.38SPL HBWC for revolver

First topic message reminder :

I load .38SPL HBWC for a S&W Model 52-2, and am considering developing a different load for a Dan Wesson .357, 6" revolver using 38SPL.
Any historical advantage to developing a SWC load for the Wesson, or will the existing HBWC shoot just as accurate as a SWC?
2.8g of WST, 148g HBWC from Precision Delta, Starline brass and CCI SPP.

AP,

Many thanks for sharing the details of your testing program. I think we all can learn and build from this particular data set. I think we have some room for some good discussion. 

From my interpretation the following are what I interpret from my reading of the information to be true of the testing. Please make corrections if anything is misinterpreted.

In the targets posted the brass used was NOS factory Remington (I assume with the twin cannelure), newer (but per given timeline pre-vista outdoors acquisition) Remington, Fiocchi, GFL, and Western (as seen in FC60s load). As a second assumption all of the brass with the exception of the newer factory loaded Remmington passes the gauge pin check. I would assume the brass used in the reloads was once or lightly fired?

Moving on to bullets, with the exception of the DEWC and potentially the factory loaded Remington, all the projectiles used were the “gold standard” Remington match bullet that was previously available, but not so much now. 

The powder charges and crimp amount and style were “the same” between all the given AP loads with the FC60 loaded being a slightly different combination. For my assumption of “the same” in regards to crimp, I am assuming negligible difference in case length.

Now on to some commentary.
I think in regards to the projectile used in the testing course given, I think the conclusion reached is reasonable. However, I think that a critical detail is being glossed over, a differences in projectiles. Not all HBWC projectiles are the same. The old Remingtons are different from other commercial options that are available now. Specifically in regards to this thread the OP mentioned using Precision delta projectiles, I currently do not have any experience with them, so I can not accurately give my assessment of them. 

These are some 148hbwc that I have on hand, from left to right “current production” Hornady, “old style” Hornady, Remington, and current production Zero. 



Note that the projectile length is visually different, the nose of them are different and the skirts are also visually different. Now if you break out some measurement tools, you can more objectively compare some measurements. One important thing to note is that the current production Hornady and Zero projectiles have a taper at the base of the bullet, whereas the older style Hornady and the Remington's do not. Now one thing that I currently do not have the ability to measure is the hardness of the alloy used in the projectiles, but at some point in the future this is something that I would like to investigate. 

This shows the importance of understanding details of other peoples testing and how it may relate to your own. My testing is not nearly as complete as that given (as I am still settling on some variables as time permits)and as such I don’t currently have a full test report, but I can say that the ammo I have loaded in Starline brass has preformed just as well as that in the RP cases, and neither of these batches of ammo have held me back in matches. I will clarify that my testing is more in the early stages (compared to that given) and potentially I could gain some better performance with some tweaks. This has been a good discussion and I will be studying the DEWC discussion closer, that is a different puzzle itself. AP and FC60, I appreciate the time that went into the testing, thanks for sharing.

I specifically decided to delay my response in hopes that others would be willing to share some testing data. I will again encourage all who can to perform at least some basic testing of your ammo before making claims that something “shoots great” or “doesn’t shoot well”.

All that said I would like to shift gears and agree with LenV that a load with a good jacketed bullet is far less hassle. I like the 158xtps myself.

jwax. FWIW I also own and shoot a Dan Wesson 357 6 inch and have found it doesn't like HBWC ammo, even at 25 yards.  The same ammo that shoots very well out of my model 52 shoots like crap in the DW.

In my experience and my gun 38 spl 158 grain lead round nose shoots best.

PhotoEscape wrote:

LenV wrote:My vote is for Hornady 110gr XTP.

Len,

Leaving aside the accuracy and other pros, can this bullet be legally used for any competition, whether in CMP or NRA matches?

AP

Jim answered that question for you but I have another answer. Of course I agree with Jim but I would add. The XTP bullet is legal for every match that 148gr HBWC are legal for. Which is what the OP was asking about.

chiz1180 wrote:Now on to some commentary.
I think in regards to the projectile used in the testing course given, I think the conclusion reached is reasonable. However, I think that a critical detail is being glossed over, a differences in projectiles. Not all HBWC projectiles are the same. The old Remingtons are different from other commercial options that are available now. Specifically in regards to this thread the OP mentioned using Precision delta projectiles, I currently do not have any experience with them, so I can not accurately give my assessment of them.

Objectives of the testing I asked FC60 to perform were somewhat different than identifying specificity of loading all available projectiles in particular caliber / form and addressing all related variables like brass cases, primers, etc.  Prior to asking FC60 to perform test, I studied available data and did my own testing.  This is when I identified that combination of Starline cases with Remington 148gr HBWC is not viable, especially when new brass is being used.  However even once or couple times fired properly sized (Lee custom sizing die) Starline brass produced swaging of the bottom portion of the bullet (cases were sized, bullets then seated, and then accurately removed).  Starline didn't work for 0.361" OD at the bottom of the bullet and 0.625" OAL.  Zero 148gr HBWCs have 0.358" OD at the bottom and same OAL as R-Ps.  These 0.003" difference might make the difference in usability of Starline brass ........... provided it is sized the same as for R-P bullets.  However (IMO) in order to achieve best accuracy (@50Y especially) sizing of cases must be adjusted to match bullet's OD.  There are several other parameters that should be accounted for - brass spring back and wall thickness just to name two of them.  So, the point here is - yes, Starline cases might be usable for loading 148gr HBWC given particular parameters of the bullets.  However it requires understanding on part of reloader of the all elements that result in producing accurate ammo.  And that was one of the main objectives for me - developing understanding and concepts for loading 38WC ammo, and for that matter ammo in other calibers too.  I must admit though, that my recent venture into reloading of 32 S&W Long WC ammo necessitated some adjustments.  This caliber kicked my rear end big time.  But that is for different times.  

Only after I identified optimal components, and settled on loading parameters, I asked FC60 to do more comprehensive testing then I could do myself.  Objectives were to identify general accuracy of my ammo, and trying to identify what affects it as well as what doesn't.  Minimizing number of variables (i.e. different bullets, different brass, different primers, etc.) provide for that.

And that brings me to the point of writing this post.  This forum is incredible source for data, and many forum members are readily share it.  That provides a head start for many things BullsEye, including reloading.  When I read LenV's post about using Hornady XTP 110gr bullets in 38 SPL load, I accept it as "ready for implementation" project.  Obviously, I will test it in my revolver(s), and decide yes / no.  However, I do not need to spend time extensively researching.  Time is what I'm is craving for...

Once again, it is all IMO.

AP

Bmitch996 wrote:jwax. FWIW I also own and shoot a Dan Wesson 357 6 inch and have found it doesn't like HBWC ammo, even at 25 yards.  The same ammo that shoots very well out of my model 52 shoots like crap in the DW.

In my experience and my gun 38 spl 158 grain lead round nose shoots best.

Thanks! My Wesson doesn't seem to have a preference, all heads shoot similar. Or maybe it's me?

Thanks to all for this exhaustive deep dive into the ways of the HBWC!

FWIW, I have old Remington heads, and they are dirty, banged up, and shoot poorly. Thus, my shift to Precision Delta, which shoot better than me. They're clean, and don't foul the loader like the ugly old Remingtons did.

AP, I used to shoot Penns 148 dewc with Starline brass and found out they didn't lead my chambers as much if I didn't size the cases first. Of course I didn't have the improved expander die back then. Now I use Winchester double cannelure brass and Star or Zero hbwc. Without sizing, the Star's can be seated and not feel extra resistance, whereas the Zero's I can feel a little resistance when it approaches the second cannelure. I do not use a heavy crimp on these because I figure that's what the cannelure does. I haven't tested for accuracy other than with bags, and I don't get the leading. 
Stan

chopper wrote:AP, I used to shoot Penns 148 dewc with Starline brass and found out they didn't lead my chambers as much if I didn't size the cases first. Of course I didn't have the improved expander die back then. Now I use Winchester double cannelure brass and Star or Zero hbwc. Without sizing, the Star's can be seated and not feel extra resistance, whereas the Zero's I can feel a little resistance when it approaches the second cannelure. I do not use a heavy crimp on these because I figure that's what the cannelure does. I haven't tested for accuracy other than with bags, and I don't get the leading. 
Stan

Stan,
AFAIK it is perfectly fine to use brass without sizing if loaded ammo is being shot from the same semi-auto pistol every time.  I would be hesitant to use the same approach in revolver(s) as charging holes most definitely do not have identical IDs or in different semi-autos as chambers are not identical either.

Penn's and other DEWC are typically much shorter than HBWC bullets for obvious reason.  Hence this type of bullets is less affected by where internal tapering of the case starts.

AP