Working on a HP load...'Barrel Lengths Matter'

[fredj338]

Hodgdon data for a 158-grain LSWC shows the highest velocities with HS-6 and CFE, quite a bit higher than slow powders like H4227, higher than other mid-range powders like Universal (an imitation of Unique), and higher than fast powders like W-231. Heck, even TrailBoss gives higher velocities than the quickest powders. Powders which need high pressures to work correctly like H-110 should not be used in .38 Special loads appropriate for a snubby.

In some cases the difference is small, in others it approaches 100 fps. The data was developed in a 7.7" barrel, but extensive testing by many shooters in the 1980s proved that the powder which gave the highest velocities in long barrels almost always gave the highest in short tubes. Muzzle blast was an entirely different subject.

But most data was related to silhouette shooters, with little data taken with barrels as short as 2".


.

Of course the selection of powder is limited by volume & pressure achieved. You can't get enough 2400 into a 9mm case to get effective vel. You can pack 2400 into a 38sp case & beat any faster powder in vel, but not by much. That is how the 357mag started, over loading the 38sp case with slower powders.

[PositiveCaster]

Even though this site is about cast bullets, if this is a last ditch protection pistol, the OP needs to not limit himself. Even purist boolet casters realize the importance of maximum bullet performance in a self-defense pistol. Speer for example makes bullets specifically designed for short barreled .38s - a 110 and a 135-grain hollow point. Trying 1960s technology like inverted HBWCs is foolish when we have modern options which are proven to work.

But it's the OP's life and family, he can make his own choice.



.

[45-70 Chevroner]

Rather than a hollow point I personally use a 148 gr dead soft hollow base wadcutter, hollow base loaded backwords. At the distance inside a house it will be bad news for the reciever. Load over 3.3 grains Bullseye. By the way technology from the past still works. Test it yourself then you decide.

[Oyeboten]

I would just use 158 Grain 'Pure Lead' DEWCs and have them going 800 or FPS, and I'd feel satisfied.

Hollow Nose is going to be problematic out of a less than two inch Snubby, and, the Hollow Nose at the Velocities the Revolver can deliver, will not do anything as well as a DEWC would, anyway, so...I'd just go with the flat face flat base Wadcutters...who are already most of the way home to where a Hollow nose would be, if it could be, at these velocities.

[OS OK]

Thanks for all the data and suggestions fellas...I'm bound to change powders, an old timer friend up country has them all so I can get some testers right away, thanks for the list to try.
The other problem is that I'm as hard headed as concrete...I've got this 75 year old mold from Ideal and I'm bound and determined to make a go of it...actually, I'm kinda enjoying the challenge.
Today I smelted up a big batch of lead flashing, can still smell the stink of it...gotta love this stuff to keep at it like this. That flashing is the softest lead I had collected around here...hopefully it'll be about 6 BHN when I test it in a week.
Remember that post someone made about their lead pot blowing up? Well today it had me spooked thinking of that post...shoulda seen me, I looked like an overhead welder all dolled up in leathers and such..well at least I didn't have any surprises and now have a fresh batch of soft Pb without any pewter or tin mixed into it, next week I'll have more results and with different powders too.
Cross your fingers for 800-830 FPS!
Remember, I want these for the wife's .38 snubby 'in house' gun...really don't want them too snappy.

[Spector]

If she fires it in the house then there will be much pre-blast and post-blast adrenaline to the point that snappy will not be a consideration. Only an AD lacks pre-blast adrenaline, but is guaranteed to provide much post-blast adrenaline.It rteminds me of my former female boss thelling me she did not want a firearm that was going to leave blood all over her floor. Just wanted something to punch small hole in a home invader.


Mike

[yondering]

but I did find it interesting how a cast HP is almost enough in one barrel and too dang much in another.

Not just any cast hollow point. As I've said in one of your other threads on this subject, the design matters a lot. Performance like this is what you get with a narrow hollow point cavity and lots of lead around it; you get a very small velocity window where it works correctly, a little too slow and it doesn't expand, a little too fast and it blows up.

As I've suggested before, you need a more progressive hollow point design to do what you're wanting; either try various top punches to alter the hollow point cavity, or have your mold modified to take a larger pin.

[Silverboolit]

How about trying a slug made of zinc instead of lead? the zinc is lighter and penetration may be limited as far as walls, etc. Has anyone tried this? You are talking about short distances in the home.

[W.R.Buchanan]

OS OK: There was an article in Handloader mag in the recent issue about using "Manstopper Boolits" in .38's and .45's

These boolits were essentially Hollow Based Wadcutters loaded backwards. And they would expand totally at 600 fps.

Since they are HB boolits the hole in the base is enormous . Just a thought.

Or another way would be to drill your existing HP's out with a bigger tapered hole which would accomplish the same thing.

Randy

[yondering]

How about trying a slug made of zinc instead of lead? the zinc is lighter and penetration may be limited as far as walls, etc. Has anyone tried this? You are talking about short distances in the home.

I have cast solid zinc bullets, but no hollow points. Zinc is lighter than lead, but much harder and stronger. In theory that would require a larger hollow point cavity and higher velocity to get expansion. Any bullet capable of penetrating a bad guy will also penetrate multiple home interior walls though; there's no getting around that.

[dubber123]

Your exact boolit, even harder alloy, (9Bhn), Bullseye powder, 1-7/8" snubbie.... Pre plug your HP!

Power Pistol will beat Bullseye handily in a snub if you don't want to up your Bullseye load.

[dverna]

Excellent thread gentlemen!!!

Thanks for the information.

Don Verna

[OS OK]

I'll do exactly that dub...

[fecmech]

I've followed this thread for a while and I have to ask, why does anyone want a bullet for this application any harder than pure lead? I have a box of the so-called FBI load by Winchester and the bullet is so soft I can peel the lead off it with my fingernail. They have a proven track record, even in snubby's for expansion if that's what one wants. At only 800 fps, pure lead is more than adequate and if you should get a bit of leading, so what? If expansion is the goal and velocity is limited to approx 800 fps (realistic snub nose velocity) then to my mind you use the softest most ductile material you can, pure lead.

[dubber123]

I've followed this thread for a while and I have to ask, why does anyone want a bullet for this application any harder than pure lead? I have a box of the so-called FBI load by Winchester and the bullet is so soft I can peel the lead off it with my fingernail. They have a proven track record, even in snubby's for expansion if that's what one wants. At only 800 fps, pure lead is more than adequate and if you should get a bit of leading, so what? If expansion is the goal and velocity is limited to approx 800 fps (realistic snub nose velocity) then to my mind you use the softest most ductile material you can, pure lead.

I went with 50/50 as it shot better with much less leading than a softer alloy, yet worked correctly 100% of the time in my tests. If for some reason a persons HP's were unreliable, I can see trying pure lead to see if the reliability increased.

[beagle]

Works kinda like that with soft lead./beagle

Thats interesting. Kind of like a Speer Gold Dot?

[beagle]

A friend of mine went to the FBIs bomb school once and somebody gave him some armor piercing bullets that looked like they were coated with solidified green Teflon. He also gave me three of their hydraulic filled bullets made to use inside houses. The bullet end was light and supposedly they completely opened on impact and dissipated all energy versus going through three rooms worth of dry wall. Always wanted to try them but I think my son beat me to them. The FBI's got some neat stuff among their equipment corrupt leaders not counting./beagle

I've followed this thread for a while and I have to ask, why does anyone want a bullet for this application any harder than pure lead? I have a box of the so-called FBI load by Winchester and the bullet is so soft I can peel the lead off it with my fingernail. They have a proven track record, even in snubby's for expansion if that's what one wants. At only 800 fps, pure lead is more than adequate and if you should get a bit of leading, so what? If expansion is the goal and velocity is limited to approx 800 fps (realistic snub nose velocity) then to my mind you use the softest most ductile material you can, pure lead.

[Forrest r]

Your problem is 2 fold.

Bullseye powder
Too small a diameter of hp (.125")

Powders that give the slowest velocities in long bbl's 38spl's (4"/6"/8") will also give the slowest velocities in short bbl'd revolvers.

A hp design/shape, diameter and depth all play a part in how it performs. Some different hp's for the 38spl/357's.
[IMG][/IMG]

When you take a 1 size fits all or in this case 1 hp hole fits all it tends to be harder to make the extremes work. Extremes ='s too low or too high of a velocity. You happen to be in the "too low" area. If you look at the pictures of the different hp's pictured above most of them have the standard 1/8" hp hole. The bottom center is a hp bullet specifically designed for the 357 (smaller .100" diameter) while the 640 hp's top row/2nd from left have larger hp holes (around .195"/5mm). Add to that a penta point version, they both do extremely well with lower velocities.

A couple of weeks ago I wanted to test some different powders in a snubnosed 38spl. Nothing fancy, a 2" bbl'd ca undercover that has a pretty good cylinder gap (.007") and a oversized bbl (.3585). Not the best combo but but it gets the job done. I used 10 different bullets in the test. I only shot 10-shot strings with each bullet. I tested 5 different powders and used the same powder charge for all 10 bullets. After firing the 10 10-shot strings for a powder I added them all together and ended up with a 100 shot string. Doing this gave me an idea of what to expect from a given powder in that snubnosed revolver. Yes there would absolutely be a +/- depending on the bullet but at the end of the day all 5 powders had the same 10-shot groups with the same 10 bullets.

The powders/charge weights used:
Bullseye 4.4gr
Unique 5.5gr
Be-86 5.7gr
Power pistol 6.2gr
2400 11.0gr

The bullets tested:
h&g #51 146gr swchp, cramer #25 158gr rnhp, cramer #25 (same as the lyman 358477) 150gr swchp), 358439 156gr swchp, 358156 148gr gc swchp, mihec 640 158gr rnfphp, mihec 148gr hbwc, jacketed 150gr xtp style hp, 358431 145gr hb swchp, raphine 145gr hb rnfphp.
The 358431 & the raphine hb bullet had a cupped hp put in them with a forster hp tool. The jacketed bullet used is a home swaged bullet made from 380acp cases. The 148gr cast hbwc was turned around to make a huge hp and was seated out in the top lube groove. The 358156 were used without a gas check installed.

4.4gr of bullseye 10-shot 10 bullet (100-shot string) AVG. 801fps
h&g #51 807fps
cramer #25 800fps
cramer #26 797fps
358439 792fps
358156 822fps
mihec 640 802fps
mihec hbwc 796fps
jacketed bullet 817fps
358431 770fps
raphine 803fps

5.5gr of Unique 10-shot 10 bullet (100-shot string) AVG. 833fps
h&g #51 828fps
cramer #25 830fps
cramer #26 846fps
358439 818fps
358156 847fps
mihec 640 838fps
mihec hbwc 845fps
jacketed bullet 835fps
358431 814fps
raphine 827fps

5.7gr of be-86 10-shot 10 bullet (100-shot string) AVG. 845fps
h&g #51 848fps
cramer #25 836fps
cramer #26 863fps
358439 852fps
358156 848fps
mihec 640 844fps
mihec hbwc 846fps
jacketed bullet 846fps
358431 827fps
raphine 841fps

11.0gr of 2400 10-shot 10 bullet (100-shot string) AVG. 882fps
h&g #51 867fps
cramer #25 879fps
cramer #26 868fps
358439 879fps
358156 888fps
mihec 640 891fps
mihec hbwc 8850fps
jacketed bullet 916fps
358431 882fps
raphine 902fps

6.2gr of power pistol 10-shot 10 bullet (100-shot string) AVG. 887fps
h&g #51 878fps
cramer #25 895fps
cramer #26 905fps
358439 873fps
358156 900fps
mihec 640 889fps
mihec hbwc 884fps
jacketed bullet 910fps
358431 859fps
raphine 880fps

The 358431 hb bullet did not do so well but I already new that the round hb design isn't the greatest. I have the same mold in 44cal and I made a conical hb pin and the velocities increased 40fps/50fps for the same bullet. I need to do the same thing and make a conical hb pin for the 358431 mold. The raphine mold already has a conical hb pin.

Anyway use that same 358439 swchp bullet/alloy and step up to 11.0gr of 2400. Your 800fps 4.4gr bullseye load is just that , too slow and your hp's are showing it. Go from a 800fps load to a 900fps load and your hp issues will be a thing of the past.

On a side note:
Power pistol out performed the other powders tested and that 6.2gr powder charge was on the light/safe side. I do load my snubnosed 38spl p+ loads hotter.
The be-86 did extremely well considering there isn't much data out there for that powder right now. Used the rather anemic alliant data. I'm looking forward to more testing as better data comes out.

[OS OK]

Forrest r...EMPIRICAL DATA...
Thank you! Your post is exactly what I had in mind when I thought about starting this on HP's...I knew that someone out there had put an ernest effort into figuring out the physics of these little buggers.
If I had the money to invest into molds...well, you know the story. But, at least I have these two old buggers and am bound and determined to understand them. Regarding the physics of these two small hole molds it's just a little harder to get the results consistently but do that I will.

One thing about the lead and the low velocity...it's got to be soft. Several times now I've gone back and retested the BHN of the several batches used and discovered that in each case with lead that is more than a week old out of the mold...well, it's about 2 BHN harder than as planned.
Instead of worrying about the mix being perfectly mixed with a tiny bit of tin or pewter, I'm doing the next test with dead soft 5 BHN lead. At least that was the measurement on the day I melted down all my flashing stock a couple days back. Someone suggested some store bought HP's and I checked the website and they advertise 5 BHN lead in their casts...maybe they know something too.

Another thing I'm throwing in is tapering that front hole some and making a bit of a scoop there, I've used a couple of wood bits for insetting wood screws flush and the smaller of the three does a good even job, then I'll add some soft silicone type plugs on their ends too.
I have some 2400 to try out so that'll be in the mix too.

Forrest believe me when I say I appreciate your sharing these data with me and us all...I do understand how much time you put into obtaining and recording it...I don't take that lightly in passing..."thank you very much!"

Another note 'I think I've noticed?', is that with the thicker sidewalls of the HP the mushroom tends to stay together and resist fragmenting.

[runfiverun]

you won't have the shearing or blow-off with the thicker supported lead.

another thing you don't want to do is have both tin and antimony in your alloy.
one or the other is fine.
a mix of 30 or 40-1 lead/tin
oooor 2% antimony is fine.

both will help hold the nose together, the tin will provide more support and the antimony will allow more slump under duress on the nose.
BHN doesn't tell the whole tale.
look at how soft Hornady's wad cutters are,,,,, they are swaged and contain 5% antimony.
lead behaves differently with different things in it especially when it's swaged versus cast.

now you might be casting them to get the initial boolit shape but you are most definitely swaging them in the throat and barrel and in the test media.
most people don't understand the swaging relationship of the boolit in the firing sequence or in terminal performance.
but it is a very important part of the loads performance in both places.