How About This Old School Bullet?

[Seedtick]

Any of ya'll have any experience with this bullet?

Remington 158 Grain Semi-Jacketed Hollow Point



What do you think about them?

Do they perform okay at both 38 special and 357 velocities or are they better at one than the other?

I figure there are probably some better choices now a days but would you feel comfortable with these in a carry load?

What about a short range deer load?

Thanks in advance.

Seedtick

 

[Steve C]

I've shot a lot of them. They shoot fine in both the 38 sl and .357 mag. Velocity from the .38 spl is marginal except with old and hot loads in long barreled guns, I shoot these form .357 mag pistols where the added pressure isn't an issue.. With current load data you can't get them up to the 1K fps muzzle velocity you need for reliable expansion. This isn't a problem with the .357 mag.

 

[7.62 Nato]

Be sure not use semi-jacketed bullets with a light powder load. The lead core can seperate from the jacket especially in a rifle, carbine, or long barreled pistol and become a barrel obstruction. Next round could be a kaboom.

 

[RidgwayCO]

I've got a bunch of them for my .357 Magnum and I like them a lot (but I prefer cast or swaged lead in the .38 Special). Mine measure .3565" diameter, which I thought was a problem until the Remington technician said it wasn't... What was a problem was my Remington .357 brass couldn't be sized down enough to hold them securely (necks too thin). I fixed that problem by using Starline brass. But I was pretty surprised when the Remington tech assured me that all was well within their normal tolerances. I mean, shouldn't your company's bullets fit tightly in your company's brass?

 

[ReloaderFred]

"I mean, shouldn't your company's bullets fit tightly in your company's brass?"


It will, if your sizing die reduces the case neck enough and the expander doesn't make it too large. There is a lot of variation in sizing dies and expanders.

Hope this helps.

Fred

 

[RidgwayCO]

Fred, I won't go into all the things I did and checked to figure out what was wrong with the combo of an undersized Remington bullet and thin-necked Remington brass. I'd never had a problem with those RCBS .357 dies before, and they're not a problem now. Suffice to say it was easier in the end to replace the brass with Starline and keep the bullets than to mess with the Remington brass. Also, the experience has put me off Remington brass indefinitely. Rational? Maybe not. But if they can't keep the dimensions of their components within some minimum standard, then what else are they skimping on?

 

[ReloaderFred]

I wasn't faulting your process, only pointing out what can occur.

All machine tools are made to certain specifications. As long as they fall within the parameters set for each tool, then they're considered "in spec".

With that said, what I was pointing out was that if a sizing die is at maximum specification, it won't size a case as much as one that is at minimum specification. Add into that the specifications for expanders. If one is at the maximum, it will expand the case mouth more than one made at the minimum specification. The two of them working together cause what's known as "tolerance stacking". This can be quite a spread if both are at maximum specifications, or even minimum specifications.

In .38/.357 calibers, I have about half a dozen sizing dies. Some will work well on all brass, and some won't, due to the differing diameters of each one. This can, and does, occur within the same brand, since it's the nature of machining hard materials. A new cutter will produce a different size than a worn cutter, but both are within specifications.

I use a lot of Remington brass in many calibers, along with almost all other brands, (except A-Merc). Over the last 47 years of reloading I've learned some of the nuances of different brands of not only brass, but the tools used to reload them. You might say I'm cheap, since I'm determined to find a way to use any and all reloadable brass, but I prefer the term "innovative", since I like to tinker and figure out what makes things tick.

I've even found a use for all that darned .40 S&W brass that I've accumulated. I make jacketed bullets out of it for my .44 caliber handguns and carbines. Works like a champ and they look just like the Hornady XTP when loaded.

Hope this helps.

Fred

 

[Seedtick]

Be sure not use semi-jacketed bullets with a light powder load. The lead core can seperate from the jacket especially in a rifle, carbine, or long barreled pistol and become a barrel obstruction. Next round could be a kaboom.

Do these bullets not have a jacketed bottom like a jacketed hollow point?

I guess was thinking that the semi part of semi-jacketed was referring to all of the exposed lead.

Seedtick

 

[ReloaderFred]

In a very light load, it's possible for the core of the bullet to slip out of the jacket and continue on out the barrel and leave the jacket stuck in the barrel. The reason for this is the friction between the copper bullet jacket and the steel of the barrel. If the jacket slows down too much, the lead core will come out, since there isn't much friction between the lead core and the copper jacket.

Just load them with moderate to warm loads and you'll be fine. I've shot a boat load of those bullets and never had a problem. In fact, those were the bullets in our duty ammunition for a period of time in the late 1970's.

Hope this helps.

Fred

 

[Seedtick]

In a very light load, it's possible for the core of the bullet to slip out of the jacket and continue on out the barrel and leave the jacket stuck in the barrel. The reason for this is the friction between the copper bullet jacket and the steel of the barrel. If the jacket slows down too much, the lead core will come out, since there isn't much friction between the lead core and the copper jacket.

Just load them with moderate to warm loads and you'll be fine. I've shot a boat load of those bullets and never had a problem. In fact, those were the bullets in our duty ammunition for a period of time in the late 1970's.

Thanks Fred.

Well, what about Ruger Only's, reckon they'll stay together for that much pressure?

This semi-jacket is a little disappointing.......

I missed that and thought I had run into a pretty good deal. I should have known better. :banghead:

I sure am glad ya'll set me straight about it though.

Seedtick

 

[jja327]

Help me understand how a light load could cause the jacket to remain in the barrel. Is this due to the copper jacket not covering the base of the bullet while the gas pushes on the core through the base? It should not be a problem if the copper jacket fully covers the base of the bullet.

 

[janobles14]

i use that very bullet in 125 gr. and pulled one out of a deer i shot. perfect mushroom and minimal jacket sepereation. i would not hesitate to use it for protection. in a 158 i would stake my life or deer on it. use with confidence.

 

[ReloaderFred]

It's pure friction that holds the jacket in the bore with a light load. The enertia is such that there isn't enough friction to hold the core inside the copper cup (jacket), but too much friction between the jacket and steel to overcome the difference. They both (jacket and core) start out at the same speed, but the friction makes the difference and the core "can" end up going faster than the jacket, wherein lies the problem.

As long as the loads are in the mid-range and above, there's no problem, so don't worry about it. The bullet in question is a good one.

If you're going to load light loads, use cast bullets.

Hope this helps.

Fred

 

[Seedtick]

i use that very bullet in 125 gr. and pulled one out of a deer i shot. perfect mushroom and minimal jacket sepereation. i would not hesitate to use it for protection. in a 158 i would stake my life or deer on it. use with confidence.

....As long as the loads are in the mid-range and above, there's no problem, so don't worry about it. The bullet in question is a good one.

If you're going to load light loads, use cast bullets.

Hope this helps.

Fred

Welp, this is sounding some better.

How fast have ya'll pushed them? I like to feed 'em a good dose of Alliant 2400.

Are they worth 12-13 cents a piece?

Seedtick

 

[ranger335v]

"What was a problem was my Remington .357 brass couldn't be sized down enough to hold them securely (necks too thin)."

Is that a problem of the cases or your dies?

 

[Peter M. Eick]

I shoot a lot of them out of my 357 Maximum's. Good bullet but I decided they were a bit light and went to 180's.

 

[Seedtick]

Originally Posted by Peter M. Eick
I shoot a lot of them out of my 357 Maximum's. Good bullet but I decided they were a bit light and went to 180's.

That takes care of that question. If they'll handle Maxi-loads then I shouldn't have any problems with them.

Thanks ya'll. If I can actually get em at that price I think I'll give em a try.

Seedtick

 

[snuffy]

I can't see why they're called semi-jacketed. I would think it would be really hard for that core to slip out of the jacket, since it is tapered to begin the ogive, and has a deep cannelure to hold the core further. I seem to remember Remington called them a core loct design, which would be an internal ring to further hold the core.

True semi-jacketed bullets would be the half or 3 quarter jacketed bullets like speer and Hornady used to make.

That said, I have used the 158 and 125 versions in several .357 revolvers, with outstanding accuracy. Expansion is aided by the scalloped design of the front of the jacket. Expanded bullets display multiple petals that shear along the bottoms of the scallops and the core seldom separates.

I still have some that have to be 15 years old. I just got a new GP-100, so I should dust them off to load some for the new gun.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I've use a lot of those Remington "Rose Pedal" bullets and they work fine. I use them mostly in .357 Magnum ammo meant for my revolvers.

 

[GCBurner]

I've reloaded a lot of them in .357 Magnum. With full-power loads, the ones I've pulled out of the backstop have all mushroomed nicely. I have full confidence in them for either hunting or HD.