RCBS 38 cal. Wadcutter Mold

[Ben]

I bought a pristine ( NOS - - NEW Old Stock ) RCBS, 140gr. Wadcutter mold from " Castbullet ". The mold didn't appear to of ever been cast with.

As near as I can tell, I don't think that RCBS makes this mold anymore ? ?

I gave it a good cleaning to get all the factory preservative off the blocks. I had my pot hot and began casting. RCBS says this mold will throw 140 gr. cast bullets. My scales say 139.7 grs. with my alloy of range lead and ACWW's.

The bullets all size out nice and round to .358 ". I've lubed the bottom lube ring with Ben's Red and rolled them in 45-45-10.

Now to try these out in a few days ? ?

Ben

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/haysb/005-46.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/haysb/004-58.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/haysb/009-35.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/haysb/007-42.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/haysb/008-37.jpg

[Ben]

excess650

Shipped from Meyersdale, Pa. 15552

Small world UUhhh ?

If $25.95 was the original retail price, it makes this one fairly old.

[GLL]

Ben:

VERY Nice buy for $25.95 ! :)

It casts a beautiful bullet !

Jerry

[Ben]

Jerry,

I bought the mold for $30 + $6 shipping.

As you've said......I think that it was a great deal.

Ben

[35remington]

Nice wadcutter that looks like a hard hitter with a bigger meplat than most. Kinda like the Lee 148 TLWC with the benefit of full lube grooves. Not that it needs that much lube; it could be the Lee has the ability to hold the minimal lube needed and no more, which maybe isn't such a bad idea for a TL bullet.

But of course a single groove is plenty with your lube and probably makes you happier anyway.

If crimped in the top lube groove the bullet is seated out more than most WC's and might sit in the throat of the pistol better. I picked up an older RCBS bevel base WC they no longer catalog at a gun show a few years back. It has the small vestigal nose on the front that is said to make it resist tumbling longer, but quite frankly I'm not so sure it matters that much. I think I would rather have yours than mine but mine does shoot well. A dead flatnosed wadcutter appeals to me for its impact and potential in short revolvers where (non?)expanding bullets are of less use. Of course seating out a bit lowers pressure and makes the round more useful for things other than targets. If seated out 800 fps is possible in a snub at standard pressures using about 4.7 Unique.

Sometime back I tried to establish just when wadcutters tumble, and at what speed, and if design played much of a role. Besides the aformentioned RCBS bevel base, I tried the full meplat dead flat nosed Lee 148 TLWC and the Lyman 358495, as well as the Lee 148 lube groove wadcutter with the small vestigal nose. Of all these the 358495 had the largest "nose" (not really all that big but slightly rounded) and it really didn't seem to matter.

Whether shot at 750 to 900 fps out of a 4 inch 38 (seated out to some degree to lower pressures when applicable for the design and sized to throat diameter or smaller in terms of the 900 fps loads) it was hard to account for all five shots in a "group" at 100 yards. Typically I would find two shots out of five (ironically with still round mostly wobble free impacts) while the others would completely miss a 3 foot by 4 foot target backer.

Moving the targets closer in 75 yards was about it. Shooting them at 1100 fps out of a 35 Remington Marlin with 4.8 grains Bullseye didn't help much. Grouping wasn't that great anyway, but still, hitting that paper at 100 yards was difficult. Just wish I could get wadcutters to shoot better in my Marlin for treetop squirrel hunting. The shorter range of a wadcutter has appeal when a rifled barrel is pointed in the air.

[C. Latch]

35Remington,

If I'm reading your post correctly, are you saying that the little wadcutters still grouped reasonably well at 75 yards?

I ask because it has occurred to me to try to get some sort of WFN .358 mold, then have it converted to a massive hollowpoint, with a longer nose than most .38 ammo has (in order to seat longer and get a tad more velocity while staying within +p pressures). Basically, trying to improve on the old 158 LSWCHP design. It seems like your experimenting incorporated some of those ideas (long seating, really wide nose) and it intrigues me. An 80% meplat (or more), deep hollowpoint, 900FPS from a 2" revolver, 150-160 grain .38 that stayed within +p pressures would greatly appeal to me - even if it tumbled at 50 yards.

I have shot my little snubbies at 100 yards or more, for fun, but to be realistic, if a bullet will fly straight for 20 yards, it will more than suffice for the sort of self-defense one would do with a .38 snubbie.

[35remington]

I could hit the target in a smaller than blunderbuss sized area. I'm not sure that qualifies as "reasonably well." 50 yards I could call my shots really well; 75, not so much all the time.

Speed, as in the 1200 fps variety, is said to help the WFN stabilize at longer ranges. Of course that much speed in a snubby is impossible, but these wadcutters easily reach to 50 with good accuracy as is and I'm not sure a WFN with a hollowpoint is all that much an improvement over the factory 158 LSWCHP +P anyway. Either will plug with clothing, so why not a wadcutter that is flat already?

I am not entirely sure 900 fps is doable but you should be close. 5.3 Unique is said to be about max for a 158 SWC at the +P level. This obtains about 880 to 890 fps in my two inch when using said SWC but of course not at standard pressure. What is tough is getting the seated out wadcutters to chamber in a fouled gun. What works in a squeaky clean revolver doesn't work so well in a fouled one, so these greatly seated out wadcutters work for the first shots out of the gun but not for an extended range session as the rounds won't chamber after awhile.

If you have .358 cylinder throats you might want to size to .357" and hope this keeps the fouling gremlins at bay longer. A cheap wadcutter that allows the option of multiple places to crimp is the Lee 358 148TLWC and you're not out a lot of money experimenting.

I tried a lot of different seating depths but that which mimics the seating depth of a 158 SWC is about optimum, as shallower seating starts getting higher variations in velocity from more room for the powder to shift front to back. In this instance the variety of data available for 158 SWC's is now available to you with such a seating depth. Thought should be given to the tendency for the bullet lube to pick up grit and one should only lube the grooves in the case, dip lubing if necessary with the TL bullet.

The flatfaced wadcutter is a great way to go in a two inch 38, I think.

That's why I couldn't help but comment positively on Ben's. I think the Lee TL WC may do what you want, if sized correctly in a reasonably clean gun.

[C. Latch]

Thanks! You said a mouthful there and it'll take me a while to process it. I'm almost out of the Gold Dot +P 135-grain load that I've been carrying for years, and they're nigh impossible to find in stock anywhere nowadays. If I was practical here I'd just buy a few hundred 158 LSWCHPs.....but I'm not very practical about stuff like this. Thus far (I'm new to this, still) half of my enjoyment in casting is in tinkering as much as actually shooting.

[35remington]

Then by all means invest in a truly flat meplat 148 WC and have at it. I know the Gold Dot +P 135 is said to be highly thought of by the wound forensic guys but I'm not sure how much it matters in terms of incapacitation potential versus a WC and I would think the greater penetration of the WC over the HP would have some appeal in some situations.

In googling some tests of the 135 Gold Dot +P, some tests showed no expansion, while others showed 12" of penetration in bare gel when it did expand, which is the minimum acceptable. Speer's own tests showed 11 inches in a lot of instances, including bare gel, heavy clothing, and auto glass. Penetration was 10" in wallboard. Given the "acceptable" spec is for 12 to 18 inches, and a wadcutter usually does 22 inches plus, I think rather than having too little penetration I'd go for more than needed with the WC. Just sayin'.

[jmort]

"Just sayin'"

Completely agree. More penetration is more better with a max meplat.

[jmort]

BTW, I just got my Lee Precision TL 148 grain wadcutter. Need to fire that one up.

[melloairman]

That is a good looking bullet . I sold the mold .But In my AR at 850 fps these .358 107 grain bullets would group 3 shot string in the bulls eye forward or backwards at 65 yards . Marvin
http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn55/melloroadman/IMG_7220-358-105.jpg (http://s301.photobucket.com/user/melloroadman/media/IMG_7220-358-105.jpg.html)

[35remington]

I agree about the penetration and max meplat thing, obviously. I still don't think it's been surpassed in a two inch in standard loads and probably not in Plus P either in terms of overall effectiveness.

Always enough penetration no matter what with full or near full caliber crush cavity has value I would think.

[Piedmont]

Another thing to consider is wadcutters don't have a good reputation for straight-line penetration. I've been wondering myself if a plain old semiwadcutter might be a good compromise. It will give a little extra velocity since more of the weight is seated out of the case and there won't be any worries of instability if a long shot is necessary.

Terminal ballistics isn't as simple as it appears at first. For instance, I was watching a youtube video of a guy shooting gelatin blocks with 115 gr. 9mm ball. It penetrated 30-36 inches (can't remember which) and tumbled at least once (maybe twice). The shooter who had done this test before commented that it always did that. It made me think maybe ball has a worse reputation than it deserves. When the bullet tumbles it damages substantially more tissue where that tumbling occurs. It also made me wonder if .45 ball always tumbles like that in gelatin. On smaller targets the RN slips through but if the target is thick enough it will probably catch a tumble. This begs the question: At what depths do various roundnose bullets begin their tumble? and I am sure it varies from load to load and caliber to caliber. It is something to think about.

I worry about an expanding bullet not getting in deep enough, just as some of you. It is somewhat amusing to read about boutique bullets that didn't penetrate enough when a plain old round nose would have ended the fight just through penetration. There is another youtube video that has been linked on this board before that is lecture by an anesthesiologist to some sort of medical conference. Part of the presentation is a radiograph (x-ray) of an expanded .40 in a man's chest that punched through the sternum and stopped one centimeter from the heart. The shootee was doing just fine, said the doctor. I'll bet the shootee was happy the shooter wasn't using garden variety ball ammo! This reminds me of another story that was from Gabe Suarez, an ex-cop and some sort of weapons trainer, who knew a law man down in Latin America somewhere who had been in something like three dozen gunfights. He used a nine (a Hi Power at first and Glock later) and Suarez asked what load. The fellow said they were only allowed to carry ball. When told everyone up here thought that wouldn't stop anyone, the cop said none of his attackers must have heard that message!

Which brings us back to Eric Martell's (hope that is the correct last name) adage: Placement is king. Penetration is queen and everything else is how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

[35remington]

Piedmont, wadcutters penetrate straight just fine. Try it. I've tried them in various media and straight line penetration is no problem, nor have I seen any evidence anyone else has had difficulty with it. You may completely cross that off your list of concerns.

We've already discounted the need for a long shot with a short 38. That's no longer defensive shooting that will apply. Besides, fifty yards is a long shot with any handgun and a wadcutter will do that easily. If you're engaged in a long range gunfight with a 38 snub you might want to question your sanity. You would be better advised to get the hell out of there or get a more suitable gun, no matter what the short 38 is loaded with. Hits are not easy already; at really long range there's something akin to Mark Twain's phrase of a "tool singularly unsuited to the task."

We've also discussed the rationale for seating a wadcutter out. The idea is to surpass the terminal performance of a semiwadcutter without pressure issues, and we do.

[Piedmont]

Piedmont, wadcutters penetrate straight just fine. Try it. I've tried them in various media and straight line penetration is no problem, nor have I seen any evidence anyone else has had difficulty with it. You may completely cross that off your list of concerns.



Perhaps you are right, but Veral Smith, who makes his living selling meplats doesn't want a full wadcutter because of tumbling concerns, and this is tumbling after impact, not in the air.

[SP5315]

Fine old molds aren't they. It was the first mold that I started out with in 1983. Mine is about the same ear as yours, old green box, used when I picked it up. I have had good accuracy in all of my 38/357's with this one over 3.4 grains of Bullseye sized to .359. They weigh in around 139 grains lubed. I have loaded more of these for target shooting than any other 38/357 mold that I own. It has sent more than one or two coyotes cartwheeling who made the mistake of trying to get at my chickens. It has always left a sizable exit wound on em.

My mentor was a retired LASD officer. This was his standard load in a backup J frame S&W. He attended an autopsy where the victim had been hit by two rounds and he was amazed by the damage that was done. I've felt comfortable carrying this round as a self defense round.

Lite recoil and accuracy make this little gem a real pleasure to shoot.

79055

[dubber123]

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh83/dubber123/IMG_3149.jpg (http://s254.photobucket.com/user/dubber123/media/IMG_3149.jpg.html)

If you "pre plug" the HP with something that will become fluid under pressure, like a wax, or boolit lube in this case, it won't plug with clothing or other material and prevent expansion. I believe these were shot through several layers of clothing over water jugs. They expand exactly the same when fired into soft wood, which will plug most handgun HP's. These are air cooled 50/50 WW-Pb, fired from a 1-7/8" S&W.

Sorry for contributing to the thread hijack Ben!

[Piedmont]

I bought one of those ogival wadcutter molds. Accuracy measured in feet at 100yds. and nothing to write home about at 25 yds. and that was after MUCH load testing in 3 guns. I think it was only later that he sold them as high velocity wad cutters. I figure there were numerous complaints.

[35remington]

Piedmont, peruse any of the tests of the wadcutter in media or gelatin. No tumbling. Many are available online. Including videos.

Also do tests of your own, like I have. Then try making the same comment. I realize you are talking about after impact. So am I.

[shooting on a shoestring]

Yep wadcutters pushed fast out of a J-Frame .38 are my second choice for concealed defensive loads. My first choice is to push them faster out of my .357 SP101. 2400 can get them above 1300 fps with the 2.25" barrel. Impressive shreading on gallon jugs of water. Hollow points need not apply.

[bhn22]

Ben- I have the same mold, but mines a little later vintage than yours is. I think this particular bullet was designed to be seated flush for semi-autos, based on the leading edges of the cavities. I keep promising myself that I won't buy any more wadcutter molds, but that still hasn't happened. I'm still experimenting with Lyman 358432 (160 gr) for use in action shooting. It's the only wadcutter I've found that works with speedloaders... sorta. I've loaded the 140 RCBS with Ed Harris' 3.5 gr of Bullseye for a neat everyday load. I could go higher, but it doesn't seem necessary.