Zendude
Member
38 special load data seems to significantly vary among different sources. Maybe cross check a couple of other sources?
In case anyone else is well meaning but incorrect, like me, I'll break down where I went wrong.Nope. No difference in remaining case volume when two wadcutter bullets (but different base design) of the same weight are seated to the same OAL.
In case anyone else is well meaning but incorrect, like me, I'll break down where I went wrong.
One assumes that if you subtract the volume of a cone (skirted void in a HBWC) from a cylinder (DEWC) that would increase case volume by the volume of the cones void.
However, if both bullets are 158gn the lead is still somewhere, and the length of the skirt will consume volume equivalent to the volume of the cones void.
I'm sure this is obvious to most but it didnt occur to me until I considered things more thoughtfully so I thought I'd post my detailed retraction just in case. The load data is identical and I only use DEWC so I hadn't really thought that hard about it I guess.
Oops.
A hollow base is a hole. A solid base is not. The hole is empty space. Oops. Disregard this reply. I agree. Missed the "same" depth. Apologies to all. If the base of each were seated to the same depth, the h.b. would have more space but nose would have to be extended out of the case. When people confuse seating depth with oal we get in trouble.If a hollow base wadcutter and a plain (non-hollow) base wadcutter bullet of the same weight are seated to the same overall length, there is no difference in remaining case volume. The hollow base does not create more space in the case.
Every button head WC I have loaded also had a hollow base and was soft. (10-12 BHN)Thanks for that..makes perfect sense.
I tried N330 because that's what I have for 9MM. Also Bullseye.
Both acted as I would expect.
Yeah, it's a button head.. supposed to fly better from the (little) research I've done. I do have *some* HP-38, but didn't try it. How about Unique for a slower powder?
Thanks for the replies, gentlemen. I'll just save the TG for another load.
What where the velocities for 5 at 2.8 gr. Titegroup at 1.290.?
Did you shoot a "calibration" round over the chronograph? I do, my calibration round is a 158 LRN with 3.5 grains Bullseye in a 38 Special case. I have fired enough of these rounds to know if the chronograph is out of alignment. I have been shooting down a case of 22lr Rem Target SV for rifles. The velocities you measured are unreasonable for a 148 grain bullet with 3.1 grains Titegroup, especially for a snubbie!
Either you put a lot more powder in the case or the chronograph was off axis, or powder residue confused the machine. What type of chronograph did you use?
OP, you loaded a shorter OAL with a different style bullet and did not start at the minimum. While I cannot say I have never done this, and guessed wrong as you did, that is what got you in trouble. Been there, done that. Welcome to the club, it tends to make us more careful after that.
Y'all be careful out there.
One it could be the reading that you are getting from your chrono. I have seen higher than expected velocities when the chrono was placed too close to the muzzle of the pistol and was getting readings from the smoke and gass passing over the chrono. Moving the chrono at least 4 to 5 yards away from the muzzle brought the reading down to what was expected.
A reasonable assumption, but something is wrong. My thing is it sounds like you have the recoil to go with the velocity the chrono gave. Maybe not, hard to tell.Because of the shorter OAL, I thought 2.8 at 1.290" would give a good margin of safety to start with.
Basically, that is why I started this thread. I've shot a lot of wadcutters out of this snubbie. It was the heaviest recoil by far that I've ever had with it. I'll let this thread die a natural death, but think I'll take my .357 magnum out and try a couple more just for grins.A reasonable assumption, but something is wrong. My thing is it sounds like you have the recoil to go with the velocity the chrono gave. Maybe not, hard to tell.
Either the space under the bullet is less than everyone thinks, or the chrono is lying, and you misread recoil. Dunno.
Good question, and while we are checking things, do you have any check weights to test the scale?Did you weight the bullets are they actually 148 gr
Did you weight the bullets are they actually 148 gr
Good question, and while we are checking things, do you have any check weights to test the scale?
Have you seen a real hollow based wadcutter? I haven't measured the volume of a hollow base cavity, but it is significant when determining the internal volume of a loaded case. More room in the case, even considering the bullets base, equals less pressure. Most reloaders know that a hollow point bullets of the same shape/design as a flat/round nose bullet is lighter. But can you say the 148 gr, HB is not a bit longer to make up the weight lost by a hollow base than a DEWC? I haven't measured the length of a HB vs a DE bullet so I could be wrong (nah!)...Nope. No difference in remaining case volume when two wadcutter bullets (but different base design) of the same weight are seated to the same OAL.
Have you seen a real hollow based wadcutter? I haven't measured the volume of a hollow base cavity, but it is significant when determining the internal volume of a loaded case. More room in the case, even considering the bullets base, equals less pressure. Most reloaders know that a hollow point bullets of the same shape/design as a flat/round nose bullet is lighter. But can you say the 148 gr, HB is not a bit shorter than a DEWC? I haven't measured the length of a HB vs a DE bullet so I could be wrong (nah!)...
"Correct. The material is just displaced, i.e. it is moved from one place to another. Thus the remaining case volume is not changed. Just the shape of the remaining volume has changed." As long as there are incorrect posts like this, I will reply. I cannot see how one cannot visualize a large void in the base of a bullet does not increase the total volume of the case. That's like thinking a 38 Special has the same volume as a 357 case; "same bullets, same powder charges and the velocity and pressures are the same, right?". A fallacy repeated several times does not make it a fact! Unable to see/visualize this? Seriously?
So if I put a 1" rod then and a 1" pipe in a glass of water, the glass will hold the same amount of water with either the rod or pipe?