vintage 77 gr. wadcutter mold - 38 special

[w30wcf]

oops! 75 gr .... I am thinking this is the bullet that I previously had read about where some folks stacked 2 or 3 of them in .38 Special / .357 mag. cases(?).


w30wcf

[MGD]

I think I remember a Guns and Ammo article about loading several of these in a 38 spl case. Think the bullet was designed for 50 ft indoor ranges; to cut down on recoil and lead cost.

[Bucking the Tiger]

I have seen a few posts on this site about people loading 2 in a .38 Special and having a "2 for 1" load. The accuracy was not for 50 yard bullseye, but it looked like a sharp idea within 7 yards.

[John in WI]

That's a neat idea. I wonder what kind of penetration one of the 77gr slugs would have by itself? I getting to be a huge fan of wadcutters in my .38, and have even taken to loading my bedside Smith with it in the winter months where heavy clothes would be a serious problem here in WI.

[rintinglen]

Lack of penetration is the rub with these little guys. I have experimented with them fairly extensively, both as a "twofer" in 38 Specials and a "threefer" in 357"s. I also have loaded them under a 358-345 115 grain SWC. Typically, at 7 yards, they spread out about an inch though ocasionally one will wander farther afield, while others seem to cling to one another. The target in the photo is the result of 6 shots using 3 358-101 boolits in a .357 casing, I used starting data for a 358-430 195 grain boolit from an older lyman manual and launched them from a S&W M-66. There are 14 shot holes visible, but 18 were fired.

[Bucking the Tiger]

You Sir,was the man I was talking about! I really like the idea of this.

[rintinglen]

The .357 load has some utility as a low penetration defense load.
As I load them, the bottom boolit gets sized .356, the top two are sized .358 to prevent case bulging, two are loaded into the case and the 3rd one is crimped in the bottom lube groove. I used LLA or Recluse formula 45/45/10 as a lube. I used 3 grains of Bullseye or 3.3 grains of WW-231 as a powder charge. I have also experimented with 3 NOE 110 grain WC in the 44 mag. I think there is a thread someplace with my info on that experiment.

[Alferd Packer]

Loading one in a case for 7 yard paper punching.
Penetration in a paper target was not a question. I just wondered if any oldtimers already had been target shooting and remembered their load and what accuracy.
It's a really oltime load, but was once popular in police station basements.
I am considering 2 grains of Bullseye to start. Just got the mold to save lead and practice. Need to get started casting some of them.
I already have a 140 grain wadcutter mold, so I don't need advice to stack two 77 s for penetration. Practice 7 yard shooting.
Thank you.

[Drm50]

I have this mold and it’s least accurate 38WC I have unless shot at very short range at about 600fps. At 15’ it will shoot same hole. I have a M&P Target, 3 m14 K38s and 2 m27s and shoot nothing but WCs in them. None of these guns will shoot 77gr at any distance or velocity.

[gwpercle]

Lack of penetration is the rub with these little guys. I have experimented with them fairly extensively, both as a "twofer" in 38 Specials and a "threefer" in 357"s. I also have loaded them under a 358-345 115 grain SWC. Typically, at 7 yards, they spread out about an inch though ocasionally one will wander farther afield, while others seem to cling to one another. The target in the photo is the result of 6 shots using 3 358-101 boolits in a .357 casing, I used starting data for a 358-430 195 grain boolit from an older lyman manual and launched them from a S&W M-66. There are 14 shot holes visible, but 18 were fired.

That 3-fer setup looks pretty darn effective at inside the house , self defense , type situations where your adversary isn't 4 legged or thick skinned and you weren't looking for a lot of through many walls penetration .
Actually even the 2-fer 38 special gets a number of boolits off at an adversary across the room .
Sounds like some merit ...thanks for the info !
The penetration numbers from The Schwartz look good laso !
Gary

[Thin Man]

In 1973 I met a guy who was getting out of casting and into swaging. He offered me his furnace, sizer and 11 or 12 sets of mold blocks which I immediately bought for his price of $115. One of those molds was a Lyman 358101 (4X) with handles. I was fascinated with the 75 grain WC boolits and made several to double load them in a single .38 Spl. case. Lots of fun telling people how the boolits broke in half due to their fast muzzle velocity. These boolits are so short I wanted to handle them with tweezers to avoid getting bit by the sizer. Still have that mold and may get it back out for a fun thrill remembering past days.

[pettypace]

Not long ago, pettypace tinkered with the multiple projectile concept here if you have not already come across the thread: http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...uble+wadcutter

At ''across-the-room'' or ''belly-to-belly'' engagement distances these multiple-projectile loads do have some potential, but at somewhat greater distances, some issues do arise mainly as a matter of dispersion rate. If terminal penetration of less than 12 inches is something that you are willing to tolerate along with the other short-comings of this arrangement, it might be what you want.

Yes, I did spend some time tinkering with two-projectile loads for the .38 snubby. There's still plenty of room for more tinkering, but here a few ideas that are settled to my satisfaction, at least:

1) Any serious self-defense load should satisfy the FBI's 12" minimum penetration requirement. For penetration, weight (actually sectional density) counts more than velocity. As noted above, a 75 grain wadcutter, even at 800 ft/s, will not likely penetrate 12". But swap the 75 grainer for a 110 grain WC (say, the Lyman 358425) and suddenly under-penetration is no longer an issue. For example, the predicted penetration of a 110 grain .35 caliber wadcutter at, say 625 f/s, is close to 14". To get that penetration from the 75 grain WC would require over 1000 f/s.



2) I've decided that the front bullet should not be a wadcutter. I've settled on the Lyman 356404 -- a truncated cone of about 100 grains (mine drops at 105 grains) with a meplat of about 0.25". The truncated cones fall into the cylinder much easier than wadcutters. But they also penetrate deeper than the wadcutters. For example, a 105 grain TC at 625 f/s has a predicted penetration of about 18".



3) For what it's worth, the combined wound mass of the front and back bullets above total about 34 grams. This is exactly the value that MacPherson gives for the "JHP Maximum" for a 9mm hollow point penetrating to 14".

4) While accuracy of this load will not win any bullseye matches, I believe it's adequate for most likely civilian self-defense scenarios. Most of the "dispersion" that I've seen has been vertical dispersion with the back bullet always printing higher than the front. Given that MacPherson used a 2" x 20" vertical cylinder as a model of the vital area for a statistical analysis, this vertical dispersion may not be a problem.

5) Finally, I don't believe the potential advantage of a two projectile load has ever been carefully analyzed. Few want to consider the element of chance involved. And as soon as you mention it, someone will say that you're trying to replace good shot placement with a scattergun effect. But given good shot placement, there's still an element of chance. And two good shots, both with adequate penetration, have a better chance than a single good shot. Early on, I introduced my shooting buddies to the Fitz Luck Target as a way to illustrate the element of chance. A few days ago, one of those buddies sent me an image of his version of the luck target, modified to incorporate MacPherson's vital vertical cylinder. The plan is to print some up so the vital area of 9's is 2" wide, staple it center of mass to the silhouette target, and see how a two-projectile load scores, shot for shot, against a single projectile load. Any bets on how that might go?

[mattw]

I have not found this mould in a good bit of looking... should say I did find 1 in single cavity that had been beaten to death... I have however shot some in the 2 bullet 38's and in 3 bullet 357's. I really liked the 38's, made it my bedside load. I found that they would not stray much from each other at 12 to 13 feet and likely will not over penetrate and end up in the next house if one had to use them.

[ddixie884]

That seems like a good idea 75 under 105 at 800fps.............

[pettypace]

That seems like a good idea 75 under 105 at 800fps.............

Front:



Rear:

[pettypace]

CAUTION! These multi-projectile loads often involve heavier total weights and deeper seating of the bullets than normal loads. If you do find published data for the desired total weight, it's not likely to be for the deep bullet seating depth that the multi-projectile load requires. Deeper seating of the bullets can drastically increase pressures.

[pettypace]

I am not sure that I see the value of the numbers in such a physical target arrangement.

Given that the spinal column is composed entirely of 9s and that a projectile strike in any point in the 2''-wide spinal column is the same (numerically) as other one occurring at any other place in the 2''-wide spinal column, you could just as easily get an IPSC target like this one—

Attachment 265455

—and tape it off like this—

Attachment 265456

—so that any projectile striking inside of the tape-defined area counts as a '1' while those falling outside of it count as a '0'. You could scale the column width to include or exclude the spinal processes to further simplify the data analysis as well. Vertical dispersion might not be a large issue, but lateral dispersion could offer a 'mixed bag' in that such an errant shot might connect with another vital organ or....not. The test process is already grossly over-simplified due to the simplistic assumption that only a projectile strike to the 2''-wide spinal column will produce an immediate result which I'd assume you are defining as being < 1 second. Of course, assuming a static, forward-facing, unobstructed shot is also one of the least likely scenarios given that the vast majority of gunfights involve an oblique target presentation that is moving unpredictably and rapidly that may also have limbs (arms, hands, shoulders, etc.) obstructing portions of their physique as well.

I agree that the numbers are of little use and that a single 2" wide vertical strip is a better target.

But my purpose in bringing up the Fitz Luck Target was only to highlight the element of chance in any defensive shooting situation. Given that element of chance, it seems obvious to me that two adequately penetrating projectiles per trigger pull have a better chance of incapacitating a bad guy than a single projectile. Here's how MacPherson put it in Bullet Penetration (page 52):

Even if a bullet strikes the "right" location, the small displacement that leads to either severing or not severing an artery or motor nerve has a very large random (or luck) component. This random element is far more important than modest changes in bullet physical or dynamic parameters. Firing multiple shots into areas containing vital structures is a tactical response to the random element; this approach can greatly increase the chances that at least one bullet will penetrate a vital structure.

Of course, MacPherson wasn't talking about two-projectile loads. But so long as both projectiles hit the "right" location with adequate penetration, what difference could it possibly make if they came from one cartridge or two? This seems obvious to me. Yet, I'm amazed how vehemently some shooters will argue against a two-projectile load without ever mentioning that increased probability of hitting a vital structure.

[rintinglen]

Of course, there are those who might argue that one of the 'extra' projectiles might deviate enough to miss the assailant and go on to strike another innocent person, but is that not also true of the 9 to 16 0.36'' — 0.30'' caliber pellets that are launched when fires a shotgun in the same anti-personnel role?

That is not my experience at all. At 21 feet, the maximum dispersion of three-boolit 357 loads in my experience is on the nature of 3+" and that is very rare, with the modal average being much more in the vicinity of 1". Typically, each shot produces a group between 1/2" and 1 1/2". About one in 6 will only show two holes.

For a home defense situation, unless you live in Windsor Castle, you can consider these to be the equivalent of a single ball. They simply don't spread out that much.

[ddixie884]

35 yrs ago I shot some .457 RB ww lubed in a star sizer .452 in pairs so lube stuck them together loaded in .45Colt crimped on the ogive over 7.5gr Unique. fired in a Ruger BH at @70yds these usually grouped one above the other 5 or 6" apart. they hit with authority

[rintinglen]

Re: The Schwartz
No I have not shot them (multi-ball) at any distances greater than 45 feet. When I was testing this stuff a few years back, that was the farthest range available to me at the indoor range I belonged to, but I was mostly concerned with a home defense application, and the longest shot possible in my home was 23 1/2 feet, which would be firing from the hip from my back bedroom wall at someone coming through the front window.

However, years before, a few attempts using the 358-101 as single projectiles at 50 yards makes me think that they are losing stability at that range. My perception was that they were spreading more than one might anticipate, that the group was larger than a linear progression would lead you to expect, but that could have been me having a less than stellar day. Once I get all my stuff unpacked, I may revisit this project.

One other thing to mention is that 800 FPS for the these multi boolit loads might be a bit generous. Out of a less than four inch barrel,
it would take a pretty good kick in the pants to get there. Perhaps not the load of choice for your non+p rated 38 snubby.