Quantcast

Heavy for Caliber?

Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by Catpop, May 13, 2019.

  1. Catpop

    Catpop Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Messages:
    1,907
    Location:
    Jack's Neck, NC
    i saw this statement in another thread and wondered what is the exact mathematical formula to make a boolit “heavy for caliber”.
     
  2. gotboostvr

    gotboostvr Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Messages:
    2,478
    Location:
    Buckeye Country
    It just means that it's heavier than the "standard" loading.

    180gr is heavy for a 357, but light in a 44.
     
  3. StrawHat

    StrawHat Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,792
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    It can be difficult to define “standard” loads but usually the load a fixed sighted revolver is tuned to, from the factory.

    Kevin
     
  4. CraigC
    • Contributing Member

    CraigC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Messages:
    17,738
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    Sectional density is used to quantify a bullet's weight relative to its diameter. Typically "standard weight" handgun bullets are around .17 to .19. The following are what 'may' be considered standard weights for their caliber:

    .357 - 158gr
    .44 - 240-250gr
    .45 - 250-260gr

    Anything heavier would be considered "heavy for caliber". Typically:

    .357 - 180-200gr
    .44 - 300-355gr
    .45 - 300-360gr

    It tends to be bullets in the .25 to .27 range that exhibit the deepest penetration. This is where the .357 and .41Mag's fall short because they just don't have the capacity for a bullet that heavy.
     
  5. BobWright

    BobWright Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2014
    Messages:
    1,426
    Location:
    Memphis, Tennessee
    Craig put it very well. Look at old ammunition catalogs, those new enough to include .357 and .44 Magnum cartridges, and note the bullet weights listed for factory ammunition. These are nominal weights for each cartridge. Anything more, or less, than weights shown are considered either light or heavy.

    Bob Wright
     
    Dave T and CraigC like this.
  6. StrawHat

    StrawHat Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,792
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    Never seen it explained in that way. It makes a bit of sense.

    Kevin
     
    adcoch1 and CraigC like this.
  7. SharpDog

    SharpDog Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,682
    Location:
    Tennessee
    My preference depends on caliber:

    A 9mm 'heavy-for-caliber' 9mm 147gr Fed, Tactical HST +p performs very similarly to a .40 S&W 165 gr Fed HST standard pressure load. So these are my GOTO loads for EDC / HD and even general field use

    In .357 I like the ole standard 125 gr 'light for caliber' load to mitigate recoil and possibly gain a little extra range and accuracy. these are field use

    For .44 mag I like the medium for caliber 210 gr loads to reduce recoil and still pack a punch for our eastern bears.These are GOTO for field use when hunting.
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2019
  8. Catpop

    Catpop Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Messages:
    1,907
    Location:
    Jack's Neck, NC
    So sectional density needs to be known prior to figuring light or heavy weight for caliber?

    What is the formula for computing sectional density of a given boolit? Is it hard to compute?

    Never mind, I think I found it on Internet.

    Now I wonder how certain grain weights were found as standard for caliber?
     
  9. Waveski

    Waveski Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Messages:
    1,589
    Location:
    43 north
    Error deleted
     
  10. .455_Hunter

    .455_Hunter Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,672
    Location:
    Colorado Front Range
    I have no idea what constitutes a heavy "boolit".
     
    mcb66, MaxP, Catpop and 1 other person like this.
  11. Catpop

    Catpop Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Messages:
    1,907
    Location:
    Jack's Neck, NC
    Now I’ve got more questions than my original post asked? Light or heavy to standard weight.

    Who/why/how derived the “standard for caliber weight” in the beginning? Gun manufacturers?Ammo manufacturers? I’m sure there is much more to this than arbitrary picking a number?
     
  12. CraigC
    • Contributing Member

    CraigC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Messages:
    17,738
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    It wasn't arbitrary. Mankind learned long ago that a conical bullet was more effective than a round ball. What is considered "standard" weight or "nominal" now was pretty much determined 150yrs ago or more. It's only really been in the last 30yrs that we've learned the utility of very heavy bullets and that your big bore cartridges are most efficient with heavy for caliber bullets.
     
    gotboostvr and Dave T like this.
  13. murf

    murf Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    4,018
    Location:
    arizona
    a standard weight was used so manufacturers could regulate fixed-sighted guns to a specific weight bullet (not a lot of bullet shapes back in the day), and ammo makers could regulate their ammo to those fixed-sighted guns. still a good idea with some cartridges, imo.

    murf
     
    Catpop and gotboostvr like this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice