Wadcutter load

[Rusty Shackleford]

I have read for years how 2.7 gr. of Bullseye under a hollow base 148gr. wadcutter was the go to load. Never had any to try, but I did just buy 2 Lee molds. Both TL 148 gr. double end wadcutter type. Seems like 3 grs. of Bullseye might be place to start. Anyone have any experience with these? Just looking for mild mannered rounds for wife's LCR.

[Outpost75]

Modern Alliant Bullseye requires about 10% higher charge for same velocity as older Herculescproduct. With 148-grain HBWC bullets, flush seated, 3.0 grains of Bullseye approximates factory velocity and pressure. With solid DEWC bullets load 3.3-3.5 grs.

[Ben]

Modern Alliant Bullseye requires about 10% higher charge for same velocity as older Herculescproduct. With 148-grain HBWC bullets, flush seated, 3.0 grains of Bullseye approximates factory velocity and pressure. With solid DEWC bullets load 3.3-3.5 grs.

Modern Alliant Bullseye requires about 10% higher charge for same velocity as older Herculescproduct. ? ? ?

Does this comment come directly from Alliant ? I would be VERY interested in the source of your comment about the 10% variation in B'eye.

You may want to read this :

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=6&f=42&t=386908

[GBertolet]

I've noticed the same thing between the old Hercules Bullseye and the new Alliant Bullseye. I had to up the charge when using the Alliant Bullseye to get the same ballistics as the Hercules version gave me. I found that the new Alliant 2400 is hotter also, as I had to cut back the charge about a grain in my 44, as the cases were starting to stick, where as they didn't with the Hercules version. The experts deny that there is any difference between Hercules and Alliant powders, and provide all kinds of scientific data to try to prove it. I just know what I experienced. Maybe they are the same, and quality control at Alliant might not be what it used to be with Hercules, and large lot to lot variations might account for this.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Reason for this thread was, Alliant's wadcutter data is for hollow based not cast DEWC. That load shows 3.1 gr. of Bullseye. 799 fps out of a 6" barrel. I have Lee TL 148 gr DEWC molds and was looking to see if anyone else had loaded any with Bullseye and how much.

[Ben]

Rusty Shackleford

The reason for my comment is " If someone is going to suggest that reloaders add 10% to their Bullseye charges, I'd like to know the source of that information."

[Larry Gibson]

I've pressure tested Alliand and Hercules Bullseye, Unique, 2400 and Blue Dot. The only difference between the old Hercules and newer Alliant Powders (any of them) is typical lot to lot variation. I have talked with Alliant's technicians and they say the formula and burning rates have not changed.

This is why all loading manuals say to "work up loads" when a component changes. That includes a different lot of the same powder. It's another reason many "max" loads have been lowered in newer manuals where piezo-transducer pressures are taken. Many think it is because of lawyers but it isn't. The max loads are most often not even to SAAMI MAP but to SAAMI MPSM (Maximum Probable Mean Sample) which will take into account the lot to lot variations in powder burning rates which can be +/-5% or the most often confused "10%".

The use of a HBWC vs a solid base WC in the .38 SPL requires different load data as Rusty mentions.

Larry Gibson

[Hardcast416taylor]

For solid based WC boolets I have always used either Win. 231 or HP-38 powders as my go to load of 3.5 gr.Robert

[Ben]

I have talked with Alliant's technicians and they say the formula and burning rates have not changed.

Is there any wonder why we need to be super cautious about what we read on the internet ?

[R.M.]

I have read for years how 2.7 gr. of Bullseye under a hollow base 148gr. wadcutter was the go to load. Never had any to try, but I did just buy 2 Lee molds. Both TL 148 gr. double end wadcutter type. Seems like 3 grs. of Bullseye might be place to start. Anyone have any experience with these? Just looking for mild mannered rounds for wife's LCR.

If 2.7 is the recommended load, why do you want to start higher?

[dbosman]

If 2.7 is the recommended load, why do you want to start higher?

It's not my post, but a Hollow Base Wad Cutter uses less of the same powder than a solid Double Ended Wad Cutter.

[Outpost75]

[QUOTE=Ben;2262514]Modern Alliant Bullseye requires about 10% higher charge for same velocity as older Herculescproduct. ? ? ?

Does this comment come directly from Alliant ? I would be VERY interested in the source of your comment about the 10% variation in B'eye.

This statement is based on my own charge/velocity test firings comparing factory wadcutter ammo from the three major US manufactuers. Anybody should be able to do their own tests for confirmation. I do each time I start a new 8-lb. caddy of powder before setting the Dillon RL550B.

I have had similar experiences with. 45 ACP as well.

[10 Spot Terminator]

This is the dilemma I have ran accross with wadcutters of late insofar as those "tried and true" powder and starting charge references go. Different wadcutters of different designs ( even slightly ) create the unknown variable and require that you tweak the loads accordingly to get good results. Hollow base wadcutters are an entity unto themselves as they fill less of the case seated to the same depth as a solid base and therefore have different starting pressures with the same load . They also have a skirt on the edge of the hollow base that varies slightly in thickness and alloy composition and creates the low charge requirement to get obturation of the skirt at low pressures individually . Go too hot and the skirts start to decay and can even seperate. The other end of the scale is what are called TYPE III wadcutters such as the early Lyman/Ideal .38 cal . #358432 design in either 148 gr. or 160 gr. configuration that have nearly 25% of the bullet seated outside of the case . Here the seating depth creates quite low pressures seated to the crimp groove so standard printed wadcutter data of for the same weights arent even in the ball park . The point of all this is that although there are many what can be called popular wadcutter loads such as 2.7 gr. of Bullseye your particular bullet may be best at 2.8 or more just as with other bullet configurations.. Shooter forums such as these are full of testimonials of pet loads performing at their best even in identical model firearms with exact components with the powder charges being slightly different . Finding the sweet spot is half the fun.

[Ben]

[QUOTE=Ben;2262514]Modern Alliant Bullseye requires about 10% higher charge for same velocity as older Herculescproduct. ? ? ?

Does this comment come directly from Alliant ? I would be VERY interested in the source of your comment about the 10% variation in B'eye.

This statement is based on my own charge/velocity test firings comparing factory wadcutter ammo from the three major US manufactuers. Anybody should be able to do their own tests for confirmation. I do each time I start a new 8-lb. caddy of powder before setting the Dillon RL550B.

I have had similar experiences with. 45 ACP as well.

My concern with this is Alliant says the burn rate of Bullseye powder has not changed ( I'd think if anyone would know anything about that point of concern it would be , and should be Alliant ) .

Young reloaders read all this and are confused and don't know what to believe.

We will all draw our own conclusions and develop our own theories about what is and isn't appropriate with respect to reloading our own ammo.

However, I'm not a young reloader , I'll stick with Alliant's version of the story on Bullseye's burn rate. Everyone else is certainly free to view the current burn rate of Bullseye in any manner that they choose.

Ben

[StrawHat]

For years I shot 38 Wadcutter reloads. I used HBWC for matches and cast DEWC for practice. Both were loaded over 2.8 grains of Bullseye. Eventually, the light bulb went on and I realized my practice scores were at or better than my match scores. I went over to DEWC and 2,8 grains and never had a problem. Your revolver may like them a bit faster but it never hurts to try what has worked for others in the past.

[Outpost75]

[QUOTE=Outpost75;2263349]

My concern with this is Alliant says the burn rate of Bullseye powder has not changed ( I'd think if anyone would know anything about that point of concern it would be , and should be Alliant ) .

Young reloaders read all this and are confused and don't know what to believe.

We will all draw our own conclusions and develop our own theories about what is and isn't appropriate with respect to reloading our own ammo.

However, I'm not a young reloader , I'll stick with Alliant's version of the story on Bullseye's burn rate. Everyone else is certainly free to view the current burn rate of Bullseye in any manner that they choose.

Ben


All I suggest is to chronograph samples of not less than 10-shots each with good factory matchgrade wadcutters from the major US manfactuers, of lots having proven accuracy, capable of producing an average extreme spread of under 2 inches at 50 yards from a match quality pistol or revolver. You will find that "accurate" lots produce 720+/-30 fps and while slower lots wil shoot OK from a PPC revolver with 14" twist or faster, in the S&W with its 18-3/4" twist, accuracy falls off dramatically below 720fps due to inadequate stability. The Remington bullet is swaged of harder alloy and has a thicker skirt than Speer, Hornady, Star, Precision Delta, etc. and can "stand" full charge velocity and pressure in an autopistol with AMU type chamber, but revolvers are a different matter. For match target use in most pistols and revolvers, using the Remington factory component bullet, mloading Remington wadcutter brass and using Remington 1-1/2 primers, best accuracy in my experience has been with 3.0 grs. of current production Alliant Bullseye. Our club buys a case of four, 8-lb. caddies of Bullseye annually, loads ammo by the 5-gallon bucketful, and tests groups at 50 yards using a Martini Cadet action with. 38 AMU chamber and 10x Unertl scope. We don't consider 50-yard groups over 2 inches accsptable. Our best loads and guns will average just over 1-1/2" at 50 yards.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Thanks for the input, StrawHat.

[rhead]

Rusty if 2.7 grains is the historically recommended load why start at 3??? You might end up at 3 but 2.7 is the recommended load because of the preponderance of good results from that load. Does your revolver have a history of liking hotter loads or what?

[Rusty Shackleford]

2.7 gr. was using HBWC, mine are DEWC's. I thought maybe someone here had used my bullets with Bullseye and could give me advice........ I will just use Alliant's HBWC recipe.

[R.M.]

A 148 gr wadcutter is a 148 gr wadcutter. The shape doesn't make much difference. They all take up the same volume.

[Ben]

A 148 gr wadcutter is a 148 gr wadcutter. The shape doesn't make much difference. They all take up the same volume.

Two 148 gr. wadcutters, one is a solid base, the other hollow base..........those take different powder charges.

[R.M.]

Two 148 gr. wadcutters, one is a solid base, the other hollow base..........those take different powder charges.

Not really. The solid base can handle hotter charges, but don't necessarily need them.

[burntpowder]

I have loaded 2.7 B.E. and 140 gr wad cutter for many years (45). That load has always grouped excellent in many different revolvers. I think that would be a starting point.

[got_lead?]

Here is what 2.7 does for my gun. I worked up this load and found it t