So, do we really NEED round nose bullets any more?

[35 Whelen]

I've asked myself this question a lot here lately. I have quite a few moulds from quite a few manufacturers, but not one of them is a round nose design and I can't think of a single reason to buy one. In some semi's there is the issue of feeding problems, but I rarely plink with my Star 9mm and my Colt gov't Model 45, and when I do I use either SWC or TC design bullets. I shoot tons and gobs of .38 and .44 Special and hope to have a 45 Colt added to the stable very soon. I always, always, always, shoot SWC's, and why not? They're plenty accurate and are a better defensive and hunting bullet than a round nose design.
Thoughts?

35W

[Boyscout]

I'm a big fan of SWC and RNFP's too. I shoot mostly paper targets and I find the SWC's are easier on the targets and leave nice clean holes which are much easier to tape up between rounds.

[cylinderman]

90% of my 38spl get DEWC and my 44mag get SWC I also use a lot of RNFP in 45ACP. All with excellent accuracy and reliability. Only way I could see a downfall with these is at long distance. I don't see why they would not well for self defense even though I carry factory self defense rounds.

[Mohillbilly]

RN nose can be good for not knocking a big hole in a pelt, most .22 rimfire are rn , and some target rifles , and some pistols need rns to feed . I have a sks/ak mold that I had modified to a rn for a bead field gun on ground hogs . I shoot off the porch with a .30 carbine blackhawk at 100-200 yrds with a chair and porch railings .. good fun when I can hit them .

[44MAG#1]

What about rifle bullets? Most of the guys that shoot BP competition with the Sharps and Sharps replicas uses RN bullets.
Just because most of us don't doesn't mean we need to take something away from those few that do.
To me that is like the anti gunners. Since they don't like guns or use them the rest of us don't need them either.
I use RN bullets occasionally myself.

[Airman Basic]

Have a Marlin 94 that functions reliably only with RN boolits. That's what it likes, so that's what I feed it.

[Lead Fred]

I got big meplat fever
Glad I got a pile of RD molds.

I have RN molds, just dont use them at the moment.

[missionary5155]

Greetings
Purpose and need is the reason for most of what was and is manufactured.
Going back into history a RN was easy to load one at a time into chambers under combat conditions when the eyes needed to be looking at approaching combatants. A RN can make the transition more easily from a slightly misaligned cylinder into a barrel that is getting slightly clogged with Black Powder residue and caked lube.
Those same RN projectiles were cast from 40-1 to maybe 20-1 mixes. Expansion was going to happen. But even if it did not a caliber .41 or larger did not need to expand much at all. A badly wounded combatant was not going to cause too many more problems. And a gut shot enemy was a good advertisement that the shooter could do it again.
Plus the RN was a carry over from the muzzle loaded round ball. That round design up front flew well and was a very easy design to ream into mold blocks.
So take a speed loader, fill it with a RN design and watch how easily they flop into the cylinders. Recharge that same speed loader with a wad cutter design... it will not take to many tries before one of those flat noses gets hung up on a cylinder lip.
So yes the RN is not the best big game hunting round unless it is cast from something like 40-1. If ever I had to use my single action Blackhawk caliber .41 Magnum to defend myself from numerous advancing targets I would hope I had a pocketful of RN cartriges to facilitate reloading while watching those varmits out there moving about. Or recharging the swung out cylinder on my Dan Wesson caliber 45 Colt, those RN boolits never hang up.
And so I say good by to post #4440... one of my favorite calibers.
Mike in Peru

[35 Whelen]

What about rifle bullets? Most of the guys that shoot BP competition with the Sharps and Sharps replicas uses RN bullets.
Just because most of us don't doesn't mean we need to take something away from those few that do.
To me that is like the anti gunners. Since they don't like guns or use them the rest of us don't need them either.I use RN bullets occasionally myself.



Have a Marlin 94 that functions reliably only with RN boolits. That's what it likes, so that's what I feed it.


:groner:....I started to put a disclaimer in my post, but thought "Naaa. Surely they'll all realize they're here": Forum> Guns & Shooting> Wheelguns, Pistols and Handcannons :kidding:

I use RN's in my rifles.

Keep 'em coming, fellas.

35W

[nwellons]

I like round noses in my older military pistols and revolvers because that is what they originally used.

[44MAG#1]

I still use RN bullets at times in my HANGUNS. I use SPITER FMJ's in a handgun yesterday morn.
RN bullets have their place whether in Handgun or rifle.
Remember you are also in the HANDCANNON section too and some of us use Encores in rifle cartridges too.
In my carry 45 ACP the round in the chamber and the first out of he mag are Speer GDHP's for the short barrel with the rest RN-FMJ's
My extra mag is loaded with RN-FMJ's too.
SO it goes.

[MGD]

Semi-wadcutters are not fun with a speedloader.

[Love Life]

All I shoot for the 45 ACP are round nose. They fly true and hit stuff.

[Groo]

Groo here
The round nose bullet can be some of the most accurate.
The trend to flat nose was to hit game harder, wadcutter cut paper better, and hp to openup.
But if you check, most of the longer range bullets pistol and rifle bullets or boolets end up being round nose.

[TXGunNut]

I got big meplat fever
Glad I got a pile of RD molds.

I have RN molds, just dont use them at the moment.

Got a case of that myself, RD moulds are an excellent prescription. Sorry about the thread drift but they work just fine in my rifles too. :wink:
MGD-tilt the speedloader a bit and start two boolits into the cylinder, then square up the speedloader and they'll drop in.

[btroj]

Define NEED

Some would say nothing but RN is needed for auto loaders.

I don't use RN bullets in handguns but certainly won't question those who do. It is up to each of us to determine what we want to use and what works for our needs.

[makicjf]

I shoot round flats, truncated cones or semiwadcutters, the only round nose I have is for a rifle ( a lee 185). I have switched totaly to a 255 swc in my loads for my 625 jm. If I have the cylinder straight up and down they thunk in very well; I can't throw them at the open cylinder like the tc's but the micro second it takes to guide them is not important for me ( I ain't that fast ;) ) . They hit steel very hard. All three of the above designs function in my 1911's as well. I do not need round nose bullets in any of my handguns and the added thump of a flat nose makes me happy. If I ever acquire a 1911 that hiccups with the tc bullets I could buy a round nose mold: I'd more than likley trade the gun.
JMO,
Jason

[44MAG#1]

If someone wants to use a RN then that means that it has a place for them. I don't care what someone else wants to use as this is a "free" country.
I use FN, RN and anything else I can shoot. Including spitzer SP and FMJ's. In some form of handgun at times.

[35 Whelen]

If someone wants to use a RN then that means that it has a place for them. I don't care what someone else wants to use as this is a "free" country.
I use FN, RN and anything else I can shoot. Including spitzer SP and FMJ's. In some form of handgun at times.

I think you're taking my original post as criticism of RN bullets and/or those that use them. That's not my point. My point is if my handguns shoot well with an SWC, why would I need a RN bullet? Is there something a RN bullet does better than an SWC besides feed in some autos? (My Colt Gov't Series 45 feeds 255 gr SWC's fine!)AGAIN, I'm talking about handgun cartridges.

35W

[HATCH]

I have switched to FPRN boolits.
They feed in everything I have.
Now I do still do the tried and true lrn 230 gr 45acp and the lrn 115gr 9mm

if you don't own ANY rifles that shoot handgun calibers then NO you don't need any RN or FPRN boolits

[btroj]

I think you're taking my original post as criticism of RN bullets and/or those that use them. That's not my point. My point is if my handguns shoot well with an SWC, why would I need a RN bullet? Is there something a RN bullet does better than an SWC besides feed in some autos? (My Colt Gov't Series 45 feeds 255 gr SWC's fine!)AGAIN, I'm talking about handgun cartridges.

35W

By the same logic- if my firearms shoot well with a RN then why do I NEED anything else?

Your entire premise is silly. In any situation where satisfactory results are achieved there is no need for change to the parameters that gave those results.

I can't decide what you do or don't need.

[44MAG#1]

Did I not state handguns on my last post and did I not say I use RN bullets in my carry gun?
I occasionally use RN bullets in my revolvers too. Not much but some.

[fecmech]

For years I shot Hunters Pistol silhouette with the H&G #39 (158 grn RN) in my K frame .38. It was THE most accurate bullet in that gun, even besting factory wadcutter loads and many SWC's that I tried. In the past couple years I tried the Lee 120 TC bullet and it beats all the other designs for pure accuracy. Now I use the 120 Lee for all the targets to 75 yds and the RN for the ram at 100 yds as the 120 won't consistently knock the ram over. In the .38 spl the RN has a reputation for being very accurate.

[1Shirt]

Just my 2 cents! Not a big deal! If that's what you have shoot it! Will admit that a big wide meplat makes for an awesome looking ctg, and that a round nose load kind of looks a bit like yesterdays news. That said, in my experience, round nose blts seem to drop from the mold better. And, if a round nose is the most accurate in your handgun, you would be foolish not to shoot it, with emphasis on paper. AND, probably 98% or more of all trigger pulling with a handgun will be on paper anyhow.
1Shirt!

[35 Whelen]

By the same logic- if my firearms shoot well with a RN then why do I NEED anything else?

Your entire premise is silly. In any situation where satisfactory results are achieved there is no need for change to the parameters that gave those results.

I can't decide what you do or don't need.

It's not a premise, rather a question...an informal poll if you will, and I'm not asking anyone to decide what I need as
I've already made that determination based on my own personal parameters.

But to answer your question, I think it's been proven over time that a SWC provides a better wound channel in game and is a better choice for defensive purposes. As such, if a SWC bullet provides the same level of accuracy, power and function in a given cartridge/firearm, what's the point of using a RN design?


I suppose if all a fella ever did was shoot at various inanimate targets, then a RN type bullet would be all that was required.

35W

[junkpile]

You know, this same question could be posed for about anything we can think of. Guns, cars, computers, women, beer, bourbon, powder, forks, you name it.

I'm choosing to use a round nose profile, and I'm choosing to use swc, and I'm choosing to use hp, and I'll probably choose to use other profiles at some other point in time. So, yes, there are lots of different kinds of folks shooting a lot of different stuff in a lot of different scenarios, and so we need lots of different profiles. I'm not saying you'd have to use them, or like them.

And, so, yes we still need rn. Because I'm a cranky, stubborn American. That's why.;)

[762 shooter]

No. I don't need them in my 44/45 wheelguns. I don't mind them, but I don't need them. Big fat meplats are my new best friend.

I really don't care if I use RN in my 38/357 because I just shoot them for play.

I never thought about it, but I will probably never seek out a RN mold for my Revolvers in the future.

762

[imashooter2]

Yes, I really NEED round nose boolits in my USPSA and ICORE moon clip guns that get reloaded on a timer.

[btroj]

I find that water, tea, and pop quench my twist fine, why do we even need beer?

[35 Whelen]

Yes, I really NEED round nose boolits in my USPSA and ICORE moon clip guns that get reloaded on a timer.

Now THAT'S a legitimate reason.


I find that water, tea, and pop quench my twist fine, why do we even need beer?

Because water, tea, and pop won't make an ugly woman prettier....

[canyon-ghost]

35 Whelen, I have one answer for you. I decided to never use a factory, jacketed round in my new Blackhawk flattop. It seemed like an insult to the 44 Special. Well, sir, I ended up trading into some 44-40 bullets that were Lee 200 grain RNFP. That went well, I used them to set the sights and get acquainted. Now, I don't see the need to switch to a SWC or flatpoint Lyman or RCBS. I can, it just seems like wasted effort.

You are right, to a degree. I'd get a better wound channel on game however, an elongated roundnose is almost the same shape as a SWC without a paper ridge (that serves no purpose on game anyway). I just don't see it to be that big an improvement.

Myself, I was a devout buyer of Lymans, still am. Some calibers I use two molds for, like using a Keith mold for distance in a 41 mag and a lighter gas checked SWC for 100 yards and under. My reloading equipment is RCBS. But, I will admit to being humbled by a good Lee mold. It may be the only Lee I own or use but, there's one on the shelf that gets used. There's some speculation about how much energy a round nose will dump into a game animal, as opposed to cutting a hole through it. That may not amount to much though.

I've never seen anything wrong with not having roundnoses but, if one comes along and is easy to use, why not? It can happen.

[Wolfer]

When hunting deer sized critters with my 45 colt I prefer a flat or hollow point. When hunting grouse or rabbits I prefer a round nose.
I like to taylor the boolit to the game.

[Charley]

Lot's of stuff we don't need , doesn't mean we don't want them. Buy/load/cast whatever shoots better for you. Who cares what the other guy is shooting (unless he beats you!)

[Kraschenbirn]

I don't really 'need' RNs but I cast quite a few for my revolvers. The Lee 358-150-1R is nearly as accurate as full WCs in my S&Ws and faster to 'speedload' when shooting against the clock and the Lyman 429383 (240 gr RN) allows me to duplicate the original factory load for my .44 Specials.

Bill

[35remington]

I was thinking about the issue, and in some pistols a lack of a roundnose would mean you'd be missing out in some respects. For example, a Luger or a 1911 using ball ammo in original GI magazines.

".......if a SWC bullet provides the same level of accuracy, power and function....."

The "function" part of the equation is the rub for these two pistols. Not saying that 1911's won't shoot other shapes with good reliability, but if you want to feel a 1911 run properly, shoot a two radius ogive roundnose like the original Lyman 452374 in a GI magazine. The long overall length of the roundnose bulleted round means the feed ramp strike is earlier in the feeding cycle, the feed angle is less steep and kachunky and the long pointed ogive offers a smoother pivot for the round off the roof of the chamber while the later release and tapered lips of the GI magazine give glassy smooth feeding in a more controlled feed than other pistol types. Other bullet shapes and overall lengths compromise this to some degree.

Not only does the gun feed, it even feels like it's not gonna jam, and the tactile is a big confidence booster once you experience how a gun is supposed to operate in the manner the designer intended. Touchy feely? Maybe, but not if you're paying attention when you shoot various bullet shapes in the platform. If knowing the gun will go bang is important to choosing a defensive round to feed one's pistol (how could it not be?) and acknowledging that "one shot stops" don't exist until a vital area is hit that really isn't resolved with a particular bullet shape (CNS hits are the only ones to be relied on) then if you told me I had to choose my most important criterion I'd say because of what I know about how a 1911 works I'd pick my RN Lyman over the 255 SWC's you claim feed in your 1911 any day of the week without thinking twice about it.

Because nothing.......absolutely nothing, trumps reliability, and you won't wanna bet me your 255 SWC's feed more reliably in a 1911 than my choice of RN bullets will. Because they won't. The gun's geometry and functional design says so, and if you wanna lay odds over a long string of shots (which is what reliability is) don't place any money on your bet than you can't afford to lose.

I like the 1911 as a defensive platform and ball shapes in a lead bullet for said pistol give me a feeling of confidence.

[35remington]

And by the way......Chargar has frequently mentioned that he has found the Lyman 358311 RN offers superior accuracy to any of the SWC's or WC's available in the 38, and I've found pretty much the same after putting one through its paces for awhile now. In addition the same bullet offered superior accuracy to any of the other pistol bullet shapes in two microgroove 35 Remington Marlins. And I tried a bunch. So we're past the functionality issue alone, as important as that is.

If they were useless, the roundnose design would be discontinued, and those two Lyman designs have been around for a long time. The Lyman 452374 was designed by a fellow Nebraskan from Wisner named Lincoln Riley about 90 years ago. He sure got it right.

[35 Whelen]

Easy there Killer!! Didn't mean to offend you or hurt your feelings! Let's set some things straight:

Sounds like your 1911 is unreliable with anything but RN. I had the same problem with mine until I finally heeded the advice of someone who knew more about the gun than I; I installed a heavier recoil spring. Voila'! Been shooting whatever my heart desires since then.

Also sounds like you're paying more attention to the sound of the gun cycling than you are the sights. You might want to work on that....:lol:

It's great you and Char-Gar have found great accuracy with the RN design bullet you mention. I personally have gotten my best accuracy with full wadcutters but then again, they're a specialty bullet where a SWC is, at least to my thinking, a much more all-around bullet. So, if accuracy at fairly short ranges were the only thing I was concerned about, I'd probably use a WC bullet, but that's not the case for me.

This whole subject started rolling over in my mind because I'd see a RN mould I thought I needed, but then couldn't really justify it as the bullet wouldn't offer anything that I wasn't already getting from a SWC.

I think imashooter2 has offered the most compelling reason for using a RN bullet.

Again, I started this thread to see what others thought, not to criticize or offend anyone. Cuss and discuss...

35W

[btroj]

You want to start a discussion and see what others think yet you seem to have all the answers.....

35 Remington never said his 1911 was only reliable with a RN bullet, he said that he can guarantee a RN of the right shape will feed more reliably day in and day put in ANY 1911 that a bullet of a different nose shape. Why? Because the gun was designed to feed that bullet style.

When reliability counts I would depend on a RN. I don't shoot them because I don't use mine for life and death situations. If I did, I would use a properly shaped RN and magazines of the original lip design. Why? Because I KNOW it will feed when I need it to.

[35remington]

Whelen, if a heavier spring makes your gun feed better, the spring wasn't the cure, it was simply masking the problem. Most likely your magazines are producing somewhat greater than normal stem binding on feeding (look it up if the term is not familiar to you) and rather than using a heavier spring and hammering the gun harder on closing so you can pound the rounds into the chamber you'd be better advised to use a different magazine. Nonstandard bullet designs and poor magazine choices go hand in hand with making 1911 feeding problematic.

It is better to feed the gun what it prefers as the path to least resistance. This should be obvious, but rest assured I've shot more different lead bullet designs in a 1911 than most people.

Lemme guess about your magazines. Chip McCormicks? Straight feed lips in the rear before the release point? I may have to put you on JMB's original magazine design and that's my first suggestion. Lose the nonstandard magazines. There was a reason Browning designed his magazines for the 1911 the way he did.

Sorry, but heavier spring installation advice was worth the same as what you paid for it. The solution to a mechanical problem is not a bigger hammer. Look elsewhere to properly fix your problem. Your advisor must have been a disciple of Chuck Taylor. The source doesn't matter; the advice you received was bad.

Greater familiarity with the 1911's design parameters and feeding dynamics would lead you to the point I was making and that btroj clarified for you, which is that the design feeds best using a bullet with a rounded ogive for the specific reasons I mentioned. Your SWC may feed, but that doesn't mean it is feeding optimally, and that reliability challenge stands ready any time you want to lose some money.

And remember, since you brought up the thread in the first place: Just because you find a certain thing to be true does not mean that everyone else has the same experience. Proof is in the continued offering of RN designs by mould manufacturers.

Simple acknowledgement of that obvious fact probably makes this whole topic moot.

[texassako]

I need a round nose in a couple of old semiauto's that were designed for FMJ's and will not reliably feed anything else. I also found the 358250 to be real accurate out of my Security Six. It may be a shade less accurate than a WC, but I like variety.

[zxcvbob]

I need them for my Hi-Power pistol. It has the humped feed ramp and doesn't like hollow points or TC's.

[NoZombies]

They fly true and hit stuff.

:) This made me smile

[Love Life]

:) This made me smile

That's all I need a bullet to do. I could care less if they (bullets/boolits) were shaped like little mini hippos as long as they fly true and hit stuff. Some like RNFP for that 'extra killing' power. I like RN because they kill things just as dead. I'll take a rn FMJ or LRN anyday over a whizbang super cool hollow point or RNFP. My preference.

[TXGunNut]

I think a Keith boolit looks a little silly sitting on a case full of FFFg but that's probably just me. I'll have a RN mould for my 45 Colt (& clones) someday because it's all about the fun in these guns, may even shoot better.

[NoZombies]

That's all I need a bullet to do.

And that's why I smiled.

I enjoy casting, heck, even just the collecting of the molds, but when it comes down to it, I do all this so that I can shoot, and I get as much pleasure sending a plain old RN down range as I do a fancy CAD designed whiz-bang super bullets.

That said, I've got a .32 auto that refuses to feed anything but RN bullets. So I "need" them too :)

[Love Life]

There is no way I can argue about the RN being the best boolit. The merits of the RNFP and HP are well tested, proven, and established. However; I can say that if you start poking holes in living things with high velocity projectiles, the living thing usually ceases to live or knocks off whatever it was doing to cause it to get perforated regardless of boolit design.

With that in my mind, I prefer RN boolits. Max penetration, easy feeding, and they just look cool to me. I do enjoy the 358429 in my 38 specials and 357 magnum though.

I also shoot RN bullets (Hornady) in my 8X57. That 170 gr smacks things hard and kills them dead!!

What it all comes down to is WANT. It can be said that all that is needed for any firearm is a RN bullet going just fast enough to get out of the barrel ad to the target, but people WANT different designs and speeds.

It's all about preference.

[fecmech]

I probably would never have bought a round nose mold but a good friend who quit his reloading business gave me 2 H&G 4 cav RN molds. They just cast sooooo easy, bullets dropping from the mold as soon as it opened with rarely a bad one. They shoot great with any powder behind them in both my pistols and Winchester 94. Just a very accurate, unfussy bullet.

[Good Cheer]

I think a Keith boolit looks a little silly sitting on a case full of FFFg but that's probably just me. I'll have a RN mould for my 45 Colt (& clones) someday because it's all about the fun in these guns, may even shoot better.

Yeah, you're right, even if it does smack of propellent correctness.
:kidding:

[theperfessor]

No bullet shape casts as easily or will give you a higher percentage of keepers than a good RN mold. I use the Lee 429-240 2R in a lot of .44 Sp loads and a clone of the Lyman 358311 in a lot of .38 loads. Loaded rounds chamber easily and most loads shoot accurately and pretty close to POA in a fixed site revolver. Not sexy but they work fine.

[RoyEllis]

That's all I need a bullet to do. I could care less if they (bullets/boolits) were shaped like little mini hippos as long as they fly true and hit stuff. Some like RNFP for that 'extra killing' power. I like RN because they kill things just as dead. I'll take a rn FMJ or LRN anyday over a whizbang super cool hollow point or RNFP. My preference.

I'm right there with ya brother! Gimme a RN bullet & a few seconds to X cut the nose with jeweler's saw & I'll show you a wound channel that will make any "big meplat" boolit cry in shame.
There's a valid reason cross cut "dum-dum" rounds were outlawed for warfare.....nobody wants a several inch wide hamburger meat looking hole in their torso. Close range shotgun blast is just as nasty of a wound, with either one you'll need a hose & squeegee to clean it all up.

[Shooter973]

Just a reminder... Millions of Buffalo were nearly wiped out by Round Nose bullets...Admittedly they were in Big Bore rifle rounds but the RN bullets did the job...
They Lee 240gr. RN nose is what I shoot (mostly) out of my M77/44 and it does just about anything I want it to do..well!!! Feeds smoothly and is as accurate as I can get from the rifle..

[Crash_Corrigan]

All we could shoot was RN in the NYCPD in the early '60's. It was issue ammo. A RNL Remington 158 gr. Later on we got SWC rounds. They do richochet less than the RN boolits but they do slow down the reloading in the revolver some.

All I shoot is RNL in my .38's as I have a Lee six banger that makes them faster then grease through a goose and they are cheap.

[robertbank]

For shooting my GP-100 in IDPA the RN boolit loads quicker using speedloaders. Guys who shoot their .45acp revolvers using moon clips use RN bullets for the same reason. My Rossi .38/.357 loads RN boolits faster than LSWC and if I were to use the rifle in CASS it certainly would be with RN boolits.

My experience differs with some when to comes to accuracy as I have found my LSWC and truncated cone shaped bollits to be more accurate than RN at the distances I shoot at. For self defense against bears I want LSWC hard cast for sure. I was a clean cut wound channel with lots of blood vessels cut. LSWC boolits do that well.

There is room for both on my bench. Depends what I intend to do with the round. I even have loaded shot cartridges in .45Colt for snakes. We don't have any poisonous snakes up here but if we did.....

Take Care

Bob

[BAGTIC]

Once velocity drops below speed of sound the RN generally maintains a higher ballistic coefficient than FN or spitzer designs. Also a true RN doesn't occupy as much case capacity.

[Mohillbilly]

John Browning designed the 1911 to feed the RN cartridge , it is successful . If your 1911 (A1 ) or 1911 style , feeds other style cartridges good for you . It is nice to be able and confident to shoot something other than Rn s . The gold standard is the 230 gr RN ( Most self sucker need the RN ) .... Now for my wheel guns I shoot what ever strikes my fancy ,and is suitable for the job at hand . I shoot full WCs , SEMIs ,TCs, LNF , WNF, RNFP, Spire points , RNs, HPs of all flavors , and whatever else I may have forgotten/left out .... YES the RN is still needed ......

[K-Rod]

It depends on what kind of shooting your doing. SWC for paper punching, hunting & defense. RN for accuracy & ease of feeding. I do long range pistol shooting with 38spl. I use the 358430 out to 200yrds out of a Model 14 with the 8 3/8 barrel. When I first started, I used the 358477 SWC. One day I read an article by Mike "The Duke" (im not going to insult him by trying to spell it. Starts with a V). He said that the RN was more accurate at long range then the SWC. So, I located a 358430 mold & did some testing at 100yrds. I had more consistent hits with the RN over the SWC. I competed in the 13th annual Elmer Keith Long Range Pistol competition this year & took 3rd place using the 358430 RN. We shot at targets from 140yrds to 200yrds. There was a 600yrd target for the guys packing more iron then my 38spl could handle. I made 9 called hits out of 12 at target out to 200yrds. During practice the day before, I could not make consistent hits with the SWC.

Of course, this is just what I experienced in my pistol. Other firearms may & im sure will perform differentially. I have a lot of SWC & RN molds. I use the one that will suit the purpose that I need filled.

[Piedmont]

K-Rod, That is interesting about the 358430 at 200 yards. Do you happen to know about what your muzzle velocity was?

[K-Rod]

K-Rod, That is interesting about the 358430 at 200 yards. Do you happen to know about what your muzzle velocity was?

My pet "Competition" load that this Model 14 likes is 3.0gr of Red Dot under the 358430 sized to .358 & CR lube. I trim all the brass to the same length but can't remember right off what it is. Each boolit is 150grs. I weigh them & remelt the ones that don't weigh out. Out of the 8 3/8 barrel they register 800-830fps through the Chrony at 2ft from the muzzle. COWW & water dropped. I've never had any leading.

Im working with the 358311 right now but I haven't been able to get it to shoot as well....yet.

This load is what my firearm likes & may not in others. Please use at your own risk.

[bangerjim]

My lever rifles and my S&W 9mm all feed VERY well with RN. Others can hand up due to ridges, cliffs, and straight areas the guns just do not like.

I have over 50% of my molds in RN. WC's cut nice clean holes............if your piece will cycle them!

LONG LIVE THE CONEHEADS!

bangerjim

[Piedmont]

My pet "Competition" load that this Model 14 likes is 3.0gr of Red Dot under the 358430 sized to .358 & CR lube. I trim all the brass to the same length but can't remember right off what it is. Each boolit is 150grs. I weigh them & remelt the ones that don't weigh out. Out of the 8 3/8 barrel they register 800-830fps through the Chrony at 2ft from the muzzle. COWW & water dropped. I've never had any leading.

Im working with the 358311 right now but I haven't been able to get it to shoot as well....yet.

This load is what my firearm likes & may not in others. Please use at your own risk.

Thanks. When you said 358430 I assumed it was the 200 grain version, which made me wonder about stability.

[K-Rod]

Thanks. When you said 358430 I assumed it was the 200 grain version, which made me wonder about stability.

Yes, I should've clarified that in my first post. Its the 150gr version. :bigsmyl2:

[sniper]

RN do chamber easier from a speedloader, for IPSC or other competitions. Who uses a wheelgun for that? Me, and I have never come in last...buuut...not in the top 10, either! ;)

[Ithaca Gunner]

I like round nose boolits just because of the way they look and shoot. They are accurate and for 99% of the handgun shooting I do they're just right. The other 1% I use either Federal Hydra-Shocks or Winchester Black Talons in my .45. The only reason I load them is, people look at you funny and pull their kids away when you walk down the street with an Ithaca trench broom or an M-1.

[singleshot]

No. Next question.

[TCTex]

:groner:....I started to put a disclaimer in my post, but thought "Naaa. Surely they'll all realize they're here": Forum> Guns & Shooting> Wheelguns, Pistols and Handcannons :kidding:

I use RN's in my rifles.

Keep 'em coming, fellas.

35W

Wheelguns, pistols and HANDCANNONS!!! [smilie=w:[smilie=w:

82964
My 35-06 LOVES the 358009! Quite possibly the most accurate bullet that barrel has ever shot!

Sorry, just had to do it… LOL

To answer your question, I shoot mostly SWC’s, LBT’s or some type of FN style bullet when possible. However, I still have a couple of autos that require a more round nose style configuration to operate. Both are older 1911 frames. One chambered in 45 and the other in 38 super. I know I could have them worked on to use a bullet with more of a FN design, but they shoot well and as the saying goes, they ant broke…

Duane

[Viper225]

It looks to me like we have very few competition Revolver shooters on here.
I shoot a lot of 38 Special loaded with 158 Round nose. S&W 686 loaded with Safariland Comp III speed loaders. Classic/SSR
I load 180 round nose for the 40 S&W. S&W 610 loaded with moon clips. ESR/Limited
I load 45acp with 230 round nose. S&W 625 loaded with moon clips. ESR/Limited

I much prefer round nose for shooting Defensive Pistol, Reactive Steel Challenge, and ICORE Matches shooting revolvers.

The reason we have several bullet designes, is because we have different purposes for the bullets.
SEMI AUTO: I always liked the H&G 68 for my 1911 shooting IPSC, IDPA, and Defensive Pistol. It makes nice clean holes in the targets, and feeds well from my 1911 Colt.
REVOLVER: For Defensive Pistol, Steel and ICORE my main concern is reloading speed. I run all my 40 S&W and 45acp brass through a Bulge Buster Die before loading because I want the moon clipped ammunition to drop freely into the cylinder. The Round Nose Bullets gets them started into the chambers the fastest.
I also hunt with my 480 Ruger Super RedHawk. I want heavy bullets with a large meplate.

Three different bullets with Three Missions. Each has a purpose. The Round Nose bullet will always be popular as long as we have Revolver Shooters shooting IDPA, IPSC, USPSA, ICORE, Steel Challenge, etc.

Bob
ICORE MO2908

[35 Whelen]

I guess I didn't think about shooting competitively. I shoot a lot of target here at the house and carry cast loads in my revolvers when working around the place in case I were to see a hog, stray dog, etc. So, for the things I use a handgun for, I just don't have much need in a RN design. Glad other do though. Guess that's why they still make the moulds!
35W

[canyon-ghost]

As usual, on this forum, if you ask the question=you get the answers. Looks like you found a lot of roundnose answers there!

[9.3X62AL]

Late to the party. Sorry about that. RN advantages in sideiron......the refill advantage has been pointed out, and that is a real net gain. The shoulders on WC and SWC bullets can pose a stumbling block to revolver refills under stressed or sped-up conditions.

Ken Waters pointed out another advantage to the RN in an article covering the 32-20 WCF in revolvers. This may be a clue to the design's inherent accuracy (e.g., Lyman 3358311) as pointed out by Char-Gar and others. Mr. Waters' thrust was that the shoulderless RN designs may by virtue of their tapered aspect self-center themselves in throats, forcing cone, and barrel of revolvers more readily than the bluff-shouldered designs. This could pay dividends in situations where clocking and alignment might be less than perfect. His remarks were made in the context of revolvers, but the same effect could be exerted in a fixed-breech autopistol barrel, self-centering in the throat more readily by design.