Why are HBWC boolits accurate?

[fatelvis]

Maybe I am overthinking this too much, but:
For years I have been hearing that HBWC boolits have been used with tremendously accurate results. To me, it is hard to understand how a bullet that doesn’t start out in a properly fitted throat, which I have been told is necessary for good accuracy, can produce such fine accuracy. Is it the fact that it is seated so deeply in the case, producing a higher Powder Fill percentage, offset the throat situation? Thanks for any input guys.

[Winger Ed.]

I think the hollow sides/base compresses or flares out and fits different barrel diameters better, there by making it more forgiving,
and the long bearing surface stabilizes easily at the slower speeds.

Solid/double end wad cutters can be very, very accurate also, but they want to be sized properly for the gun.
If solid wadcutters are on the small side for a barrel, they may not 'squish' to expand enough at the lower pressures to fit well.

[fcvan]

First of all, the cylinder throats center the projectile to enter the forcing cone concentrically and make it's way down the bore. The hollow base expands to seal the chamber and bore so that even low pressure loads could get a good seal. Lastly, the boolit is weight forward with kind of a shuttle-cock effect.

When I left the academy, our duty round was the FBI load of 158 HP semi-wadcutter, but our qualification rounds were factory HB wadcutters. Some years later they had us qualify with duty rounds, surely some scheme by the manufacturers to sell more expensive ammo for training.

Before we switched to G22 40 S&W we were using 130 gr HP +p loads, still expensive. When I was the training manager, I had to buy the ammo. 9mm and 40 was cheaper than 38 SP as few agencies still used wheel guns. We got G22s in a one for one trade with a distributor so the only expense was 16 hours of transition training nd a case of ammo per Officer.

Retired now, don't have to worry about such things any longer. I had been tempted to get a wadcutter mold but don't see the point. However, back in the day there were more than a few Officers who shot PPC and those race guns shot the HB wadcutters like nobody's business. Surplus revolvers, tapered bbl models from the 1950s, were often available for $75 and with new internals and a PPC bbl, they could be quite affordable - compared to race guns built on new frames.

[StuBach]

For what it’s worth, factory Vintage Remington wadcutters all contained HBWC bullets. I had an old vintage box and pulled one once to find out.

Miha produced a HB version of the classic Hensley and Gibbs #50 and they shoot amazing in my S&W k357 and k38 masterpiece.

[Petrol & Powder]

First of all, the cylinder throats center the projectile to enter the forcing cone concentrically and make it's waay down the bore. The hollow base expands to seal the chamber and bore so that even low pressure loads could get a good seal. Lastly, the boolit is weight forward with ind of a shuttle-cock effect..............


/\ You covered it well right there /\

:goodpost:

[Petrol & Powder]

Long bearing surface
The weight forward "shuttle cock" effect. (works at short range, becomes a determent out beyond 50 yards)
The ability to get a good seal at low pressures due to the skirt sealing the bore.
Not really an accuracy issue but the full wadcutter design does take the maximum advantage of the scoring rules by cutting clean holes in the target.

So, in a nutshell; the HBWC is more of a combination of desirable traits for target shooting than it is an inherently accurate bullet. Of course, in addition to all of those traits, it is also an accurate bullet. So maybe it is the sum of all of those qualities that makes it great.

[dverna]

A number of factors at play. First the design works. But also bear in mind it is a bullet that is shot in guns that are inherently accurate.

I shot 10's of thousands of solid H&G #50 BB bullets and in extensive testing found that the difference (bewteen the H&G 50 and the Remington 148 HBWC) was less than 1" at 50 yards for 50 shot groups. I do not know how much of that difference was due to the HB, or soft alloy used for swaging, or the higher consistency of swaged bullets.

In most cases the issue is moot. For hunting and defensive loads, reliable feeding trumps a minimal improvement in accuracy. My M52 was reliable but it was not a cheap gun. And magazines were not thrown around and dropped. A blunt nose bullets will be more prone to feeding hiccups.

[tazman]

Here is an excellent article on wadcutters by one of the experts in the field, Ed Harris

https://www.hensleygibbs.com/edharris/articles/38wadcutterQA.htm

[mdi]

Long bearing surface
The weight forward "shuttle cock" effect. (works at short range, becomes a determent out beyond 50 yards)
The ability to get a good seal at low pressures due to the skirt sealing the bore.
Not really an accuracy issue but the full wadcutter design does take the maximum advantage of the scoring rules by cutting clean holes in the target.

So, in a nutshell; the HBWC is more of a combination of desirable traits for target shooting than it is an inherently accurate bullet. Of course, in addition to all of those traits, it is also an accurate bullet. So maybe it is the sum of all of those qualities that makes it great.:goodpost: Yep, that's it. As for the deep seated pressure; does not apply, most HBWC are loaded to very light pressures...

[lightman]

Accuracy is pretty much what a HBWC was designed for. They made and broke a lot of records in the Bullseye game over the years. You just don't want to load them too hot.

[HangFireW8]

Maybe I am overthinking this too much, but:
For years I have been hearing that HBWC boolits have been used with tremendously accurate results. To me, it is hard to understand how a bullet that doesn’t start out in a properly fitted throat, which I have been told is necessary for good accuracy, can produce such fine accuracy.

Could it be? There are more ways to find accuracy than preached by the Cult of the Ball Seat? Will such heresy be allowed on this board?

[onelight]

Maybe I am overthinking this too much, but:
For years I have been hearing that HBWC boolits have been used with tremendously accurate results. To me, it is hard to understand how a bullet that doesn’t start out in a properly fitted throat, which I have been told is necessary for good accuracy, can produce such fine accuracy. Is it the fact that it is seated so deeply in the case, producing a higher Powder Fill percentage, offset the throat situation? Thanks for any input guys.

a hollow base bullet on the correct charge of powder will adjust itself to fit the throats within reason.
its old style technology in action , just like a civil war mini ball in a musket 8-)

[Walks]

My Dad used HBWC's cast from a pair of Lyman #358395 molds back in the 1950's- 1960's for Bullseye Shooting. Used Foundry 20/1 Lead. He dropped from one mold from the left side of the Pot and one from the right. Used match REM Brass & 2.8grs of Bullseye.
Used a Colt Officers Model Match for .38Spl, He was one Fine Pistol Shot.

I could never cast HBWC's to match His, so I just went with Hornady Swaged HBWC in my S&W M14. Could never get close to His group size. Best I ever did was 1 1/4" at 25yrds, and that was only once. Dad did one hole groups of about an inch or better all day long.

Accurate, I can't give you a definitive answer. They just are. It's like other's have said, the skirts expand to seal the chamber and bbl. Only thing I can think of.

[Tatume]

The advantage of HBWC bullets in Bullseye competition is that they can be loaded with very light charges. Recoil can be reduced to very low levels, which provides an advantage in rapid fire strings. Accuracy needs to be sufficient to hold the ten ring at 25 yards.

The alternative for revolver shooters is to shoot the 32 S&W Long cartridge, which is the equal of the 38 Special in 25 yard rapid fire strings. However, the 38 special can be loaded with 158 gr RN bullets for the fifty yard slow fire strings, and may be more accurate at fifty yards than the 32. Charlie Green Frog could comment on this. Charlie can also comment on how difficult it is to acquire a S&W 32 Long revolver in modern times.

[Martin Luber]

Winger got it, When the hbwc crushes in the bore, there are no extended fins on the base like a solid, the hbwc is perfectly symmetrical. The drum head can crush without accuracy loss. If you want even better precision, push them through a swage to tru up the base. Sometimes this can be accomplished by simply sizing it so the base cleans up. Smith model 52s were notorious for poor precision with cast because the groove was true 9mm and the hbwc could take the crush.

[Green Frog]

I have ZERO personal experience with the 32 S&W in a semiauto. I spoke recently with a gunsmith who does work for the military pistol and rifle teams, and he said he had been busy recently making 32 ACP chambered barrels for 32 semiauto target guns for the teams. I never saw one, but that’s the story I got.

I shot just about a bajillion HBWC s in the old PPC league I was in, along with a smaller number of solid DEWCs. From what I could see in that game (and with my admittedly limited skills) there didn’t seem to be a noticeable difference between the two for that application.

Froggie

[Petander]

A number of factors at play. First the design works. But also bear in mind it is a bullet that is shot in guns that are inherently accurate.

I shot 10's of thousands of solid H&G #50 BB bullets and in extensive testing found that the difference (bewteen the H&G 50 and the Remington 148 HBWC) was less than 1" at 50 yards for 50 shot groups. I do not know how much of that difference was due to the HB, or soft alloy used for swaging, or the higher consistency of swaged bullets.

In most cases the issue is moot.

https://i.postimg.cc/kgPBssKZ/IMG-20191204-071100-609.jpg

[gwpercle]

I have no idea ! Also don't know why 2.7 (+/- 1 grain) is the secrete recipe for accuracy in a 38 special .
It's just Magic !
Don't question it... just load, shoot and enjoy the Magicalness of it !
Gary

[fatelvis]

I’ve read somewhere that now, because of different formulation of Bullseye, you should use 3.0 grains.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tazman]

I’ve read somewhere that now, because of different formulation of Bullseye, you should use 3.0 grains.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ed Harris reports that data about Bullseye in the link I posted previously. I don't have any old powder to compare the new stuff to.

[beagle]

From my experiences with the 358395, the 358431 and the 429422 they all require lower velocities in the target velocity range. Don't do any good to hot rod them.

The arguments on the HBWC are all good and valid for accuracy. Good base fit, long bearing surface and a bit front heavy making good accuracy up to about 75 yards. After that, due to the dynamic design of the WC, stability becomes a factor. At one time, I only had a 358495 Lyman mould and shot thousands of these on a multipurpose military range out of a 4" Colt Python. Targets for plinking were 1/2 man sized steel targets at 125 yards in a bunker and full sized at 200 yards for use by the sniper boys. Using WCs off a sandbag, the 125 was a piece of cake. In still conditions, the 200 was doable about 4 out of 6 times with flyers developing.

At 300 and 400 yards there were tank hulks and on a dry day with the boy spotting and using much KY elevation, it was possible to place a couple out of a cylinder on the 300 and occasionally, you'd get a hit at 400. To me, long distance is the true test of a bullet's accuracy. All errors are magnified by the distance. The WC just don't have it that far but, again, they're not designed for that.

It has been mentioned about the base of the bullet and that's true. All of my HB moulds were received w/o the base pin. I had to figure out the depth and diameter of the base and then give them a try. This entailed many bullet recovery operations from the berm and I learned a lot. Examining my fresh cast bullets, I could see some cavities not oval shaped and some voids in the cavities. This worried me. After recovering maybe 50 bullets over time I came to the conclusion that oval shaped base cavitied blew out until perfectly round so that is not a factor. Voids on the side of the cavity were prone to blow through the side during the firing process and no appreciable affect was seen in performance or accuracy but I started merciously culling the voided bases and detected no more during future recover operations. In summary, given normal target velocities, the HB sets up an almost perfect base and seal and gives you the good accuracy you want and get from wadcutters.
Is it worth the extra effort to cast HB versus PB wadcutters? My opinion is it's not worth the effort./beagle

[Echo]

Accuracy is pretty much what a HBWC was designed for. They made and broke a lot of records in the Bullseye game over the years. You just don't want to load them too hot.

Danged accurate to 50 yards, but indications were they were starting to yaw. And can't keep them on the target at 100 yards (HBWC's, that is!). We used them for qualification purposes in the USAF. I shot on USAF Pistol Teams, and never used my Clark 38 in competition, always using the .45 in CF matches. But the Clark was a temperamental BITCH! Make a little mistake that would throw a 10 (rather than an X) with a .45, and the 38 would throw a 9! But the Clark was sweet, other than that...