It is generally conceded that hollowpoints don't always expand and with loads suitable for lightweight snubbies they seldom expand. For that reason, many recommend cast bullets with a large meplate. Nothing has a larger meplate than a full wadcutter and the solid base version can be loaded as fast as any bullet of similar weight, so why not?
I recall reading many years ago, when .38 special was the standard cop gun, that they commonly used the 158 roundnose for duty and 148 wadcutters for practice. I wonder if they might have done better to reverse that. Granted that wadcutters would not be good for rapid reloads with a speed loader, but for personal defence, reloading is seldom an issue, except maybe for Bruce Willis.:D

It is generally conceded that hollowpoints don't always expand and with loads suitable for lightweight snubbies they seldom expand. For that reason, many recommend cast bullets with a large meplate. Nothing has a larger meplate than a full wadcutter and the solid base version can be loaded as fast as any bullet of similar weight, so why not?
I recall reading many years ago, when .38 special was the standard cop gun, that they commonly used the 158 roundnose for duty and 148 wadcutters for practice. I wonder if they might have done better to reverse that. Granted that wadcutters would not be good for rapid reloads with a speed loader, but for personal defence, reloading is seldom an issue, except maybe for Bruce Willis.:D FYI 38 cal 148 hollow base wadcutters loaded inverted DO EXPAND in the human body & turn everything to mush according to a homicide detective I knew who investigated just such a murder.

FYI 38 cal 148 hollow base wadcutters loaded inverted DO EXPAND in the human body & turn everything to mush according to a homicide detective I knew who investigated just such a murder.



What is your definition of "every thing to mush" I would also preclude that penetration is minimal as the 38 special is not considered to be a great penetrator at best and at what velocities are these bullet being driven inorder to give such incredible performance...

I have tried the hollow based WCs reversed in wetpac, sometime they expand but mostly they tumble. I was referring to solid base or "double ended" wadcutters, preferably hard cast and loaded warm. I think the reversed wadcutter is an "old wives tale".

Better than RN, but be careful loading DEWC's warm (and definately don't load HBWC's warm). Tend to shoot wildly past a certain point...and if the gun is slighly out of time, will spit lead from the flash gap (as well as put a bit of extra strain on the forcing cone).

Have got reversed HBWC's to shoot well, but there is a trick to it (and it's probably not worth the doing).
Set up a luber-sizer with a .355" die.
Set up a mechanical stop adjusted so only HALF the bullet enters the die.
Size bullets hollow base first...which will size only 1/2 the bullet to .355".
Load them backwardes (with the .355" section sticking out). Seat to the sized section and crimp.

This will leave .355" diameter seated out of the case...which will aloy you to chamber them and allows for more case volume. Basically, used loads for swaged 158gr. RNL (which seat about to the same depth, leaviong the same case volume).

Yep...will lead up horribly after a few cylindersfull. But just how many people do you plan on having to shoot before taking a break to clean your gun?

Tim Sundles over at Buffalo Bore Ammunition has a 150 hard cast wadcutter in the line just for the reasons noted in this thread. Here is the link:

http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm#standard38

"Item 20D utilizes a very hard cast 150gr. WAD CUTTER bullet. The bullet is made hard, so it won’t deform or mushroom. It cuts/crushes a “cookie cutter”, full diameter hole in human flesh just like it does on a paper target. It penetrates deeply (roughly 14 to 16 inches in human tissue) and its full diameter profile maximizes blood loss as it cuts and crushes (not slips or slides) its way through tissue. Although I’ve never been shot with a full profile wad cutter bullet, I must assume that the initial impact of that wide flat nosed bullet, is crushingly formidable. As a teenager, I took to the woods on a regular basis and killed many a critter with heavily loaded 38SPL wad cutters’. The effect of a full profile wad cutter on small game was obvious and amazing, compared to regular round nosed bullets. That flat nose, literally hammers living things. These bullets are hard and properly lubed and will NOT lead your barrel. Note my velocities from real world “over the counter” revolvers—NOT TEST BARRELS!
a. S&W mod. 60, 2 inch barrel—868 fps (251 ft. lbs.)
b. S&W mod. 66, 2.5 inch barrel—890 fps (264 ft. lbs.)
c. Ruger SP101, 3 inch barrel—961 fps (308 ft. lbs.)
d. S&W Mt. Gun, 4 inch barrel—1005 "

Ralph

Thanks for the link, that is exactly what I had in mind, but I will likely load my own, that Buffalo Bore stuff is a bit costly if one does much shooting.

If you're going to use cast lead bullets for self defense, there are two advantages to SWC bullets over full wadcutters. The first -- and the least important -- is that wadcutters lose stability at longer ranges. This seems all wrong because they are, after all, used in target loads, but it is nonetheless true that semi-wadcutters are more stable. The main reason for a full wadcutter is to cut a full-diameter hole in paper, something that can turn a 9 score into a 10, a 10 into an X.

More importantly, SWCs are also far more stable in living flesh -- in other words, they tend to track straight, while wadcutters are much more prone to veer off course. Wadcutters may well cut a bigger hole -- although what is a fact on paper may not be a fact in flesh -- but the SWC is going to go deeper and straighter. There are plenty of heavy hunting bullets on the market for revolvers right now, and some of them have enormous meplats -- but, they all have some up-front taper like a SWC. There are practical reasons for that characteristic.

I have some real problems with what pisgah just said...a wadcutter will shoot sub 1" groups at 50 yards....and by that I mean atleast a 10 round group...from a test bbl. AND you score the bullet's mark on the target, not the hole. For example, w/a 9mm, you have the hole and then around that is about a 1/16" smudge on the target, the smudge gets scored...if it doesn't I pull $3 out and the target goes straight to the referee. The hole is smaller that the bullet, but the bullet leaves/makes a mark on the target the same size as it is. Sometimes it is a real bear to see that smudge on a black target. The Rule book says that the score is such and such if, "The leaded edge of the bullet" touches the scoring ring...and they are scored the way...even w/a jacketed bullet.

Wadcutters have a terrible ballistic coeficient and loose speed like crazy and drip like a rock, but the are exceedingly accurate.

I agree w/what you said about the SWC on flesh...a pretty good bullet.

Wadcutters we used for defense, loaded backwards, inside your own house. Outside of your house, use a 125 gn JHP loaded about 2-300 fps faster...or use a magnum and 500 fps faster (most defense magnum loads are between .38 and REAL .357 loads).

It's a bit technical, but take a look at

www.tuffsteel.com/Ballistics/bullfly/anom.htm#unstablemuzzle (http://www.tuffsteel.com/Ballistics/bullfly/anom.htm#unstablemuzzle)

Be sure to click on the icon and check out the illustration of dynamic instability. Depending on the firearm and exact load, instability may not be any problem at short range. But the wadcutter is inherently dynamically unstable. A Google search of "wadcutter bullet stability" will get you enough reading to last all month.

By selecting a WC loade (even loaded fast) are tading penetration of faster energy transfer. Reversing the HP will farther reduce penetration and increase the rate of energy transfer...even if it tumbles rather than expands.

OF course, that might be a bad trade if your target is fat...or in heavy clothes...or you strike the meaty part of the arm before the "good stuff"... and tumblijng means a bullet that doesn't penetrate in a straight line.

But some people feel these trade-offs are worth it. I'm not one of them, preferring two holes to one, but do allow folks to make their own choices and live with the consequences.

But some people feel these trade-offs are worth it. I'm not one of them, preferring two holes to one, but do allow folks to make their own choices and live with the consequences.


Or not.....

True enough...get it wrong and you don't get a second chance.

Good penetration, small hole

http://www.brassfetcher.com/Buffalo%20Bore%20Ammunition%20150gr%20standard%20p ressure%20Hard%20Cast%20Wad%20Cutter.html

Good penetration, bigger hole

http://www.brassfetcher.com/158%20grain%20+P%20lead%20HP%20(test%202).html

Note that both barrels were 1 7/8 and no mush

Thats why I use the old Remington 158gr SWCHP +p

The factory wadcutters are not fast enough. Id say at least 800 fps would be good. The factory wadcutters come out of a 2 inch barrel about 580 fps. The standard 38 RNL would be better. At least you get some penetration. If you must have a handload then one of the soft swaged 158 gr lead HP with a plus + powder charge might give some expansion. Or just get the Buffalo Bore for carry. Replace it once a year. Thats what I would do if I only had a 38 Spec.

I haven’t had a lot of time for interneting but I have enjoyed lurking on this thread and the other one about the .45 auto bullets – which I cannot find at the moment!
A good article on using wadcutters for self defense was written by William C. Davis Jr. for the American Rifleman: “Wadcutter’s from 2” the Best Defense Load?”
I believe an LBT style bullet such as those cast by Marshal is far superior but we each make our choice.
As far as accuracy goes it takes a good revolver shooting excellent ammunition to shoot 3” ten shot groups at fifty yards – from a machine rest. For accuracy testing ammunition, bolt action ammunition test fixtures as made by Alton Dinon and others will shoot very small ten shot groups. Nick may have more recent information but it takes very high quality home cast bullets equal the accuracy of machine swaged hollow base wadcutters.
I intended to post in the .45 Auto thread that Alton Dinant designed the 217-grain 45266 semi wadcutter bullet for Lyman and this bullet shot quite well in the 1911 pistol. I’ll attach a picture of a ten shot group shot in Dinan’s test barrel which simulated the 1911 barrel bushing support. These were loaded with 3.5 grains of Hercules Bullseye.

If the wad cutter really worked in short barreled revolvers as a self defense ammo would Speer have developed short barreled ammo using a gold dot bullet?

The history of firearm projectiles is an interesting study. "Self defence" narrows it down abit. I'm not hard to kill(other than the fact that I will fight back)! Put a BB through my eye and into my brain and I will fall down. A 22 long rifle in my chest makes me a dead guy on the floor.
"Jacketed Hollow Point(JHP)" is a "BUZZWORD"! Strikes fear and contempt into the hearts of those that consider firearms "bad things".

Consider the Winchester "Black Talon". It was a very well designed JHP. The name alone took it off the market. "Golden Sabre" is "politicly correct enough" to survive the media. Both are "just a JHP with different designs".

Note to Marshall Stanton: Beartooth is a "scarry" name! I suggest powderpuff or similar to escape all of this.

Cheezywan

Cheezwan, you may not be aware of this but, the Country singer Trace Atkins was shot in the heart with a 38 Special by his wife (ex wife now) several years ago and he is alive and still perform still performing

Don't decide to give up the "ghost" that easily...

The use of .38 Special wadcutters for self defense was discussed in an article for the October 1979 issue of the American Rifleman by William C. Davis Jr. The article entitled: “Wadcutters from 2” the Best Defense Load?” The subject of velocity, expansion and reversed hollow base wadcutters was discussed in a short but well researched article.


What about the most important aspect of it all penetration?

Store bought handgun ammo has improved in the past 30 years, I think. :)

Yes it has, Richard. And it's a prescient point.

Loading HBWC bullets backwards was a move of near desperation due to the appalling failure-to-stop record of 158 roundnose bullets then in use (by policy) in police guns.

But bullet design has come a looooong way since those grim days. It's come that long way precisely to avoid any need to craft oddball loads. Today, I'd simply buy ammo designed for short-barrel revolver use. It's out there, it works as advertised and it's cheap compared to a funeral. If you reload, it's a simple matter to develop PRACTICE loads that match the recoil and impact point of the good stuff - and terminal performance is moot in practice ammo.

Of all .38 Special loads, the 158 LSWCHP+P has quite a good record. Most people can shoot it very well, even in practice. In a high-adrenaline defense situation, few would even notice recoil or blast heavier than these loads produce.

For those truly unable to shoot more powerful stuff, factory wadcutter loads are adequate for indoor defense, or for very close-in defense anywhere. Adequate at best, I might point out. But if that's all one can tolerate, then it's the best choice available.

Massad Ayoob quoted the late Jim Cirrillo as saying something like "A 160 grain wadcutter in the eye socket tends to end gunfights pretty quick."

But someone else said "The only sure stopper is a super sonic telephone pole." And then they went on to discuss--and recommend--a 22 Long Rifle Walther semi auto!

You kinda need to look at effective handgun hunting ammo...a big meplat does the damage and higher velocity if possible. For anti-personnel, I'd investigate Round Nose Flat Point Cowboy ammo. Not near the semantics problems like "black talon" or whatever the media is crying about currently(and is a quicker re-load than wadcutters!) "We all love Hoppy, Gene and Roy...and the Lone Ranger too!"

I don't carry, so it's a moot point. If I did, it would be the commercial Cowboy ammo....I shoot a lot of similar reloads. BUT I'd love to be able to buy commercial ammo with a 44 full wadcutter at 900 FPS. It sure makes nice holes in my targets!....and probably anything else!

. . . BUT I'd love to be able to buy commercial ammo with a 44 full wadcutter at 900 FPS. It sure makes nice holes in my targets!....and probably anything else!

Just roll your own. Use Beartooth WFN's or, if you want the lighter target full wadcutters, NEI has a mold.

As to wadcutters for self-defense in a .38 snubby, they may still make sense. This information (http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs9.htm) is 10 years old, but I don't know that it has been superceded by new ammo developments in that time?"2-inch .38 snubs
There seems to be no JHP bullet cartridge that is capable of providing a reasonable balance of adequate penetration and reliable expansion. A bullet that expands will not penetrate deeply enough, whereas a bullet that does not expand will probably overpenetrate.

"As a result, we feel the best cartridge for .38 snubbies is the 148 grain wadcutter target load. (MacPherson, Duncan: Bullet Penetration, Ballistic Publications, El Segundo, California, 1994. p. 247, Figure 10-2 Cylinder Bullet Penetration Depth.) The sharp-edged shoulder of the full wadcutter design provides the best penetration and wounding efficiency for this gun/cartridge combination.

"Speer offers a total metal jacket (FMJ) 148 grain wadcutter in its Lawman line of ammunition. As opposed to a lead wadcutter, the shoulder of the Speer copper-jacketed bullet is more likely to retain its sharp shoulder on impact. The downside of the Speer . . . {cartridge uses}. . . the less sensitive "Cleanfire primer" which may not provide reliable cartridge ignition in guns that have had trigger work, a lighter mainspring installed, or bobbed hammer."

The Brass Fetcher site has some more current gellatin tests which may shed some light on the effectiveness of newer cartridges. This link is specifically for snub nosed 38s. There are other test results also available.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/38special2inchbarrel.html

If one might really be in need of a "snubby" concealed revolver for defense purposes, why would he not be carrying a small frame .357 mag.? I'm not talking "air weight" here, but general concealed carry. There may be real questions about the extent of the advantages of a .357 mag./2" bbl., but there must be some.

Rev

The Brass Fetcher site has some more current gellatin tests. . .

Richard,

I have looked at the Brass Fetcher tests before, and have one basic problem with them. The single-shot examples have no statistical significance. It probably matters less to longer guns, but we had a thread awhile back on a snubby that was producing something like 150 fps extreme spread in near-muzzle velocity. When you're only running around 600 fps maximum velocity in the first place, that's a lot of spread in the form of random velocity reduction. It constitutes losing almost a third of the kinetic energy from one round to the next.

I ran some analysis in QuickLOAD and found many common pistol powders were still in the middle of their pressure curve peak when the bullet base left the muzzle of a snubby. That is the region in which longer barrels let the powder make up somewhat for ignition startup differences, so variances in everything from case crimp strength to cylinder throat dimensions to powder charge weight and position in the cases at firing all contributed a lot more to velocity variance in that short barrel than they do in longer ones.

In the case of the Brass Fetcher tests, I would like to see about 30 rounds of each cartridge put through the guns. I would start with the gun tipped up before firing for each of half the shots, and with it tipped down before firing for the other half, to get powder over the primer and away from it, alternately. I would clean after each cylinder full, and would rotate which chamber fired the first shot, so possible effects on bullet pull in different chambers got averaged in. With all that done, the variance and extreme spread in velocity, penetration and expansion would reflect how much of a gamble was being taken on performance of an given shot?

The above test protocol would reflect quite a cost in gelatin making, but if you liked the performance of one of the rounds in the single shot test, handloading will let you work to replicate its velocity, then expend effort to achieve that performance consistently. You can run your own 30 round strings over a chronograph to prove that.

Interesting unclenick, I haven't chronographed many loads from snubbies, but I once did some accuracy testing with a scope mounted on the frame of a Dan Wesson .357 with 2 1/2" and 6" barrels. I found the short barrel to be quite accurate but only with one load, whereas the 6" was at least reasonably accurate with every load tried. My overall impression has been that accuracy from snubbies "can" be quite good but they are finicky about loads. The velocity variation you describe could very well explain that.