Other than the slight visual differences between SWC's and RNFP's, are there any reasons to choose one over the other?
Printable View
Other than the slight visual differences between SWC's and RNFP's, are there any reasons to choose one over the other?
SWC's cut a clean hole in paper targets. SWC's tend to track straight in flesh. I think that's a couple reasons it's a popular profile. SWC's can be a difficult feed (into a chamber) consideration. Nothing wrong with RN configuration.
RNFP's are supposed to feed better in leveractions, since they mimic the original rounds better. With that said, I have no problems feeding the 358429 in my Winchester 94 in .357 Magnum or the 452424 in my Marlin 1894 Cowboy in .45 Colt.
Robert
i generally have both types of boolits available.
i prefer the rnfp for general everyday stuff like hunting,and sharing ammo between guns.
If you use speedloaders the RN reloads MUCH faster than trying to get 6 SWCs to all line up at the same time. Not a big deal if you never compete. I only use RN for competition. The rest of the time it's SWCs.
David
The post above have pretty much covered it, but I just wanted to add that SWC look cooler...
I shoot a lot of lead round nose flat points in my .44s (SWC feed w/difficulty in my .44 carbine). I have 2 gascheck molds and one plain base. I've not shot any game with these bullets, but, they are designed as hunting bullets, with a large flat meplate. I've also read that SWC's shoulder does not affect hunting preformance as the nose pushes any flesh away from the shoulder, acting like a RNFP. RNFPs are just as accurate in my 5, .44 Magnums as my 429241 and 429244 cast bullets.
Some simi-autos will have issues feeding swc.