncated cone shape. Our average penetration measurement is reasonably close to MacPherson's model for a 115-grain .38 caliber truncated cone bullet, propelled at 790 fps. Figure 10-3 Truncated Cone Bullet Penetration Depth (Curve D, p. 248) shows a model penetration depth of approximately 23 inches in standard ordnance gelatin and soft tissue.2 The 3-inch difference between our test results and MacPherson's model can be explained by the 5-grain difference in bullet weight, the inexact nature of our test method, and possible dynamic differences between an unexpanded open tip hollowpoint bullet versus the meplat of a closed tip TC bullet.
"Our average penetration result for the CCI 148-grain wadcutter bullet is identical to MacPherson's model. According to Figure 10-2 Cylinder Bullet Penetration Depth, Curve B (145-grain bullet, 780 fps), the model indicates a penetration depth of approximately 20 inches of standard gelatin or flesh (p. 247).2
"It appears the Federal 110-grain Personal Defense HydraShok bullet doesn't achieve sufficient velocity necessary to cause the bullet to expand, when fired out of a short 2-inch barreled revolver. Water usually produces slightly greater JHP bullet expansion than gelatin and soft tissue. Therefore, if a bullet doesn't expand in water, it is highly unlikely to expand in an attacker's body.
"The unexpanded, streamlined, and less wound efficient truncated cone shape allowed the light Federal 110-grain Personal Defense HydraShok bullet to penetrate as deeply as the heavier, cylindrical shaped CCI wadcutter bullet, although both were propelled at similar velocities...
References/End Notes:
1. According to Cotey: "Penetration in rows of water-filled, 2-quart (1.89 liter) cartons is approximately 1.5 times that which would occur in 10% 4 degrees C gelatin. Since a U.S. 2-qt. carton is 3.75 inches (9.525 cm) wide and 3.75/1.5 = 2.5, one simply multiples the number of the carton in the row from which a test bullet was recovered by 2.5 to determine approximate gelatin penetration in inches or by 6.35 for the reading in centimeter. For example, a shot recovered from carton #6 would correspond to a gelatin penetration depth of approximately 15 inches (38.1 cm). (Cotey, Gus Jr.:"Number 1 Buckshot, the Number 1 Choice." Wound Ballistics Review, 2(4): p. 11; 1996.)
2. MacPherson, Duncan: Bullet Penetration - Modeling the Dynamics and Incapacitation Resulting from Wound Trauma. Ballistic Publications, El Segundo, CA; 1994.
From airweight snubbies not suited for use with +P loads .38 Special wadcutters outperform JHPs which don't expand.
"None of the Federal 110-grain JHP bullets expanded. Each bullet retained its pre-fired truncated cone shape. Our average penetration measurement is reasonably close to MacPherson's model for a 115-grain .38 caliber truncated cone bullet, propelled at 790 fps. Figure 10-3 Truncated Cone Bullet Penetration Depth (Curve D, p. 248) shows a model penetration depth of approximately 23 inches in standard ordnance gelatin and soft tissue.2 The 3-inch difference between our test results and MacPherson's model can be explained by the 5-grain difference in bullet weight, the inexact nature of our test method, and possible dynamic differences between an unexpanded open tip hollowpoint bullet versus the meplat of a closed tip TC bullet.
"Our average penetration result for the CCI 148-grain wadcutter bullet is identical to MacPherson's model. According to Figure 10-2 Cylinder Bullet Penetration Depth, Curve B (145-grain bullet, 780 fps), the model indicates a penetration depth of approximately 20 inches of standard gelatin or flesh (p. 247).2
"It appears the Federal 110-grain Personal Defense HydraShok bullet doesn't achieve sufficient velocity necessary to cause the bullet to expand, when fired out of a short 2-inch barreled revolver. Water usually produces slightly greater JHP bullet expansion than gelatin and soft tissue. Therefore, if a bullet doesn't expand in water, it is highly unlikely to expand in an attacker's body.
"The unexpanded, streamlined, and less wound efficient truncated cone shape allowed the light Federal 110-grain Personal Defense HydraShok bullet to penetrate as deeply as the heavier, cylindrical shaped CCI wadcutter bullet, although both were propelled at similar velocities...
References/End Notes:
1. According to Cotey: "Penetration in rows of water-filled, 2-quart (1.89 liter) cartons is approximately 1.5 times that which would occur in 10% 4 degrees C gelatin. Since a U.S. 2-qt. carton is 3.75 inches (9.525 cm) wide and 3.75/1.5 = 2.5, one simply multiples the number of the carton in the row from which a test bullet was recovered by 2.5 to determine approximate gelatin penetration in inches or by 6.35 for the reading in centimeter. For example, a shot recovered from carton #6 would correspond to a gelatin penetration depth of approximately 15 inches (38.1 cm). (Cotey, Gus Jr.:"Number 1 Buckshot, the Number 1 Choice." Wound Ballistics Review, 2(4): p. 11; 1996.)
2. MacPherson, Duncan: Bullet Penetration - Modeling the Dynamics and Incapacitation Resulting from Wound Trauma. Ballistic Publications, El Segundo, CA; 1994.
schnarrgj
Member
Thanks Gryffydd for the meplat. Spelling had not always been my strong point. At my age trying to go by memory too, is something that should not be done. My whole feeling on most caliber wars or bullet wars, is that use an adequate bullet that disrupts the systems needed for life, and things will happen. The old statement that "it is not the arrow that kills the deer but the Indian" is still true.
Gryffydd
Member
Hey, I would hope somebody would help me out when I misspell something too
Agreed.
xXxplosive
Member
If I recall correctly, Mr. Keith loaded his hollow base wadcutters in reverse.....with the hollow base in front. That seemed to give the best results he was looking for.
Jim Watson
Member
I don't think I ever read Mr Keith to say much if anything about the reversed wadcutter gimmick. His recommendation for a two inch .38 was a 160 gr HP or 173 gr SWC and sufficient Unique to turn the average Internet Handloading Expert's hair snow white overnight. We won't even get into Jeff Cooper's ideas. He admitted that his load was "contributing to the delinqency of handloaders" but necessary to get the snubby off the floor and at least up on its knees.
The answer to the non-expanding JHP is a HP without jacket. The 158 gr lead HP "FBI load" expands nicely in water from a 2" revolver.
The answer to the non-expanding JHP is a HP without jacket. The 158 gr lead HP "FBI load" expands nicely in water from a 2" revolver.
Ed Harris
Member
Backwards wadcutters are unstable and give extremely poor accuracy at beyond across the card table distances. If they happen to hit end-on rather than sideways, which is more likely, expansion and penetration are inconsistent. Standard factory wadcutters work fine. Handloaded full-charge (850 f.p.s., vs. 750 f.p.s. - not +P) wadcutters work even better.
Of the all-lead hollowpoint +P loads the Remington R38S12 performs best of the available loads when fired from a 2 inch barrel. The Federal 38G is no longer manufactured, but old stock may be found on dealers shelves which is also OK in a 2 inch. The Winchester X38SPD performs best when fired from a 3 inch or longer barrel, and may not expand reliably in some 2 inch guns having cylinder gaps larger than 0.006" in which striking velocity is less than 840 f.p.s.
Of the all-lead hollowpoint +P loads the Remington R38S12 performs best of the available loads when fired from a 2 inch barrel. The Federal 38G is no longer manufactured, but old stock may be found on dealers shelves which is also OK in a 2 inch. The Winchester X38SPD performs best when fired from a 3 inch or longer barrel, and may not expand reliably in some 2 inch guns having cylinder gaps larger than 0.006" in which striking velocity is less than 840 f.p.s.
xXxplosive
Member
Ooooops...........guess I stand corrected about Elmer.
But I do recall someone reccomending reloading HB wadcutters reversed for maximum upset. Not sure on the accuracy point as I have never tried this stunt and don't intend to.
But I do recall someone reccomending reloading HB wadcutters reversed for maximum upset. Not sure on the accuracy point as I have never tried this stunt and don't intend to.
Jim Watson
Member
Oh, reversed wadcutters have been The Secret Weapon for years and years. Nearly everybody with a .38 and a loading press has tried them at one time or another, even me. I just don't think Elmer Keith favored them.
Heck the ORIGINAL Hydrashok was made like a reversed wadcutter with the central post added; no ogive, no jacket.
I think a full power wadcutter like the Buffalo Bore or the old Service Wadcutter will hit hard, much more effective than a roundnose or a stiff hollowpoint that doesn't expand. But I think a hollowpoint made soft enough to expand at real revolver velocities is better.
Heck the ORIGINAL Hydrashok was made like a reversed wadcutter with the central post added; no ogive, no jacket.
I think a full power wadcutter like the Buffalo Bore or the old Service Wadcutter will hit hard, much more effective than a roundnose or a stiff hollowpoint that doesn't expand. But I think a hollowpoint made soft enough to expand at real revolver velocities is better.
Backpacker33
Member
Handgun ammo is not particularly powerful. The military has long considered handguns as insignificant in unit combat. Annecdotal evidence (and Hollywood makebelieve) notwithstanding, there are few documented accounts of handguns being used successfully in military combat.
The chief advantage of a handgun is its portability. That automatically induces compromises. Therefore, it serves to add all the edges possible. Modern ammo has superior ballistics to stuff available even three years ago. It shoots flater, which means straighter, and retains its energy farther away. Non-LEOs really don't need to think much about penetrating barriers, though clothing is an issue for anyone, and argues for bullets that penetrate. Hornady's LeverEvolution ammo is a good example of modern defensive bullets that have superior ballistics, good penetration and and the energy dump of a good hollowpoint.
One thing this allows is lower velocity and lighter bullets. Arthritic hands and arms ARE a factor for many people. I recently trained a 50ish woman recently divorced from a violet significant other. Turning keys is hard for her, and she could not operate any semi-auto, or even the DA trigger on my S&W Model 18. She decided on a S&W 686+. A local gunsmith smoothed the action for her and she has no problem. She practiced with .38 Special Plus P with modern hollow points, and keeps the 686 loaded with them at home.
Mention was made of Elmer Keith using wadcutters on game. Any hunter can advise that a proper lead game bullet should be hard cast. I load Buffalo Bore or Laser Cast bullets in my backpacking and hunting ammo because it is proven to penetrate the denser muscle of game and dangerous animals, and is able to break bones. Flat noses slow rapidly and have arcs like rainbows. When I carry my Marlin .45-70, it is now loaded with Hornady LeverEvolution ammo because it shoots flatter and has better terminal velocity at distance.
A hard, flat-nose bullet, particularly in a handgun may dump less energy in a human target while going right on through. Some years ago a female deputy sheriff in The People's Republik of California was shot through the aorta with a .44 Magnum and lived. The round-nosed bullet made an awful hole but did not expand.
The 9mm gets a bad rap, usually from people who don't do their research. For LEO or military, bigger is definitely better. For personal self-defense, we are much less likely to face the challenges they do. Examination of success rates with 9mm, .40S&W and .45ACP modern bullets, show very little difference in performance. Whether one or the other is a percentage point ahead of the other is a function of the happenstance of available data. Some police departments have stayed with 9mm or returned to it because modern 9mm cartridges do as well as any other caliber, and the softer recoil allows faster follow-up shots for people of average skills.
So, I feel the key is to select modern cartridges in whatever caliber, that are designed for the barrel length of the gun(s) one will be using.
Then, as my mentor in the USAF said, "Shoot back first."
- Backpacker
The chief advantage of a handgun is its portability. That automatically induces compromises. Therefore, it serves to add all the edges possible. Modern ammo has superior ballistics to stuff available even three years ago. It shoots flater, which means straighter, and retains its energy farther away. Non-LEOs really don't need to think much about penetrating barriers, though clothing is an issue for anyone, and argues for bullets that penetrate. Hornady's LeverEvolution ammo is a good example of modern defensive bullets that have superior ballistics, good penetration and and the energy dump of a good hollowpoint.
One thing this allows is lower velocity and lighter bullets. Arthritic hands and arms ARE a factor for many people. I recently trained a 50ish woman recently divorced from a violet significant other. Turning keys is hard for her, and she could not operate any semi-auto, or even the DA trigger on my S&W Model 18. She decided on a S&W 686+. A local gunsmith smoothed the action for her and she has no problem. She practiced with .38 Special Plus P with modern hollow points, and keeps the 686 loaded with them at home.
Mention was made of Elmer Keith using wadcutters on game. Any hunter can advise that a proper lead game bullet should be hard cast. I load Buffalo Bore or Laser Cast bullets in my backpacking and hunting ammo because it is proven to penetrate the denser muscle of game and dangerous animals, and is able to break bones. Flat noses slow rapidly and have arcs like rainbows. When I carry my Marlin .45-70, it is now loaded with Hornady LeverEvolution ammo because it shoots flatter and has better terminal velocity at distance.
A hard, flat-nose bullet, particularly in a handgun may dump less energy in a human target while going right on through. Some years ago a female deputy sheriff in The People's Republik of California was shot through the aorta with a .44 Magnum and lived. The round-nosed bullet made an awful hole but did not expand.
The 9mm gets a bad rap, usually from people who don't do their research. For LEO or military, bigger is definitely better. For personal self-defense, we are much less likely to face the challenges they do. Examination of success rates with 9mm, .40S&W and .45ACP modern bullets, show very little difference in performance. Whether one or the other is a percentage point ahead of the other is a function of the happenstance of available data. Some police departments have stayed with 9mm or returned to it because modern 9mm cartridges do as well as any other caliber, and the softer recoil allows faster follow-up shots for people of average skills.
So, I feel the key is to select modern cartridges in whatever caliber, that are designed for the barrel length of the gun(s) one will be using.
Then, as my mentor in the USAF said, "Shoot back first."
- Backpacker
NoirFan
Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2006
- Messages
- 671
Here's how I think of the .38 special light target wadcutter loads: gel tests show that it penetrates to almost twice the FBI required depths for a defensive bullet, while expanding very slightly. It does this while delivering negligible recoil to the shooter even out of a lightweight snubnose revolver. For this reason I think it is a adequate defensive load.
I don't know about the claims that the flat face cuts a more damaging hole; it might be true, it might not be. I just know it meets the penetration standard and is easy to shoot out of a small concealed gun.
I don't know about the claims that the flat face cuts a more damaging hole; it might be true, it might not be. I just know it meets the penetration standard and is easy to shoot out of a small concealed gun.
woad_yurt
Member
It is true.
Both holes below were made by the same gun. A wadcutter made the left one. Notice how it cut out a wad? Thus, "wadcutter."
Stolen picture!
Both holes below were made by the same gun. A wadcutter made the left one. Notice how it cut out a wad? Thus, "wadcutter."
Stolen picture!
Last edited:
JTQ
Member
I find this article interesting...
http://www.gsgroup.co.za/articlepvdw.html
I don't have the answers, but these things always make me ask more questions...
1. When hunters use a round that is marginal for the task why don't they use hollow point bullets?
2. Aren't all handgun rounds marginal for self defense?
3. How many hunting bullets .35 caliber and above are available as hollow points or rapid expanding "ballistic tip" style? Do hunters believe .35 caliber (9MM) is a big enough hole? Why not for personal defense?
4. What came first?
- lawsuits by criminals (or their surviving family members) against police and citizens defending themselves against those criminals
- hollow point hand gun bullets
http://www.gsgroup.co.za/articlepvdw.html
I don't have the answers, but these things always make me ask more questions...
1. When hunters use a round that is marginal for the task why don't they use hollow point bullets?
2. Aren't all handgun rounds marginal for self defense?
3. How many hunting bullets .35 caliber and above are available as hollow points or rapid expanding "ballistic tip" style? Do hunters believe .35 caliber (9MM) is a big enough hole? Why not for personal defense?
4. What came first?
- lawsuits by criminals (or their surviving family members) against police and citizens defending themselves against those criminals
- hollow point hand gun bullets
I was watching a real murder investigation show about a man had his wife to go shoot a prosecutor, and he told her to put wadcutters in the revolver because it was more deadly.
Other than that, I think they're fine for SD. In fact, I loaded an elderly ladies revolver with them (.38s), except the last round wich is a .357 Power'R ball.
Other than that, I think they're fine for SD. In fact, I loaded an elderly ladies revolver with them (.38s), except the last round wich is a .357 Power'R ball.
Gryffydd
Member
IRT JTQ
1. A hollow point in an already marginal cartridge is likely to lead to poor penetration and less/no damage to vitals.
2. Yes, but some are more marginal than others and some are more sensitive to bullet selection.
3. A .30-.35 caliber rifle bullet at near 3,000 feet per second can't really be compared to a .35 caliber pistol round.
1. A hollow point in an already marginal cartridge is likely to lead to poor penetration and less/no damage to vitals.
2. Yes, but some are more marginal than others and some are more sensitive to bullet selection.
3. A .30-.35 caliber rifle bullet at near 3,000 feet per second can't really be compared to a .35 caliber pistol round.
Mad Chemist
Member
Increased seating depth of WC bullet leads to increased pressure relative to other bullet types. Hence WC must have a lighter charge to avoid overly high pressures.
Hot HBWC will lead the bore.
Hot HBWC will lead the bore.
Last edited:
- Status