Hollow point .357 GB 175 gr KSWC

[shooting on a shoestring]

I cast a batch of the GB 175 mould for use in .357s. I used WWs and quenched them in water, sized .358, lubed with Felix lube, drilled 1/8 inch hollow points about 0.200" deep, loaded over 14.0 grs 2400, fired through 4&5/8" .357 Blackhawk, velocity chronographed 1347 fps.

I shot a gallon jug of drinking water at 5 paces, jug was shredded impressively, not enough water to make a puddle, bullet fragmented and left about 6 small ragged exit holes at various places on the backside of the jug. I recovered the base of the boolit, weighs 97 grains.

I'm thinking of using hollow pointed 175 KSWCs in this revolver for possible use against small bears, big pigs and perhaps badguys. The fragmented boolit was impressive against the water jug, but I don't want it to fragment against bad critters.

I have a small supply of lino, some fairly pure Pb, some scrap firing range Pb, and WWs.

Has anyone found a good simple alloy to get expansion and not fragmentation for a .357 HP'd boolit running around 1300?

[quietmike]

If it were me i'd try not hollowpointing the bullet first, and see how well it expands. Then I'd try different levels of heat treating instead of water quenching. Maybe try#2 alloy.

I doubt if you can get expansion w/o fragmentation with a HP at that velocity especially a SWC HP. YMMV.

[Ricochet]

I agree with the above. In .44 Magnum, what seems to work best are rather diluted wheelweight to pure lead alloys, in the range of about 1:3 to 1:5 WW:PL, heat treated. With hollowpoints they still blow up and leave a nice small "button mushroom" from the solid base. Solid semiwadcutters make big pretty 7/8" mushrooms.

[docone31]

I second the diluted batch. I would mix the range with the wheel weights and try to find a good blend.
Just my 2C on this.
Usually, hollow points on jacketed bullets are soft, but retained by the jacket. Too hard lead, and you have pieces.

[Dale53]

My personal preference for bears, hogs, and deer is and will be a semi-wadcutter at standard full velocities up to a heavier SWC (for instance, in .44 mag 240-310grs) with NO hollow point. I want penetration, not bullet break up. The wide flat nose of a good SWC design gives me all the "smack" I need plus plenty of penetration.

Dale53

[GabbyM]

Deer and Hogs are one thing. But for bears you really do want to heat treat them hard and tough so they go through. A hollow point will dump most of it's energy before getting to the vitals. A 240 pound sow generally has the hair , hide then 4” of fat then huge ribs. A .357 mag doesn't have the energy to spare on all that. For instance your average 180gr high shock soft point in a 30-06 rifle performs pitifully on a bear.
Some people may have different experience but that's all I've seen.

IMHO Hollow points work well on small critters. Where the solid bullet would have passed through without dumping it's energy. But on the big fat ones they are going to catch the bullet for you.

[JIMinPHX]

Did you ever see the plates of muscle on a bear once the skin is removed? Those things are like plates of armor. For bears, stay with a flat point. Hollow points don’t go nearly deep enough to get in where you want them to hit.

[docone31]

Many, many times I have wondered on nose design.
The semi wad cutters, have that blunt nose. Spitzers are sharp. I wondered, if, instead of an hollow point, if a concave well was used. Not deep, just rather than flat, dished in.
It would seem to me that instead of fragments produced by an hollow point, there would be a deformation, at least at the nose.
When I have recovered cast bullets, they really seemed intact. That suprised me. I had thought, being lead, they would be at least fairly flat. Not so. Slight nose deformation apparently relative to backdrop.
It would seem, that a concave nose would produce hydrostatic shock. An hollow point would expand and unjacketed would fragment. The main point is producing a wound channel.
I suspect Keith and a myriad of others have at least tested this to some extent. An hollow point mold, the inner walls of the casting have the stelletite layer. Drilling the hollow point does not have this. Pictures of the Lyman Devastator show decent retention. Hollow point molds are a pain though. Hot, lots of parts, lots of defects.
Bullet design is a critical factor. A spire point, would to my mind swage inwards on impact. It does not seem to be a constant factor on recovered rounds. It bends, flattens to a side, etc.
I have almost never recovered a perfect mushroom, even from jacketed. Some I recovered were almost perfect rounds. However, when I recovered a ball, or Mine', that was different. Of course pure lead is used here. I use Wheel Weight, water dropped. Hard little suckers.
Being on this forum, and having done castings for a time, I can read the recovered bullets a lot better. Things make sense.
I use lead pads to planish soft metals. However shooting them, not the pads, bullets, they recover like tough little things. Most of their shape is intact. Ergo, jacketed vs., cast we are literally talking Apples and Oranges here. Even though the same rifle is used. It is not like jacketed vs swaged copper.
This all keeps me thinking. Almost as good as coffee in the morning. Mix the two. Yeah ha!