double ended wadcutters ? 38 cal.

Status
Not open for further replies.

lonewolf5347

Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
495
I never use them but some one gave me a box they found they have no use for.The cal. 38 I wonder how acurate are they compared to the standard the 148Gr. double end wadcutters. My reloading manual specifies hollow base. Is there a difference?
 
I have shot a lot of the swaged Hornady DEWCs, and they seem plenty accurate. Never did a hard core DE vs HB test to be able to give you exact figures as to any differences in accuracy. Solid WCs like these and others, can be driven to much higher velocities over HB varieties, because there is no soft, thin skirt to blow out.

FWIW, if you feel like bumping up the speed a bit, give it a try. I have loaded these Hornady and other commercial "hard cast" 148 WCs to mid 900 fps velocities, and they remain accurate, and hard hitting.
 
Just load 'em up and they will be fine. I've shot thousands of them over the years. Since they are solid you can bump 'em up in velocity if you want.

Greg
 
I have one last Question I see the casters use either .357 or .358 which one would be better in the model 15 S@W
 
I buy and/or size my self cast ".38" bullets .358" for my S&W Model 60. Knowing your revolvers throat and barrel groove diameter is helpful, but I'd bet your gun will shoot .358" just fine. Now if we are talking typically "tight" Python revolvers that had groove diameters around .355", .357" might make good sense.
 
I prefer the double ended. They are easier to load right-side up.
 
I like DEWC bullets better than HBWC bullet. I hardly use nothing but DEWC when I load a wadcutter. I find myself using 158gr LSWC bullets mostly now because they can do everything.
 
When bullseye shooting the HBWC is preferred over the DEWC in 38 SPL at low velocities due to a better gas seal and the resulting lower recoil that can improve accuracy. Some still say that the WC makes a cleaner hole than the SWC and that may win the match for them when scoring. I have seen no practical difference. I use DEWC because I can load to higher velocities in the 38 SPL and 357, also they are easier to load right side up as stated. Some use the HBWC in backwards as a "wicked bad" poor mans hollow point for SD but the hollow points now made are IMHO better. I would load 'em up and shoot some paper.:D
 
For anything over slow target velocities, most folks go with the DEWC. It can be pushed pretty hard, but also loaded light for target shooting. Loaded to full potential it is not a bad round for critters. Cuts a .38 caliber hole through them.
 
The concern with HBWC's is that if you push them too hard, you can blow the front part of the bullet off and leave a ring of lead in the barrel.

Years, and I mean many years ago I was shooting at a indoor range and during cease fires I was picking up my brass and found many 38 caliber lead rings on the floor about 30 ft down range. The looked like elongated donuts of lead in 38. It took me a long time to realize that they were HBWC's bases that were being blown off and then either fell off the bullet in flight or were blown out by the next round. There were a bunch of them.

Ever since then I only load HBWC's with a maximum of 2.8 grns of bullseye. I would hate to have that happen and cause a bore restriction in one of my guns.

My experience has been that HBWC's are more accurate then DBWC's but for my purposes they are close enough. I gave up on HBWC's and went back to DBWC's and SWC's in general.
 
The DEWC were made to feed easily work through auto-bullet feeders in progressive presses. There is little - if any - overall accuracy difference between WC and DEWC, both are only slightly better at very low speeds than a SWC.

All that's needed for sized bullet diameter is to fill the bore, low pressure loads rarely obturate like mid to upper power loads tend to do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top