SWC or LFN

[johns10mm]

Hope this is in the right place. What bullet style do you guys prefer for hunting to around 100 yards or less SWC, LFN or WFN

[Sweetpea]

Need more info.

What are you shooting?

What will it feed properly?

[MakeMineA10mm]

I don't find much difference. I load 44s in both styles. I use Lyman 431640 (LFN) in my levers and in HP, it weighs 270gr. In my revolvers, I load my custom Hvy. Keith SWC, which weighs 270gr. Load them both with same powder and load. I use the LFN for feeding-sake in the levers, but my revolvers eat the SWCs well.

[jmort]

The LFN will penetrate the most if it is dangerous game. I think the LBT LFN and WFN are superior designs, but SWC will work real good.

[johns10mm]

Sorry 41 magnum revolver. Hunting deer maybe hogs someday

[RobS]

There are both camps and both designs have been made to shoot very accurately. The designs have nearly the same or the same meplat diameter (Keith SWC) so for hunting things are the same or nearly so. I've shot a ton of the Keith style designs and did so for quite some time. I was able to make the Keith shoot 1-1 1/2" groups as with a LFN style design. The big difference I noted was that I could get the accuracy from the LFN style designs with more powder combinations i.e. it was easier more forgiving to find accurate loads with multiple different boolit/powder combos. I have since went exclusively to LFN style designs for handgunning.

[shoot-n-lead]

In the real world...you CANNOT argue the effectiveness of the SWC design...it has done it all...but the LFN performs well, also.

[44man]

All will kill the same, reason I don't use a SWC is I never get the accuracy I want.

[jmort]

The LFN/WFN have larger meplats, which is the point. Veral Smith increased the meplat to increase terminal effect. Veral proved that the front band below the SWC meplat does not get any "action" and as such the meplat on the SWC is smaller and less effective. That does not mean a SWC cannot work, just that it has a smaller meplat which is clearly visible.

[Hickok]

I started out with SWC's many years ago, and they have worked great for me in hunting. (I do have a .44 Devastator mold ordered after reading up on it here).

If I was starting out anew, I would look at LFN and WFN boolit designs. But I believe a good Keith SWC is never a mistake.

[RobS]

The LFN/WFN have larger meplats, which is the point. Veral Smith increased the meplat to increase terminal effect. Veral proved that the front band below the SWC meplat does not get any "action" and as such the meplat on the SWC is smaller and less effective. That does not mean a SWC cannot work, just that it has a smaller meplat which is clearly visible.

Yes and no. When considering a Keith SWC then the LFN has the same or nearly the same meplat diameter however the WFN does have a wider meplat over the Keith SWC. If one is considering a typical SWC then yes the meplat is larger on the LFN and WFN designs.

[jmort]

Here is a Lyman SWC with .290" meplat and an LBT style with a .335"

But having checked it out, Elmer did move up to a 70% meplat on his last SWCs and the LBTs are approximately 75%. Not enough to make a huge difference if any.

http://www.accuratemolds.com/img/bullets/detail/43-251L-D.png

126061

[RobS]

WFN meplat is cut .090 smaller than the full the diameter and the LFN's melplat is .125 smaller than the full boolit diameter.

So:
357 Mag -358 WFN: .268" LFN: .233" Keith SWC: .250"
41 Mag - 410 WFN: .320" LFN: .285" Keith SWC: .287"
44 Mag - 430 WFN: .340" LFN: .305" Keith SWC: .301"
45 Colt - 452 WFN: .362" LFN: .327" Keith SWC: .316"

From Veral himself: http://www.go2gbo.com/forums/ask-veral-smith-of-lbt-qa/lfn-wfn-meplat-size/

You are correct that Keith SWC's were in the neighborhood of around 70% meplat later on give or take so I added the third column in under those measurements. The Keith SWC meplat is very close to the LFN's that is for sure.

[jmort]

Makes sense and I stand corrected. Thanks for the link. Good stuff.

[SINGLE_SHOT]

In my head SWC cuts through paper/cardboard paper so i feel it would be better. But not by much. I wouldnt buy new mould/bullets to have the other but SWC would make me feel a tad more comfortable.

[GLynn41]

if the meplats are similar--then the results will be also soooo shoot what you like-- of the 2--personally I like both and have killed deer with both --I do like a LWN better --took a #280 boar with LWN

[Tatume]

Veral proved that the front band below the SWC meplat does not get any "action" and as such the meplat on the SWC is smaller and less effective.

Brian Pierce claims to have proved that Veral was wrong. Both are playing fast and loose with the word "prove" in my opinion.

[44man]

Veral is correct, the shoulder on a Keith does nothing in an animal. The reason is there is a pressure wave off a flat meplat the keeps tissue away from the little shoulder.
Where I find Veral wrong is the relationship between hardness and velocity and increasing the meplat on a boolit too hard just increases the secondary wound channel. But he goes into the soft nose casting to get some upset and slowing of the boolit in passage and he is again correct.
When things are not right with the alloy or velocity, even an 80% meplat will fail.
I have gone to an 82% meplat but the alloy and velocity defeated me with deer running 120 yards with no blood trails. Just softening half the nose and most deer hit the ground before recoil is over.
This is the first season the .500 JRH has worked because of the softer nose. I never seen deer drop so fast except with my .475 or .54 ML.
The Keith has enough meplat as does the WLN and WFN but other factors are in play.
The only reason I don't shoot a Keith is the little shoulder can wipe off at the forcing cone and not align the cylinder. So will a wad cutter. The LBT will pull the cylinder.

[Piedmont]

Brian Pierce claims to have proved that Veral was wrong. Both are playing fast and loose with the word "prove" in my opinion.

Brian says the few Keiths he has recovered from game and cattle show wear on the front band showing that shoulder was cutting in the animal. He also says the entrance wounds show cutting of the shoulder. Veral, or was it Ross Siefried, proved that if you put sand in gelatin and shoot it that the front band won't be cut. Does anyone hunt gelatin?

Brian makes more sense to me on this issue and he doesn't have a vested interest, just wants to shoot what works. Veral is selling meplats.

[jmort]

I like both Brian and Veral. I believe Veral put black magic marker on the front band which was intact post impact. Veral has done far more for cast bullets than Brian. But, Brian May be right. The more I looked into this, the more I am convinced that the SWC s never a bad choice.

[Bigslug]

I am gravitating toward the LFN/WFN style - width of nose depending on the launch platform. I don't professionally "hunt" paper, so the SWC shoulder maximizing ring value is not a huge deal for me.

The LFN/WFN nose style will put more lead forward, outside of the brass, giving you more room for powder if running large, compressed charges.

As to the SWC shoulder "cutting" in game or not - I tend to think that yes, it will, eventually. Probably not at higher speed, but at the tail end of the wound channel, IF the bullet is slowing down to the point of not exiting.

The way my thinking is leaning (this week, anyway:veryconfu) is to go with WFN's that are light as far as WFN offerings go, but middle-heavy for caliber (i.e. 260 grains for a .44, maybe 200-220 for a .41?). The idea is to throw them faster for a greater displacement off the nose, and still have plenty of penetration.

[44man]

I suppose the Keith shoulder will cut if shot very slow but you lose energy. And get just a hole. You still need energy.

[leadman]

I shoot a Ruger SBH Hunter in 41 mag. To try the LFN I bought some 265gr from Cast Performance. I tried many powders and loads, primers, etc. and could not get acceptable accuracy with them. So I use them in my 40-65 Rolling Block.
I also had the discontinued Lee 240gr SWC mold and these also did not shoot as well as I wanted for hunting.
My plinking boolit is the Saeco 220gr GC truncated cone and it does very well out to 200 yards for me.
I tried the Lyman 215gr SWC GC and it was marginal. The RCBS 215gr SWC plain base does shoot very well for me to 200 yards and this is the boolit I will take hunting if I draw a tag again.

I have seen others struggle with the heavy boolits in the 41 mag. even at 100 yards. Don't know if it is rifling twist, the shooter, or what, but the boolits up to 220gr seem to shoot better.

I can push the RCBS SWC to 1,550 fps with Alliant 300 MP powder.

[MakeMineA10mm]

As to the SWC shoulder "cutting" in game or not - I tend to think that yes, it will, eventually. Probably not at higher speed, but at the tail end of the wound channel, IF the bullet is slowing down to the point of not exiting.

This is what I am thinking too. (No proof, just a belief, based on reasoning the question through.)

On the other hand, I think the SWC is better ballistically (retained velocity/energy & hence flatter trajectory) for long-range shooting than the WFN. If I remember correctly, I believe this is why the LFN design was brought out - so Veral's design could could compete at long range with the SWC. I believe it has been shown that the LFN actually out-performs the SWC at distance. So, Veral has a design that's better at close range (WFN) due to bigger meplat causing better wound tract, AND a design that has equal killing power and trajectory to the SWC at long range (LFN).

The unmentioned point is that a RNFP design feeds better in leverguns than the SWC.

Lastly, I'd point out that Ross Seyfried, a disciple of Elmer Keith, has adopted Verals designs as superior to the SWC, and has said in print that Keith didn't live long enough to really test them.

With all that said, I'll tell you:
1) Very darn few of us shoot at 300-600 yards with our pistols for the long range question to deserve much merit.
2) Most problems people have with SWCs is from poorly designed, alloyed, sized, and loaded bullets. If you cast your own from proper alloy (for the pressure of your load), have a mould which has a long-enough front driving band to center the loaded round in the throat, don't seat that band too deep in the case, and size these bullets to throat diameter, I've found SWCs to be easy to find accurate loads for.

So, yes, I still like and find very useful SWCs. I just don't think there's enough difference between RNFPs (even greatly modified/improved ones like Veral's) to argue about. I use them both and like them both.

[Ed K]

To try the LFN I bought some 265gr from Cast Performance.

Veral is quick to point out that Cast Performance has never purchased a LBT mold.

On another note, Veral usually comments that a WFN needs to be pushed hard. Many comment about long range stability of WFNs. Maybe there is truth to it. Personally, being a 50-75 yard brush hunter with them I don't really care. I can accept that I might want to switch to a LFN for longer range - which to me means single shot pistol or rifle. The added velocity should more than make up for the difference in meplat.

[44man]

Just velocity match to twist. My WFN boolits are stable to 547 yards. To tell the truth I use the same loads with the WFN that I do with a WLN. My WLN I made has a LONG ogive to match the 11* forcing cone close. it is 330 gr so I had to reduce my load 1/2 gr. Seems there is a sweet spot with the .44 at 21.5 gr of 296 using 300 to 320 gr boolits, A little too much with my 330 gr. Not beyond pressure but groups open.
I do not think a WFN has to be shot faster, just fast enough. In the .44 it appears around 1316 fps is where it is. If I slow them, I get a shotgun.
Strange thing is my boolit will feed in a Marlin but a shorter boolit will not. Never figured it out and sold the Marlin.

[Ed K]

A 330gr 44 cal boolit running at 1316 fps out of a revolver isn't fast? ;)

126267

[44man]

A 330gr 44 cal boolit running at 1316 fps out of a revolver isn't fast? ;)

126267
I do not get that velocity shown and my SBH is 10-1/2". But I use a Fed 150 primer. Magnum primers never go in my .44. A primer can add almost 2000 psi, I don't go there because primer pressure can move out a boolit before ignition. I want fire only.

[paul h]

Can't go wrong with either design, but as another posted mentioned the LFN's seem to be more flexible in terms of finding accurate loads. One benefit ogival wadcutter is that for a given weight it is a shorter bullet than a swc so there is more powder capacity in the case.

As far as the WFN's needing to be pushed hard, I had a 460 gr .475" WFN that I was able to get excellent accuracy in my 480 @ 1050 fps which is slower than some have claimed WFN's need to be driven for accuracy. I did send some to a fellow 480 shooter to test and he said when he did long range testing they started to fly wild around 150-175 yds. So if your plans include long range work I'd suggest sticking with the LFN design.

[Artful]

But I believe a good Keith SWC is never a mistake.

I'm going to second this - I like the clean holes on paper targets and the shock on game.
If your shooting a revolver and have a good fit to the cylinder accuracy can be outstanding.

[mattw]

I hunt deer in Illinois with a .41 Mag, I have used the Saeco #411 230gr SWC and the LBT 230gr. WFN and a 265 Tru-shot LFN(?). I really like the terminal ballistics of the WFN, but at 100+ yards would go with the LFN or the SWC. I load with an old commercial variant of H110 that allows H110 loads to be reduced 10%, thus upping the effective case capacity... Long and short of it, I do really crank them out. I do not shoot a steady diet of these loads, do not want to shoot out my pistols.

[rockshooter]

An issue that I encountered with the WFN (NOE) was that the nose collided with the chamber throats and I couldn't seat then where needed and get a decent crimp. I can crimp over the first band in a SWC and all works better.
Loren

[BRobertson]

Brian says the few Keiths he has recovered from game and cattle show wear on the front band showing that shoulder was cutting in the animal. He also says the entrance wounds show cutting of the shoulder. Veral, or was it Ross Siefried, proved that if you put sand in gelatin and shoot it that the front band won't be cut. Does anyone hunt gelatin?

Brian makes more sense to me on this issue and he doesn't have a vested interest, just wants to shoot what works. Veral is selling meplats.

I would be concerned if I was recovering ANY of the boolits!! I have never recovered a 300 gr .44 LFN or 300 grn SSK. Even in moose.

Bob

[Blackwater]

Well, this is always a good arguement, of course, and we all love a good arguement, as well as learning the results of others' experiences and experiments. I always listen to 44man's words because he's gone further than most any of the rest of us in establishing and testing his loads, including bullet types. However, as an old swamp rat and hunter, I really believe that any of these bullets, cast of appropriate alloy (usually as soft as the loads require to not lead badly) will work just fine, and it's where you hit 'em that matters most. THAT is the real difference here, IMO. I just got a NOE 235 gr. RNFP mould for my .44 Marlin carbine, and haven't gotten to try it yet, but in that particular gun, I was looking for sure, reliable feeding. When a .44 bullet of decent weight and design DOESN'T kill deer well, I know it'll be MY fault, and not likely the load's or bullet's fault, assuming it had tested to be accurate as well. We all too often forget that, these days, what with our busy lives limiting our time at the range. I long ago gave up things that interfered with my shooting, and yes, it cost me something, but I don't regret the decision for a minute. KNOWING where that bullet is going to land is something that I value, and a little bullet in the right place beats a big one somewhere else ANY day of the week. Knowing how to move so that you don't alarm the quarry is important, too. It's ALL these things working together that produces the results we all want, so let's keep them all in perspective.

[Shiloh]

Either.

Shiloh

[Jtarm]

WFN. Probably doesn't matter much. I do love LBT moulds, though.

[BAGTIC]

I believe Veral.

SWC makes a neater hole in paper though. IMO one advantage of designs similar to Veral's is that they move some of weight out of the case and reduce seating depth giving greater usable case capacity.

[44man]

Elmer was back in the day of a lot of target shooting where a hole in paper was important but he wanted better then a RN could do on game. I was also there . He was correct about the meplat but still wanted a boolit to cut paper so all would like it. Wad cutters were a favorite but poor at range. Elmer fixed it. Yet the shoulder itself was a burden and did nothing on game. I do not think a keith will shoot as far with accuracy because as the pressure wave reduces and contacts the shoulder, the turbulence will increase.
Yet it kills OK, just from the meplat at the right velocity. But Elmer used softer lead and expansion was a factor. His boolit would expand greatly but would lose penetration.
I use hard boolits for accuracy but found hard with too much velocity did not kill good even with a WFN. I found meplat alone is never the solution. Sounds crazy but a WFN at 1600 fps is less affective then at 1300 fps. A 440 gr, 50 caliber WFN at 1350 fps is less affective then a 420 gr .475 at 1300 fps. Who would think? I solved the .500 JRH by making half the nose softer. I stack deer every year. I see those failures and what works.
You have to look at the pressure wave off the meplat. Disrupt it to slow the boolit will mean a better and faster kill. Yet do not lose penetration.

[MT Gianni]

I believe that the meplate does most of the damage that results in an animals death. There are SWC's with a minimal meplate, think Lee 140 gr swc, and there are those that rival a rf. Pick one of equal size and your results will be too close to equal to measure.

[44man]

I believe that the meplate does most of the damage that results in an animals death. There are SWC's with a minimal meplate, think Lee 140 gr swc, and there are those that rival a rf. Pick one of equal size and your results will be too close to equal to measure.
That is true, I never dicker over a few thousandths. I believe in a fast kill.
It is stunning to see a revolver put deer on the ground before out of recoil. I swear they are more lethal then a rifle. My friend uses a .270 and his deer run off, spray blood of course but most of mine just drop. I wish I could talk him into a revolver.
I found two dead doe where I hunt from a neighbor that uses a .308. I find too many dead deer from rifles.
For a long time I thought I was a fool using a revolver. But as years went on I seen just how affective they are.

[35remington]

Sure, the SWC shoulder can run into things that don't act like fluids, like bone. But then I'm not sure what value this has.

If the SWC shoulder worked on tissue, it would also work on much thinner air and the BC wouldn't be any higher than a wadcutter. Thing is, the BC is considerably higher than a wadcutter. Shadowgraph tests of airborne bullets show the bow wave of a SWC lets the shoulder of the bullet pass with much less air disturbance more nearly approximating that drag found on the lube grooves.....and it's reasonable to believe the shoulder does not do much work, as trendy as it is for Handloader magazine to say otherwise.

And....if the visible shoulder damage of the SWC DID occur as resulting from tissue, which is somewhat doubtful, it can't work for very long as the shoulder is now rounded and the "cutting action" of the shoulder would be lost for most of its passage through the animal. If deformation of the shoulder did occur, it would occur nearest to the entrance wound as this is where deceleration and deformation of the bullet is greatest and where high kinetic energy has the most potential to cause said deformation. For most of the bullet's passage through the animal the "cutting action" of the shoulder would be nonexistent because the "sharp edge" has been lost and is now rounded.

Whatever your take on the issue, the "cutting action" of the shoulder is either nonexistent on muscle tissue or simply not present for most of the bullet's passage through the critter even if it does occur for a few fractions of an inch after impact. So proselytizing for the SWC shoulder having great effect on game doesn't seem to be a credible stance to take.

Those taking a stand on the issue have to define their terms better.

[bobthenailer]

Which every i have in that caliber with the WFN or LFN being my first choice and the SWC last.

[44man]

I profess to still liking a keith, I used the original 429421 for years and also the Thompson 358156 HP that was astounding in my 27 with 8-3/8" ribbed barrel, Phantom scope, I could hit 1" targets at 100 from prone. I used to put water in those little frozen juice cans and blow them up all day.
However there seems to be a difference as my calibers got larger, I have never had a SWC shoot good from the .475 and up. Might be because I shoot full hunting loads or one GG is not right, will never know. I ran out of boolits sent to me before I got any results.
My 420 gr WFN out of the BFR plain works and I shot some 1/2" groups with a friends Freedom at 50 yards. I sent the boolits to be copied and some tweaking was done so when I was sent some to try, they still shot decent. I prefer not to change it. To see it hit steel at 500 meters every shot might sound crazy but my .500 JRH does the same with an 80% meplat.
The Keith will also shoot very, very far as I was shooting my 1956 flat top and my first 29 to over 400 yards back in the day. I think the only thing a Keith needs is a gun with good alignment. Wad cutter is worse.
What I don't like with a Keith is the nose ogive will touch NOTHING in the bore or cone unless it slumps. If it slumps even, you have a WLN at the target. I suppose my 22 gr load of 2400 gave that to me long ago.
We could not hunt deer with handguns in Ohio back then but many varmints bit the dust. It started my love affair with the .44. The year I had to move was the first year of deer handgun hunting in Ohio, I was fit to be tied. We could use them for varmints and also rifles but not for deer.

[robg]

i ve found swc more accurate than wfn at longer range 50plus yards with my 94 .357 trapper.

[GLynn41]

I am surprized to see this still going-- I just plain like a Keith-- I am not a shoulder man ;) but on deer hide mine which has been the Lyman 410459 cut a hole just like paper-- guess the shoulder worked -- it was .41 cal btw- I have also got some of my best groups with that boolit -- also have a 4 cav Saeco 230 K-- but for sheer hole in the deer my 255 WLN does better -- both always shoot through and kill -- but WLN is more damaging-- btw the 410459 has a .255 meplat, Saeco .275 the WLN .33

[44man]

Looking back we water tested many bullets/boolits and we thought they would be the ticket for deer. We were all wrong in the end. Boolits caught in a few jugs were just wrong. One jug blown to the moon was not enough. Catching a boolit was not enough.
I am close to 190 deer shot with revolvers, rough estimate will be around 180 and I learned a lot over the years. Have to pick archery deer out of the total. Then a rifle for a few and ML's so I have no numbers I can count on. Shoot a block of jello or papers soaked in water and nothing works like a live animal.
Anyway all my hunting now is with revolvers since I can't pull my bows anymore and hate to tote a heavy rifle. I do not carry along with a rifle, I hunt with the revolver only.

[44man]

I am surprized to see this still going-- I just plain like a Keith-- I am not a shoulder man ;) but on deer hide mine which has been the Lyman 410459 cut a hole just like paper-- guess the shoulder worked -- it was .41 cal btw- I have also got some of my best groups with that boolit -- also have a 4 cav Saeco 230 K-- but for sheer hole in the deer my 255 WLN does better -- both always shoot through and kill -- but WLN is more damaging-- btw the 410459 has a .255 meplat, Saeco .275 the WLN .33
The shoulder will cut on entry but from then on the meplat and wave takes over unless the boolit is very slow. But I would not add the shoulder to the meplat. A soft keith will lose the shoulder in game or in the gun before leaving. I showed this before, picture from a gun rag. 127324
Are you surprised yet?

[GLynn41]

glad you have a good hunting .44 man--I am at about half that -and that is for rifle, bow, mzl- handguns/// as for testing -- wet news print - - if it does well in that -- I will hunt with it -- the .33 meplat WLN at 1350 mv normally makes about a 1'' hole -- and at 30 yards or so has blown lungs up like a rifle- the 410459 ---.41 in the hide and around .50-60 in muscle or heart- less in lungs -- as to the picture in 40 years of casting and catching - never have seen that happen -- I use wheel weights and recovered boolits with WD as I think i need often acww

[44man]

glad you have a good hunting .44 man--I am at about half that -and that is for rifle, bow, mzl- handguns/// as for testing -- wet news print - - if it does well in that -- I will hunt with it -- the .33 meplat WLN at 1350 mv normally makes about a 1'' hole -- and at 30 yards or so has blown lungs up like a rifle- the 410459 ---.41 in the hide and around .50-60 in muscle or heart- less in lungs -- as to the picture in 40 years of casting and catching - never have seen that happen -- I use wheel weights and recovered boolits with WD as I think i need often acww
The revolver is fantastic but accuracy is so important to me. I MUST hit where aimed first.
You read PLACEMENT all the time and it is true but you need the boolit to never deform either so a Keith at 16 to 1 is NOT going to be as cast. Hard to recover with out a mushroom so you don't know how it left the gun. I have seen boolits with no GG's left at all so why lube them?
My recovered boolits look the same as cast with only rifling marks on them.