Distinguished Revolver bullets---can I use these?

O-kay, here we go....
I cast my own bullets, and have done so for years. My favorite load is the 200 grain LSWC HG 68 design. Extremely accurate when used with 3.5 of Clays, and 3.8 for the long line.
So, I have decided to go for Distinguished Revolver. I am very aware of the limitations on ammunition--158 gr. LSWC or LRN.
I looked, and looked, and found Lyman molds on Amazon.com. I ordered a 4 cavity block. They came today...and here they are...
http://www.lymanproducts.com/lyman/bullet-casting/mould-details.php?entryID=11
Here is my question...are these bullets OK for Distinguished Revolver, used as LSWC? Or, do I have to send them back and get a true round nose design?
Please let me know....the first registered match is coming up in June, and I need to get ready!

Those look like they should be fine. Neil at NSK Sales could say for sure.

3.1.4 Distinguished Revolver

(e) Ammunition - Any safe .38 caliber ammunition us
ing the 158 grain round nose or Semi-Wadcutter bullet
only.

The above is straight from the rulebook. I don't see that cowboy bullet falling in either category.

This is what is so frustrating. That flat point says semi-wadcutter to me. The semi-wadcutter hollow points seem to conform to the rule. But, Neil has said he would disqualify someone for using one. People don't agree on even the simple rules.

Until we have a bullet design that will hold the gun with perfect sight alignment, sight picture and trigger control, it seems like pretty much any design should be eligible. The bullet is the right weight and has a flat point which makes it a semi-wadcutter.

In my eyes, that is a round nose flat point bullet and not allowed in DR.
Clarence

To be a SWC it would need to have the small shoulder design built in just in front of the case mouth.

Either a Lyman 358311 for a LRN or the RCBS 38-150 for the SWC. Won't be exactly 158 grains, but they pass the design test.

the rules say 158 gr round nose or semi-wadcutter ONLY... not sorta-kinda. I would have to say no even though I don't want to.

DeweyHales wrote:This is what is so frustrating. That flat point says semi-wadcutter to me. The semi-wadcutter hollow points seem to conform to the rule. But, Neil has said he would disqualify someone for using one. People don't agree on even the simple rules.

Until we have a bullet design that will hold the gun with perfect sight alignment, sight picture and trigger control, it seems like pretty much any design should be eligible. The bullet is the right weight and has a flat point which makes it a semi-wadcutter.

I can't agree with your conclusion. The whole revolver match reasoning was to be a throw back to the old days of revolver shooting, when the .38 Spl ruled and these were the bullet designs in popular use. To water down these rules would kill the spirit of the original intent.

Nope, no, na na. The link shows a profile that is not a semi-wad cutter. What you have is most likely a bullet for cowboy action shooting. I would disqualify anyone using a bullet with this profile.

As much as I like the design of that bullet, I would concur with everyone else. If brought to my attention, I would DQ the ammo. The rules are pretty specific on bullet choice.
Al

So I'm new to all of this, but why does the profile matter so much?

The original rules mandated the use of 158gr RN bullets only. If memory serves me correctly, this revolver match was designed to closely resemble the stock pistols and ammo available for police use in years past.

Then, a few years back 158 RN were virtually impossible to get, so the rules were relaxed to allow 158 RN and 158 SWC. It has never been changed back to RN only.

If we want to shoot modifyed revolvers and our choice of ammo, the Harry Reeves match is the route to go.

3.1.4.e has been eliminated from the latest rule book. I have the 1 May 2012 NRA Pistol Rules handed out at Camp Perry this year. The sole reference to ammo is that the revolver must be capable of clambering and firing a 158 grain round nose or semi wad cutter .38 Special cartridge. That is it, period. No reference to " safe" or "lead" or anything else. Section 23 is also completely silent in regards to ammo. There may be an errata sheet I'm not aware of, none was provided in my registration package. Looks to me you could shoot exploding bullets as long as the revolver is capable of clambering and firing a 158 grain round nose or semi wad cutter cartridge. One may reasonably suspect a major error in the publication of the rules.

It appears that you are correct. Without any reference, .38 SPL 148 gr. hollow-based wadcutters would be allowed. I'll bet this was a big OOPS.

JMHO;

When I read the rules for distinguished revolver ammunition it is this...
158gr. LRN
158gr. SWC
Not 148gr.HBWC (which is a full wadcutter not a semi wad cutter).

Just saying.

Clarence

Pistolero wrote:3.1.4.e has been eliminated from the latest rule book. I have the 1 May 2012 NRA Pistol Rules handed out at Camp Perry this year. The sole reference to ammo is that the revolver must be capable of clambering and firing a 158 grain round nose or semi wad cutter .38 Special cartridge. That is it, period. No reference to " safe" or "lead" or anything else. Section 23 is also completely silent in regards to ammo. There may be an errata sheet I'm not aware of, none was provided in my registration package. Looks to me you could shoot exploding bullets as long as the revolver is capable of clambering and firing a 158 grain round nose or semi wad cutter cartridge. One may reasonably suspect a major error in the publication of the rules.

 Wow. That's a good find.

Current Conventional Pistol Rules show no mention of required ammunition, if I'm reading them right.

C.Perkins wrote:DR # 99

Heh. I owe you a debt of gratitude

john bickar wrote:

C.Perkins wrote:DR # 99

Heh. I owe you a debt of gratitude

John;

I was wanting #100, but I gladly accepted #99

Clarence

C.Perkins wrote:

john bickar wrote:

C.Perkins wrote:DR # 99

Heh. I owe you a debt of gratitude

John;

I was wanting #100, but I gladly accepted #99

Clarence

As I would have, were the situations reversed. Congrats on your DR!

(An inconsequential - yet amusing - sidenote: I got DQ'd/DNF'd in the first DR match I tried to shoot, because I showed up with what I had: a Colt Python and Federal 148gn wadcutter ammo.)

john bickar wrote:

Pistolero wrote:3.1.4.e has been eliminated from the latest rule book. I have the 1 May 2012 NRA Pistol Rules handed out at Camp Perry this year. The sole reference to ammo is that the revolver must be capable of clambering and firing a 158 grain round nose or semi wad cutter .38 Special cartridge. That is it, period. No reference to " safe" or "lead" or anything else. Section 23 is also completely silent in regards to ammo. There may be an errata sheet I'm not aware of, none was provided in my registration package. Looks to me you could shoot exploding bullets as long as the revolver is capable of clambering and firing a 158 grain round nose or semi wad cutter cartridge. One may reasonably suspect a major error in the publication of the rules.

 Wow. That's a good find.

Current Conventional Pistol Rules show no mention of required ammunition, if I'm reading them right.

There's the letter of the law (rule), and then there's the spirit of the law...and here, I think they are two different things: the letter of the rule doesn't make any mention of required ammunition, simply that the gun must be able to chamber and fire .38 Special cartridges loaded with those specific types of bullets. Nowhere does it say the competitor must actually use those types of bullets (or even the .38 Special casing) for Distinguished Revolver matches. So with a strict reading of the rules, one could argue that a competitor could use basically any ammo as long as the gun complied with the rules -- if someone had, for instance, a Philips & Rogers Medusa 47 (which could chamber and fire many different types of ammo, including .38 Special), they could technically use 9mm or .380 Auto or whatever.

The spirit of the rule is as mentioned before: competitors ought to use .38 Specials with round-nose or semi-wadcutter bullets, because that's what was used "back in the day".

I know many will disagree with me...but I feel that the DR & HB should shot with BASICLY STOCK guns & approximately factory loads.
If you want an equipment & ammo race there are plenty of other categories to shoot in.
Accurized guns are one thing, but I would like to accept that the next guy is on the same field as I am.

back to my dog

STEVE SAMELAK wrote:I know many will disagree with me...but I feel that the DR & HB should shot with BASICLY STOCK guns & approximately factory loads.
If you want an equipment & ammo race there are plenty of other categories to shoot in.
Accurized guns are one thing, but I would like to accept that the next guy is on the same field as I am.

back to my dog

I agree with you; that's how I got my DR badge - stock S&W revolvers (a Model 19 and a couple Model 14s) with no work done beyond basic trigger jobs, shot with 'approximately' factory loads (though I loaded them myself, I don't think anyone would think I'm trying to gain an advantage with 158gr swaged Remington LSWCs over 3.6gr AA#2 - pretty close to the widely accepted 158gr lead bullet over 3.5gr Bullseye load).

Even then, though, there is a good amount of variability permissible within the rules in manufacturers, barrel lengths, grip shapes and sizes, trigger shapes, and thus the weight and balance of the guns used, let alone the ammunition available, and even the techniques used. What worked for me may not work for someone else.

That's not to say that there shouldn't be limits - there should, and there are, and they do basically establish a level playing field.

I got distinguished shooting a 6" Colt custom shop Python using 158gr LRN American Eagle ammo.
Purchased it to shoot DR and sold it after getting distinguished.
Fired double action for the short line, what a sweet trigger.
Basically rented it for a couple years or so

Clarence

I swear I heard a referee stated that they DQ'd a DR shooter for using .357 brass for his reloads in the DR match.
 
I'm pretty sure that ref was unaware of this rule change because I asked him about the legality of me using 158gr LRN for the long line and 158gr LSWC for the short line, and he said that either of those were the legal choices.
 
Oh, by the way, the ruling was that using the different bullets for the different yard lines was OK.