Why Use a Wadcutter??

[Daryl]

I'm just sitting here wondering why I am casting and loading the Lee 358-148-WC for 38 Special. I also have the Lee 358-158-RF which I like very much. I'm wondering if there is a benefit to one over the other?

I'm guessing some small cost savings is possible. 10 grains of lead per boolit is saved. I also know the WC is seated more deeply which would require a lighter load of powder for the same pressure/velocity so there would be a savings there. I did not do the calculations but I imagine these savings are minute.

Then, I understand that the wider the meplat of the WC will cause more damage and tissue displacement for quicker stopping power.

It seems that the WC is beneficial for short distance (20-50' ???) defensive use for this reason. Maybe it would lose accuracy at greater distances and the benefit of a wide meplat would give way to the increased need for accuracy?

I also guess that the WC leaves a cleaner hole in paper if scoring ease would be critical?

Am I hitting the key issues? Are there others? What are your thoughts on these?

[NSP64]

Longer bearing surface, reduced recoil.

[MtJerry]

The ONLY reason a full wadcutter was developed was for scoring purposes. It cuts clean holes in targets and facilitiates easy scoring.

All other benefits were icing on the cake!

[beagle]

As has been mentioned, the full WC is primarily for punching paper. But, when I only had one .38 mould, a Lyman 358495, it was a good all around bullet for my .38 Special.

Good for plinking and great for varmints and small game. I must have 50 assorted .38 moulds now and there are always a couple of hundred cast and sized wads on the bench and 6 or 8 boxes of loaded ammo in the ammo shelf.

It's just a darn fine design for general purpose use and all that's needed./beagle

[lwknight]

A true slug.

[Shiloh]

Think of them as a .357 cal paper punch. On a heavier weight tag board targets, they punch a very clean hole for scoring. If it touches the line, it counts as the higher value. Eliminates arguments for the most part. Either it is or it isn't.

SHiloh

[Recluse]

Hell, it's real easy and simple for me why I cast and load wadcutters: The .38 Special WC is my wife's favorite round to shoot.

That's all I need to know.

:coffee:

[x101airborne]

I have 3 WC molds and dont use any of them.... The SWC loaded properly will do any velocity, range, score card, or defensive work a person could want. Then you can really PUSH them for hunting, 50 yard work, etc... if you have the 158 RF, use it, love it. it's about as close as you could want for a WC.

[ReloaderFred]

If you had ever shot the older target disciplines, you would very much appreciate the full wadcutter bullet. It's very, very accurate and the scoring was made easier by it. We always shot at 50 yards, and that's where a good wadcutter really showed it's stuff, whether you were a bullseye shooter or PPC shooter.

I used to have a target with a 10 shot group fired from my K-38 at 50 yards from a Ransom Rest that measured 1 7/8". That's TEN shots from a revolver, using all six chambers. I lost that target in a divorce, along with just about everything else I owned.....

Nowadays, most kids think 7 yards is the norm, and 15 yards is long distance. It used to be 25 yards was the norm, and 50 yards was long distance, with some courses of fire even longer. The wadcutter is a great bullet for it's intended purpose, and at one time was just about the most loaded bullet from the major factories.

Hope this helps.

Fred

[AviatorTroy]

The ONLY reason a full wadcutter was developed was for scoring purposes. It cuts clean holes in targets and facilitiates easy scoring.

All other benefits were icing on the cake!

Yep. It was NEVER designed to be used as a defensive load. Some guys like to load the hollow base WC backward, but there are much better designs for SD than that.


Hell, it's real easy and simple for me why I cast and load wadcutters: The .38 Special WC is my wife's favorite round to shoot.


I have that same "problem" too! My wife's favorite! They are fun to shoot, with about 2.8 gr. of Bullseye.

[felix]

Primary reason for the full wadcutter (today, especially) is to steal undesired space within the case. ... felix

[mooman76]

I bought a snubbie that didn't shoot that great. I tried every 38 cal bullet I had and the full WC shot twice as good as anything else. Plus it puts nice neet holes in bad guys!

[Bret4207]

Nowadays, most kids think 7 yards is the norm, and 15 yards is long distance. It used to be 25 yards was the norm, and 50 yards was long distance, with some courses of fire even longer. The wadcutter is a great bullet for it's intended purpose, and at one time was just about the most loaded bullet from the major factories.

Hope this helps.

Fred

Man, ain't that the truth!!!:veryconfu

[Shiloh]

Yep. It was NEVER designed to be used as a defensive load. Some guys like to load the hollow base WC backward, but there are much better designs for SD than that.



I have that same "problem" too! My wife's favorite! They are fun to shoot, with about 2.8 gr. of Bullseye.

Some folks use reverse seated hollow base wadcutters in snubbies as they will expand at low velocities better than jacketed hollowpoints.

Shiloh

[mdi]

What is the intended use? I've loaded thousands of WC 38s and 90% went downrange at my fav. indoor shootin' stop. The other 10% were plinking out in the hills. For SD I loaded some up hot (not the hollow base wadcutters) for my 2" .38 nightstand gun. For a while, mebbe a couple months, I tried the hollow base wadcutter loaded backwards, but for me they weren't accurate ( 6" or more @ 15') and I read an article/test on how they preformed. Surprisingly, they didn't open up as thought; some would clog with clothing and act like a WC, for most the cavity would collapse, and those that did mushroom came apart. Too erratic preformance, so I went back to double ended wad cutters, until I found my 1911[smilie=l:

[dave_g]

For light cheap loads I like the WC. The point of impact for a 148gr with 2.7 gr of Bullseye is about the same as with a 158gr SWC with more powder and I get better groups. I tried lighter bullets like the 105gr SWC and it hits really low with light loads.

So for plinking or target shooting I don't have to adjust my sights so much and it's cheap to shoot.

[82nd airborne]

I bought a snubbie that didn't shoot that great. I tried every 38 cal bullet I had and the full WC shot twice as good as anything else. Plus it puts nice neet holes in bad guys!

How many have you shot with it?!

[felix]

76/82, both of you please quiesce this kind of talk on this board. ... felix

[82nd airborne]

Roger, over. My appologies. I was guessing that that was not found from experience. Just trying to confirm with sarcassm of course.

[Char-Gar]

I have not read all of the responses so this may have been covered. The only benefit of a wadcutter is cutting a clean hole in the paper target in the Bullsye shooting competition. If you cut the line in any degree, you get the higher point. Hence the need for a clean hole.

The wadcutter actually is a hair less accurate than a RN bullet. The WC also will start to tumble much past 50 yards. They do make good close in small game bullets.

But unless a person is a Bullseye competitor there is no advantage of a full wadcutter over a semi-wadcutter or even a round nose bullet. The SWC being a better killer on flesh and blood.

[BoolitBill]

For every 750 that I cast I get 50 for free?

[Shiloh]

I have not read all of the responses so this may have been covered. The only benefit of a wadcutter is cutting a clean hole in the paper target in the Bullsye shooting competition. If you cut the line in any degree, you get the higher point. Hence the need for a clean hole.

The wadcutter actually is a hair less accurate than a RN bullet. The WC also will start to tumble much past 50 yards. They do make good close in small game bullets.

But unless a person is a Bullseye competitor there is no advantage of a full wadcutter over a semi-wadcutter or even a round nose bullet. The SWC being a better killer on flesh and blood.

I don't know what the BC is on a wadcutter, but for what they are, they are surprizingly accurate. Who would think that a miniature version of a Campbell's soup can would be accurate at all.

Shiloh

[82nd airborne]

My wifes Taurus 851 ultra lite loves those little suckers on top of 4.1 gr of Unique. It makes for a fun little load.

[EDK]

I acquired a H&G 50 mould (cheap!) and 358432 after doing some reading and learned to like the little guys in my 357 VAQUEROS. THEN I got one of GLL's extra 200 grain 44 wadcutter moulds and Blammer's 429352 clone from OWBM for the 44s. At 25 +/- yards, a full wadcutter really works for me in the big bores. I haven't loaded any of the NOE 45 wadcutters yet, but should have some down time to do so shortly.

For field ammo, it is a toss-up between the round nose/flat point and semi-wadcutter. Good designs abound in both, multiple weight choices, and most of them will feed in my Marlin Cowboy rifles. There's some more on my wish list...and someday I'll have as many choices as Blammer's picture shows!

:Fire::cbpour::redneck:

[Good Cheer]

And there's wadcutters and then there's wadcutters.

NEI's gas checked wadcutter makes an excellent full power hammer seated way out in a 357.

Lymans old 38 hollow based wadcutter makes a pretty good expanding load in a 38 Special with limited velocity. Makes a pretty good minie ball in a flintlock too.

Lymans old 41 wadcutter makes a good general purpose load in a Blackhawk.

[Char-Gar]

Shiloh.. The 38 wadcutter is plenty accurate for it's intended purpose, which is to place ten rounds into the X-Ring of a standard 25 and 50 yard pistol targets. I have fired many thousands of them at such targets.

But that said, a well cast RN bullet like 358311 will deliver smaller groups, albiet by just a tad. I have heard /read it postulated that a RN bullet will center itself up in the revolver's forcing cone better. I really can't say if that is true or not, but I can say the RN bullet will shade a WC in terms of pure accuracy. At least, I have proven it to myself beyond any doubt.

About 20 years ago, Terry Murback wrote and excellent article on 38 wadcutters fired at mid-range speeds (850 - 900 fps). I have tried some of Terry's recomendations that they will deliver accuracy on par if not better than the target loads at 675 - 725 fps. Needless to say these kinds of loads are limited to solid base wadcutters as the hollow base version can and do blow off the skirts at such pressures/velocities. It is a shame Terry doesn't write any more as he was one of the best and most knowledable.

[a.squibload]

I have 3 WC molds and dont use any of them....

I ain't got (snif!) ANY wc molds! :violin:

Maybe you could send me one?
Prefer 38 or 44.
Send me the one you don't use the most!

[x101airborne]

a.squibload..... if you would like, i would gladly trade you one. Mine are lyman and I would like a mold (anything but a WC pretty much) on par with lyman quality. Not really wanting to sell, mainly interested in a trade.

[zxcvbob]

I'm just sitting here wondering why I am casting and loading the Lee 358-148-WC for 38 Special. I also have the Lee 358-158-RF which I like very much. I'm wondering if there is a benefit to one over the other?
There's not much benefit one over the other. Both of those are great boolits, and that particular 158 has an unusually wide nose with sharp corners -- it's almost as good a hole puncher as the wadcutter. Almost.

You can load the 158 to higher power without getting the pressure too high for a .38 Special because there's more room for powder (and the extra 10 grains of lead doesn't hurt.) You can load the 148 down to much lower power and still have enough pressure for the powder to burn efficiently because there's less room for powder.

[cajun shooter]

Charger, I will disagree with you about the the RN being more accurate than the WC. I have shot myself and seen others with a S&W 52 shoot the X ring out at matches. At 63 I grew up when you went into a sporting goods store and asked for a box of 38 specials, they gave you a box of R-P 158 gr RNL bullets. When I became a Firearms Instructor I scored many targets that were shot with this bullet. When they hit paper they left a hole that contained tears all around the hole and you could have two in the same hole and miss them.The WC was used with the 2.7 grs of Bullseye load that was used by most departments in the US. The turning around of the HBWC was loaded by the air Marshals so that the skin of the plane would not be punched through.The HBWC is still not only a top target round but a darn good plinking round. If you decide to shoot paper it has no equal. If a person is not going to shoot paper or targets then the 158 will be a better all around round. I loaded thousands of them on the departments Camdex.

[Good Cheer]

Swaged HBWC reloads were what I hunted rabbits with when I bought my first revolver.
Got 'em from the same fella that sold me an RCBS press for $15.

[Char-Gar]

Cajun.. A Smith 52 is a semi-auto that is dedicated to full WC bullets, so there is no way to shoot RN bullets in that pistol for a comparison. The 52 is a match specific autopistol and really cannot be compared to a sixgun. It will shoot rings around any sixgun ever made.

I was talking revolvers in the first place. There are no 38 Special autopistols that will fire a case loaded with a 155 160 grain RN bullet and I assumed the folks on this board knew that.

My original post said the wadcutter was used in paper shooting to cut clean holes to aid in scoring.

If you are not shooting for score, using a sixgun and just measuring the spread of the group, I will stick by my statement that a good RN bullet is more accurate than a full WC. Nothing you have said is relevant to my statement.

[BruceB]

[QUOTE=Chargar;1053862]Cajun.. A Smith 52 is a semi-auto that is dedicated to full WC bullets, so there is no way to shoot RN bullets in that pistol for a comparison. The 52 is a match specific autopistol and really cannot be compared to a sixgun. It will shoot rings around any sixgun ever made.


Given enough curiosity, many things are possible.

We've had a pair of Model 52s since about 1970. Many years ago, I noted that the guns would feed empty cases reliably, WITHOUT damaging the mouths in any way. Sooo....I loaded quite a few trial rounds with 358156 SWCs with an eye to using them as small-game ammo. I left off the gaschecks, which also gave me a "heel" on the bullet to avoid bulging the cases where the brass thickens toward the case head. Bullets were seated flush with the mouth....STRANGE-looking rounds, with all that airspace around the noses!

I don't recall the powder charge, but the ammo worked fine and chronographed around 700 fps. Accuracy from a LEE "machine rest" was almost as good as the 35863 wadcutters we used for competition. In the end, I decided it wasn't worth the effort...but it was interesting. The round-nosed 358311 would also work when loaded in this manner, I'm reasonably sure.

Ah, youth.....

[a.squibload]

a.squibload..... if you would like, i would gladly trade you one. Mine are lyman and I would like a mold (anything but a WC pretty much) on par with lyman quality. Not really wanting to sell, mainly interested in a trade.

Well, I was kinda kidding but you got me thinking.
I recently got a used Lyman 429421, haven't cast with it yet. One of the alignment pins was pushed in slightly.
I tapped it from the back to reposition, not sure it will stay there.
I intended to remove it and stipple or peen it for a tighter fit.
Not sure I would feel right about trading it untested.
Thing is I after that I got a NOE 429421, essentially the same boolit.
Figured the Lyman would be a backup.

Sorry, off topic, guess this should have been a PM.

I've shot WCs in 44 before, a friend had a mold for a short one.
Was fun smacking beverage cans full of water at slow speed, and pretty accurate.
I have a 44 WFN Hoch mold, 315gns or so, that's almost a WC, haven't played with it yet.

[x101airborne]

a.squibload... PM incoming.

[ghh3rd]

.38 148gr Lee "soupcans" were my first cast boolit. I was advised to use 2.7 gr Bullseye, and snuck my first batch into an indoor range that didn't like reloads. I was nervous about getting 'busted' cause those holes were so perfectly round.

By the way, I used my SW 642 at the great distance of 7 yards :) and they punched holes right where I aimed. My son called me tonight and decided that he wants to learn to load for his .38, and since I still have a couple thousand of these little buggers lubed up, guess what he's going to start with?

[HangFireW8]

76/82, both of you please quiesce this kind of talk on this board. ... felix

That'll do it, Felix... sending them to their dictionaries will quiet them down! :bigsmyl2: